Research Article Reducing Requirements Ambiguity via Gamification: Comparison with Traditional Techniques Hafsa Shareef Dar , 1,2 Salma Imtiaz , 1 and Muhammad IkramUllah Lali 3 1 Department of Computer Science & Software Engineering, Faculty of Basic & Applied Sciences IIU Islamabad, Islamabad, Pakistan 2 Department of Software Engineering, Faculty of Computing & IT, University of Gujrat, Gujrat City, Pakistan 3 Department of Information Sciences, University of Education Lahore, Jauharabad Campus, Lahore, Pakistan Correspondence should be addressed to Hafsa Shareef Dar; hafsa.dar@uog.edu.pk Received 18 May 2022; Revised 21 June 2022; Accepted 27 June 2022; Published 18 July 2022 Academic Editor: Dalin Zhang Copyright © 2022 Hafsa Shareef Dar et al. is is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Requirements elicitation is one of the most signiﬁcant activities of requirements engineering (RE) process. Poorly speciﬁed requirements can lead to a failed project. Various elicitation techniques are used to elicit requirements from the users and other stakeholders, each having its own pros and cons. Lack of user engagement, less user involvement, textual nature of the re- quirements, time taking process are some of the major problems that make it diﬃcult to perform elicitation via traditional techniques. Moreover, these problems further create other challenges such as ambiguity, inconsistency, and incompleteness in requirements. Currently, researchers have focused on reducing ambiguity in requirements with the help of diﬀerent techniques such as natural language processing techniques, requirement templates, and formal methods; however, these techniques work on reducing ambiguity during speciﬁcation or from speciﬁed requirements. One of the “young’ and exciting way of engaging users in requirements elicitation of a system is “Gamiﬁcation’, which helps in user engagement into the system. We intend to discover how gamiﬁcation helps in reducing ambiguity by engaging stakeholders in an interactive manner. In this review study, we have reviewed traditional techniques used to detect and reduce requirements ambiguity. On the contrary, we have also presented the signiﬁcance of gamiﬁcation in requirements elicitation and the popular but eﬀective game elements used in similar systems. Furthermore, this study highlights the signiﬁcance of using gamiﬁcation in requirements elicitation, which is beneﬁcial to software development team as well as the users involved in the system. 1. Introduction Requirements are gathered during requirements elici- tation using diﬀerent methods [1], but this activity has many challenges such as lack of requirements under- standing, less user involvement, and more user expec- tation from the system under development [2]. ese challenges create major problems in the system in later stages. However, the requirements must be speciﬁed with great care to avoid any kind of ambiguity during software development. In requirements engineering (RE), ambiguity is deﬁned as “having multiple interpretations despite the readers knowledge of the RE context”[3]. Literature is evident that ambiguity in requirements is a more intractable problem than the other problems in requirements like misunderstood and incomplete requirements [4] because requirements are speciﬁed in natural language (NL) [5, 6]. One way to avoid ambiguity is speciﬁcation of requirements in formal lan- guages. e formal languages are based on mathematical evaluations to strictly deﬁne the syntax and semantics of the language and are helpful in equivalence veriﬁcation of the requirements between speciﬁcation and implementation phase. Writing formal speciﬁcations is a complex and time taking process and requires expertise. Although formal and constrained languages are proposed due to their structure to avoid ambiguity, they lack the depth of NL in expressing the concept [7]. Hindawi Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience Volume 2022, Article ID 3183411, 12 pages https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3183411