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.