Annals of Computer Science and Information Systems, Volume 18

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15439/2019F114

Citation: Proceedings of the 2019 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, M. Ganzha, L. Maciaszek, M. Paprzycki (eds). ACSIS, Vol. 18, pages 803–812 (2019)

Full text

Abstract. This study utilizes citation analysis and automated topic analysis of papers published in International Conference on Agile Software Development (XP) from 2002 to 2018. We collected data from Scopus database, finding 789 XP papers. We performed topic and trend analysis with R/RStudio utilizing the text mining approach, and used MS Excel for the quantitative analysis of the data. The results show that the first five years of XP conference cover nearly 40\% of papers published until now and almost 62\% of the XP papers are cited at least once. Mining of XP conference paper titles and abstracts result in these hot research topics: ``Coordination'', ``Technical Debt'', ``Teamwork'', ``Startups'' and ``Agile Practices'', thus strongly focusing on practical issues. The results also highlight the most influential researchers and institutions. The approach applied in this study can be extended to other software engineering venues and applied to large-scale studies.

References

1. E. Garfield, “Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool?” Scientometrics, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 359–375, May 1979. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02019306. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02019306
2. C. Wohlin, “An analysis of the most cited articles in software engineering journals - 2000,” Information and Software Technology, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 2–11, 2007. http://dx.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2006.08.004. [Online]. Available: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950584906001133
3. P. Raulamo-Jurvanen, M. V. Mäntylä, and V. Garousi, “Citation and topic analysis of the esem papers,” in 2015 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), Oct. 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ESEM.2015.7321193. ISSN 1949-3770 pp. 1–4.
4. V. Garousi and M. V. Mäntylä, “Citations, research topics and active countries in software engineering: A bibliometrics study,” Computer Science Review, vol. 19, pp. 56–77, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosrev.2015.12.002. [Online]. Available: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1574013715300654
5. OECD. (2013) Oecd frascati manual, sixth edition, annex 7, paras. 20-22, oxford dictionaries, 2013, website. [Online]. Available: https://stats.oecd.org/glossary/detail.asp?ID=198
6. T. A. Hamrick, R. D. Fricker, and G. G. Brown, “Assessing what distinguishes highly cited from less-cited papers published in interfaces,” INFORMS Journal on Applied Analytics, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 454–464, 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/inte.1100.0527. [Online]. Available: https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/inte.1100.0527
7. R. Danell, “Can the quality of scientific work be predicted using information on the author’s track record?” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 50–60, 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.21454. [Online]. Available: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/asi.21454
8. L. Bornmann, “How are excellent (highly cited) papers defined in bibliometrics? a quantitative analysis of the literature,” Research Evaluation, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 166–173, 03 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvu002. [Online]. Available: https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvu002
9. R. L. Glass, I. Vessey, , and V. Ramesh, “Research in software engineering: an analysis of the literature,” Information and Software Technology, vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 491–506, 2002. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-5849(02)00049-6. [Online]. Available: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950584902000496
10. A. Hoonlor, B. K. Szymanski, and M. J. Zaki, “Trends in computer science research,” Commun. ACM, vol. 56, no. 10, pp. 74–83, Oct. 2013. http://dx.doi.org/https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0950-5849(02)00049-6
11. R. V. Noorden, B. Maher, and R. Nuzzo, “The top 100 papers,” Nature, vol. 514, no. 7524, pp. 550–553, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1038/514550a
12. T. L. Griffiths and M. Steyvers, “Finding scientific topics,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 101, no. suppl 1, pp. 5228–5235, 2004. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0307752101. [Online]. Available: http://www.pnas.org/content/101/suppl 1/5228
13. S.-W. Chuang, T. Luor, and H.-P. Lu, “Assessment of institutions, scholars, and contributions on agile software development (20012012),” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 93, pp. 84–101, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2014.03.006. [Online]. Available: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0164121214000697
14. D. Karanatsiou, Y. Li, E.-M. Arvanitou, N. Misirlis, and W. E. Wong, “A bibliometric assessment of software engineering scholars and institutions (20102017),” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 147, pp. 246–261, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2018.10.029. [Online]. Available: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0164121218302334
15. V. Garousi and J. M. Fernandes, “Highly-cited papers in software engineering: The top-100,” Information and Software Technology, vol. 71, pp. 108–128, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.11.003. [Online]. Available: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950584915001871
16. D. W. Aksnes, “Characteristics of highly cited papers,” Research Evaluation, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 159–170, 12 2003. http://dx.doi.org/10.3152/147154403781776645. [Online]. Available: https://dx.doi.org/10.3152/147154403781776645
17. C. Wohlin, P. Runeson, M. Höst, M. C. Ohlsson, B. Regnell, and A. Wesslén, Experimentation in Software Engineering: An Introduction, ser. International Series in Software Engineering. Springer US, 2000, vol. 6.
18. V. Garousi and J. M. Fernandes, “Quantity versus impact of software engineering papers: a quantitative study,” Scientometrics, vol. 112, no. 2, pp. 963–1006, Aug 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2419-6. [Online]. Available: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2419-6
19. A. Letchford, H. S. Moat, and T. Preis, “The advantage of short paper titles,” Royal Society Open Science, vol. 2, no. 8, pp. 1–6, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150266. [Online]. Available: https://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150266
20. M. Ponweiser, “Latent dirichlet allocation in r,” Master’s thesis, Institute for Statistics and Mathematics, University of Economics and Business, Vienna, Austria, 2012.
21. T. Dingsøyr, S. Nerur, V. Balijepally, and N. B. Moe, “A decade of agile methodologies: Towards explaining agile software development,” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 85, no. 6, pp. 1213–1221, 2012. http://dx.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2012.02.033 Special Issue: Agile Development. [Online]. Available: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0164121212000532