On the Theoretical Foundations of Research into the Understandability of Business Process Models
暂无分享,去创建一个
[1] Paolo Tonella,et al. Optimizing the Trade-Off between Complexity and Conformance in Process Reduction , 2011, SSBSE.
[2] Danilo Caivano,et al. Prediction Models for BPMN Usability and Maintainability , 2009, 2009 IEEE Conference on Commerce and Enterprise Computing.
[3] J. Recker,et al. Does It Matter Which Process Modelling Language We Teach or Use? An Experimental Study on Understanding Process Modelling Languages without Formal Education , 2007 .
[4] Michael Becker,et al. Towards Customer-Individual Configurations of Business Process Models , 2012, BMMDS/EMMSAD.
[5] Ned Kock,et al. Communication-focused business process redesign: assessing a communication flow optimization model through an action research study at a defense contractor , 2003 .
[6] Richard E. Mayer,et al. Multimedia Learning , 2001, Visible Learning Guide to Student Achievement.
[7] Peretz Shoval,et al. Quality and comprehension of UML interaction diagrams-an experimental comparison , 2005, Inf. Softw. Technol..
[8] António Rito Silva,et al. Using roles and business objects to model and understand business processes , 2005, SAC '05.
[9] Andreas Meyer,et al. Data Support in Process Model Abstraction , 2012, ER.
[10] Volker Gruhn,et al. Adopting the Cognitive Complexity Measure for Business Process Models , 2006, 2006 5th IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Informatics.
[11] Alessandro Marchetto,et al. Domain-Driven Reduction Optimization of Recovered Business Processes , 2012, SSBSE.
[12] José Javier Dolado,et al. Evaluation of the comprehension of the dynamic modeling in UML , 2004, Inf. Softw. Technol..
[13] Peter Loos,et al. Understanding understandability of conceptual models - what are we actually talking about? - Supplement , 2013 .
[14] José Javier Dolado,et al. An Initial Experimental Assessment of the Dynamic Modelling in UML , 2004, Empirical Software Engineering.
[15] Jan Mendling,et al. On Measuring the Understandability of Process Models , 2009, Business Process Management Workshops.
[16] Mark Strembeck,et al. Factors of process model comprehension - Findings from a series of experiments , 2012, Decis. Support Syst..
[17] Fred D. Davis. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..
[18] David A. Carrington,et al. User Preference of Graph Layout Aesthetics: A UML Study , 2000, GD.
[19] Herbert A. Simon,et al. THE MIND'S EYE IN CHESS , 1988 .
[20] Barbara Weber,et al. Toward enhanced life‐cycle support for declarative processes , 2012, J. Softw. Evol. Process..
[21] Remco M. Dijkman,et al. Human and automatic modularizations of process models to enhance their comprehension , 2011, Inf. Syst..
[22] Peter Loos,et al. On the Relevance of Design Knowledge for Design-Oriented Business and Information Systems Engineering , 2010, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng..
[23] Mark Strembeck,et al. Influence Factors of Understanding Business Process Models , 2008, BIS.
[24] Mario Piattini Velthuis,et al. Measurement in business processes: a systematic review , 2010 .
[25] Jan Mendling,et al. A Discourse on Complexity of Process Models , 2006, Business Process Management Workshops.
[26] Jan Mendling,et al. Syntax highlighting in business process models , 2011, Decis. Support Syst..
[27] Markus Kohlbacher,et al. Intuitive Comprehensibility of Process Models , 2013, S-BPM ONE.
[28] Marian Petre,et al. Usability Analysis of Visual Programming Environments: A 'Cognitive Dimensions' Framework , 1996, J. Vis. Lang. Comput..
[29] Mario Piattini,et al. Defining Metrics for UML Statechart Diagrams in a Methodological Way , 2003, ER.
[30] Ron Weber,et al. An Ontological Model of an Information System , 1990, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..
[31] John Krogstie,et al. Modelling of the People, by the People, for the People , 2007 .
[32] Jan Mendling,et al. Thresholds for error probability measures of business process models , 2012, J. Syst. Softw..
[33] Hajo A. Reijers,et al. Evaluating workflow process designs using cohesion and coupling metrics , 2008, Comput. Ind..
[34] Olga Levina,et al. Granularity as a Cognitive Factor in the Effectiveness of Business Process Model Reuse , 2009, BPM.
[35] Mark Strembeck,et al. Towards a Usability Assessment of Process Modeling Languages , 2009 .
[36] Jan Mendling,et al. Managing Process Model Complexity Via Abstract Syntax Modifications , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics.
