Industry Practices in the Classification of User Reviews into Non-Functional Requirements and Their Traceability to Release Notes

preprint OA: closed CC-BY-4.0
AI-generated deep summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-24 · read from full text

This paper examines industry practices for classifying online user reviews into non-functional requirement (NFR) categories and for establishing traceability from those reviews to mobile application release notes. Using a structured survey, the authors collected data from 93 practitioners across ten software companies in Saudi Arabia, focusing on current workflows, challenges, and approaches for NFR classification and traceability. They find that user reviews are used as input to requirements engineering, but the processes for extracting NFRs and maintaining traceability to release notes are largely manual, inconsistently formalized, and challenged by linguistic ambiguity and high data volume. The paper does not explicitly discuss endometriosis or adenomyosis; it was included in the corpus via a keyword match in the upstream search index.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

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.
Full text 14,248 characters · extracted from preprint-html · click to expand
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.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: preprint-html

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-22T02:00:06.705733+00:00
License: CC-BY-4.0