Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Sarah Thew

dblp:00/4067 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
3as first author
0since 2021 · last 2018
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 5 · 3 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Empirical software engineering · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Empirical software engineering
developer studies
0.012010
Analysing "people" problems in requirements engineering · ICSE (2) 2010
Empirical software engineering › human factors in software engineering
psychology of programming
0.012010
Analysing "people" problems in requirements engineering · ICSE (2) 2010
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2018 Value-based requirements engineering: method and experience
abstract
'Socio-political' issues, such as emotions, values and people's feelings, are often cited as problems in the RE process. A method is described for analysing such issues. The method consists of a taxonomy of stakeholders' values, motivations and emotions (VME), with process guidance for eliciting and analysing these issues for the RE process and design implications. Values are personal attitudes or long-term beliefs which may influence stakeholder functional and non-functional requirements. Motivations are psychological constructs related to personality traits which may be viewed as stakeholders' long-term goals in RE. Emotions are cues to stakeholders' reactions arising from value/motivation conflicts. The method is supported by a website which illustrates the taxonomy with explanations and scenarios describing problems arising from value conflicts, and from poor understanding of stakeholder values. Two method validation studies were undertaken: first, an evaluation of the website and method by novices and RE experts; and second, case study applications of RE value analysis in real-world industrial practice. The method was used by all practitioners, although in different ways, some used it to create an agenda of issues for analysis while others employed the VMEs to interpret stakeholders' views and manage stakeholder negotiations. The validation studies provide evidence for the acceptability of the method for industrial practitioners, illustrating how value-related problems are identified and analysed effectively by the method. The utility of analysing VMEs is compared to other 'socio-political issues'-oriented methods in RE and methods which focus on monetized values in product requirements.
Sarah Thew, Alistair G. Sutcliffe
Requir. Eng.1
2011 Experience with user-centred requirements engineering
Alistair G. Sutcliffe, Sarah Thew, Paul Jarvis
Requir. Eng.2
2010 Analysing "people" problems in requirements engineering
abstract
The aim of this tutorial is to explain in an accessible manner the psychology of people in the context of misunderstandings, politics and social issues that affect software development. It focuses on user-stakeholder interaction techniques for analysis and interpretation of human behaviour, and how psychological knowledge can be used to improve the requirements engineering (RE) process as well as interpreting the implications of human motivations and values for requirements and software systems architecture. Soft issues, such as politics and people's feelings, are often cited as problems in the RE process and as key causes of system failure. It is clear from the RE literature that understanding user beliefs and values is vital for the success of software development. The London Ambulance service is a canonical example of system failure caused, in part, by inadequate understanding of ambulance crews' motivations, values of self esteem and autonomy, and the emotional reaction to lack of involvement in the requirements process, leading to technology failure.
Alistair G. Sutcliffe, Sarah Thew
ICSE (2)2
2008 Investigating the Role of 'Soft Issues' in the RE Process
abstract
Soft issues, such as politics and people's feelings, are often cited as problems in the RE process. A method aimed at improving elicitation and analysis of such 'soft' issues is described. The method consists of a taxonomy of users' values, motivations and emotions, with process guidance for eliciting and analysing these issues for the RE process.
Sarah Thew, Alistair G. Sutcliffe
RE1
2008 Experience in e-Science Requirements Engineering
abstract
We describe the experience of using a combination of requirements engineering techniques (scenarios, storyboards, observation and workshops) in an e-science application to develop a geographical analysis tool for epidemiologists. Problems encountered were: eliciting tacit knowledge; and creating new visions and working practices for our users. The combination of techniques worked well, although observation of working practice was not so effective in this scientific domain, where activity is mainly cognitive.
Sarah Thew, Alistair G. Sutcliffe, Oscar de Bruijn, John McNaught, Rob Procter, Colin C. Venters, Iain E. Buchan
RE1