A Digital Library Model for the Grey Literature of Academic Institutes

Chrissikopoulos, Vassilios; Georgiou, Dimitrios; Koziris, Nectarios; Toraki, Katerina; Tsanakas, Panayiotis

doi:10.1007/3-540-49653-x_68

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Grey literature, though not peer-reviewed thoroughly, is still an important source of information. 3,18,58,61,62 Grey publications embrace and embody works-authored, edited, translated, compiled, or otherwise changed by many researchersassociated with multiple establishments in many countries. This subsequently leads to one of the major distinct challenges that grey literature faces: the liability of compliance with native, national, and international law(s).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…where publishing is not the primary activity of the producing body.” According to the definition of Luxumberg and Grey Net community conference, proceedings, thesis, working papers, reports, bibliographies, technical specifications, and government policy documents belong to the grey literature. Grey literature, though not peer‐reviewed thoroughly, is still an important source of information 3,18,58,61,62 …”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On the utilization of non‐quality assessed literature in software engineering research

Yasin

Fatima

Liu

et al. 2022

J Software Evolu Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quality of research and knowledge sources can be a critical factor to judge the quality of the research citing them. The prevailing online dissemination of research via blogs, websites, experience reports, and white papers can be helpful as it minimizes potential publication biases. In this paper, we have (i) identified the body of software engineering (SE) literature that is non‐indexed by Web‐of‐Science but has been used in published SE systematic literature review (SLR) studies (as primary studies); (ii) proposed a checklist‐based method for quality assessment of non‐indexed and grey literature; (iii) empirically evaluated the effectiveness of the proposed method; (iv) searched primary studies retrieved from the SLRs in DBLP and Google Scholar (GS) to verify whether DBLP or Google Scholar can act as viable options to search for non‐indexed Web‐of‐Science (non‐WOS‐indexed) literature. Besides proposing our synthesized checklist method, we found that (i) SE literature reviews use significantly non‐indexed Web‐of‐Science sources; (ii) DBLP only covers a portion of the non‐WOS‐indexed reference, whereas GS has a more complete coverage of the non‐indexed reference in comparison. Preliminary evaluation of the proposed quality assessment point system‐based and checklist‐based methods shows it to be a viable way to assess quality of the non‐indexed and grey literature.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%