Usability Evaluation of Modeling Languages

185 Pages·2013·2.55 MB·

by  Christian Schalles (auth.)

Usability Evaluation
of Modeling Languages
Christian Schalles
Usability Evaluation
of Modeling Languages
An Empirical Research Study
Foreword by Prof. Dr. Michael Rebstock
and Dr. John Creagh
RESEARCH
Christian Schalles
Leidersbach, Germany
Dissertation Cork Institute of Technology (Ireland), 2012
ISBN 978-3-658-00050-9 ISBN 978-3-658-00051-6 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-3-658-00051-6
Library of Congress Control Number: 2012947015
The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie;
detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de.
Springer Gabler
© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2013
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole
or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical
way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer
software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts in connection with reviews or schol-
arly analysis or material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed
on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplication of this pub-
lication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the
Publisher’s location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained
from Springer. Permissions for use may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright
Clearance Center. Violations are liable to prosecution under the respective Copyright Law.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
While the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the
date of publication, neither the authors nor the editors nor the publisher can accept any legal
r esponsibility for any errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty,
express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein.
Printed on acid-free paper
Springer Gabler is a brand of Springer DE. Springer DE is part of Springer Science+Business Media.
www.springer-gabler.de
To Carina, Heidi, Wilhelm and Andreas. Thanks for your
patience and support
Foreword
ConceptualmodelingoftenisconsideredtobeattheheartoftheBusinessandInformation
SystemsEngineeringdiscipline.Withoutconceptualmodeling,itwouldbeextraordinarilycostly
andtime-consuming,ifnotimpossible,tocommunicateconcepts,structuresandartifactsofa
projectdomainbetweenalargernumberofteammembersandtofinishaprojectsuccessfully
andefficiently.Graphicalmodelinglanguagesarethekeyinstrumentsofconceptualmodeling
andarewidelyusednotonlythroughoutmostdiversekindsofsoftwareprojects,butalsoin
processmanagement,qualitymanagementorcompliancemanagementprojects.
Comparedtoitscentralimportance,surprisinglylittleisknownabouttheusabilityevaluation
ofmodelinglanguages.Graphicalmodelinglanguagesareinventedanddevelopedbypersons,
teamsororganizations,oftenbaseduponpriorconcepts,andcanevolveintobeingacertifiedora
defactoindustrystandard.Butduringthesedevelopmentprocesses,usabilityevaluationsarenot
yetcommon.Thusitoftenremainsunclear,whenalanguageshouldbechosenforagivenproject
task,whatintellectualandpracticalskillstheuseoftheconceptsandelementsofthelanguage
requires,orwhichaspectsinfluencethecontentandthequalityofmodelsdeveloped. Still,
thesequestionsareofconsiderablerelevanceforthesuccessofmodelingtasksinorganizational
practice.
ChristianSchallesinvestigatesandshedslightonthisexcitingandimportant,howeverrather
neglectedfieldofresearch.Forthispurposeheexaminesthevariablesthatinfluencetheusability
ofmodelinglanguages.Hisinquirynotonlybringstogetherconceptualarguments,butisalso
drivenbyempiricalresearch.Inaninnovativeway,theusabilityevaluationconceptpresented
inthisbookcombinesapproachesfromdifferentdisciplines.Relevantusabilityattributesare
derivedfromliterature;metricsandaframeworkforevaluationaredeveloped;hypothesesare
formulatedandtestedempirically.Thus,usabilityevaluationofgraphicalmodelinglanguagesis
putonasoundbasis.
VIII
Thebooknotonlywidensandenhancesresearchaboutmodelinglanguagesandsetsanagendafor
futureinvestigation.Itisalsoofimmediateusefordevelopersofgraphicalmodelinglanguages,
asitcontainsrecommendationsfortherefinementofexistinglanguagesorthedevelopment
ofnewones–whereverthis,despitetheplethoraonhand,maystillbenecessary. Itisalso
usefulforbusinesspractice,asitprovidesadecisionframeworkthathelpsprojectmanagersto
determinetheappropriatemodelinglanguageforagivenapplicationcontext. Ihopethatthe
bookwillbewellreceivedbythedifferentaudiencesitaddressesandthatitspursmanyfruitful
discussionsinresearchteams,standardizationbodies,publicadministrationsandbusinesses.
Prof.Dr.MichaelRebstock
June,2012
Foreword
Thisthesisexplorestheusabilityofmodelinglanguagesusedinbothsoftwaredevelopmentand
businessprocesses.AFrameworkforUsabilityEvaluationofModelingLanguages(FUEML)is
developed,followedbyaseriesofinvestigationsbasedonFUEML.
Thisresearchintotheusabilityofmodelinglanguageshassignificantimplicationsforthefuture
evolutionofmodelinglanguagesbothinsoftwaredevelopmentandbusinessprocesses.Witha
greaterunderstandingofuserexperiences,softwaretoolsmaypresentanenvironmentformodel
developmentandinterpretationthatleadstogreaterefficiencyandeffectiveness.
Theoverallapproachestakenbythisresearchinthedevelopmentofaframeworkmaybea
beneficialapproachformanyotherareaswhereusabilityisimportant.
TheDepartmentofComputingattheCorkInstituteofTechnology,Ireland(CIT)hasalong
establishedcollaborationwiththeUniversityofAppliedSciencesinDarmstadt.
ThisPh.D.thesiswassuccessfullycompletedbyChristianSchalles,underthesupervisionof
Dr.JohnCreagh,DepartmentofComputing,CIT,andProf.Dr.MichaelRebstock,Facultyof
BusinessAdministrationandEconomics,Darmstadt
IwishtoexpressmygratitudetotheCorkInstituteofTechnologyandtheUniversityofApplied
SciencesDarmstadt.
Dr.JohnCreagh
CorkInstituteofTechnologyJune,2012
Acknowledgements
Itwouldnothavebeenpossibletowritethisdoctoralthesiswithoutthehelpandsupportofthe
kindpeoplearoundme,toonlysomeofwhomitispossibletogiveparticularmentionhere.
Inthefirstplace,Iwishtothankthemembersofthesupervisionteamfortheirpositiveand
comprehensivesupportandencouragementoverthelastyears.
Dr.JohnCreagh,whosupportedthisworkasthemainsupervisor.HesupervisedmeattheCork
InstituteofTechnology.Thankyouverymuchforyoursupervisionduringthelastyears.
Prof.Dr.MichaelRebstock,whosupervisedmeattheUniversityofAppliedSciencesDarmstadt.
Thankyouverymuchforyoursupervision.
Furthermore,IwishtothanktheCorkInstituteofTechnologyandespeciallyMichaelLoftus
andJimO’Dwyer.
IalsowouldliketoacknowledgethecontributionofHolgerBassarek,whoassistedwithhisvast
knowledgeineye-trackinghardwareandsoftware.
ThanksmustalsobegiventomyresearchgroupattheUniversityofAppliedSciencesDarmstadt:
KerstinReinking,EmanuelBerger,JaninaFengelandWalterNoll.Thankyouforyoursupport
inallthatyears.
IwouldspeciallyliketothankProf.Dr.UdoBleimannfromtheUniversityofAppliedSciences
DarmstadtandDr.IngoStengelfromtheUniversityofPlymouthwhosupportedmeinformal
andinformalissuesaroundmyPhD.
ThisisalsoextendedtoNormenHaasandTilmanSwinkefromtheUniversityofApplied
SciencesWorms.ThanksguysforagreattimeinCorkinJanuary2011.Goodluckwithyour
PhD!
IalsowanttothankProf. Dr. ChristophWieseforhismentalsupportduringthetimeofmy
PhD-studies.
Last,butbynomeansleast,IthankmyfriendsinIreland,GreatBritain,Germanyandelsewhere
fortheirsupportandencouragementthroughout,someofwhomhavealreadybeennamed.
Keeponrockin’guys!
Dr.ChristianSchalles
June,2012
Abstract
Overthelasttwodecadesmoreandmorecompaniesstartedtorecognizetheimportanceof
graphicalmodelingasawaytomeettheirbusinessgoals.Inordertodescribeabusinesscase
suchasabusinessprocessoranapplicationsystem,informationinvariousdifferentformats
hastobeintegratedwithinagraphicalmodel.Graphicalmodelsaredevelopedusingmodeling
languagessuchastheUnifiedModelingLanguage(UML)andEventDrivenProcessChains
(EPC).
Theusabilityofgraphicalmodelinglanguageshasnotbeenexplicitlyconsideredinpastresearch.
Mostusabilityevaluationsurveysaremainlyfocusingonapplications,websites,softwareand
technicalproducts.Usabilityhasnotbeenfocusedonwithinthedevelopmentofcurrentgraphical
languagesforconceptualmodeling.Consequently,theimpactofgraphicalmodelinglanguages
onusersaswellastheoutputresultingfromtheirapplicationisnotclear.
Thisthesisfocusesonanempiricalusabilityevaluationofgraphicalmodelinglanguagesinbusi-
nessprocessandsoftwaremodeling.Ausabilityevaluationframeworkforgraphicalmodeling
languagesisproposed.Theframeworkcontainsdifferentuserscenarios,usabilityattributesand
metricsformeasuringusabilityinthedomainofgraphicalmodelinglanguages.
Basedonthis,hypothesesassumingdifferencesofvariousgraphicalmodelinglanguagesregard-
ingtheirimpactonusabilityaredeveloped.Subsequently,thedefinedhypothesesareexplored
bytheconductionofanempiricalsurvey.ThedataanalysisiscalculatedbyusinganAnalysis
ofCovariance(ANCOVA)andaStructuralEquationModeling(SEM)approachforanalyzing
causalinteractionsandrelationsbetweenlanguageandusabilityattributes.
Generalempiricalfindingsofthisthesisarethatlanguage-basedmetapropertiessuchascom-
plexityandvisualpropertiesofgraphicalmodelinglanguagesinfluencetheusabilityondifferent
causalstages. Furthermore,itisempiricallyproventhattwodifferingscenarios,themodel
developmentscenarioandthemodelinterpretationscenarioaffectusabilityinseparateways.
Subsequently,theempiricalresultsareappliedfordevelopingamanagementdecisionframework
supportingCIOsinindustrywiththeuser-orientedselectionofmodelinglanguagessuitableto
company’srequirements.Inadditiontothat,theprocessofmodelingincompaniesisdetermined
andenrichedwiththefindingsoftheempiricalsurveysconductedinthisthesis.
Thisthesisprovidesimportantfindingsformodelinglanguagestandardizationanddevelopment
organizationsaswellaspractitionersfromindustry.
Contents
Foreword VII
Acknowledgements XI
Abstract XIII
List of Figures XXI
List of Tables XXIII
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1
1. Introduction 3
1.1. Motivation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. ResearchQuestion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3. Structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2. Background of Software and Business Process Modeling 9
2.1. GeneralConceptofModeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2. HistoryofConceptualModeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3. TermsandDefinitionsintheModelingDomain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.4. AbstractionLayers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.5. ModelinginSoftwareEngineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.5.1. UML2.0ActivityDiagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.5.2. UML2.0UseCaseDiagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.5.3. UML2.0ClassDiagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.6. BusinessProcessModeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.6.1. EventDrivenProcessChains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.6.2. BusinessProcessModelingNotation2.0(BPMN) . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.7. SimilaritiesbetweendifferentModelingConcepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.8. ChapterConclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29