Environmental Factors on Concept Maps Design

  • Daniela OliveiraEmail author
  • Mickael Gardoni
  • Kimiz Dalkir
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 540)


Building Information Modeling (BIM) environments have a lot of potential to facilitate communication and support collective work, speeding construction times and increasing the overall quality of the project. A few ontologies creation efforts have been made by both academia and practitioners to foster the transmission of knowledge in BIM environments. This paper aims to add to the discussion by analyzing the notes of users of concept maps, knowledge structures similar to ontologies, and comparing them to BIM environment researchers’.


BIM Concept maps Knowledge management Knowledge transmission Knowledge construction Ontologies 



Daniela’s work was supported by McGill University’s Centre for Social and Cultural Data Science (CSCDS) grant number J1317026.


  1. 1.
    Adesope, O.O., Nesbit, J.C.: A systematic review of research on collaborative learning with concept maps. In: Handbook of Research on Collaborative Learning Using Concept Mapping, pp. 238–255. Information Science Reference, Hershey (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brilhante, V., Macedo, G., Macedo, S.: Heuristic transformation of well-constructed conceptual maps into owl preliminary domain ontologies. In: Workshop on Ontologies and their Applications, WONTO (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Campbell, R., Salem, D.A.: Concept mapping as a feminist research method. Psychol. Women Q. 23, 65–89 (1999). Scholar
  4. 4.
    Castro, A.G., et al.: The use of concept maps during knowledge elicitation in ontology development processes – the nutrigenomics use case. BMC Bioinform. 7, 267 (2006). Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cerovsek, T.: A review and outlook for a “Building Information Model” (BIM): a multi-standpoint framework for technological development. Adv. Eng. Inform. 25, 224–244 (2011). Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ci, C., Choi, S.: How to manage a city’s image using the brand concept map and network analysis: a case of Seoul. Qual. Quant. 51, 2441–2456 (2017). Scholar
  7. 7.
    Daley, A.: Reflections on reflexivity and critical reflection as critical research practices. Affillia 25, 68–82 (2010). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dalkir, K.: A Knowledge Management Approach for Digital Cultural Heritage Preservation, Istanbul (2017)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dansereau, D.F.: Node-link mapping principles for visualizing knowledge and information. In: Tergan, S.-O., Keller, T. (eds.) Knowledge and Information Visualization. LNCS, vol. 3426, pp. 61–81. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eastman, C.M., Jeong, Y.-S., Sacks, R., Kaner, I.: Exchange model and exchange object concepts for implementation of national BIM standards. J. Comput. Civ. Eng. 24, 25–34 (2010). Scholar
  11. 11.
    Freeman, L.A.: The effects of concept maps on requirements elicitation and system models during information systems development. In: Cañas, A.J., Novak, J.D., González, F. (eds.) Concept Maps: Theory, Methodology, Technology. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Concept Mapping. Universidad Pública de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain, pp. 257–264 (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Freeman, L.A., Jessup, L.M.: The power and benefits of concept mapping: measuring use, usefulness, ease of use, and satisfaction. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 26, 151–169 (2004). Scholar
  13. 13.
    González, H.L., Palencia, A.P., Umaña, L.A., Galindo, L., Villafrade, M.L.A.: Mediated learning experience and concept maps: a pedagogical tool for achieving meaningful learning in medical physiology students. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 32, 312–316 (2008). Scholar
  14. 14.
    Howard, R., Björk, B.-C.: Building information modelling – experts’ views on standardisation and industry deployment. Adv. Eng. Inform. 22, 271–280 (2008). Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jackson, K.M., Trochim, W.M.K.: Concept mapping as an alternative approach for the analysis of open-ended survey responses. Organ. Res. Methods 5, 307–336 (2002). Scholar
  16. 16.
    Laakso, M., Kiviniemi, A.: The IFC standard - a review of history, development, and standardization. J. Inf. Technol. Constr. ITcon. 17, 134–161 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lambe, P.: Organising Knowledge: Taxonomies, Knowledge and Organisational Effectiveness. Chandos Publishing (Oxford) Ltd., Witney (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lambiotte, J.G., Dansereau, D.F., Cross, D.R., Reynolds, S.B.: Multirelational semantic maps. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 1, 331–367 (1989). Scholar
  19. 19.
    Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., Sugimoto, C.R., Tsou, A.: Team size matters: collaboration and scientific impact since 1900. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 66, 1323–1332 (2015). Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lee, J., Jeong, Y.: User-centric knowledge representations based on ontology for AEC design collaboration. Comput. Aided Des. 44, 735–748 (2012). Scholar
  21. 21.
    Linton, R.: Conceptualizing feminism: clarifying social science concepts. Eval. Program. Plann. 12, 25–29 (1989). Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liu, Y., Van Nederveen, S., Hertogh, M.: Understanding effects of BIM on collaborative design and construction: an empirical study in China. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 35, 686–698 (2017). Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ridde, V.: “The problem of the worst-off is dealt with after all other issues”: the equity and health policy implementation gap in Burkina Faso. Soc. Sci. Med. 66, 1368–1378 (2008). Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rogers, R.R.: Reflection in higher education: a concept analysis. Innov. High. Educ. 26, 37–57 (2001). Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rosas, S.R.: Multi-map comparison for group concept mapping: an approach for examining conceptual congruence through spatial correspondence. Qual. Quant. 51, 2421–2439 (2017). Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rosas, S.R., Camphausen, L.C.: The use of concept mapping for scale development and validation in evaluation. Eval. Program. Plann. 30, 125–135 (2007). Scholar
  27. 27.
    Santos, R., Costa, A.A., Grilo, A.: Bibliometric analysis and review of Building Information Modelling literature published between 2005 and 2015. Autom. Constr. 80, 118–136 (2017). Scholar
  28. 28.
    Starr, R.R., de Oliveira, J.M.P.: Concept maps as the first step in an ontology construction method. Inf. Syst. 38, 771–783 (2013). Scholar
  29. 29.
    Succar, B.: Building information modelling framework: a research and delivery foundation for industry stakeholders. Autom. Constr. 18, 357–375 (2009). Scholar
  30. 30.
    Trochim, W.M.: An introduction to concept mapping for planning and evaluation. Eval. Program. Plann. 12, 1–16 (1989). Scholar
  31. 31.
    Trochim, W.M., Cook, J.A., Setze, R.J.: Using concept mapping to develop a conceptual framework of staff’s views of a supported employment program for individuals with severe mental illness. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 62, 766 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vincent, A., Ross, D.: Personalize training: determine learning styles, personality types and multiple intelligences online. Learn. Organ. 8, 36–43 (2001). Scholar
  33. 33.
    Weinerth, K., Koenig, V., Brunner, M., Martin, R.: Concept maps: a useful and usable tool for computer-based knowledge assessment? A literature review with a focus on usability. Comput. Educ. 78, 201–209 (2014). Scholar
  34. 34.
    Windsor, L.C.: Using concept mapping in community-based participatory research: a mixed methods approach. J. Mix. Methods Res. 7, 274–293 (2013). Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wix, J., Karlshoej, J.: Information delivery manual: guide to components and development methods. Build. Int. 5, 10 (2010)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yao, J., Gu, M.: Conceptology: using concept map for knowledge representation and ontology construction. J. Netw. 8, 1708–1712 (2013)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zhao, X.: A scientometric review of global BIM research: analysis and visualization. Autom. Constr. 80, 37–47 (2017). Scholar
  38. 38.
    Petrucci, C.J., Quinlan, K.M.: Bridging the research-practice gap. J. Soc. Serv. Res. 34, 25–42 (2007). Scholar
  39. 39.
    Stoyanova, N., Kommers, P.: Concept mapping as a medium of shared cognition in computer-supported collaborative problem solving. J. Interact. Learn. Res. 13, 111 (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniela Oliveira
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mickael Gardoni
    • 1
  • Kimiz Dalkir
    • 2
  1. 1.École de Technologie SupérieureMontrealCanada
  2. 2.School of Information StudiesMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations