Advertisement

A socio-technical-based process for questionnaire development in requirements elicitation via interviews

  • Abdullah WahbehEmail author
  • Surendra Sarnikar
  • Omar El-Gayar
Original Article
  • 8 Downloads

Abstract

Software development is the process of building systems that solve users’ need and satisfy stakeholders’ objectives. Such needs are determined through requirements elicitation, which is considered an intensive, complex, and multi-disciplinary process. Traditional methods of elicitation often fail to uncover requirements that are critical for successful and wide-scale user adoption because these methods primarily focus on the technical aspects and constraints of the systems rather than considering a socio-technical perspective. The success of information system development involves the identification of the social, organizational and technical features of the systems, which in turn can result in a more acceptable system by users. In this paper, we propose a requirements elicitation process based on socio-technical (ST) systems theory. The process leverages ST system components to help identify a set of ST imbalances, which in turn help in requirements elicitation. The applicability of the process is demonstrated using empirical investigation with a randomized two-group experimental design, where the objective is to see the potential of the proposed process to enhance analysts’ understanding of socio-technical aspects of a domain, interview readiness, and questionnaire quality.

Keywords

Software development Requirement elicitation User interviews Questionnaire development Socio-technical systems Design research 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Hickey AM, Davis AM (2004) A unified model of requirements elicitation. J Manag Inf Syst 20(4):65–84Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Toro AD, Jiménez BB, Cortés AR, Bonilla MT (1999) A requirements elicitation approach based in templates and patterns. In: Proceedings 2nd workshop on requirements engineering, Buenos Aires, Argentina, September 9–10, pp 17–29Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Raghavan S, Zelesnik G, Ford G (1994) Lecture notes on requirements elicitation. Educational Materials CMU/SEI–94–EM–10. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon UniversityGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hickey AM, Davis AM (2003) Requirements elicitation and elicitation technique selection: model for two knowledge-intensive software development processes. In: Proceedings of the 36th annual hawaii international conference on system sciences, Hawaii 2003. IEEE, p 10Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brooks (1987) No silver bullet essence and accidents of software engineering. Computer 20(4):10–19MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zowghi D, Coulin C (2005) Requirements elicitation: a survey of techniques, approaches, and tools. In: Engineering and managing software requirements. Springer, pp 19–46Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Davis GB (1982) Strategies for information requirements determination. IBM Syst J 21(1):4–30Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Byrd TA, Cossick KL, Zmud RW (1992) A synthesis of research on requirements analysis and knowledge acquisition techniques. Manag Inf Syst Q 16(1):117–138Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pitts MG, Browne GJ (2007) Improving requirements elicitation: an empirical investigation of procedural prompts. Inf Syst J 17(1):89–110Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Browne G, Rogich M (2001) An empirical investigation of user requirements elicitation: comparing the effectiveness of prompting techniques. J Manag Inf Syst 17(4):223–249Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Klier J, Klier M, Muschter S (2017) How to manage IS requirements in complex public sector structures: toward an action design research approach. Requir Eng 22(4):419–432Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mumford E (2000) A socio-technical approach to systems design. Requir Eng 5(2):125–133Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Aurum A, Wohlin C (2005) Engineering and managing software requirements, 1st edn. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sampaio do Prado Leite J, Gilvaz APP (1996) Requirements elicitation driven by interviews: the use of viewpoints. In: Proceedings of the 8th international workshop on software specification and design. IEEE, pp 85–94Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vitharana P, Jain H, Zahedi F (2012) A knowledge based component/service repository to enhance analysts’ domain knowledge for requirements analysis. Inf Manag 49(1):24–35Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Baloian N, Zurita G, Santoro FM, Araujo RM, Wolfgan S, Machado D, Pino JA (2011) A collaborative mobile approach for business process elicitation. In: 2011 15th international conference on computer supported cooperative work in design (CSCWD). IEEE, pp 473–480Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Agarwal R, Tanniru M (1990) Knowledge acquisition using structured interviewing: an empirical investigation. J Manag Inf Syst 1:123–140Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vasundran M (2012) Comparison of requirements elicitation techniques. Int J Adv Comput Inf TechnolGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lim SL, Finkelstein A (2012) StakeRare: using social networks and collaborative filtering for large-scale requirements elicitation. