An Analysis of the Empirical Software Engineering over the last 10 Editions of Brazilian Software Engineering Symposium

Monteiro, Davi; Gadelha, Rômulo; Alencar, Thayse; Neves, Bruno Silveira; Yeltsin, Italo; Gomes, Thiago; Cortés, Mariela I.

doi:10.1145/3131151.3131158

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Emâmbito nacional, Silveira Neto et al [2013] analisaram a evolução das 24 primeiras edições do SBES considerando múltiplos fatores, incluindo os temas de pesquisa mais investigados, os autores mais produtivos e mais citados, e a proporção de integrantes nacionais e internacionais do comitê de programa. Monteiro et al [2017] investigaram a evolução das publicações de 10 edições do SBES em temas relacionadosà Engenharia de Software Experimental. Recentemente, Pacheco et al [2019] estudaram a diversidade do comitê de programa do SBES em termos do gênero e da localização geográfica de seus integrantes.…”

Section: Trabalhos Relacionadosunclassified

Quão Fechada é a Comunidade do SBES? TL;DR: Não Passarás!

Mendonça

Steinmacher

Wiese

et al. 2021

Anais Do I Workshop De Práticas De Ciência Aberta Para Engenharia De Software (OpenScienSE 2021)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

O Simpósio Brasileiro de Engenharia de Software (SBES) é o principal evento da comunidade brasileira de Engenharia de Software. No entanto, pouco se sabe sobre o quão aberta ou fechada é a comunidade do SBES para novos pesquisadores independentes. Este artigo analisa a “abertura” da comunidade do SBES em termos do percentual de artigos publicados nas edições de 2015 a 2020 cujos autores não atuaram como membros do comitê de programa nem publicaram artigos em cinco edições anteriores do evento. Os resultados mostram que o SBES é um evento de difícil acesso a novos pesquisadores, com cerca de 91%, em média, dos artigos publicados na trilha de pesquisa tendo pelo menos um autor que já faz parte da comunidade.

show abstract

Section: Trabalhos Relacionadosunclassified

Quão Fechada é a Comunidade do SBES? TL;DR: Não Passarás!

Mendonça

Steinmacher

Wiese

et al. 2021

Anais Do I Workshop De Práticas De Ciência Aberta Para Engenharia De Software (OpenScienSE 2021)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although interesting, this is not the focus of this paper. Monteiro et al (2017) and colleagues conducted a quasi-controlled experiment with 201 papers published between 2007-2016 in SBES. The paper discussed a portrait of which empirical methods were most commonly used, how validations were made, and how threats to validity were reported.…”

Section: Bibliometric Studies In Software Engineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analyzing the evolution and diversity of SBES Program Committee

Pacheco¹,

Wiese²,

Cartaxo³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering (SBES) is one of the most important Latin American Software Engineering conferences. It was first held in 1987, and in 2019 marks its 33rd edition. Over these years, many researchers have participated in SBES, attending the conference, submitting, and reviewing papers. The researchers who participate in the Program Committee (PC) and perform the reviewers' role are fundamentally important to SBES, since their evaluations (e.g., deciding whether a paper is accepted or not) have the potential of drawing what SBES is now. Knowing that diversity is an important aspect of any group work, we wanted to understand diversity in the SBES PC community. We investigated a number of characteristics of SBES PC members, including their gender and geographic location. We also analyzed the turnover and renovation of the committee. Among the findings, we observed that although the number of participants in the SBES PC has increased over the years, most of them are men (∼80%) and from the Southeast and Northeast of Brazil, with very few members from the North region. We also observed that there is a small turnover: during the 2010 decade, only 11% of new members were added to the PC. Finally, we investigated the participation of the PC members publishing papers at SBES. We observed that only 24% of the papers accepted to SBES were authored by members who were not committee members of the respective year. Moreover, committee members usually do not collaborate among themselves: a significant number of the papers are authored by the PC members and students. This paper may contribute to the SBES community, in particular, its special interest group, in understanding the needs and challenges of the PC's participants.

show abstract