Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Defining protocols of systematic literature reviews in software engineering: A survey
Federal University of Technology, BRA.
Federal University of Technology, BRA.
Federal University of Esp'rito Santo, BRA.
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais, BRA.
Show others and affiliations
2017 (English)In: Proceedings - 43rd Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, SEAA 2017 / [ed] Felderer, M; Olsson, HH; Skavhaug, A, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc. , 2017, p. 202-209, article id 8051349Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Context: Despite being defined during the first phase of the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) process, the protocol is usually refined when other phases are performed. Several researchers have reported their experiences in applying SLRs in Software Engineering (SE) however, there is still a lack of studies discussing the iterative nature of the protocol definition, especially how it should be perceived by researchers conducting SLRs. Objective: The main goal of this study is to perform a survey aiming to identify: (i) the perception of SE researchers related to protocol definition; (ii) the activities of the review process that typically lead to protocol refinements; and (iii) which protocol items are refined in those activities. Method: A survey was performed with 53 SE researchers. Results: Our results show that: (i) protocol definition and pilot test are the two activities that most lead to further protocol refinements; (ii) data extraction form is the most modified item. Besides that, this study confirmed the iterative nature of the protocol definition. Conclusions: An iterative pilot testcan facilitate refinements in the protocol. © 2017 IEEE.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc. , 2017. p. 202-209, article id 8051349
Keywords [en]
Protocol Definition, Secondary Study, Survey, Systematic Literature Review, Systematic Mapping Study, Application programs, Iterative methods, Surveying, Surveys, Data extraction, Pilot tests, Protocol refinement, Review process, Systematic literature review (SLR), Systematic mapping studies, Software engineering
National Category
Software Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:bth-15611DOI: 10.1109/SEAA.2017.17ISI: 000426074600030Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85034417529ISBN: 9781538621400 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:bth-15611DiVA, id: diva2:1163520
Conference
43rd Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, (SEAA), Vienna
Available from: 2017-12-07 Created: 2017-12-07 Last updated: 2018-03-23Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Mendes, Emilia

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Mendes, Emilia
By organisation
Department of Computer Science and EngineeringDepartment of Software Engineering
Software Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
isbn
urn-nbn
Total: 52 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf