Classification and trend analysis of UML books (1997–2009)

Garousi, Vahid

doi:10.1007/s10270-011-0189-9

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As shown in Figure 5, we also used our own expertise from our recently-published MLRs [43,44,54,62] and one GLR [42]. Additionally, our experience includes several SLR studies, e.g., [34][35][36][64][65][66][67][68]].…”

Section: Figure 5-an Overview Of Our Methodology For Developing the Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The SLR guidelines of Kitchenham and Charters [22] state that specifying the RQs is the most important part of any systematic review. To make the connection among the review's goal, research (review) questions (RQs) as well as the metrics to collect in a more structured and traceable way, we have often made use of the Goal-Question-Metric (GQM) methodology [90] in our previous SM, SLR and MLR studies [34][35][36][64][65][66][67][68]. In fact, the RQs drive the entire review by affecting the following aspects directly:…”

Section: Setting the Goal And Raising The Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Guidelines for including grey literature and conducting multivocal literature reviews in software engineering

Garousi

Felderer

Mäntylä

2019

Information and Software Technology

Self Cite

488

458

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: A Multivocal Literature Review (MLR) is a form of a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) which includes the grey literature (e.g., blog posts, videos and white papers) in addition to the published (formal) literature (e.g., journal and conference papers). MLRs are useful for both researchers and practitioners since they provide summaries both the state-of-the art and -practice in a given area. MLRs are popular in other fields and have recently started to appear in software engineering (SE). As more MLR studies are conducted and reported, it is important to have a set of guidelines to ensure high quality of MLR processes and their results.Objective: There are several guidelines to conduct SLR studies in SE. However, several phases of MLRs differ from those of traditional SLRs, for instance with respect to the search process and source quality assessment. Therefore, SLR guidelines are only partially useful for conducting MLR studies. Our goal in this paper is to present guidelines on how to conduct MLR studies in SE. Method:To develop the MLR guidelines, we benefit from several inputs: (1) existing SLR guidelines in SE, (2), a literature survey of MLR guidelines and experience papers in other fields, and (3) our own experiences in conducting several MLRs in SE. We took the popular SLR guidelines of Kitchenham and Charters as the baseline and extended/adopted them to conduct MLR studies in SE. All derived guidelines are discussed in the context of an already-published MLR in SE as the running example. Results:The resulting guidelines cover all phases of conducting and reporting MLRs in SE from the planning phase, over conducting the review to the final reporting of the review. In particular, we believe that incorporating and adopting a vast set of experience-based recommendations from MLR guidelines and experience papers in other fields have enabled us to propose a set of guidelines with solid foundations. Conclusion:Having been developed on the basis of several types of experience and evidence, the provided MLR guidelines will support researchers to effectively and efficiently conduct new MLRs in any area of SE. The authors recommend the researchers to utilize these guidelines in their MLR studies and then share their lessons learned and experiences.

show abstract

Section: Figure 5-an Overview Of Our Methodology For Developing the Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Setting the Goal And Raising The Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Guidelines for including grey literature and conducting multivocal literature reviews in software engineering

Garousi

Felderer

Mäntylä

2019

Information and Software Technology

Self Cite

488

458

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The guidelines given by [41,55] were used to carry out this MLR. Several other SM and SLR reports, such as [6,26,30], were used to develop the technique. Figure 1 depicts the process that underpins this study.…”

Section: Proposed Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Serious games for teaching agile methods: A review of multivocal literature

Rodríguez

Caino

Resett

2021

Comp Applic In Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Serious games (SGs) have emerged to improve the commitment and performance of user players, since they perform an exact mission, integrating with the game mechanics, thus creating a very attractive mission. In software engineering (SE), SGs have been addressed to increase the commitment of developers. Moreover, the use of SGs is of great interest to train and train future professionals to experience situations that they could face in software development. This study presents a multivocal literature review (MLR) to systematize and categorize the state-of-the-art of SGs for teaching Agile Methods. The MLR allowed software practitioners and teachers to identify cutting-edge methods for evaluating SGs, application domains in which the assessments were carried out, and the main features considered for assessing the educational benefits of SGs. For academics and professionals eager to test SGs in the training field of Agile Methods, the findings are helpful to (i) provide evidence regarding the usage of games in SE education, (ii) design game-based teaching/learning strategies, and (iii) offer a repertoire of tactics for assessing the use of SGs in SE courses. In conclusion, the knowledge collected was structured and classified to provide a response to our research questions, aimed at providing a summary of the key research in this area, as well as defining open issues in the field.

show abstract