access icon free Externalising tacit knowledge of the systematic review process

Systematic Reviews (SRs) have recently intensified in Software Engineering. However, there is a lack of work that makes explicit how the process to perform SR is in practice. The goal of this paper is externalising the process that reflects how SRs are currently performed, transforming tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge. We describe the phases and activities that compose the process and the relationship among them, and explore the iterative characteristic of this process, focusing on intra- and inter-phase iterations that are necessary to conduct the process appropriately. To achieve the proposed goal, we devised the process based on practical experience acquired for several years by research groups in Software Engineering, which include graduate students and researchers who have applied SR. The process has been applied in several SRs and seems to be effective in keeping the focus of the review at all phases. Moreover, the externalisation of the process has been useful to help researchers improving the process execution quality. As the process reflects the practice and is explained in details, it can be used as a guide to better understand the SR process and its details. This shall contribute to improve all SR process phases, and hence the quality of SR results.

Inspec keywords: software engineering; iterative methods

Other keywords: process execution quality; SR process phases; software engineering; inter-phase iteration; intra-phase iteration; explicit knowledge; iterative characteristic; systematic review process; graduate students; tacit knowledge

Subjects: Software engineering techniques; Interpolation and function approximation (numerical analysis)

References

    1. 1)
      • 15. Zhang, H., Muhammad, A.: ‘Systematic reviews in software engineering: an empirical investigation’, Inf. Softw. Technol., 2013, 55, (7), pp. 13411354 (doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2012.09.008).
    2. 2)
      • 34. Felizardo, K., MacDonell, S., Mendes, E., Maldonado, J.: ‘A systematic mapping on the use of visual data mining to support the conduct of systematic literature reviews’, J. Softw. (JSW J.), 2011, 7, (2), pp. 450461.
    3. 3)
      • 20. Stapic, S., LÓpez, E.G., Cabot, A.G., Ortega, d.M., Strahonja, L.V.: ‘Performing systematic literature review in software engineering’. Central European Conf. Information and Intelligent Systems (CECIIS’ 12), 2012, pp. 441447.
    4. 4)
      • 26. Dybå, T., Dingsøyr, T.: ‘Strength of evidence in systematic reviews in software engineering’. Proc. Second ACM-IEEE Int. Symp. Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), 2008, pp. 178187.
    5. 5)
      • 3. Zhang, H., Muhammad, A.: ‘An empirical investigation of systematic reviews in software engineering’. Proc. Fifth Int. Symp. Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), 2011, pp. 110.
    6. 6)
      • 8. Sulayman, M., Mendes, E.: ‘A systematic literature review of software process improvement in small and medium web companies’. Advances in Software Engineering, vol. 59 of Communications in Computer and Information Science, 2009, pp. 18.
    7. 7)
      • 2. Kitchenham, B., Brereton, P., Turner, M., et al: ‘Refining the systematic literature review process – two participant-observer case studies’, Empir. Softw. Eng. (ESE), 2010, 15, (6), pp. 618653 (doi: 10.1007/s10664-010-9134-8).
    8. 8)
      • 23. Boell, S., Cezec-Kecmanovic, D.: ‘Are systematic reviews better, less biased and of higher quality?’. Proc. 19th European Conf. Information Systems (ECIS), Helsinki, Finland, 2011.
    9. 9)
      • 4. Petersen, K., Nauman, B.: ‘Identifying strategies for study selection in systematic reviews and maps’. Proc. Fifth Int. Symp. Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), 2011, pp. 110.
    10. 10)
      • 14. Kitchenham, B., Brereton, P., Turner, M., et al: ‘The impact of limited search procedures for systematic literature reviews – a participant-observer case study’. Proc. Third Int. Symp. Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), 2009, pp. 336345.
    11. 11)
      • 25. Kitchenham, B., Brereton, O., Owen, S., Butcher, J., Jefferies, C.: ‘Length and readability of structured software engineering abstracts’, IET Softw., 2008, 2, (1), pp. 3745 (doi: 10.1049/iet-sen:20070044).
    12. 12)
      • 24. Dybå, T., Dingsøyr, T., Hanssen, G.: ‘Applying systematic reviews to diverse study types: an experience report’. Proc. First Int. Symp. Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), 2007, pp. 225234.
    13. 13)
      • 29. Cruzes, D., Dyba, T.: ‘Recommended steps for thematic synthesis in software engineering’. Proc. Fifth Int. Symp. Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), 2011, pp. 275284.
    14. 14)
      • 21. Kitchenham, B., Charters, S.: ‘Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering’. Technical report, EBSE 2007-001, Keele University and Durham University, UK, 2007.