[37] Jan Mendling,et al. Understanding Business Process Models: The Costs and Benefits of Structuredness , 2012, CAiSE.
[38] Jan Mendling,et al. Quality indicators for business process models from a gateway complexity perspective , 2012, Inf. Softw. Technol..
[39] Jan Recker. Understanding Quality in Process Modelling: Towards a Holistic Perspective , 2007, Australas. J. Inf. Syst..
[40] Mark Strembeck,et al. On the Cognitive Effectiveness of Routing Symbols in Process Modeling Languages , 2010, BIS.
[41] Jos van Hillegersberg,et al. Evaluating the Visual Syntax of UML: An Analysis of the Cognitive Effectiveness of the UMLFamily of Diagrams , 2009, SLE.
[42] Jan Mendling,et al. Prediction of Business Process Model Quality Based on Structural Metrics , 2010, ER.
[43] Sara Jones,et al. The Untrained Eye: How Languages for Software Specification Support Understanding in Untrained Users , 1999, Hum. Comput. Interact..
[44] Peter Loos,et al. Comparing the Control-Flow of EPC and Petri Net from the End-User Perspective , 2005, Business Process Management.
[45] Jan Mendling,et al. Declarative versus Imperative Process Modeling Languages: The Issue of Understandability , 2009, BMMDS/EMMSAD.
[46] Barbara Weber,et al. Assessing Process Models with Cognitive Psychology , 2011, EMISA.
[47] Marta Indulska,et al. Sometimes Less is More: Are Process Modeling Languages Overly Complex? , 2007, 2007 Eleventh International IEEE EDOC Conference Workshop.
[48] Detlef Seese,et al. Towards Validating Prediction Systems for Process Understandability: Measuring Process Understandability , 2008, 2008 10th International Symposium on Symbolic and Numeric Algorithms for Scientific Computing.
[49] James C. Spohrer,et al. Empirical Studies of Programmers: Fifth Workshop , 1993 .
[50] Ralf Laue,et al. Cognitive Complexity in Business Process Modeling , 2011, CAiSE.
[51] Allen Newell,et al. Human Problem Solving. , 1973 .
[52] R E Mayer. Comprehension as affected by structure of problem representation , 1976, Memory & cognition.
[53] Peter Loos,et al. Towards the Reconstruction and Evaluation of Conceptual Model Quality Discourses - Methodical Framework and Application in the Context of Model Understandability , 2012, BMMDS/EMMSAD.
[54] Jan Mendling,et al. Modularity in Process Models: Review and Effects , 2008, BPM.
[55] Timo Lainem. Enhancing Participant Business Process Perception through Business Gaming , 2001, HICSS.
[56] D. Kolb. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development , 1983 .
[57] Yvonne Rogers,et al. External cognition: how do graphical representations work? , 1996, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..
[58] John Sweller,et al. Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning , 1988, Cogn. Sci..
[59] John R. Anderson. A spreading activation theory of memory. , 1983 .
[60] Dov Dori,et al. A graph grammar-based formal validation of object-process diagrams , 2012, Software & Systems Modeling.
[61] Jan Mendling,et al. Quality Assessment of Business Process Models Based on Thresholds , 2010, OTM Conferences.
[62] John Krogstie,et al. Process models representing knowledge for action: a revised quality framework , 2006, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..
[63] Peter Rittgen. Quality and perceived usefulness of process models , 2010, SAC '10.
[64] Hajo A. Reijers,et al. Declarative versus imperative process modeling languages : the issue of understandability , 2009, BPMDS 2009.
[65] Ian Hacking,et al. Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science , 1983 .
[66] G A Cioffi,et al. Theoretically speaking , 2015, Nature Photonics.
[67] Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al. Complexity metrics for Workflow nets , 2009, Inf. Softw. Technol..
[68] Christine Natschläger. Deontic BPMN , 2011, DEXA.
[69] Jan Pries-Heje,et al. Explanatory Design Theory , 2010, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng..
[70] Geert Poels,et al. Distance-based software measurement: necessary and sufficient properties for software measures , 2000, Inf. Softw. Technol..
[71] Erika Rogers,et al. A Cognitive Theory of Visual Interaction , 1995 .
[72] Werner Esswein,et al. Rules from Cognition for Conceptual Modelling , 2012, ER.
[73] A. Bandura. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory , 1985 .
[74] Herbert A. Simon,et al. Why a Diagram is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words , 1987, Cogn. Sci..
[75] Jan Recker,et al. How Much Language Is Enough? Theoretical and Practical Use of the Business Process Modeling Notation , 2008, CAiSE.
[76] Jan Mendling,et al. The Impact of Secondary Notation on Process Model Understanding , 2009, PoEM.
[77] Jan Mendling,et al. Activity labeling in process modeling: Empirical insights and recommendations , 2010, Inf. Syst..
[78] Li Zhang,et al. Evaluating Cognitive Complexity Measure of Processes with Weyuker Properties , 2009 .
[79] Iris Vessey,et al. Cognitive Fit: A Theory‐Based Analysis of the Graphs Versus Tables Literature* , 1991 .
[80] Mario Piattini,et al. METRICS FOR UML STATECHART DIAGRAMS , 2005 .
[81] Manfred Reichert,et al. Visualizing Large Business Process Models: Challenges, Techniques, Applications , 2012, Business Process Management Workshops.
[82] Xi Liu,et al. Simplified Business Process Model Mining Based on Structuredness Metric , 2011, 2011 Seventh International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Security.
[83] Jan Mendling,et al. On the Usage of Labels and Icons in Business Process Modeling , 2010, Int. J. Inf. Syst. Model. Des..
[84] Barbara Weber,et al. Expressiveness and Understandability Considerations of Hierarchy in Declarative Business Process Models , 2015, BMMDS/EMMSAD.
[85] 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.
[86] Daniel Amyot,et al. Analysing the Cognitive Effectiveness of the BPMN 2.0 Visual Notation , 2010, SLE.
[87] Hajo A. Reijers,et al. An Integrative Framework of the Factors Affecting Process Model Understanding: A Learning Perspective , 2010, AMCIS.
[88] P. Ackerman,et al. Goal setting, conditions of practice, and task performance: A resource allocation perspective. , 1994 .
[89] Shirley Gregor,et al. The Nature of Theory in Information Systems , 2006, MIS Q..
[90] Volker Gruhn,et al. Reducing the cognitive complexity of business process models , 2009, 2009 8th IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Informatics.
[91] Eileen Kraemer,et al. Empirical Evaluation of a UML Sequence Diagram with Adornments to Support Understanding of Thread Interactions , 2007, 15th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC '07).
[92] Jan Mendling,et al. A study on the effects of routing symbol design on process model comprehension , 2013, Decis. Support Syst..
[93] Database and Expert Systems Applications , 1996, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.
[94] Bill Curtis,et al. Process modeling , 1992, CACM.
[95] Markus Nüttgens,et al. Eye Tracking Experiments in Business Process Modeling: Agenda Setting and Proof of Concept , 2011, EMISA.
[96] Elaine J. Weyuker,et al. Evaluating Software Complexity Measures , 2010, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..
[97] Manfred Reichert,et al. Refactoring Process Models in Large Process Repositories , 2008, CAiSE.
[98] Fred D. Davis,et al. A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies , 2000, Management Science.
[99] A. Selçuk Güceglioglu,et al. Using Software Quality Characteristics to Measure Business Process Quality , 2005, Business Process Management.
[100] Gordon B. Davis,et al. User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..
[101] Mario Piattini,et al. Empirical Validation of Metrics for UML Statechart Diagrams , 2003, ICEIS.
[102] Jan Recker,et al. Opportunities and constraints: the current struggle with BPMN , 2010, Bus. Process. Manag. J..
[103] Jan Mendling,et al. Towards Systematic Usage of Labels and Icons in Business Process Models , 2008, EMMSAD.
[104] Jan Mendling,et al. Assessing the Impact of Hierarchy on Model Understandability - A Cognitive Perspective , 2011, MoDELS.
[105] Jan Mendling,et al. What Makes Process Models Understandable? , 2007, BPM.
[106] Jan Mendling,et al. Tying Process Model Quality to the Modeling Process: The Impact of Structuring, Movement, and Speed , 2012, BPM.
[107] Daniel L. Moody,et al. Theoretical and practical issues in evaluating the quality of conceptual models: current state and future directions , 2005, Data Knowl. Eng..
[108] A. Paivio. Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. , 1991 .
[109] Mario Piattini,et al. Using Controlled Experiments for Validating UML Statechart Diagrams Measures , 2007, IWSM/Mensura.
[110] M. D’Esposito. Working memory. , 2008, Handbook of clinical neurology.
[111] B. Biddle,et al. Role Theory: Concepts and Research , 1966 .
[112] Danilo Caivano,et al. Assessing the Influence of Stereotypes on the Comprehension of UML Sequence Diagrams: A Controlled Experiment , 2008, MoDELS.
[113] A. Treisman,et al. A feature-integration theory of attention , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.
[114] Jörg Becker,et al. Guidelines of Business Process Modeling , 2000, Business Process Management.
[115] Stefan Oppl,et al. Towards Intuitive Modeling of Business Processes: Prospects for Flow- and Natural-Language Orientation , 2009, TAMODIA.
[116] Sandro Morasca,et al. Property-Based Software Engineering Measurement , 1996, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..
[117] Diogo R. Ferreira,et al. Understanding Spaghetti Models with Sequence Clustering for ProM , 2009, Business Process Management Workshops.
[118] A.,et al. Cognitive Engineering , 2008, Encyclopedia of GIS.
[119] Neil A. Ernst,et al. A Framework for Empirical Evaluation of Model Comprehensibility , 2007, International Workshop on Modeling in Software Engineering (MISE'07: ICSE Workshop 2007).
[120] Palash Bera. Does Cognitive Overload Matter in Understanding Bpmn Models? , 2012, J. Comput. Inf. Syst..
[121] Mark Strembeck,et al. The Influence of Notational Deficiencies on Process Model Comprehension , 2013, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..
[122] C. G. Jung. Psychological Types , 2000 .
[123] Volker Gruhn,et al. Good and Bad Excuses for Unstructured Business Process Models , 2007, EuroPLoP.
[124] José Javier Dolado,et al. An empirical comparison of the dynamic modeling in OML and UML , 2005, J. Syst. Softw..
[125] Jorge S. Cardoso,et al. Evaluating the process control-flow complexity measure , 2005, IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS'05).
[126] Björn Niehaves,et al. Reconstructing the giant: On the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process , 2009, ECIS.
[127] Ritu Agarwal,et al. Cognitive Fit in Requirements Modeling: A Study of Object and Process Methodologies , 1996, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..
[128] Oliver Holschke,et al. Impact of Granularity on Adjustment Behavior in Adaptive Reuse of Business Process Models , 2010, BPM.
[129] T. Kuhn,et al. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .
[130] Jan Mendling,et al. Dimensions of Business Processes Quality (QoBP) , 2008, Business Process Management Workshops.
[131] I. Ajzen,et al. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research , 1977 .
[132] Jan Mendling,et al. On a Quest for Good Process Models: The Cross-Connectivity Metric , 2008, CAiSE.
[133] Jan Mendling,et al. Imperative versus Declarative Process Modeling Languages: An Empirical Investigation , 2011, Business Process Management Workshops.
[134] Helen C. Purchase,et al. Which Aesthetic has the Greatest Effect on Human Understanding? , 1997, GD.
[135] Mario Piattini,et al. Evaluating the effect of composite states on the understandability of UML statechart diagrams , 2005, MoDELS'05.
[136] Jorge S. Cardoso,et al. Business Process Control-Flow Complexity: Metric, Evaluation, and Validation , 2008, Int. J. Web Serv. Res..
[137] Peter Loos,et al. Understanding Understandability of Conceptual Models - What Are We Actually Talking about? , 2012, ER.
[138] Mario Piattini,et al. Assessing the understandability of UML statechart diagrams with composite states—A family of empirical studies , 2009, Empirical Software Engineering.
[139] Michael Derntl,et al. Cognitive effectiveness of visual instructional design languages , 2010, J. Vis. Lang. Comput..
[140] Nelson Goodman,et al. Languages of Art, an Approach to a Theory of Symbols , 1970 .
[141] Mario Piattini,et al. The impact of structural complexity on the understandability of UML statechart diagrams , 2010, Inf. Sci..
[142] Barbara Weber,et al. The Impact of Testcases on the Maintainability of Declarative Process Models , 2011, BMMDS/EMMSAD.
[143] Guttorm Sindre,et al. Evaluating the Quality of Process Models: Empirical Testing of a Quality Framework , 2002, ER.
[144] Sophie Dupuy-Chessa,et al. Evaluating Choreographies in BPMN 2.0 Using an Extended Quality Framework , 2011, BPMN.
[145] Jörg Becker,et al. Configurative Process Modeling - Outlining an Approach to Increased Business Process Model Usability , 2004 .
[146] G. A. Miller. THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .
[147] Manfred Reichert,et al. Refactoring large process model repositories , 2011, Comput. Ind..
[148] Ned Kock,et al. Communication flow orientation in business process modeling and its effect on redesign success: Results from a field study , 2009, Decis. Support Syst..
[149] Michael Rebstock,et al. Usability of Modelling Languages for Model Interpretation: An Empirical Research Report , 2011, Wirtschaftsinformatik.
[150] Susanne Patig,et al. A Practical Guide to Testing the Understandability of Notations , 2008, APCCM.
[151] W.M.P. van der Aalst,et al. Business Process Management: A Comprehensive Survey , 2013 .
[152] David A. Carrington,et al. Experimenting with Aesthetics-Based Graph Layout , 2000, Diagrams.
[153] Félix García,et al. Towards thresholds of control flow complexity measures for BPMN models , 2011, SAC.
[154] Subhasish Dasgupta,et al. Individual Differences and Conceptual Modeling Task Performance: Examining the Effects of Cognitive Style, Self-efficacy, and Application Domain Knowledge , 2011, BMMDS/EMMSAD.
[155] David A. Carrington,et al. UML collaboration diagram syntax: an empirical study of comprehension , 2002, Proceedings First International Workshop on Visualizing Software for Understanding and Analysis.
[156] Jinwoo Kim,et al. Why Are Some Diagrams Easier to Work With? : Effects of Diagrammatic Representation on the Cognitive Integration Process of Systems Analysis and Design , 1999 .
[157] Jafar Habibi,et al. A Semantic Framework for Business Process Modeling Based on Architecture Styles , 2012, 2012 IEEE/ACIS 11th International Conference on Computer and Information Science.
[158] Patrick van Bommel,et al. Elementary Patterns for Converting Textual and Visual Formalisms based on Set Theory and ORM , 2011, J. Digit. Inf. Manag..
[159] Akhilesh Bajaj,et al. COGEVAL: A Propositional Framework Based on Cognitive Theories To Evaluate Conceptual Models , 2004, CAiSE Workshops.
[160] Ned Kock,et al. An experimental study of process representation approaches and their impact on perceived modeling quality and redesign success , 2005, Bus. Process. Manag. J..
[161] Ralf Laue,et al. Measuring the Understandability of Business Process Models - Are We Asking the Right Questions? , 2010, Business Process Management Workshops.
[162] Volker Gruhn,et al. Complexity Metrics for business Process Models , 2006, BIS.
[163] Ritu Agarwal,et al. Comprehending Object and Process Models: An Empirical Study , 1999, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..
[164] Mario Piattini,et al. Using Practitioners for Assessing the Understandability of UML Statechart Diagrams with Composite States , 2007, ER Workshops.
[165] Jan Recker,et al. The Effects of Content Presentation Format and User Characteristics on Novice Developers' Understanding of Process Models , 2011, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..
[166] Mario Piattini,et al. Measurement in business processes: a systematic review , 2010, Bus. Process. Manag. J..
[167] Manfred Reichert,et al. Investigating expressiveness and understandability of hierarchy in declarative business process models , 2015, Software & Systems Modeling.
[168] Angelo Susi,et al. reBPMN: Recovering and reducing business processes , 2012, 2012 28th IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM).
[169] Yair Wand,et al. Towards Understanding the Process of Process Modeling: Theoretical and Empirical Considerations , 2011, Business Process Management Workshops.
[170] Jan Mendling,et al. A Study Into the Factors That Influence the Understandability of Business Process Models , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans.
[171] Barbara Weber,et al. Investigating the Process of Process Modeling with Cheetah Experimental Platform , 2010, ER-POIS@CAiSE.
[172] Mario Piattini,et al. Defining and Validating Metrics for UML Statechart Diagrams , 2002 .
[173] Jan Mendling,et al. Making sense of business process descriptions: An experimental comparison of graphical and textual notations , 2012, J. Syst. Softw..
[174] August-Wilhelm Scheer,et al. ARIS - Business Process Frameworks , 1998 .
[175] N. Goodman,et al. Languages of art : an approach to a theory of symbols , 1979 .
[176] Jinwoo Kim,et al. A cognitive engineering study on the development of an object oriented process modeling formalism , 1997, Proceedings of the Thirtieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
[177] Peter Loos,et al. Empirical research in business process management - analysis of an emerging field of research , 2010, Bus. Process. Manag. J..
[178] Ulrich Frank,et al. Towards a pluralistic conception of research methods in information systems research , 2006 .
[179] Mario Piattini,et al. Evaluation of BPMN Models Quality - A Family of Experiments , 2008, ENASE.
[180] Nigel P. Melville,et al. Theories Used in Information Systems Research: Identifying Theory Networks in Leading IS Journals , 2009, ICIS.
[181] David J. Gilmore,et al. Comprehension and Recall of Miniature Programs , 1984, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..