Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Scopus||Web of Science®||Altmetric|
|Title:||Comparing distributed and face-to-face meetings for software architecture evaluation: a controlled experiment|
|Citation:||Empirical Software Engineering, 2008; 13(1):39-62|
|Muhammad Ali Babar, Barbara Kitchenham, Ross Jeffery|
|Abstract:||Scenario-based methods for evaluating software architecture require a large number of stakeholders to be collocated for evaluation meetings. Collocating stakeholders is often an expensive exercise. To reduce expense, we have proposed a framework for supporting software architecture evaluation process using groupware systems. This paper presents a controlled experiment that we conducted to assess the effectiveness of one of the key activities, developing scenario profiles, of the proposed groupware-supported process of evaluating software architecture. We used a cross-over experiment involving 32 teams of three 3rd and 4th year undergraduate students. We found that the quality of scenario profiles developed by distributed teams using a groupware tool were significantly better than the quality of scenario profiles developed by face-to-face teams (p < 0.001). However, questionnaires indicated that most participants preferred the face-to-face arrangement (82%) and 60% thought the distributed meetings were less efficient. We conclude that distributed meetings for developing scenario profiles are extremely effective but that tool support must be of a high standard or participants will not find distributed meetings acceptable.|
|Keywords:||Architecture evaluation; Process improvement; Controlled experiments; Groupware support; Scenario development|
|Rights:||© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2007|
|Appears in Collections:||Computer Science publications|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.