Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: How reliable are systematic reviews in empirical software engineering?
Authors: MacDonell, SG
Shepperd, MJ
Kitchenham, BA
Mendes, E
Keywords: Empirical software engineering;Meta-analysis;Systematic review;Cost estimation
Issue Date: 2009
Publisher: IEEE
Citation: IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 36(5): 676-687, Sep 2010
Abstract: BACKGROUND – the systematic review is becoming a more commonly employed research instrument in empirical software engineering. Before undue reliance is placed on the outcomes of such reviews it would seem useful to consider the robustness of the approach in this particular research context. OBJECTIVE – the aim of this study is to assess the reliability of systematic reviews as a research instrument. In particular we wish to investigate the consistency of process and the stability of outcomes. METHOD – we compare the results of two independent reviews under taken with a common research question. RESULTS – the two reviews find similar answers to the research question, although the means of arriving at those answers vary. CONCLUSIONS – in addressing a well-bounded research question, groups of researchers with similar domain experience can arrive at the same review outcomes, even though they may do so in different ways. This provides evidence that, in this context at least, the systematic review is a robust research method.
ISSN: 0098-5589
Appears in Collections:Computer Science
Dept of Computer Science Research Papers
Software Engineering (B-SERC)

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
How reliable are systematic reviews in empirical software engineering?.pdf602.2 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.