Early lifecycle work: influence of individual characteristics, methodological constraints, and interface constraints

Empirical Software Engineering

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 269-285

  Brooks, Andrew ^a   Utbult, Fredrik ^b,c   Mulligan, Catherine ^b   Jeffery, Ross ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^c NDC Netzler and Dahlgren CO   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; COMPUTER AIDED SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; COMPUTER PROGRAMMING; CONSTRAINT THEORY; DATA FLOW ANALYSIS; ENGINEERING RESEARCH; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; USER INTERFACES;

DATA FLOW DIAGRAMS; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERFACE; INTERFACE CONSTRAINTS; SOFTWARE PACKAGE CASEMAKER;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE SELECTION AND EVALUATION;

EID: 0034318272     PISSN: 13823256     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1026594716872     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Beck, K. 1999. Embracing change with extreme programming. Computer 32(10): 70-77.
2. Brooks, A. and Scott, L. 2000. User perceptions of constraints in CASE tools. Submitted to the International Journal of Human-Computer Studies.
3. Brooks, A., Scott, L. and Takada, S. 1998. Evaluating the application of software metrics to data flow diagrams and class diagrams in usability laboratory experiments (CADPRO Pilot #1). CAESAR Technical Report 98/9, School of Information Systems, University of New South Wales.
4. Brooks, A., Takada, S. and Scott, L. 1999. Strongly formative pilot studies on constraints in early life-cycle work. Proceedings of the Sixth Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC '99), 614-621. IEEE Computer Society.
5. Brooks, A., Utbult, F., Mulligan, C. and Jeffery, R. 2000. Early lifecycle work: influence of individual characteristics, methodological constraints, and interface constraints. Centre for Advanced Empirical Software Research (CAESAR) Technical Report 00/9. School of Information Systems, Technology and Management, University of New South Wales. (http://www.caesar.unsw.EDU.AU/CAESAR.html)
6. Day, D. 1995. User responses to constraints in computerized design tools. Ph.D. thesis, School of Information Studies, Syracuse University. UMI Order Number 95-44905.
7. Day, D. 1996. User responses to constraints in computerised design tools: An extended abstract. ACM Software Engineering Notes 21(5): 47-50.
8. th Australian Conference on Information Systems, 509-516.
9. Haddley, N. and Sommerville, I. 1990. Integrated support for systems design. Software Engineering Journal 5(6): 331-338.
10. Jankowski, D. J. 1997. Computer-aided systems engineering methodology support and its effect on the output of structured analysis. Empirical Software Engineering 2(1):11-38.
11. Jarzabek, S. and Huang, R. 1998. The case for user-centred CASE tools. Communications of the ACM 39(10): 94-103.
12. Khwaja, A. A. and Jurban, J. E. 1993. Syntax-directed editing environments: issues and features. Proc. 1993 ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing: States of the Art and Practice. Indianapolis, USA, 230-237.
13. Rehder, B., Pennington, N., and Lee, A. Y. 1997. Scoring the completeness of software designs. J. Systems Software 36: 33-68.
14. Reeves, A., Marashi, M. and Budgen, D. 1995. A software design framework or how to support real designers. Software Engineering Journal 10(4): 141-155.
15. Scott, L. 1997. Hypernode model support for software design methodology modelling. JRCASE Technical Report 97/2, School of MPCE, Macquarie University.
16. Silver, M. S. 1988. On the restrictiveness of decision support systems. In Organizational Decision Support Systems. Elsevier Science, 259-270.
17. Takada, S., Scott, L. and Brooks, A. 1998. Evaluating data flow diagrams and class diagrams in usability laboratory experiments (CADPRO Pilot #2). JRCASE Research Report No. 98/15, School of MPCE, Macquarie University.
18. Yourdon, E. 1989. Modern Structured Analysis. Prentice-Hall International Inc., 339.
19. Zelkowitz, M. 1990. Evolution towards specifications environment: experiences with syntax editors. Information and Software Technology 32(3): 191-198.