软件工程中灰色文献的评价

G. D. Angelis, F. Lonetti
{"title":"软件工程中灰色文献的评价","authors":"G. D. Angelis, F. Lonetti","doi":"10.1145/3463274.3463362","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is an ongoing interest in the Software Engineering field for multivocal literature reviews including grey literature. However, at the same time, the role of the grey literature is still controversial, and the benefits of its inclusion in systematic reviews are object of discussion. Some of these arguments concern the quality assessment methods for grey literature entries, which is often considered a challenging and critical task. On the one hand, apart from a few proposals, there is a lack of an acknowledged methodological support for the inclusion of Software Engineering grey literature in systematic surveys. On the other hand, the unstructured shape of the grey literature contents could lead to bias in the evaluation process impacting on the quality of the surveys. This work leverages an approach on fuzzy Likert scales, and it proposes a methodology for managing the explicit uncertainties emerging during the assessment of entries from the grey literature. The methodology also strengthens the adoption of consensus policies that take into account the individual confidence level expressed for each of the collected scores.","PeriodicalId":328024,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"About the Assessment of Grey Literature in Software Engineering\",\"authors\":\"G. D. Angelis, F. Lonetti\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3463274.3463362\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There is an ongoing interest in the Software Engineering field for multivocal literature reviews including grey literature. However, at the same time, the role of the grey literature is still controversial, and the benefits of its inclusion in systematic reviews are object of discussion. Some of these arguments concern the quality assessment methods for grey literature entries, which is often considered a challenging and critical task. On the one hand, apart from a few proposals, there is a lack of an acknowledged methodological support for the inclusion of Software Engineering grey literature in systematic surveys. On the other hand, the unstructured shape of the grey literature contents could lead to bias in the evaluation process impacting on the quality of the surveys. This work leverages an approach on fuzzy Likert scales, and it proposes a methodology for managing the explicit uncertainties emerging during the assessment of entries from the grey literature. The methodology also strengthens the adoption of consensus policies that take into account the individual confidence level expressed for each of the collected scores.\",\"PeriodicalId\":328024,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3463274.3463362\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3463274.3463362","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

在软件工程领域,包括灰色文献在内的多声音文献综述正在引起人们的兴趣。然而,与此同时,灰色文献的作用仍然存在争议,将其纳入系统评价的好处是讨论的对象。其中一些争论涉及灰色文献条目的质量评估方法,这通常被认为是一项具有挑战性和关键的任务。一方面,除了一些建议之外,在系统调查中包含软件工程灰色文献缺乏公认的方法支持。另一方面,灰色文献内容的非结构化形状可能导致评价过程中的偏差,影响调查的质量。这项工作利用了模糊李克特量表的方法,并提出了一种方法,用于管理在灰色文献中评估条目期间出现的明确不确定性。该方法还加强了协商一致政策的采用,该政策考虑到每个收集到的分数所表示的个人置信度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
About the Assessment of Grey Literature in Software Engineering
There is an ongoing interest in the Software Engineering field for multivocal literature reviews including grey literature. However, at the same time, the role of the grey literature is still controversial, and the benefits of its inclusion in systematic reviews are object of discussion. Some of these arguments concern the quality assessment methods for grey literature entries, which is often considered a challenging and critical task. On the one hand, apart from a few proposals, there is a lack of an acknowledged methodological support for the inclusion of Software Engineering grey literature in systematic surveys. On the other hand, the unstructured shape of the grey literature contents could lead to bias in the evaluation process impacting on the quality of the surveys. This work leverages an approach on fuzzy Likert scales, and it proposes a methodology for managing the explicit uncertainties emerging during the assessment of entries from the grey literature. The methodology also strengthens the adoption of consensus policies that take into account the individual confidence level expressed for each of the collected scores.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信