IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jdataj/v7y2022i6p70-d824305.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

iKeyCriteria: A Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis Method to Infer Key Criteria since a Systematic Literature Review for the Computing Domain

Author

Listed:
  • Mayra Carrión-Toro

    (Departamento de Informática y Ciencias de la Computación, Escuela Politécnica Nacional, Quito 170525, Ecuador)

  • Jose Aguilar

    (Centro de Estudios en Microelectrónica y Sistemas Distribuidos, Universidad de Los Andes, Mérida 5101, Venezuela
    GIDITIC, Universidad EAFIT, Medellín 050022, Colombia)

  • Marco Santórum

    (Departamento de Informática y Ciencias de la Computación, Escuela Politécnica Nacional, Quito 170525, Ecuador)

  • María Pérez

    (Departamento de Informática y Ciencias de la Computación, Escuela Politécnica Nacional, Quito 170525, Ecuador)

  • Boris Astudillo

    (Departamento de Informática y Ciencias de la Computación, Escuela Politécnica Nacional, Quito 170525, Ecuador)

  • Cindy-Pamela Lopez

    (Departamento de Informática y Ciencias de la Computación, Escuela Politécnica Nacional, Quito 170525, Ecuador)

  • Marcelo Nieto

    (Departamento de Informática y Ciencias de la Computación, Escuela Politécnica Nacional, Quito 170525, Ecuador)

  • Patricia Acosta-Vargas

    (Intelligent and Interactive Systems Laboratory, Universidad de Las Américas, Quito 170125, Ecuador)

Abstract

A systematic literature review is a synthesis of the available evidence, in which a review of quantitative and qualitative aspects of primary studies is carried out, to summarize the existing information regarding a particular topic. The researchers extract key criteria from papers collected about their study area, answering research questions and conducting document analysis. Nonetheless, in some cases, these criteria are improperly justified, unknowing their true level of importance in the study subject. Hence, an additional study is necessary to explain the criteria relevance in the papers studied using qualitative and quantitative premises. The correct identification of these key criteria is a critical factor in prioritizing and achieving appropriate results in any scientific research work. In our paper, a new method to determine key criteria from a literature review is proposed, composed of three components: input-process-output. First, the inputs are a set of criteria to evaluate and a set of documents to analyze. Next, the process component examines the document set to indicate whether the criteria to be analyzed are found. The process component produces a Boolean matrix, which is the input of the mathematical logic process that will get the key criteria considered necessary and sufficient as the output component. The iKeyCriteria method has been applied in different computing domains, particularly for serious games design and virtual organizations, giving positive results in each context. Finally, we developed an online tool that provides global support to the execution of our method.

Suggested Citation

  • Mayra Carrión-Toro & Jose Aguilar & Marco Santórum & María Pérez & Boris Astudillo & Cindy-Pamela Lopez & Marcelo Nieto & Patricia Acosta-Vargas, 2022. "iKeyCriteria: A Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis Method to Infer Key Criteria since a Systematic Literature Review for the Computing Domain," Data, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-21, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jdataj:v:7:y:2022:i:6:p:70-:d:824305
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5729/7/6/70/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5729/7/6/70/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joanna Sale & Kevin Brazil, 2004. "A Strategy to Identify Critical Appraisal Criteria for Primary Mixed-Method Studies," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 351-365, August.
    2. Snyder, Hannah, 2019. "Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 333-339.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ali Zackery & Joseph Amankwah-Amoah & Zahra Heidari Darani & Shiva Ghasemi, 2022. "COVID-19 Research in Business and Management: A Review and Future Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-32, August.
    2. Eusebius Pantja Pramudya & Lukas Rumboko Wibowo & Fitri Nurfatriani & Iman Kasiman Nawireja & Dewi Ratna Kurniasari & Sakti Hutabarat & Yohanes Berenika Kadarusman & Ananda Oemi Iswardhani & Rukaiyah , 2022. "Incentives for Palm Oil Smallholders in Mandatory Certification in Indonesia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-28, April.
    3. Crooks, Valorie A., 2007. "Exploring the altered daily geographies and lifeworlds of women living with fibromyalgia syndrome: A mixed-method approach," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 577-588, February.
    4. Peter Schnell & Phillip Haag & Hans Christian Jünger, 2022. "Implementation of Digital Technologies in Construction Companies: Establishing a Holistic Process which Addresses Current Barriers," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-18, December.
    5. Chen, Yanyan & Mandler, Timo & Meyer-Waarden, Lars, 2021. "Three decades of research on loyalty programs: A literature review and future research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 179-197.
    6. Hongxia Jin & Lu Lu & Haojun Fan, 2022. "Global Trends and Research Hotspots in Long COVID: A Bibliometric Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-14, March.
    7. Prince Donkor Ameyaw & Walter Timo de Vries, 2020. "Transparency of Land Administration and the Role of Blockchain Technology, a Four-Dimensional Framework Analysis from the Ghanaian Land Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-25, December.
    8. Amal Almansour & Reem Alotaibi & Hajar Alharbi, 2022. "Text-rating review discrepancy (TRRD): an integrative review and implications for research," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, December.
    9. Švarc, Jadranka & Dabić, Marina, 2021. "Transformative innovation policy or how to escape peripheral policy paradox in European research peripheral countries," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    10. So, Hau Wing & Lafortezza, Raffaele, 2022. "Reviewing the impacts of eco-labelling of forest products on different dimensions of sustainability in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    11. Mónica de Castro-Pardo & Pascual Fernández Martínez & Amelia Pérez Zabaleta & João C. Azevedo, 2021. "Dealing with Water Conflicts: A Comprehensive Review of MCDM Approaches to Manage Freshwater Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-32, April.
    12. Mackey, Jeremy D., 2022. "The effect of cultural values on the strength of the relationship between interpersonal and organizational workplace deviance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 760-771.
    13. Alexander Salmen, 2021. "New Product Launch Success: A Literature Review," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 69(1), pages 151-176.
    14. Halim Lee & Jaewon Son & Dayoon Joo & Jinhyeok Ha & Seongreal Yun & Chul-Hee Lim & Woo-Kyun Lee, 2020. "Sustainable Water Security Based on the SDG Framework: A Case Study of the 2019 Metro Manila Water Crisis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, August.
    15. Rachel Greer & Timo Wirth & Derk Loorbach, 2023. "The Circular Decision-Making Tree: an Operational Framework," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 693-718, June.
    16. Del Vecchio, Pasquale & Secundo, Giustina & Garzoni, Antonello, 2023. "Phygital technologies and environments for breakthrough innovation in customers' and citizens' journey. A critical literature review and future agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    17. Pina Puntillo & Carmela Gulluscio & Donald Huisingh & Stefania Veltri, 2021. "Reevaluating waste as a resource under a circular economy approach from a system perspective: Findings from a case study," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 968-984, February.
    18. Heleen Dreyer & Nadine Sonnenberg & Daleen Van der Merwe, 2022. "Transcending Linearity in Understanding Green Consumer Behaviour: A Social–Cognitive Framework for Behaviour Changes in an Emerging Economy Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-27, November.
    19. Sultan Çetin & Catherine De Wolf & Nancy Bocken, 2021. "Circular Digital Built Environment: An Emerging Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-34, June.
    20. Manuel Sánchez-Pérez & Nuria Rueda-López & María Belén Marín-Carrillo & Eduardo Terán-Yépez, 2021. "Theoretical dilemmas, conceptual review and perspectives disclosure of the sharing economy: a qualitative analysis," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(7), pages 1849-1883, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jdataj:v:7:y:2022:i:6:p:70-:d:824305. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.