Stopping behavior of systems analysts during information requirements elicitation

被引:51
作者
Pitts, MG [1 ]
Browne, GJ
机构
[1] Univ Memphis, Memphis, TN 38152 USA
[2] Texas Tech Univ, Rawls Coll, Business Adm, Lubbock, TX 79409 USA
关键词
cognitive stopping rules; information gathering; knowledge elicitation; requirements determination; systems analysis;
D O I
10.1080/07421222.2004.11045795
中图分类号
TP [自动化技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
Understanding the cognitive activities of analysts during information requirements determination (IRD) has been recognized as a key indicator of IRD success. The research presented here examines one such cognitive activity: analysts' determination of the sufficiency of information gathered during the elicitation of requirements. Research in behavioral decision-making has identified various heuristics, or stopping rules, that are used to gauge the sufficiency of the information obtained and to terminate information acquisition. Despite the fact that analysts undoubtedly employ such stopping rules in requirements elicitation, no research has studied this phenomenon. In the present research, we present a classification of stopping rules appropriate for information gathering problems. Stopping-rule use was identified for 54 practicing systems analysts participating in a requirements determination problem in a laboratory setting. Results indicated that analyst experience influences the application of specific cognitive stopping rules, and that the use of these stopping rules has an impact on requirements determination outcomes. In addition, the use of certain stopping rules resulted in greater quantity and completeness of requirements elicited from users. Theoretical implications for the elicitation of information and practical implications for the training of systems analysts are discussed.
引用
收藏
页码:203 / 226
页数:24
相关论文
共 86 条
[1]  
Agarwal R., 1990, Journal of Management Information Systems, V7, P123
[2]  
Agresti A., 1990, Analysis of categorical data
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1983, THINKING EXPANDING F
[4]  
[Anonymous], MODERN SYSTEMS ANAL
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1932, REMEMBERING
[6]   STOCHASTIC CHOICE HEURISTICS [J].
ASCHENBRENNER, KM ;
ALBERT, D ;
SCHMALHOFER, F .
ACTA PSYCHOLOGICA, 1984, 56 (1-3) :153-166
[7]   HEURISTICS AND BIASES IN DIAGNOSTIC REASONING .2. CONGRUENCE, INFORMATION, AND CERTAINTY [J].
BARON, J ;
BEATTIE, J ;
HERSHEY, JC .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 1988, 42 (01) :88-110
[8]  
Boehm B. W., 1981, SOFTWARE ENG EC
[9]   SUCCESSFUL APPLICATION OF COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUES TO IMPROVE THE SYSTEMS-DEVELOPMENT PROCESS [J].
BOSTROM, RP .
INFORMATION & MANAGEMENT, 1989, 16 (05) :279-295
[10]   HUMAN DIAGNOSTIC REASONING BY COMPUTER - AN ILLUSTRATION FROM FINANCIAL ANALYSIS [J].
BOUWMAN, MJ .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 1983, 29 (06) :653-672