Analysing the use of graphs to represent the results of Systematic Reviews in Software Engineering
Katia Romero Felizardo, Mehwish Riaz, Muhammad Sulayman, Em\'ilia, Mendes, Stephen G. MacDonell, Jos\'e Carlos Maldonado

TL;DR
This study compares tables and graphs for presenting systematic review results, finding that graphs reduce analysis time without compromising understanding, thus offering an effective alternative to traditional tables.
Contribution
It provides empirical evidence that graphical representations improve efficiency in analyzing systematic review data without affecting comprehension.
Findings
Graphs reduce analysis time compared to tables.
No significant difference in understanding across formats.
Graphs are a viable alternative for presenting SLR results.
Abstract
The presentation of results from Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs) is generally done using tables. Prior research suggests that results summarized in tables are often difficult for readers to understand. One alternative to improve results' comprehensibility is to use graphical representations. The aim of this work is twofold: first, to investigate whether graph representations result is better comprehensibility than tables when presenting SLR results; second, to investigate whether interpretation using graphs impacts on performance, as measured by the time consumed to analyse and understand the data. We selected an SLR published in the literature and used two different formats to represent its results - tables and graphs, in three different combinations: (i) table format only; (ii) graph format only; and (iii) a mixture of tables and graphs. We conducted an experiment that compared…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
