Preliminary results of a study of the completeness and clarity of structured abstracts

11th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, EASE 2007

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages

  Budgen, David ^a   Kitchenham, Barbara ^b   Charters, Stuart ^a   Turner, Mark ^b   Brereton, Pearl ^b   Linkman, Stephen ^b  

^a DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b KEELE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Evidence based software engineering; structured abstracts; systematic literature review

Indexed keywords

ABSTRACTING; PAPER;

CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; EVIDENCE BASED SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; RANDOM SELECTION; RESEARCH TEAMS; SIZE DIFFERENCE; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING EXPERIMENTS; STRUCTURED ABSTRACT; SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW; T-TESTS; WORD LENGTH;

SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

EID: 55049120013     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.14236/ewic/EASE2007.7     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (12)

1. Bayley, L. and Eldredge, J. (2003) The structured abstract: an essential tool for researchers, Hypothesis, 17(1), 11–13.
2. Brereton, O., Kitchenham, B., Budgen, D., Turner, M. & Khalil, M. (2007) Lessons from applying the Systematic Literature Review process within the Software Engineering domain, J. of Systems & Software, 80(4), 571-583.
3. th
4. Hartley, J. (2003) Improving the clarity of journal abstracts in psychology: The case for structure, Science Communication, 24, 366–379.
5. Hartley, J. (2004) Current findings from research on structured abstracts, J. of Medical Library Association, 92, 368–371.
6. Hartley, J. and Benjamin, M. (1998) An evaluation of structured abstracts in journals published by the British Psychological Society, British J. of Educational Psychology, 68, 443–456.
7. Hartley, J. and Sydes, M. (1997) Are structured abstracts easier to read than traditional ones?, J. of Research in Reading, 20, 122–136.
8. Kitchenham, B. (2004) Procedures for undertaking systematic reviews, Technical Report TR/SE-0401, Department of Computer Science, Keele University and National ICT, Australia Ltd. Joint Technical Report.
9. Kitchenham, B.A., Brereton, O.P., Owen, S., Butcher, J. and Jefferies, C. (2006a) Length and Readability of Software Structured Abstracts, Keele University Technical Report.
10. Kitchenham, B., Al-Khilidar, H., Babar, M. A., Berry, M., Cox, K., Keung, J., Kurniawati, F., Staples, M., Zhang, H. & Zhu, L. (2006b) Evaluating Guidelines for Empirical Software Engineering Studies. Proceedings of ISESE 2006, ACM Press.
11. Sjøberg, D., Hannay, J., O.Hansen, Kampenes, V., Karahasanovic, A., Liborg, N.-K. and Rekdal, A. (2005) A Survey of Controlled Experiments in Software Engineering, IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 31(9), 733–753.
12. Webster, J. and Watson, R. (2002) Analysing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review, MIS Quarterly, 26, xiii–xxiii.