  Context: Quality requirements (QRs) are a topic of constant discussions both
in industry and academia. Debates entwine around the definition of quality
requirements, the way how to handle them, or their importance for project
success. While many academic endeavors contribute to the body of knowledge
about QRs, practitioners may have different views. In fact, we still lack a
consistent body of knowledge on QRs since much of the discussion around this
topic is still dominated by observations that are strongly context-dependent.
This holds for both academic and practitioners' views. Our assumption is that,
in consequence, those views may differ. Objective: We report on a study to
better understand the extent to which available research statements on quality
requirements, as found in exemplary peer-reviewed and frequently cited
publications, are reflected in the perception of practitioners. Our goal is to
analyze differences, commonalities, and context-dependent grey areas in the
views of academics and practitioners to allow a discussion on potential
misconceptions (on either sides) and opportunities for future research. Method:
We conducted a survey with 109 practitioners to assess whether they agree with
research statements about QRs reflected in the literature. Based on a
statistical model, we evaluate the impact of a set of context factors to the
perception of research statements. Results: Our results show that a majority of
the statements is well respected by practitioners; however, not all of them.
When examining the different groups and backgrounds of respondents, we noticed
interesting deviations of perceptions within different groups that may lead to
new research questions. Conclusions: Our results help identifying prevalent
context-dependent differences about how academics and practitioners view QRs
and pinpointing statements where further research might be useful.
