为严谨性添加相关性:通过引文上下文分析评估软件工程中 SLR 的贡献

IF 13.3 1区 计算机科学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS Computer Science Review Pub Date : 2024-06-18 DOI:10.1016/j.cosrev.2024.100649
Oscar Díaz , Marcela Genero , Jeremías P. Contell , Mario Piattini
{"title":"为严谨性添加相关性:通过引文上下文分析评估软件工程中 SLR 的贡献","authors":"Oscar Díaz ,&nbsp;Marcela Genero ,&nbsp;Jeremías P. Contell ,&nbsp;Mario Piattini","doi":"10.1016/j.cosrev.2024.100649","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Research in Software Engineering greatly benefits from Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs), in view of the citations they receive. While there has been a focus on improving the quality of SLRs in terms of the process, it remains unclear if this emphasis on rigor has also led to an increase in relevance. This study introduces Citation Context Analysis for SLRs as a method to go beyond simple citation counting by examining the reasons behind citations. To achieve this, we propose the Resonance Scheme, which characterizes how referring papers use SLRs based on the outputs that SLRs can provide, either backward-oriented (such as synthesis or aggregating evidence) or forward-oriented (such as theory building or identifying research gaps). A proof-of-concept demonstrates that most referring papers appreciate SLRs for their synthesis efforts, while only a small number refer to forward-oriented outputs. This approach is expected to be useful for three stakeholders. First, SLR producers can use the scheme to capture the contributions of their SLRs. Second, SLR consumers, such as Ph.D. students looking for research gaps, can easily identify the contributions of interest. Third, SLR reviewers can use the scheme as a tool to assess the contributions that merit SLR publication.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48633,"journal":{"name":"Computer Science Review","volume":"53 ","pages":"Article 100649"},"PeriodicalIF":13.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adding relevance to rigor: Assessing the contributions of SLRs in Software Engineering through Citation Context Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Oscar Díaz ,&nbsp;Marcela Genero ,&nbsp;Jeremías P. Contell ,&nbsp;Mario Piattini\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cosrev.2024.100649\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Research in Software Engineering greatly benefits from Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs), in view of the citations they receive. While there has been a focus on improving the quality of SLRs in terms of the process, it remains unclear if this emphasis on rigor has also led to an increase in relevance. This study introduces Citation Context Analysis for SLRs as a method to go beyond simple citation counting by examining the reasons behind citations. To achieve this, we propose the Resonance Scheme, which characterizes how referring papers use SLRs based on the outputs that SLRs can provide, either backward-oriented (such as synthesis or aggregating evidence) or forward-oriented (such as theory building or identifying research gaps). A proof-of-concept demonstrates that most referring papers appreciate SLRs for their synthesis efforts, while only a small number refer to forward-oriented outputs. This approach is expected to be useful for three stakeholders. First, SLR producers can use the scheme to capture the contributions of their SLRs. Second, SLR consumers, such as Ph.D. students looking for research gaps, can easily identify the contributions of interest. Third, SLR reviewers can use the scheme as a tool to assess the contributions that merit SLR publication.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48633,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computer Science Review\",\"volume\":\"53 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100649\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Computer Science Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1574013724000339\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computer Science Review","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1574013724000339","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从系统文献综述 (SLR) 的引用率来看,软件工程领域的研究大大受益于系统文献综述 (SLR)。虽然人们一直在关注如何从流程上提高 SLR 的质量,但对严谨性的强调是否也导致了相关性的提高,这一点仍不清楚。本研究介绍了 SLR 的引文背景分析方法,该方法通过研究引文背后的原因,超越了简单的引文计数。为此,我们提出了 "共振方案"(Resonance Scheme),该方案根据 SLR 所能提供的产出,或面向后方(如综合或汇总证据),或面向前方(如理论构建或确定研究差距),来描述引用论文如何使用 SLR。概念验证表明,大多数参考文献赞赏 SLR 的综合工作,而只有少数参考文献提及前瞻性产出。这种方法预计将对三个利益相关者有用。首先,可持续土地资源生产者可使用该计划来记录其可持续土地资源的贡献。其次,SLR 消费者,如寻找研究空白的博士生,可轻松识别感兴趣的贡献。第三,SLR 审核人员可将该计划作为一种工具,用于评估值得发表 SLR 的贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Adding relevance to rigor: Assessing the contributions of SLRs in Software Engineering through Citation Context Analysis

Research in Software Engineering greatly benefits from Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs), in view of the citations they receive. While there has been a focus on improving the quality of SLRs in terms of the process, it remains unclear if this emphasis on rigor has also led to an increase in relevance. This study introduces Citation Context Analysis for SLRs as a method to go beyond simple citation counting by examining the reasons behind citations. To achieve this, we propose the Resonance Scheme, which characterizes how referring papers use SLRs based on the outputs that SLRs can provide, either backward-oriented (such as synthesis or aggregating evidence) or forward-oriented (such as theory building or identifying research gaps). A proof-of-concept demonstrates that most referring papers appreciate SLRs for their synthesis efforts, while only a small number refer to forward-oriented outputs. This approach is expected to be useful for three stakeholders. First, SLR producers can use the scheme to capture the contributions of their SLRs. Second, SLR consumers, such as Ph.D. students looking for research gaps, can easily identify the contributions of interest. Third, SLR reviewers can use the scheme as a tool to assess the contributions that merit SLR publication.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Computer Science Review
Computer Science Review Computer Science-General Computer Science
CiteScore
32.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
51 days
期刊介绍: Computer Science Review, a publication dedicated to research surveys and expository overviews of open problems in computer science, targets a broad audience within the field seeking comprehensive insights into the latest developments. The journal welcomes articles from various fields as long as their content impacts the advancement of computer science. In particular, articles that review the application of well-known Computer Science methods to other areas are in scope only if these articles advance the fundamental understanding of those methods.
期刊最新文献
From accuracy to approximation: A survey on approximate homomorphic encryption and its applications Image processing and artificial intelligence for apple detection and localization: A comprehensive review A systematic review on security aspects of fog computing environment: Challenges, solutions and future directions A survey of deep learning techniques for detecting and recognizing objects in complex environments Intervention scenarios and robot capabilities for support, guidance and health monitoring for the elderly
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1