Industry Practices in the Classification of User Reviews into Non-Functional Requirements and Their Traceability to Release Notes | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Industry Practices in the Classification of User Reviews into Non-Functional Requirements and Their Traceability to Release Notes Afra Alrbaiyan, Noureddine Abbadeni This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-9558095/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 4 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Context: Online user reviews are recognised as a valuable source for identifying non-functional requirements (NFRs), such as performance, usability, and reliability. In the context of mobile applications, these reviews provide real-world user feedback that can guide developers in enhancing app quality in future releases. In the literature, several automated methods have been proposed for extracting non-functional requirements and establishing traceability between user reviews and development artefacts such as release notes. However, empirical evidence regarding their adoption and real-world use in industry remains limited. Objective: To address this gap, this study aims to examine industrial practices for classifying user reviews into non-functional requirement (NFR) categories and to investigate whether practitioners establish traceability between these reviews and release notes. Method: We conducted a survey with 93 practitioners involved in mobile application development across ten software companies in Saudi Arabia, using a structured questionnaire to collect data on current practices, challenges, and approaches related to the classification of user reviews into non-functional requirement (NFR) categories and their traceability to release notes. Results: The results show that, within participating organisations, user reviews are a source of input for requirements engineering activities. Nevertheless, actively leveraging user feedback—including identifying non-functional requirements (NFRs) and attempting to maintain their traceability to release notes—the related processes are still predominantly manual and lack consistent formalisation. The study also highlights that analysing user reviews remains challenging, mainly due to their linguistic ambiguity and the large volume of available data. Conclusion: a clear gap exists between the value of user reviews and the maturity of current processes and tool support. This highlights the need for automated or semi-automated approaches, as well as structured methodologies, to improve the extraction, classification, and traceability of NFRs in user-feedback-driven development. User Reviews Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs) NFR Classification Requirements Traceability Requirements Engineering Industry Practices Empirical Study Full Text Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files SupplementarymaterialthematicanalysisIndustryPracticesintheClassificationofUserReviewsintoNonFunctionalRequirementsandTheirTraceabilitytoReleaseNote.pdf Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Reviewers invited by journal 13 May, 2026 Editor assigned by journal 29 Apr, 2026 Submission checks completed at journal 29 Apr, 2026 First submitted to journal 28 Apr, 2026 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-9558095","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":639654155,"identity":"efb6dfb8-c9dd-4530-bd55-75cfa095e783","order_by":0,"name":"Afra Alrbaiyan","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"King Saud University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Afra","middleName":"","lastName":"Alrbaiyan","suffix":""},{"id":639654156,"identity":"c4e7b30c-619d-48ca-accd-ff25e9887755","order_by":1,"name":"Noureddine Abbadeni","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"King Saud University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Noureddine","middleName":"","lastName":"Abbadeni","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-04-28 20:24:43","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9558095/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9558095/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":109305237,"identity":"d09fa81c-6e8e-49d1-9093-385aed1289d5","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-15 09:56:02","extension":"pdf","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":638387,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"IndustryPracticesintheClassificationofUserReviewsintoNonFunctionalRequirementsandTheirTraceabilitytoReleaseNote.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9558095/v1_covered_2a48bdc5-a760-49e7-88f4-fee599c70ef8.pdf"},{"id":109305021,"identity":"4199c950-c9c5-4c05-86ae-41e187bc084b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-15 09:55:28","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":104664,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"SupplementarymaterialthematicanalysisIndustryPracticesintheClassificationofUserReviewsintoNonFunctionalRequirementsandTheirTraceabilitytoReleaseNote.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9558095/v1/14824955d3a1fa497855be95.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Industry Practices in the Classification of User Reviews into Non-Functional Requirements and Their Traceability to Release Notes","fulltext":[],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":false,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":true,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":true,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"
[email protected]","identity":"requirements-engineering","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"reen","sideBox":"Learn more about [Requirements Engineering](http://link.springer.com/journal/766)","snPcode":"766","submissionUrl":"https://submission.springernature.com/new-submission/766/3","title":"Requirements Engineering","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"User Reviews, Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs), NFR Classification, Requirements Traceability, Requirements Engineering, Industry Practices, Empirical Study ","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9558095/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9558095/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eContext: Online user reviews are recognised as a valuable source for identifying non-functional requirements (NFRs), such as performance, usability, and reliability. In the context of mobile applications, these reviews provide real-world user feedback that can guide developers in enhancing app quality in future releases. In the literature, several automated methods have been proposed for extracting non-functional requirements and establishing traceability between user reviews and development artefacts such as release notes. However, empirical evidence regarding their adoption and real-world use in industry remains limited.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eObjective: To address this gap, this study aims to examine industrial practices for classifying user reviews into non-functional requirement (NFR) categories and to investigate whether practitioners establish traceability between these reviews and release notes.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMethod: We conducted a survey with 93 practitioners involved in mobile application development across ten software companies in Saudi Arabia, using a structured questionnaire to collect data on current practices, challenges, and approaches related to the classification of user reviews into non-functional requirement (NFR) categories and their traceability to release notes.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eResults: The results show that, within participating organisations, user reviews are a source of input for requirements engineering activities. Nevertheless, actively leveraging user feedback—including identifying non-functional requirements (NFRs) and attempting to maintain their traceability to release notes—the related processes are still predominantly manual and lack consistent formalisation. The study also highlights that analysing user reviews remains challenging, mainly due to their linguistic ambiguity and the large volume of available data.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConclusion: a clear gap exists between the value of user reviews and the maturity of current processes and tool support. This highlights the need for automated or semi-automated approaches, as well as structured methodologies, to improve the extraction, classification, and traceability of NFRs in user-feedback-driven development.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Industry Practices in the Classification of User Reviews into Non-Functional Requirements and Their Traceability to Release Notes","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-05-15 09:54:02","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9558095/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-05-13T10:04:44+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2026-04-29T09:42:32+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2026-04-29T09:41:50+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Requirements Engineering","date":"2026-04-28T20:13:17+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"
[email protected]","identity":"requirements-engineering","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"reen","sideBox":"Learn more about [Requirements Engineering](http://link.springer.com/journal/766)","snPcode":"766","submissionUrl":"https://submission.springernature.com/new-submission/766/3","title":"Requirements Engineering","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"e067d84c-0f61-4de0-aa20-40e32c085b0d","owner":[],"postedDate":"May 15th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"3","date":"2026-05-13T10:04:44+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2026-04-29T09:42:32+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2026-04-29T09:41:50+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-15T09:54:02+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-05-15 09:54:02","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-9558095","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-9558095","identity":"rs-9558095","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.