Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Framework for Software Quality Evaluation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Product Focused Software Process Improvement (PROFES 2002)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2559))

Abstract

The primary objective of this paper was to propose and empirically test a theoretical model for Software Quality Evaluation based on Gutman's Means-End Chain Model. Recent studies of Gutman's Model have found it significant for software quality evaluation. As such the proposed framework introduces the first theoretical model for software quality evaluation, which considers the motivation behind the quality evaluation, and the utilization of cognitive structures to describe these relationships. The framework not only gives the rationale for the choice of characteristics used in software quality evaluation, but also introduces the possibility that the characteristics can be used to measure the capability for attaining desired consequences and sought after values. To test this proposed framework, a study of 22 commercial Australian companies was conducted and analyzed with Path Analysis. Results of the analysis provided a number of important insights and suggest several conclusions. The study showed (1) that there is support for applying Gutman's Means-end chain model as the theoretical foundation for a framework on software quality evaluation; (2) that characteristics can be used as a measure to predict the capability of the software on desired consequences and values; (3) that non-ISO9126 characteristics are also important for software evaluation; (4) that the characteristic, consequence, value relationship can be valuable to benefit the Goal Question Metric model

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Wong, B. & Jeffery, R.: Cognitive Structures of Software Evaluation: A Means-End Chain Analysis of Quality, Proceedings of the Third International Conference, PROFES 2001, 2001, pp 6–26.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wong, B: The Appropriateness of Gutman’s Means End Chain Model in Software Evaluation, Proceedings of the 2002 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, ISESE 2002, pp 56–65.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wong, B. & Jeffery, R.: Quality Metrics: ISO9126 and Stakeholder Perceptions, Proceedings of the Second Australian Conference on Software Metrics, 1995, pp 54–65.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Wong, B. & Jeffery, R.: A Pilot Study of Stakeholder Perceptions of Quality, Technical Report, CSIRO, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gutman, J.: A Means-End Chain Model Based on Consumer Categorization Processes, Journal of Marketing, 46 (Spring): 60–72.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gutman. J.: Means-End Chains as Goal Hierarchies, Psychology & Marketing, 14 (6):1997 545–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bagozzi, R.: Goal-directed behaviours in marketing: cognitive and emotional, Psychology & Marketing, 14, Sept 1997, pp 539–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Valette-Florence, P.: A Causal Analysis of Means-End Hierarchies in a Crosscultural Context: Metholodogical Refinements, Journal of Business Research, v 42 No 2 June 1998, pp 161–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bagozzi, R. and Dabholkar, P.: Discursive psychology: an alternative conceptual foundation to means-end chain theory, Psychology & Marketing, 17, July 2000, pp 535–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kahle L, Beatty S and Homer P.: Alternative Measurement Approaches to Consumer Values: The List of Values (LOV) and Values and Life Style (VALS), Journal of Consumer Research, 13 December, 1986, 405–409.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Oppenheim A: Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement, London: Pinter, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Payne S: The Art of Asking Questions, New Jersey: Princeton University, 1951.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Maddala G: Introduction to Econometrics, New York: Macmillan, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kim J and Mueller C: Introduction to Factor Analysis. What it is and how to do it, London: Sage, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Anderson T and Zelditch M: Basic Course in Statistics, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wong, B: An Investigation of the Cognitive Structures used in Software Quality Evaluation, Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of New South Wales, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wright S: The Method of Path Coefficients, Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 5, 1934, pp. 161–215.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Ullman J B: Structural Equation Modeling (in Using Multivariate Statistics, Third Edition, B G Tabachnick and L S Fidell Eds), HarperCollins College Publishers, New York, NY, 1996, pp. 709–819.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Bollen K A: Structural Equations with Latent Variables, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1989.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Marsh H W, Balla J R and McDonald R P: Goodness of Fit Indices in Confirmatory Factor Analysis: The Effect of Samle Size, Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 1988, pp. 391–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Tanaka J S: Multifaceted Conceptions of Fit in Structural Equation Model, in K. A. Bollen & J. Scott Long (Editors), Testing Structural Equation Models, Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1993, pp. 10–39.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hoyle R and Panter A: Writing About Structural Equation Models, in Structural Equation Modeling, Concepts, Issues and Applications, R. H. Hoyle (ed), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA 1995, pp. 158–176.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Chin W W: Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling, Management Information Systems Quarterly, 22(1), Mar 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  24. MacCallum R C, Wegener D T, Uchino B N, Fagbrigar L R: The Problem of Equivalent Models in Applications of Covaraiance Structure Analysis, Psychological Bulletin, 114(1), 1993, pp.185–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Breckler S J: Application of Covariance Structure Modeling in Psychology: Cause for Concern?, Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 1990, pp. 260–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Jöreskog K G & Sörbom D: Lisrel 8: User’s Reference Guide, Chicago: Scientific Software, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Bentler P M: Drug use and personality in Adolescence and Young Adulthood: Structural Model with Nonnormal Variables, Child Development, 58, 1987, pp. 65–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Bentler P M & Bonnett D G: Significance Tests and Goodness of Fit in the Analysis of Covariance Structures, Psychological Bulletin, 88, 1980, pp. 588–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Bentler P M: Comparative Fit Indexes in Structural Model, Psychological Bulletin, 107, 1990, pp. 238–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Cohen J: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences, 2nd Edition, Hillsdale,NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Rombach D and Basili V: Practical Benefits of Goal-Oriented Measurement, Proceedings Annual Workshop of the Centre for Software Reliability: Reliability and Measurement, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany: Elsevier, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Information Technology, University of Technology, Broadway, PO Box 123, 2007, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Bernard Wong

  2. School of Computer Science & Engineering, University of New South Wales, 2052, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Ross Jeffery

Authors
  1. Bernard Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ross Jeffery
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information Processing Science, University of Oulu, P.O. Box 3000, 90014, Oulun yliopisto, Finland

    Markku Oivo

  2. VTT Electronics, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, P.O. Box 1100, 90571, Oulu, Finland

    Seija Komi-Sirviö

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Wong, B., Jeffery, R. (2002). A Framework for Software Quality Evaluation. In: Oivo, M., Komi-Sirviö, S. (eds) Product Focused Software Process Improvement. PROFES 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2559. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36209-6_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36209-6_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-00234-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-36209-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation