How do we read specifications? experiences from an eye tracking study

Abstract

[Context and motivation] Writing good specifications is difficult and takes time. There are several guidelines such as the Volere template to assist writing a good specification. They provide a table of contents which can be used like a checklist to consider all relevant aspects. Voluminous specifications take more time to write, and also more time to read. A larger specification is not always a better one. [Question/Problem] A requirements engineer should be aware of how readers make use of a specification and consider their interests in writing it. In addition, some people prefer reading on a screen while others hold a preference for paper printouts. Some parts or aspects may be read differently in both representations. [Principal ideas/results]: We have conducted an Eye Tracking study investigating how specifications are read. We compared paper-based with on-screen presentation, and different reading perspectives such as UI designers, tester, software architects etc. We derived study goals by using GQM down to the level of quantitative and statistical eye tracking analyses. [Contribution]: There is a two-fold contribution: (a) Observations and findings about the way specifications are read; e.g., we had expected paper-based reading to be faster. Instead, we found similar reading patterns on paper versus on screen. (b) Insights with respect to eye tracking as a research method for requirements engineering. We discuss strengths and shortcomings, and provide lessons learned.