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 38(3):707–735Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Moody JW, Blanton JE, Cheney PH (1998) A theoretically grounded approach to assist memory recall during information requirements determination. J Manag Inf Syst 15:79–98Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ferrari A, Spoletini P, Gnesi S (2016) Ambiguity and tacit knowledge in requirements elicitation interviews. Requir Eng 21(3):333–355Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Davis A, Dieste O, Hickey A, Juristo N, Moreno AM (2006) Effectiveness of requirements elicitation techniques: empirical results derived from a systematic review. In: 14th IEEE international requirements engineering conference St. Paul, Minneapolis. IEEE, pp 179–188Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Clegg C (2000) Sociotechnical principles for system design. Appl Ergonom 31:463–477.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-6870(00)00009-0 Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fuentes-Fernández R, Gómez-Sanz JJ, Pavón J (2010) Understanding the human context in requirements elicitation. Requir Eng 15(3):267–283Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kaufmann A, Riehle D (2017) The QDAcity-RE method for structural domain modeling using qualitative data analysis. Requir Eng 24(1):1–18Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Thew S, Sutcliffe A (2018) Value-based requirements engineering: method and experience. Requir Eng 23(4):443–464Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Levy M, Hadar I, Aviv I (2018) A requirements engineering methodology for knowledge management solutions: integrating technical and social aspects. Requir Eng 23(1):1–19Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Weinert B, Hahn A, Uslar M (2018) Domain-specific requirements elicitation for socio-technical system-of-systems. In: Paper presented at the 2018 13th annual conference on system of systems engineering (SoSE), Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wang Y, Zhao L (2017) Eliciting user requirements for e-collaboration systems: a proposal for a multi-perspective modeling approach. Requir Eng 254(2):205–229Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Shahri A, Hosseini M, Taylor J, Stefanidis A, Phalp K, Ali R (2019) Engineering digital motivation in businesses: a modelling and analysis framework. Requir Eng 24(1):1–32Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ackerman M, Prilla M, Stary C, Herrmann T, Goggins S (2017) Designing healthcare that works: a sociotechnical approach, 1st edn. Academic Press, OrlandoGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Li T, Horkoff J, Mylopoulos J (2018) Holistic security requirements analysis for socio-technical systems. Softw Syst Model 17(4):1253–1285Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Eason K (2008) Sociotechnical systems theory in the 21st Century: another half-filled glass. In: Desmond M, John K (eds) Sense in social science—a collection of essays in Honour of Dr. Lisl Klein, Desmond Graves, pp 123–134Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vink P (2012) Advances in social and organizational factors, 1st edn. Taylor & Francis Group, LondonGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Baxter G, Sommerville I (2011) Socio-technical systems: from design methods to systems engineering. Interact Comput 23(1):4–17Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mumford E (2006) The story of socio-technical design: reflections on its successes, failures and potential. Inf Syst J 16(4):317–342Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Emery F, Trist E (1960) Socio-technical systems. In: West C, Michael V (eds) Management sciences models and techniques, vol 1. Pergamon Press, New York, pp 38–58Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bryl V, Giorgini P, Mylopoulos J (2009) Designing socio-technical systems: from stakeholder goals to social networks. Requir Eng 14(1):47–70Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Cherns A (1987) Principles of sociotechnical design revisted. Hum Relat 40(3):153–161Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Cherns A (1976) The principles of sociotechnical design. Hum Relat 29(8):783–792Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Berg M, Toussaint P (2003) The mantra of modeling and the forgotten powers of paper: a sociotechnical view on the development of process-oriented ICT in health care. Int J Med Inf 69(2):223–234Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Eason K (2007) Local sociotechnical system development in the NHS National Programme for Information Technology. J Inf Technol 22(3):257–264Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zielczynski P (2007) Requirements management using IBM rational requisitepro. Pearson Education & IBM Press, IndianapolisGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Leffingwell D, Widrig D (2000) Managing software requirements: a unified approach, 1st edn. Addison-Wesley Professional, Indianapolis, IN, USAGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Turner CR, Fuggetta A, Lavazza L, Wolf AL (1999) A conceptual basis for feature engineering. J Syst Softw 49(1):3–15Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Turner CR, Wolf AL, Fuggetta A, Lavazza L (1998) Feature engineering. In: Proceedings of the 9th international workshop on software specification and design, Mie, Japan. IEEE Computer Society, p 162Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Tsung