App Update Patterns: How Developers Act on User Reviews in Mobile App Stores

  • Shance Wang
  • Zhongjie WangEmail author
  • Xiaofei Xu
  • Quan Z. Sheng
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10601)


Mobile app stores receive numerous reviews that contain valuable feedbacks raised by users. Incorporating user reviews into iterative delivery of new App versions would improve the quality and ratings of Apps. To date, there is no explicit answer on whether and to what degree App developers make use of user reviews sufficiently and timely. In this paper, we extract requested features in user reviews and updated features in new versions, identify the latent relation between them, and discover 7 types of Update Patterns (UPs) by grouping similar Atomic Update Units (AUs). UPs delineate common behavioral characteristics of acting on user reviews from perspectives of feature intensity trend, sufficiency and responsiveness. Statistics are conducted to explore the similarity/difference between exhibited update patterns w.r.t. Apps, features, and time. Results would help developers get a clear understanding on their own habits on how to act on user reviews, and thus offer suggestions on utilizing user reviews more efficiently in App development.


Mobile App App store User review Atomic Update Unit (AU) Update Pattern (UP) Empirical study 



Work in this paper is supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 61772155, 61472106).


  1. 1.
    Carreño, L.V.G., Winbladh, K.: Analysis of user comments: an approach for software requirements evolution. In: International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 582–591. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cerf, V.G.: Apps and the web. Commun. ACM 59(2), 7–7 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen, N., Lin, J., Hoi, S.C., Xiao, X., Zhang, B.: Ar-miner: mining informative reviews for developers from mobile app. marketplace. In: International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 767–778. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cugola, G., Ghezzi, C., Pinto, L.S., Tamburrelli, G.: Adaptive service-oriented mobile applications: A declarative approach. In: International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing, pp. 607–614. Springer (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Finkelstein, A., Harman, M., Jia, Y., Martin, W., Sarro, F., Zhang, Y.: App. store analysis: Mining app. stores for relationships between customer, business and technical characteristics. Research Note of UCL Department of Computer Science 14, 10 (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gorla, A., Tavecchia, I., Gross, F., Zeller, A.: Checking app. behavior against app. descriptions. In: International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 1025–1035. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Guzman, E., Maalej, W.: How do users like this feature? a fine grained sentiment analysis of app. reviews. In: International Conference on Requirements Engineering, pp. 153–162. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hao, Y., Wang, Z., Xu, X.: Empirical study on the interface and feature evolutions of mobile apps. In: International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing, pp. 657–665. Springer (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Iacob, C., Harrison, R.: Retrieving and analyzing mobile apps feature requests from online reviews. In: IEEE Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories, pp. 41–44. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Iacob, C., Harrison, R., Faily, S.: Online reviews as first class artifacts in mobile app. development. In: International Conference on Mobile Computing, Applications, and Services, pp. 47–53. Springer (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Khalid, H., Shihab, E., Nagappan, M., Hassan, A.E.: What do mobile app users complain about? IEEE Softw. 32(3), 70–77 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maalej, W., Nabil, H.: Bug report, feature request, or simply praise? on automatically classifying app. reviews. In: IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering, pp. 116–125. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Martin, W., Sarro, F., Harman, M.: Causal impact analysis applied to app. releases in google play and windows phone store. Research Note of UCL Department of Computer Science 15, 07 (2015)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Martin, W., Sarro, F., Jia, Y., Zhang, Y., Harman, M.: A survey of app. store analysis for software engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, PP(99), 1–32 (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    McIlroy, S., Ali, N., Hassan, A.E.: Fresh apps: an empirical study of frequently-updated mobile apps in the google play store. Emp. Softw. Eng. 21(3), 1346–1370 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    McIlroy, S., Ali, N., Khalid, H., Hassan, A.E.: Analyzing and automatically labelling the types of user issues that are raised in mobile app reviews. Emp. Softw. Eng. 21(3), 1067–1106 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nayebi, M., Adams, B., Ruhe, G.: Release practices for mobile apps-what do users and developers think?. In: IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution, and Reengineering, vol. 1, pp. 552–562. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pagano, D., Maalej, W.: User feedback in the appstore: An empirical study. In: IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering, pp. 125–134. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Palomba, F., Linares-Vásquez, M., Bavota, G., Oliveto, R., Di Penta, M., Poshyvanyk, D., De Lucia, A.: User reviews matter! tracking crowdsourced reviews to support evolution of successful apps. In: IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution, pp. 291–300. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Syer, M.D., Nagappan, M., Hassan, A.E., Adams, B.: Revisiting prior empirical findings for mobile apps: An empirical case study on the 15 most popular open-source android apps. In: Conference of the Center for Advanced Studies on Collaborative Research, pp. 283–297. IBM Corp. (2013)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Takahashi, H., Nakagawa, H., Tsuchiya, T.: Towards automatic requirements elicitation from feedback comments: Extracting requirements topics using lda. In: International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, pp. 489–494 (2015)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vu, P.M., Nguyen, T.T., Pham, H.V., Nguyen, T.T.: Mining user opinions in mobile app. reviews: A keyword-based approach. In: International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, pp. 749–759. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wang, H., Wang, Z., Xu, X.: Time-aware customer preference sensing and satisfaction prediction in a dynamic service market. In: International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing, pp. 236–251. Springer (2016)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yan, X., Guo, J., Lan, Y., Cheng, X.: A biterm topic model for short texts. In: International World Wide Web Conference, pp. 1445–1456. ACM (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shance Wang
    • 1
  • Zhongjie Wang
    • 1
    Email author
  • Xiaofei Xu
    • 1
  • Quan Z. Sheng
    • 2
  1. 1.Harbin Institute of TechnologyHarbinChina
  2. 2.Macquarie UniversitySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations