Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review

By Tore Dybå, Torgeir Dingsøyr. Information and Software Technology, 2008

1,232 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Information Systems, Management of Technology and Innovation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/652db5cfe6f3c217710f40b62800d878a2183016

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Information Systems

In Management of Technology and Innovation

Citations in the corpus

Self-Organizing Roles on Agile Software Development Teams (2013, neutral): “In contrast, research on Scrum is scarce, despite Scrum being arguably the most popular Agile method used in the industry [32], [51].”
Role of IoT Technology in Agriculture: A Systematic Literature Review (2020, methodology): “For this purpose, we used the search process defined by Dybå and Dingsøyr [21] for the screening of relevant papers.”
Where Is Current Research on Blockchain Technology?—A Systematic Review (2016, methodology): “For screening the relevant papers, we used a process inspired by Dybåand Dingsøyr [14].”
Recommended Steps for Thematic Synthesis in Software Engineering (2011, neutral): “Many of the these methods have much in common with meta-ethnography, as originally described by Noblit and Hare [37], and used in SE by Dybå and Dingsøyr [21].”
A systematic mapping study on technical debt and its management (2015, positive): “Q2 and Q5 were adopted from [20] and [21] while Q3 and Q4 are formulated according to our study topic and RQs.”
A systematic literature review on agile requirements engineering practices and challenges (2015, methodology): “As Dybå and Dingsøyr (2008) indicate, search strings in software engineering are language dependent; thus, there is a possibility of missing relevant studies during each search.”
A Systematic Survey of Program Comprehension through Dynamic Analysis (2008, background): “In a first pass, we study all papers and write down words of interest that could be relevant for a particular facet (e.g., “survey,” or “feature analysis” for the activity facet).”
Learning Analytics for Learning Design: A Systematic Literature Review of Analytics-Driven Design to Enhance Learning (2019, methodology): “These criteria were informed by CASP and adapted for the purpose of this study following the Quality Assessment form used in a systematic review study about empirical studies of agile software development [52].”
A decade of agile methodologies: Towards explaining agile software development (2012, neutral): “(2005), and Dybå and Dingsøyr (2008).”
Toward Agile: An Integrated Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Field Data (2010, neutral): “To fill this gap, researchers have called for structured, rigorous empirical studies on agile development with a common research agenda (Dybå and Dingsøyr 2008).”
Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study (2014, neutral): “Threats to study selection and data extraction [57] have been mitigated with an up-front definition of the inclusion / exclusion criteria [4].”
Women’s Participation in Open Source Software: A Survey of the Literature (2021, methodology): “The GRADE approach is widely used by secondary studies in software engineering to evaluate the strength of evidence found in the primary studies [1, 2, 30, 47, 48, 96].”
Does Agile work? - A quantitative analysis of agile project success (2015, neutral): “A quantitative analysis of agile project success”