SMM-L (2004) ERP: a route toward successful implementation. University of Leeds, University of Leeds Press, LeedsGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gross D, Yu E (2001) From non-functional requirements to design through patterns. Requir Eng 6(1):18–36zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Lee Y, Zhao W (2006) Domain requirements elicitation and analysis-an ontology-based approach. In: Paper presented at the international conference on computational science, Berlin, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Nuseibeh B, Easterbrook S (2000) Requirements engineering: a roadmap. In: Proceedings of the conference on the future of software engineering, Limerick, Ireland. ACM, pp 35–46Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Liu L, Lin L (2008) ARED-CK: an automated requirements elicitation approach based on decision-making with complete knowledge. In: First international workshop on managing requirements knowledge, Barcelona, Spain. IEEE, pp 47–52Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kenzi K, Soffer P, Hadar I (2010) The role of domain knowledge in requirements elicitation: an exploratory study. In: Mediterranean conference on information systems Netherlands, vol 2. Association for Information Systems, p 48Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Hofmann HF, Lehner F (2001) Requirements engineering as a success factor in software projects. IEEE Softw 18(4):58–66Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Hadar I, Soffer P, Kenzi K (2014) The role of domain knowledge in requirements elicitation via interviews: an exploratory study. Requir Eng 19(2):143–159Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Sabahat N, Iqbal F, Azam F, Javed MY (2010) An iterative approach for global requirements elicitation: a case study analysis. In: International conference on electronics and information engineering, 2010. IEEE, pp V1-361–V361-366Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Sutcliffe A, Sawyer P (2013) Requirements elicitation: Towards the unknown unknowns. In: Paper presented at the 21st IEEE international requirements engineering conference, Rio de Janeiro, BrazilGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Chua BB, Bernardo DV, Verner J (2010) Understanding the use of elicitation approaches for effective requirements gathering. In: 2010 Fifth international conference on software engineering advances (ICSEA). IEEE, pp 325–330Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Alistair S, Shailey M (1999) Analysing socio-technical system requirements. In: 4th International symposium on requirements engineering, Limerick, IrelandGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Mavin A, Maiden N (2003) Determining socio-technical systems requirements: experiences with generating and walking through scenarios. In: Proceedings of the 11th IEEE international conference on requirements engineering, Monterey Bay, CA. IEEE, pp 213–222Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Sommerville I, Sawyer P (1997) Requirements engineering: a good practice guide, 1st edn. Wiley, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Holbrook H III (1990) A scenario-based methodology for conducting requirements elicitation. ACM Sigsoft Softw Eng Notes 15(1):95–104Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Asteasuain F, Braberman V (2017) Declaratively building behavior by means of scenario clauses. Requir Eng 22(2):239–274Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Atladottir G, Hvannberg ET, Gunnarsdottir S (2012) Comparing task practicing and prototype fidelities when applying scenario acting to elicit requirements. Requir Eng 17(3):157–170Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Sutcliffe, Ryan (1998) Experience with SCRAM, a scenario requirements analysis method. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the third international conference on requirements engineering, Colorado Springs, COGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Sommerville I, Sawyer P, Viller S (1998) Viewpoints for requirements elicitation: a practical approach. In: Proceedings of the third international conference on requirements engineering, Colorado Springs, CO. IEEE, pp 74–81Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Fuller RM, Davis CJ (2008) The Overreliance on analyst experience in the selection of requirements elicitation techniques. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 14th Americas conference on information systems (AMCIS 2008). Toronto, Ontario, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Dalpiaz F, Giorgini P, Mylopoulos J (2013) Adaptive socio-technical systems: a requirements-based approach. Requir Eng 18(1):1–24Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Herrmann T (2009) Systems design with the socio-technical walkthrough. In: Whitworth B, de Moor A (eds) Handbook of research on socio-technical design and social networking systems. IGI Global, Pennsylvania, pp 336–351Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Jones S, Maiden NA (2005) RESCUE: An integrated method for specifying requirements for complex socio-technical systems. In: Jose LM, Andres S (eds) Requirements engineering for socio-technical systems. IGI Global, Pennsylvania, pp 245–265Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Katina PF, Keating CB, Raed MJ (2014) System requirements engineering in complex situations. Requir Eng 19(1):45–62Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Hubbard R, Schroeder CN, Mead NR (2000) An assessment of the relative efficiency of a facilitator-driven requirements collection process with respect to the conventional interview method. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on requirements engineering, Schaumburg, IL. IEEE, pp 178–186Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Clegg C (2000) Sociotechnical principles for system design. Appl Ergonom 31(5):463–477Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Lyytinen K, Newman M (2008) Explaining information systems change: a punctuated socio-technical change model. Eur J Inf Syst 17(6):589–613Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Horkoff J, Aydemir FB, Cardoso E, Li T, Maté A, Paja E, Salnitri M, Piras L, Mylopoulos J, Giorgini P (2017) Goal-oriented requirements engineering: an extended systematic mapping study. Requir Eng 24(2):1–28Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Hevner March, Park Ram (2004) Design science in information systems research. Manag Inf Syst Q 28(1):75–105Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    vom Brocke J, Riedl R, Léger P-M (2013) Application strategies for neuroscience in information systems design science research. J Comput Inf Syst 53(3):1–13Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Peffers K, Tuunanen T, Rothenberger MA, Chatterjee S (2007) A design science research methodology for information systems research. J Manag Inf Syst 24(3):45–77Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Hogan J, Hogan R, Busch CM (1984) How to measure service orientation. J Appl Psychol 69(1):167Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Gebauer J, Shaw MJ, Gribbins ML (2005) Towards a specific theory of task-technology fit for mobile information systems. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business Working PaperGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Thompson J (2017) Organizations in action: social science bases of administrative theory. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Fredericks S, Guruge S, Sidani S, Wan T (2010) Postoperative patient education: a systematic review. Clin Nurs Res 19(2):144–164Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Bandura A, McClelland DC (1977) Social learning theory. General Learning Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Bandura A (1994) Self-efficacy. In: Corsini R (ed) Encyclopedia of psychology, vol 3, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Bandura A (1977) Social learning theory, 1st edn. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Barki H, Hartwick J (1994) Measuring user participation, user involvement, and user attitude. Manag Inf Syst Q 18(1):59–82Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Fishbein M, Ajzen I (1975) Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Philos Rhetor 10(2):130–132Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. Manag Inf Syst Q 27(3):425–478Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Haug MR, Lavin B (1981) Practitioner or patient-Who’s in charge? J Health Soc Behav 22(3):212–229Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Sadiq SW, Marjanovic O, Orlowska ME (2000) Managing change and time in dynamic workflow processes. Int J Coop Inf Syst 9(01n02):93–116Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Galloway LJ (2006) A scheme of technology acceptance for mobile computing. In: Proceedings of the 2006 information resources management association international conference, Washington, DC. IGI Global, pp 21–24Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Davis F (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. Manag Inf Syst Q 13(3):319–340Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Harris Wysocki, Sadler Wilkinson, Harvey Buckloh, Mauras White (2000) Validation of a structured interview for the assessment of diabetes self-management. Diabetes Care 23(9):1301–1304Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Wagner EH, Austin BT, Von Korff M (1996) Organizing care for patients with chronic illness. Milbank Q 74(4):511–544Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Wysocki T, Taylor A, Hough BS, Linscheid TR, Yeates KO, Naglieri JA (1996) Deviation from developmentally appropriate self-care autonomy: association with diabetes outcomes. Diabetes Care 19(2):119–125Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Nam S, Chesla C, Stotts NA, Kroon L, Janson SL (2011) Barriers to diabetes management: patient and provider factors. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 93(1):1–9Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Toobert DJ, Strycker LA, Glasgow RE, Barrera M, Bagdade JD (2002) Enhancing support for health behavior change among women at risk for heart disease: the Mediterranean Lifestyle Trial. Health Educ Res 17(5):574–585Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Bayliss EA, Steiner JF, Fernald DH, Crane LA, Main DS (2003) Descriptions of barriers to self-care by persons with comorbid chronic diseases. Ann Family Med 1(1):15–21Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Tobin S et al (2012) Lesson learned: effective training strategies for electronic data capturing. Society for Clinical Trials, Miami Annual MeetingGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Ershow AG (2009) Environmental influences on development of type 2 diabetes and obesity: challenges in personalizing prevention and management. J Diabetes Sci Technol 3(4):727–734Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Schwarzer R, Schüz B, Ziegelmann JP, Lippke S, Luszczynska A, Scholz U (2007) Adoption and maintenance of four health behaviors: Theory-guided longitudinal studies on dental flossing, seat belt use, dietary behavior, and physical activity. Ann Behav Med 33(2):156–166Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Anderson J (2007) Social, ethical and legal barriers to e-health. Int J Med Inf 76(5):480–483Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Marrero DG (2007) Overcoming patient barriers to initiating insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Clin Cornerstone 8(2):33–43Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Richard AA, Shea K (2011) Delineation of self-care and associated concepts. J Nurs Scholarsh 43(3):255–264Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Fisher WA (2007) Barriers and behaviours in blood glucose monitoring. US Endocrine Dis 2(1):51–53Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Skinner TC, John M, Hampson SE (2000) Social support and personal models of diabetes as predictors of self-care and well-being: a longitudinal study of adolescents with diabetes. J Pediatr Psychol 25(4):257–267Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Morisky DE, DeMuth NM, Field-Fass M, Green LW, Levine DM (1985) Evaluation of family health education to build social support for long-term control of high blood pressure. Health Educ Behav 12(1):35–50Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    IEEE (1984) ANSI/IEEE Standard 830-1984: IEEE guide for software requirements specifications. IEEE STD, pp 1–26Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Kitchenham BA, Linkman SG, Law D (1994) Critical review of quantitative assessment. Softw Eng J 9(2):43–54Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Juristo N, Moreno AM (2003) Lecture notes on empirical software engineering, vol 12, 1st edn. World Scientific, River EdgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Gaska MT, Gause DC (1998) An approach for cross-discipline requirements engineering process patterns. In: Proceedings of IEEE international symposium on requirements engineering, Colorado Springs, CO. IEEE, pp 182–189Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Osgood CE (1964) Semantic differential technique in the comparative study of Cultures1. Am Anthropol 66(3):171–200Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    D’Aubeterre F, Iyer LS, Singh R (2009) An empirical evaluation of information security awareness levels in designing secure business processes. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on design science research in information systems and technology, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. ACM, p 16Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Walls JG, Widmeyer GR, El Sawy OA (1992) Building an information system design theory for vigilant EIS. Inf Syst Res 3(1):36–59Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Joseph H, William B, Barry B, Rolph A (2010) Multivariate data analysis, 7th edn. Pearson, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Karimi J, Somers TM, Gupta YP (2001) Impact of information technology management practices on customer service. J Manag Inf Syst 17(4):125–158Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang A (2013) G*Power Version 3.1.7 [computer software]Google Scholar
  117. 117.
  118. 118.
    Stevens JP (1984) Outliers and influential data points in regression analysis. Psychol Bull 95(2):334MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Pallant J (2013) SPSS survival manual: a step-by-step guide to data analysis using SPSS, 5th edn. Open University Press, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Pearson ES, Pearson K (1954) Biometrika tables for statisticians, vol 2, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Kenneth A, Richard C, Ingram BEO (1996) Education in a research University, 1st edn. Stanford University Press, Palo AltoGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Arthur W (2002) The interaction between developmental bias and natural selection: from centipede segments to a general hypothesis. Heredity 89(4):239–246Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Dufour JM, Farhat A, Gardiol L, Khalaf L (1998) Simulation-based finite sample normality tests in linear regressions. Econom J 1(1):154–173Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Mendes M, Pala A (2003) Type I error rate and power of three normality tests. Pak J Inf Technol 2(2):135–139Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    Trochim WM, Donnelly JP (2006) Research methods knowledge base, 3rd edn. Atomic Dog PublishingGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Everitt BS (2002) The Cambridge dictionary of statistics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Montgomery DC (2012) Design and analysis of experiments. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Neil S (2012) 100 questions (and answers) about research methods. SAGE Publications, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Campbell DT, Stanley JC (2015) Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Ravenio Books, New York Online (e-textbook) Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    Thomas C (1976) Quasi-experimentation: design and analysis issues for field settings, 1st edn. Houghton Mifflin, ChicagoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Slippery Rock UniversitySlippery RockUSA
  2. 2.California State UniversityHaywardUSA
  3. 3.Dakota State UniversityMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations