Usage of Psychophysiological Data as an Improvement in the Context of Software Engineering: A Systematic Mapping Study

Abstract

In recent years, many studies have applied wearable devices to capture psychophysiological data from software developers. However, the current literature lacks investigations that classify the studies and point out gaps to be explored. This article, therefore, seeks to present a comprehensive overview of the literature by classifying and creating a systematic map of the works. Besides, it seeks to pinpoint research gaps, challenges, and trends. Based on widely known guidelines, a systematic mapping of the literature was designed and run to answer eight research questions. After applying a careful filtering process, we selected 27 representative studies from a sample of 2,084 potentially relevant works retrieved from seven digital libraries. The main results are: a classification scheme of the published studies was produced; there is no predominance of the devices used to capture psychophysiological data; over 50% of the studies have explored indicators related to mental states and neural activity; and 80% have analyzed composite data to understand the cognitive load and in the context of understanding debugging programs and strategies. Our findings can benefit researchers and students by creating a systematic map of the literature, being a starting point for future research.

On the prediction of source code design problems: A systematic mapping study

“…This protocol addresses the steps and guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering (Kitchenham & Charters, 2007;Kitchenham et al, 2011;Petersen et al, 2008;Petersen et al, 2015). Additionally, our protocol was also inspired on our previous mapping studies (Carbonera et al, 2020;Bischoff et al, 2021;Vieira & Farias, 2020) Figure 1. The systematic mapping process used in our study (adapted from (Petersen et al, 2008)).…”

“…Our mapping study follows well-known practical guidelines (Petersen et al, 2015;Petersen et al, 2008). Moreover, it is based on the authors' experience in carrying out previous mapping studies (Bischoff et al, 2021;Carbonera et al, 2020;Menzen et al, 2021;Vieira & Farias, 2020). In total, 35 primary studies were selected, analyzed, and categorized after applying a careful filtering process to a sample of 894 candidate studies to answer six research questions.…”