Automated User Interaction Analysis for Workflow-Based Web Portals

  • Emil Backlund
  • Mikael Bolle
  • Matthias Tichy
  • Helena Holmström Olsson
  • Jan Bosch
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 182)

Abstract

Success in the software market requires constant improvement of the software. These improvements however have to directly align with the needs of the users of the software. A recent trend in software engineering is to collect post-deployment data about how users use a software system. We report in this paper about a case study with an industrial partner in which (1) we identified which data has to be collected for a web-based portal system, (2) implemented the data collection, and (3) performed an experiment comparing the collected data with answers of the test subjects in a survey.

Keywords

user interaction post-deployment data collection Build-Measure-Learn data-driven software engineering 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Holmström Olsson, H., Bosch, J.: Towards data-driven product development: A multiple case study on post-deployment data usage in software-intensive embedded systems. In: Fitzgerald, B., Conboy, K., Power, K., Valerdi, R., Morgan, L., Stol, K.-J. (eds.) LESS 2013. LNBIP, vol. 167, pp. 152–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Holmström Olsson, H., Bosch, J.: Post-deployment data collection in software-intensive embedded products. In: Herzwurm, G., Margaria, T. (eds.) ICSOB 2013. LNBIP, vol. 150, pp. 79–89. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ries, E.: The Lean Startup: How Constant Innovation Creates Radically Successful Businesses. Penguin Group, London (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Highsmith, J., Cockburn, A.: Agile software development: The business of innovation. IEEE Computer 34(9), 120–122 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abrahamsson, P., Warsta, J., Siponen, M.T., Ronkainen, J.: New directions on agile methods: A comparative analysis. In: Clarke, L.A., Dillon, L., Tichy, W.F. (eds.) ICSE, pp. 244–254. IEEE Computer Society (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Morris, M., Dillon, A.: How user perceptions influence software use. IEEE Software14(4), 58–65 (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Soloway, E., Guzdial, M., Hay, K.E.: Learner-centered design: the challenge for hci in the 21st century. Interactions 1(2), 36–48 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Argyris, C., Schön, D.: Organisational learning: A theory of action perspective. Addison Wesley (1978)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kohavi, R., Longbotham, R., Sommerfield, D., Henne, R.M.: Controlled experiments on the web: survey and practice guide. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 18(1), 140–181 (2009)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bosch, J.: Building products as innovation experiment systems. In: Cusumano, M.A., Iyer, B., Venkatraman, N. (eds.) ICSOB 2012. LNBIP, vol. 114, pp. 27–39. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dzamashvili-Fogelström, N., Gorschek, T., Svahnberg, M., Olsson, P.: The impact of agile principles on market-driven software product development. Journal of Software Maintenance 22(1), 53–80 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sommerville, I.: Software Engineering, 6th edn. Pearson Education, Essex (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bird, C., Murphy, B., Nagappan, N., Zimmermann, T.: Empirical software engineering at microsoft research. In: Hinds, P.J., Tang, J.C., Wang, J., Bardram, J.E., Ducheneaut, N. (eds.) CSCW, pp. 143–150. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Beck, K.: Test Driven Development: By Example. Addison-Wesley Professional (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cockburn, A.: Agile Software Development. Addison-Wesley Professional (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Backlund, E., Bolle, M.: Automated usage tracing and analysis: a comparison with web survey. Master’s thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden (2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kiczales, G., Lamping, J., Mendhekar, A.: Aspect-oriented programming. In: Akşit, M., Matsuoka, S. (eds.) ECOOP 1997. LNCS, vol. 1241, pp. 220–242. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hasan, L., Morris, A., Probets, S.G.: Using google analytics to evaluate the usability of e-commerce sites. In: Kurosu, M. (ed.) HCD 2009. LNCS, vol. 5619, pp. 697–706. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    van der Schuur, H., Jansen, S., Brinkkemper, S.: Becoming responsive to service usage and performance changes by applying service feedback metrics to software maintenance. In: Proc. of the 23rd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering - Workshops, pp. 53–62. IEEE (September 2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tarta, A., Moldovan, G.: Automatic usability evaluation using aop. In: 2006 IEEE International Conference on Automation, Quality and Testing, Robotics, vol. 2, pp. 84–89. IEEE (2006)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tao, Y.: Capturing user interface events with aspects. In: Jacko, J.A. (ed.) HCI 2007. LNCS, vol. 4553, pp. 1170–1179. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tarby, J., Ezzedine, H., Kolski, C.: Trace-Based Usability Evaluation Using Aspect-Oriented Programming and Agent-Based Software Architecture. In: Human-Centered Software Engineering, pp. 257–276 (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emil Backlund
    • 1
  • Mikael Bolle
    • 2
  • Matthias Tichy
    • 3
  • Helena Holmström Olsson
    • 4
  • Jan Bosch
    • 3
  1. 1.ATEA and Chalmers University of TechnologySweden
  2. 2.Chalmers University of TechnologySweden
  3. 3.Chalmers and University of GothenburgSweden
  4. 4.Malmö UniversitySweden

Personalised recommendations