We distinguish between two general types of practice: 2.2 Types of practice involving multiple disciplines The next section has the following aims: to distinguish between possible types of MP in RE to illustrate and amplify them and to review some examples. Surprisingly little attention has been paid to the nature of MDP per se. The emergence is characterised by a proliferation of perspectives, and a profusion of concepts, and it has been suggested for some time that RE may be multidisciplinary in nature and includes contributions from a wide range of disciplines including software engineering, human factors, cognitive psychology, and sociology (Scaife et al., 1994). RE remains an emerging field, and there is little consensus as to its nature and scope. The accommodation of alternative paradigms is discussed, and criteria for support to overcome the problems are proposed. MDP in RE is introduced, exemplified, and its problems identified the incommensurability of conflicting paradigms may be a possible underlying cause of these problems. It argues that multidisciplinary requirements engineering practice is ineffective. This section is concerned with multidisciplinary practice (MDP) in the requirements engineering (RE). Multidisciplinary Practice in Requirements Engineering: Problems and Criteria for Support Section 5 provides an illustration of the methodological support offered to multidisciplinary practice, the operationalisation of the dialectic process is applied to requirements constructed by the use of two different requirements engineering techniques from two different disciplines (representing two different paradigms), in the domain of Accident and Emergency healthcare. Section 4 illustrates informally how the dialectic approach might meet the criteria proposed in Section 2. ![]() This methodological support takes the form of a dialectic process, and its associated products, which is conceptualised and then operationalised. In Section 3, a form of methodological support, which it is claimed may help overcome some of the problems associated with multidisciplinary practice in requirements engineering, is developed. It is also suggested that the incommensurability of conflicting paradigms is an underlying cause of the problems in multidisciplinary practice, and a number of criteria for support to overcome such problems are proposed. In Section 2, it is argued that multidisciplinary requirements engineering practice is ineffective, and some specific problems for multidisciplinary practice are identified. This methodological support takes the form of a dialectic process, and its associated products, which is conceptualised and then operationalised.Īs an illustration of the methodological support offered to multidisciplinary practice, the operationalisation of the dialectic process is applied to requirements constructed by the use of two different requirements engineering techniques from two different disciplines (representing two different paradigms), in the domain of Accident and Emergency healthcare. It is also suggested that the incommensurability of conflicting paradigms is an underlying cause of the problems in multidisciplinary practice, and a number of criteria for support to overcome such problems are proposed.Ī form of methodological support, which it is claimed may help overcome some of the problems associated with multidisciplinary practice in requirements engineering, is developed. ![]() It is argued that multidisciplinary requirements engineering practice is ineffective, and some specific problems for multidisciplinary practice are identified. This paper develops an approach that supports multidisciplinary practice in requirements engineering. Formerly: Ergonomics and HCI Unit, University College London, 26 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAP, UK.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |