What is the Impact of Bad Layout in the Understandability of Social Goal Models?

The i* community has published guidelines, including model layout guidelines, for the construction of models. Our goal is to evaluate the effect of the layout guidelines on the i* novice stakeholders' ability to understand and review i* models. We performed a quasi-experiment where participants were given two understanding and two reviewing tasks. Both tasks involved a model with a bad layout and another model following the i* layout guidelines. We evaluated the impact of layouts by combining the success level in those tasks and the required effort to accomplish them. Effort was assessed using time, perceived complexity (with NASA TLX), and eye-tracking data. Participants were more successful in understanding than in reviewing tasks. However, we found no statistically significant difference in the success, time taken, or perceived complexity, between tasks conducted with models with a bad layout and models with a good layout. Most participants had little to no prior knowledge in i*, making them more representative of stakeholders with no requirements engineering expertise. They were able to understand the models fairly well after a short tutorial, but struggled when reviewing models. In the end, adherence to the existing i* layout guidelines did not significantly impact i* model understanding and reviewing performance.

[1]  Eric Yu,et al.  Modeling Strategic Relationships for Process Reengineering , 1995, Social Modeling for Requirements Engineering.

[2]  Patrick Heymans,et al.  Visual notation design 2.0: Towards user comprehensible requirements engineering notations , 2013, 2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE).

[3]  Victor R. Basili,et al.  The TAME Project: Towards Improvement-Oriented Software Environments , 1988, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[4]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Eye-Tracking the Factors of Process Model Comprehension Tasks , 2013, CAiSE.

[5]  S. Hart,et al.  Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .

[6]  Natalia Juristo Juzgado,et al.  Crossover Designs in Software Engineering Experiments: Benefits and Perils , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[7]  Hans Gruber,et al.  Eye Tracking Metrics in Software Engineering , 2018, ECSEE.

[8]  Harald Störrle On the impact of layout quality to understanding UML diagrams , 2011, 2011 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC).

[9]  Yann-Gaël Guéhéneuc,et al.  Taupe: Visualizing and analyzing eye-tracking data , 2014, Sci. Comput. Program..

[10]  Jonathan I. Maletic,et al.  An eye tracking study on the effects of layout in understanding the role of design patterns , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance.

[11]  Andrew Fish,et al.  Towards an Operationalization of the "Physics of Notations" for the Analysis of Visual Languages , 2013, MoDELS.

[12]  Daniel L. Moody,et al.  The “Physics” of Notations: Toward a Scientific Basis for Constructing Visual Notations in Software Engineering , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[13]  Yann-Gaël Guéhéneuc,et al.  An empirical study on the efficiency of graphical vs. textual representations in requirements comprehension , 2013, 2013 21st International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC).

[14]  Yann-Gaël Guéhéneuc,et al.  A systematic literature review on the usage of eye-tracking in software engineering , 2015, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[15]  Nergiz Ercil Cagiltay,et al.  Performing and analyzing non-formal inspections of entity relationship diagram (ERD) , 2013, J. Syst. Softw..

[16]  Bonita Sharif,et al.  Empirical assessment of UML class diagram layouts based on architectural importance , 2011, 2011 27th IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM).

[17]  Jonathan I. Maletic,et al.  The Effects of Layout on Detecting the Role of Design Patterns , 2010, 2010 23rd IEEE Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training.

[18]  Jonathan I. Maletic,et al.  Assessing the Comprehension of UML Class Diagrams via Eye Tracking , 2007, 15th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC '07).