=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1796/rmt-preface
|storemode=property
|title=None
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1796/rmt-preface.pdf
|volume=Vol-1796
}}
==None==
<pdf width="1500px">https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1796/rmt-preface.pdf</pdf>
<pre>
    Research Method Track: Message From the
                    Chairs

                        Oscar Dieste1 and Fabio Massacci2
                    1
                        Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Spain
                                 odieste@fi.upm.es
                             2
                               University of Trento, Italy
                              fabio.massacci@unitn.it




    In 2017, REFSQ hosted for the third time a research method track, organized
by the authors. It aims providing a forum for the discussion of ideas and experi-
ences about the application of empirical methods to Requirements Engineering.
    This track does not seek mature research results (REFSQ main track is prob-
ably a better place for this type of contributions). In turn, we are interested in
e.g., research proposals, discussions of different research methodologies’ benefits
and perils, reflections about data collection and analysis procedures, etc. Papers
with a focus on the adoption, or adaptation, of methods and theories used in
other disciplines (e.g., health sciences, sociology, psychology, and engineering)
to RE are also welcomed. These different themes configure the categories of
contributions described in the Call for Papers:

 – Regular contributions: Research method papers and Lessons learned re-
   ports (published in the Springer LNCS proceedings).
 – Interaction contributions: Research methods mini-tutorials, Plans for re-
   search studies, and Live studies (published in the CEUR proceedings).
    We received three regular and two interaction contributions. The numbers
are in line with past edition (four regular and three interaction contributions).
All contributions were independently reviewed by 3 members of the Program
Committee, who provided recommendation for acceptance, shepherding, or re-
jection. As a result of this process, two regular contributions were accepted for
inclusion in the LNCS proceedings and presentation at the conference:
 – Specifying Software Requirements for Safety-Critical Railway Systems: an
   Experience Report, by Luciana Provenzano and Kaj Hänninen, reports the
   authors’ experiences in introducing a safety compliant method of writing
   safety software requirements for railway projects in a distributed organiza-
   tion.
 – Using Human Error Identification Tool for Detection of Requirements Faults:
   An Empirical Investigation, by Vaibhav Anu, Gursimran Walia, Gary Brad-
   shaw, Wenhua Hu and Jeffrey Carver, discusses the effectiveness of the Hu-
   man Error Abstraction Assist (HEAA) tool and Human Error Taxonomy




Copyright c 2017 for this paper by its authors. Copying permitted for private and
academic purposes.
   (HET) in helping inspectors identify human errors and resulting faults dur-
   ing the requirements inspection.

    One interaction contribution was selected for inclusion in the CEUR proceed-
ings and to be conducted at the conference. In Understanding Human Errors In
Software Requirements: An Online Survey, Wenhua Hu, Jeffrey Carver, Gur-
simran Walia, Vaibhav Anu and Gary Bradshaw propose a survey to identify
which type of human errors and related faults requirement engineers make on
real projects, and which methods they use to prevent them. This study will be
conducted online during the conference.
    The aforementioned study by Hu et al. takes no actual time during the con-
ference sessions. Thus, we invited Anu et al. to adapt their paper Using Human
Error Identification Tool for Detection of Requirements Faults: An Empirical
Investigation) to be conducted as a live study in the conference. This proposal
titled Using Human Error Abstraction Method for Detecting and Classifying
Requirements Errors: A Live Study, is strongly related to the online study. It
aims evaluating the use of the Human Error Abstraction Assist (HEAA) tool in
helping inspectors correctly abstract and classify human errors responsible for
requirement faults. This proposal is also included in the CEUR proceedings.
    Although the number of submissions was lower than we expected, we hope
that the Research Method Track program will satisfy all REFSQ attendees.
We also wish to thank the members of the Research Method Track Program
Committee for their support and professional work:

   Kristian Beckers                 Technische Universität München, Germany
   Travis D. Beaux                  Carnegie Mellon University, USA
   Maya Daneva                      University of Twente, Netherlands
   Karen Elliott                    Newcastle University Business School, UK
   Katsyarina Labunets              University of Trento, Italy
   Ignacio Panach                   Universitat de València, Spain
   Lutz Prechelt                    Freie Universität Berlin, Germany
   Maria Riaz                       North Carolina State University, USA
   Riccardo Scandariato             Chalmers University and
                                    University of Gothenburg, Sweden

   Last, but not least, we gratefully acknowledge the support from the local
organizers.

</pre>