Abstract
People post millions of app reviews on Google Play and Apple’s App Store, but developers can struggle to incorporate this feedback in human-centered design processes. Although researchers have developed automated techniques to gather requirement information, including bug reports and feature requests, for developers tasked with app updates, these methods overlook contextual details in app reviews that explain why users encounter problems and offer insight into new design possibilities. However, prior research has not described the relative availability and characteristics of requirement and context information provided by users in app reviews. To address this gap in the literature, this study performs a content analysis of reviews of Citizen, a personal safety app, to show that users often include rich, contextual details about where, why, and how they use Citizen, but rarely discuss explicit requirements that most automated requirements elicitation techniques attempt to gather from app reviews. These findings suggest opportunities to scale human-centered design processes by collecting and classifying contextual details in app reviews to summarize use case scenarios that can provide rationales for app updates and inspire ideas for the design of new features and products.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Dąbrowski, J., Letier, E., Perini, A., Susi, A.: Analysing app reviews for software engineering: a systematic literature review. Empir. Softw. Eng. 27(2), 1–63 (2022)
Panichella, S., Di Sorbo, A., Guzman, E., Visaggio, C.A., Canfora, G., Gall, H.C.: How can I improve my app? Classifying user reviews for software maintenance and evolution. In: IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME 2015), pp. 281–290. IEEE (2015)
Aslam, N., Ramay, W.Y., Xia, K., Sarwar, N.: Convolutional neural network-based classification of app reviews. IEEE Access 8, 185619–185628 (2020)
Phong, M.V., Nguyen, T.T., Pham, H.V., Nguyen, T.T.: Mining user opinions in mobile app reviews: a keyword-based approach. In: IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2015), pp. 749–759. IEEE (2015)
Lim, S., Henriksson, A., Zdravkovic, J.: Data-driven requirements elicitation: a systematic literature review. SN Comput. Sci. 2(1), 1–35 (2021)
Guo, H., Singh, M.P.: Caspar: extracting and synthesizing user stories of problems from app reviews. In: IEEE/ACM International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2010), pp. 628–640. IEEE (2020)
Minen, M.T., Gumpel, T., Ali, S., Sow, F., Toy, K.: What are headache smartphone application (app) users actually looking for in apps: a qualitative analysis of app reviews to determine a patient-centered approach to headache smartphone apps. Headache J. Head Face Pain 60(7), 1392–1401 (2020)
Raharjana, I.K., Siahaan, D., Fatichah, C.: User story extraction from online news for software requirements elicitation: A conceptual model. In: International Joint Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering (JCSSE 2016), pp. 342–347. IEEE (2019)
Genc-Nayebi, N., Abran, A.: A systematic literature review: opinion mining studies from mobile app store user reviews. J. Syst. Softw. 125, 207–219 (2017)
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. Empir. Softw. Eng. 21(3), 1067–1106 (2016)
Khalid, H.: On identifying user complaints of iOS apps. In: International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2013), pp. 1474–1476. IEEE (2013)
Khalid, H., Shihab, E., Nagappan, M., Hassan, A.E.: What do mobile app users complain about? IEEE Softw. 32(3), 70–77 (2014)
Pagano, D., Maalej, W.: User feedback in the App Store: an empirical study. In: IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE 2013), pp. 125–134. IEEE (2013)
McIlroy, S., Shang, W., Ali, N., Hassan, A.E.: Is it worth responding to reviews? Studying the top free apps in google play. IEEE Softw. 34(3), 64–71 (2015)
Iacob, C., Veerappa, V., Harrison, R.: What are you complaining about?: a study of online reviews of mobile applications. In: International BCS Human Computer Interaction Conference 2013, pp. 1–6 (2013)
Carroll, J.M.: Making use: Scenario-Based Design of Human-Computer Interactions. MIT Press, Cambridge (2003)
Neuendorf, K.A.: The Content Analysis Guidebook. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2017)
Freelon, D.: ReCal: Intercoder reliability calculation as a web service. Int. J. Internet Sci. 5(1), 20–33 (2010)
Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G., Freeman, L.C.: UCINET for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis. Analytic Technologies (2002)
Jha, N., Mahmoud, A.: Using frame semantics for classifying and summarizing application store reviews. Empir. Softw. Eng. 23(6), 3734–3767 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-018-9605-x
Patton, J., Economy, P.: User Story Mapping: Discover the Whole Story, Build the Right Product. O’Reilly Media, Inc., Sebastopol (2014)
Grace, R., Fonseca, F.: Participatory asymmetry: theorizing media objects and media flows in a framework of participatory production. First Monday 24(10) (2019)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Grace, R., Burnham, K., Na, H.S. (2023). How Much Context Do Users Provide in App Reviews? Implications for Requirements Elicitation. In: Sserwanga, I., et al. Information for a Better World: Normality, Virtuality, Physicality, Inclusivity. iConference 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13972. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28032-0_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28032-0_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-28031-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-28032-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)