nach oben

Erschienen in:

2017 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Eye Tracking Experiments on Process Model Comprehension: Lessons Learned

verfasst von : Michael Zimoch, Rüdiger Pryss, Johannes Schobel, Manfred Reichert

Erschienen in: Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

For documenting business processes, there exists a plethora of process modeling languages. In this context, graphical process models are used to enhance the process comprehensibility of the stakeholders involved. The large number of available modeling languages, however, aggravates process model comprehension and increases the knowledge gap between domain and modeling experts. Upon this, one major challenge is to identify factors fostering the comprehension of process models. This paper discusses the experiences we gathered with the use of eye tracking in experiments on process model comprehension and the lessons learned in this context. The objective of the experiments was to study the comprehension of process models expressed in terms of four different modeling languages (i.e., BPMN, eGantt, EPC, and Petri Net). This paper further provides recommendations along nine identified categories that can foster related experiments on process model comprehension.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Cognitive Insights into Business Process Model Comprehension: Preliminary Results for Experienced and Inexperienced Individuals

Nächstes Kapitel Teaching and Learning State-Oriented Business Process Modeling. Experience Report

http://www.smivision.com/en/gaze-and-eye-tracking-systems/products/iview-x-hi-speed.html.

Sample material downloadable from: www.dropbox.com/sh/our1qp7vkpv020i/AABr3a24DwCKjWAU_2DDCIWMa?dl=0.

Petrusel, R., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Task-specific visual cues for improving process model understanding. Inf. Softw. Technol. 79, 63–78 (2016)CrossRef

Martini, M., Pinggera, J., Neuratuer, M., Sachse, P., Furtner, M., Weber, B.: The impact of working memory and the process of process modelling on model quality: investigating experienced versus inexperienced modellers. In: Scientific Reports, vol. 6 (2016)

Moody, D.L.: Theoretical and practical issues in evaluating the quality of conceptual models: current state and future directions. Data Knowl. Eng. 55, 243–276 (2005)CrossRef

Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., Cardoso, J.: What makes process models understandable? In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 48–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-75183-0_4 CrossRef

Turetken, O., Rompen, T., Vanderfeesten, I., Dikici, A., Moll, J.: The effect of modularity representation and presentation medium on the understandability of business process models in BPMN. In: La Rosa, M., Loos, P., Pastor, O. (eds.) BPM 2016. LNCS, vol. 9850, pp. 289–307. Springer, Cham (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-45348-4_17 CrossRef

Recker, J., Reijers, H.A., van de Wouw, S.G.: Process model comprehension: the effects of cognitive abilities, learning style and strategy. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 34, 199–222 (2014)

Recker, J., Dreiling, A.: Does it matter which process modelling language we teach or use? An experimental study on understanding process modelling languages without formal education. In: Proceedings of ACIS 2007, pp. 356–366 (2007)

Petrusel, R., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: How visual cognition influences process model comprehension. Decis. Support Syst. 96, 1–16 (2017)

Figl, K., Recker, J.: Exploring cognitive style and task-specific preferences for process representations. Requirements Eng. 21, 63–85 (2016)CrossRef

10.

Döhring, M., Reijers, H.A., Smirnov, S.: Configuration vs. adaptation for business process variant maintenance: an empirical study. Inf. Syst. 39, 108–133 (2014)

11.

Bandara, W., Gable, G.G., Rosemann, M.: Factors and measures of business process modelling: model building through a multiple case study. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 14, 347–360 (2005)CrossRef

12.

Ottensooser, A., Fekete, A., Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J., Menictas, C.: Making sense of business process descriptions: an experimental comparison of graphical and textual notations. J. Syst. Softw. 85, 596–606 (2012)CrossRef

13.

Weber, B., Pinggera, J., Neurauter, M., Zugal, S., Martini, M., Furtner, M., Sachse, P., Schnitzer, D.: Fixation patterns during process model creation: initial steps toward neuro-adaptive process modeling environments. In: Proceedings of the 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 600–609 (2016)

14.

Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Seven process modeling guidelines (7PMG). Inf. Softw. Technol. 52, 127–136 (2010)CrossRef

15.

Rodrigues, R.D.A., Barros, M.D.O., Revoredo, K., Azevedo, L.G., Leopold, H.: An experiment on process model understandability using textual work instructions and BPMN models. In: 29th Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering, pp. 41–50 (2015)

16.

Petrusel, R., Mendling, J.: Eye-tracking the factors of process model comprehension tasks. In: Salinesi, C., Norrie, M.C., Pastor, Ó. (eds.) CAiSE 2013. LNCS, vol. 7908, pp. 224–239. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-38709-8_15 CrossRef

17.

Haisjackl, C., Barba, I., Zugal, S., Soffer, P., Hadar, I., Reichert, M., Pinggera, J., Weber, B.: Understanding declare models: strategies, pitfalls, empirical results. Softw. Syst. 15, 325–352 (2016)CrossRef

18.

Recker, J.: Empirical investigation of the usefulness of gateway constructs in process models. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 22, 673–689 (2013)

19.

Sánachez-González, L., Garcia, F., Ruiz, F., Mendling, J.: Quality indicators for business process models from a gateway complexity perspective. Inf. Softw. Technol. 54, 1159–1175 (2012)CrossRef

20.

Kock, N., Verville, J., Danesh-Pajou, A., Deluca, D.: Communication flow orientation in business process modeling and its effect on redesign success: results from a field study. Decis. Support Syst. 45, 562–575 (2009)CrossRef

21.

Figl, K., Mendling, J., Strembeck, M.: The influence of notational deficiencies on process model comprehension. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 14, 312–338 (2013)

22.

Recker, J., Dreiling, A.: The effects of content presentation format and user characteristics on novice developers’ understanding of process models. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 28, 65–84 (2011)

23.

Figl, K., Strembeck, M.: Findings from an experiment on flow direction of business process models. In: International Workshop on EMISA 2015, pp. 59–73 (2015)

24.

Figl, K., Laue, R.: Influence factors for local comprehensibility of process models. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 82, 96–110 (2015)CrossRef

25.

List, B., Korherr, B.: An evaluation of conceptual business process modelling languages. In: Proceedings of the 2006 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 1532–1539 (2006)

26.

Pichler, P., Weber, B., Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Imperative versus declarative process modeling languages: an empirical investigation. In: Daniel, F., Barkaoui, K., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM 2011. LNBIP, vol. 99, pp. 383–394. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-28108-2_37 CrossRef

27.

Dobesova, Z., Malcik, M.: Workflow diagrams and pupil dilatation in eye tracking testing. In: Proceedings of 13th International Conference on Emerging eLearning Techniques Applications, pp. 59–64 (2015)

28.

Hogrebe, F., Gehrke, N., Nüttgens, M.: Eye tracking experiments in business process modeling: agenda setting and proof of concept. In: Proceedings of 4th International Workshop on Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures, pp. 183–188 (2011)

29.

Mendling, J., Strembeck, M., Recker, J.: Factors of process model comprehension - findings from a series of experiments. Decis. Support Syst. 53, 195–206 (2012)

30.

Weitlaner, D., Guettinger, A., Kohlbacher, M.: Intuitive comprehensibility of process models. In: S-BPM ONE-running Processes, vol. 360, pp. 52–71 (2013)

31.

Krogstie, J.: Model-Based Development and Evolution of Information Systems. Springer, London (2012)

32.

Jošt, G., Huber, J., Heričko, M., Polančič, G.: An empirical investigation of intuitive understandability of process diagrams. Comput. Stand. Interface 48, 90–111 (2016)CrossRef

33.

SMI: iView X Hi-Speed (2016). http://www.smivision.com/en/gaze-and-eye-tracking-systems/products/iview-x-hi-speed.html. Accessed 10 Feb 2017

34.

Majaranta, P., Aoki, H., Donegan, M., Hansen, D.W., Hansen, J.P., Hyrskykari, A., Räihä, K.: Gaze Interaction and Applications of Eye Tracking: Advances in Assistive Technologies. IGI Global, Hershey (2011)

35.

Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: Adept\(_{flex}\) – supporting dynamic changes of workflows without losing control. J. Int. Inf. Syst. 10, 93–129 (1998)CrossRef

36.

Wang, W., Ding, H., Dong, J., Ren, C.: A comparison of business process modeling methods. In: International Conference on Service Operations and Logistics, and Informatics, pp. 1136–1141 (2006)

37.

Salvucci, D.D., Goldberg, J.H.: Identifying fixations and saccades in eye-tracking protocols. In: Proceedings of 2000 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research Application, pp. 71–78 (2000)

38.

OMG: Business Process Management and Notation 2.0 (2016). www.bpmn.org. Accessed 11 Oct 2016

39.

van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Formalization and verification of event-driven process chains. Inf. Softw. Technol. 41, 639–650 (1999)

40.

Person, J.L.: Petri Net Theory and the Modeling of Systems. Prentice Hall, Englewood (1981)

41.

Sommer, M.: Zeitliche Darstellung und Modellierung von Prozessen mithilfe von Gantt-Diagrammen. Bachelors Thesis, Ulm University (2012)

42.

Bernstein, V., Soffer, P.: Identifying and quantifying visual layout features of business process models. In: Gaaloul, K., Schmidt, R., Nurcan, S., Guerreiro, S., Ma, Q. (eds.) CAISE 2015. LNBIP, vol. 214, pp. 200–213. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-19237-6_13 CrossRef

43.

Schrepfer, M., Wolf, J., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: The impact of secondary notation on process model understanding. In: Persson, A., Stirna, J. (eds.) PoEM 2009. LNBIP, vol. 39, pp. 161–175. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-05352-8_13 CrossRef

44.

Zugal, S., Soffer, P., Haisjackl, C., Pinggera, J., Reichert, M., Weber, B.: Investigating expressiveness and understandability of hierarchy in declarative business process models. Softw. Syst. Model. 14, 1081–1103 (2015)CrossRef

45.

Linden, D., Zamansky, A., Hadar, I.: How cognitively effective is a visual notation? On the inherent difficulty of operationalizing the physics of notations. In: Schmidt, R., Guédria, W., Bider, I., Guerreiro, S. (eds.) BPMDS/EMMSAD -2016. LNBIP, vol. 248, pp. 448–462. Springer, Cham (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-39429-9_28

46.

Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J., Dijkman, R.M.: Human and automatic modularizations of process models to enhance their comprehension. J. Inf. Syst. 36, 881–897 (2011)CrossRef

47.

Koschmider, A., Reijers, H.A., Dijkman, R.: Empirical support for the usefulness of personalized process model views. In: Multikonf Wirtschaftsinformatik (2012)

48.

Claes, J., Vanderfessten, I., Pinggera, J., Reihers, H.A., Weber, B., Poels, G.: A visual analysis of the process of process modeling. Inf. Syst. e-Business Manage. 13, 147–190 (2015)CrossRef

49.

Figl, K.: Comprehension of procedural visual business process models. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 59, 41–57 (2017)CrossRef

50.

Mili, H., Tremblay, G., Jaoude, G.B., Lefebvre, É., Elabed, L., Boussaidi, G.E.: Business process modeling languages: sorting through the alphabet soup. ACM Comput. Surv. 43, 1–56 (2010)CrossRef

Titel: Eye Tracking Experiments on Process Model Comprehension: Lessons Learned
verfasst von: Michael Zimoch
Rüdiger Pryss
Johannes Schobel
Manfred Reichert
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-59465-1

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-59466-8

Copyright-Jahr: 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59466-8_10

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"