    15. 15)
      • 12. Bailey, J., Zhang, C., Budgen, D., Turner, M., Charters, S.: ‘Search engine overlaps: do they agree or disagree?’. Proc. Second Int. Workshop on Realising Evidence-Based Software Engineering (REBSE), 2007, pp. 16.
    16. 16)
      • 16. Riaz, M., Sulayman, N., Salleh, M., Mendes, E.: ‘Experiences conducting systematic reviews from Novices’ perspective’. Proc. 14th Int. Conf. Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE), BCS-eWiC, 2010, pp. 110.
    17. 17)
      • 28. Ferrari, F., Maldonado, J.: ‘Experimenting with a multi-iteration systematic review in software engineering’. Proc. Fifth Experimental Software Engineering Latin America Workshop (ESELAW), Salvador, Brazil, 2008, pp. 110.
    18. 18)
      • 27. Dieste, O., López, M., Ramos, F.: ‘Formalizing a systematic review updating process’. Proc. Sixth Conf. Software Engineering Research, Management and Applications (SERA), 2008, pp. 143150.
    19. 19)
      • 5. Mendes, E.: ‘A systematic review of web engineering research’. Proc. Fourth Int. Symp. Empirical Software Engineering (ISESE), 2005, pp. 498507.
    20. 20)
      • 7. MacDonell, S.G., Shepperd, M.J.: ‘Comparing local and global software effort estimation models – reflections on a systematic review’. Proc. First Int. Symp. Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), 2007, pp. 401409.
    21. 21)
      • 9. Dieste, O., Juristo, N.: ‘Systematic review and aggregation of empirical studies on elicitation techniques’, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 2011, 37, (2), pp. 283304 (doi: 10.1109/TSE.2010.33).
    22. 22)
      • 33. Antonio, E.A., Ferrari, F.C., Fabbri, S.C.P.F.: ‘A systematic mapping of architectures for embedded software’. Proc. Second Brazilian Conf. Critical Embedded Systems (CBSEC), 2012, pp. 1823.
    23. 23)
      • 6. Hannay, J.E., Sjøberg, D.I.K., Dybå, T.: ‘A systematic review of theory use in software engineering experiments’, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 2007, 33, (2), pp. 8710 (doi: 10.1109/TSE.2007.12).
    24. 24)
      • 17. Kitchenham, B.: ‘Procedures for performing systematic reviews, joint technical report TR/SE-0401 (Keele) – 0400011 T.1 (NICTA)’. Software Engineering Group – Department of Computer Science – Keele University and Empirical Software Engineering – National ICT Australia Ltd., 2004.
    25. 25)
      • 22. Zhang, H., Muhammad, P., Tell, A.B.: ‘Identifying relevant studies in software engineering’, Inf. Softw. Technol., 2011, 53, (1), pp. 625637 (doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2010.12.010).
    26. 26)
      • 1. Brereton, P., Kitchenham, B., Budgen, D., Turner, M., Khalil, M.: ‘Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain’, J. Syst. Softw., 2007, 80, (4), pp. 571583 (doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2006.07.009).
    27. 27)
      • 30. Ferrari, F.C.: ‘A contribution to the fault-based testing of aspect-oriented software’. PhD thesis, Instituto de Ciências Matemáticas e de ComputaÇão, Universidade de São Paulo (ICMC/USP), São Carlos/SPBrasil, 2010.
    28. 28)
      • 32. Molléri, J.S., Silva, L.E., Benitti, F.B.V.: ‘Proposal of an automated approach to support the systematic review of literature process’. Proc. 25th Conf. Software Engineering & Knowledge Engineering (SEKE), 2013, pp. 488493.
    29. 29)
      • 18. Biolchini, J., Mian, P., Natali, A., Travassos, G.: ‘Systematic review in software engineering: relevance and utility’. Technical report, PESC/- COPPE/UFRJ, 2005.
    30. 30)
      • 10. Salleh, N., Mendes, E., Grundy, J.: ‘Empirical studies of pair programming for CS/SE teaching in higher education: a systematic literature review’, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 2011, 37, (4), pp. 509525 (doi: 10.1109/TSE.2010.59).
    31. 31)
      • 19. Staples, M., Niazi, M.: ‘Experiences using systematic review guidelines’, J. Syst. Softw., 2007, 80, (1), pp. 14251437 (doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2006.09.046).
    32. 32)
      • 13. Dieste, O., Griman, A., Juristo, N.: ‘Developing search strategies for detecting relevant experiments’, Empir. Softw. Eng., 2009, 14, (5), pp. 513539 (doi: 10.1007/s10664-008-9091-7).
    33. 33)
      • 31. Petersen, K., Feldt, R., Mujtaba, S., Mattsson, M.: ‘Systematic mapping studies in software engineering’. Proc. 12th Int. Conf. Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE), BCS-eWiC, University of Bari, Italy, 2008, pp. 110.
    34. 34)
      • 11. Dieste, O., Padua, A.: ‘Developing search strategies for detecting relevant experiments for systematic reviews’. Proc. First Int. Symp. Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), 2007, pp. 215224.
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1049/iet-sen.2013.0029
Loading

Related content

content/journals/10.1049/iet-sen.2013.0029
pub_keyword,iet_inspecKeyword,pub_concept
6
6
Loading