Resource Description and Access (RDA): mapeamento sistemático de literatura

Abstract: Unlike its predecessor Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, Second Edition (AACR2), Resource Description and Access (RDA) has incorporated principles and objectives at the beginning of the code. This article is an attempt to make a comparative study between the practical applications of the principles of RDA with that of the Normative Principles of cataloging of S. R. Ranganathan. It is found that the instructions of RDA are much more in compliance with the scientific principles of Ranganathan than the RDA principles recorded at the beginning of the code. The outcome of the study is presented in two different ways. Tabular presentation of the same is made at the beginning followed by analytical studies.

Abstract: Context: We are strong advocates of evidence-based software engineering (EBSE) in general and systematic literature reviews (SLRs) in particular. We believe it is essential that the SLR methodology is used constructively to support software engineering research. Objective: This study aims to assess the value of mapping studies which are a form of SLR that aims to identify and categorise the available research on a broad software engineering topic. Method: We used a multi-case, participant-observer case study using five examples of studies that were based on preceding mapping studies. We also validated our results by contacting two other researchers who had undertaken studies based on preceding mapping studies and by assessing review comments related to our follow-on studies. Results: Our original case study identified 11 unique benefits that can accrue from basing research on a preceding mapping study of which only two were case specific. We also identified nine problems associated with using preceding mapping studies of which two were case specific. These results were consistent with the information obtained from the validation activities. We did not find an example of an independent research group making use of a mapping study produced by other researchers. Conclusion: Mapping studies can save time and effort for researchers and provide baselines to assist new research efforts. However, they must be of high quality in terms of completeness and rigour if they are to be a reliable basis for follow-on research.

Abstract: In the decade since the idea of adapting the evidence-based paradigm for software engineering was first proposed, it has become a major tool of empirical software engineering. Evidence-Based Software Engineering and Systematic Reviews provides a clear introduction to the use of an evidence-based model for software engineering research and practice. The book explains the roles of primary studies (experiments, surveys, case studies) as elements of an over-arching evidence model, rather than as disjointed elements in the empirical spectrum. Supplying readers with a clear understanding of empirical software engineering best practices, it provides up-to-date guidance on how to conduct secondary studies in software engineeringreplacing the existing 2004 and 2007 technical reports. The book is divided into three parts. The first part discusses the nature of evidence and the evidence-based practices centered on a systematic review, both in general and as applying to software engineering. The second part examines the different elements that provide inputs to a systematic review (usually considered as forming a secondary study), especially the main forms of primary empirical study currently used in software engineering. The final part provides practical guidance on how to conduct systematic reviews (the guidelines), drawing together accumulated experiences to guide researchers and students in planning and conducting their own studies. The book includes an extensive glossary and an appendix that provides a catalogue of reviews that may be useful for practice and teaching.