Skip to main content

How Cognitively Effective is a Visual Notation? On the Inherent Difficulty of Operationalizing the Physics of Notations

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 248))

Abstract

The Physics of Notations [9] (PoN) is a design theory presenting nine principles that can be used to evaluate and improve the cognitive effectiveness of a visual notation. The PoN has been used to analyze existing standard visual notations (such as BPMN, UML, etc.), and is commonly used for evaluating newly introduced visual notations and their extensions. However, due to the rather vague and abstract formulation of the PoN’s principles, they have received different interpretations in their operationalization. To address this problem, there have been attempts to formalize the principles, however only a very limited number of principles was covered. This research-in-progress paper aims to better understand the difficulties inherent in operationalizing the PoN, and better separate aspects of PoN, which can potentially be formulated in mathematical terms from those grounded in user-specific considerations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://www.omg.org/spec/SBVR/.

  2. 2.

    Nonetheless, existing work [16] seems to take debatable choices, such as seemingly arbitrary weights for distinguishing visual distance variables, whose objective nature can also be discussed.

References

  1. Giraldo, F.D., España, S., Pineda, M.A., Giraldo, W.J., Pastor, O.: Conciliating model-driven engineering with technical debt using a quality framework. In: Nurcan, S., Pimenidis, E. (eds.) CAiSE Forum 2014. LNBIP, vol. 204, pp. 199–214. Springer, Switzerland (2015)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Granada, D., Vara, J.M., Brambilla, M., Bollati, V., Marcos, E.: Analysing the cognitive effectiveness of the webml visual notation. Softw. Syst. Model., 1–33 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Green, T.R.G., Petre, M.: Usability analysis of visual programming environments: a cognitive dimensions framework. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 7(2), 131–174 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Gregor, S.: The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Q. 30, 611–642 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gulden, J., Reijers, H.A.: Toward advanced visualization techniques for conceptual modeling. In: Proceedings of the CAiSE Forum 2015 Stockholm, Sweden, 8–12 June, 2015

    Google Scholar 

  6. Halpin, T.: ORM 2. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM-WS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3762, pp. 676–687. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Krogstie, J., Sindre, G., Jørgensen, H.: Process models representing knowledge for action: a revised quality framework. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 15(1), 91–102 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Moody, D., van Hillegersberg, J.: Evaluating the visual syntax of UML: an analysis of the cognitive effectiveness of the UML family of diagrams. In: Gašević, D., Lämmel, R., Wyk, E. (eds.) SLE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5452, pp. 16–34. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Moody, D.L.: The physics of notations: toward a scientific basis for constructing visual notations in software engineering. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 35(6), 756–779 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Moody, D.L., Heymans, P., Matulevičius, R.: Visual syntax does matter: improving the cognitive effectiveness of the i* visual notation. Requirements Eng. 15(2), 141–175 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. zur Muehlen, M., Recker, J.: How much bpmn do you need (2008). http://www.bpm-research.com/2008/03/03/how-much-bpmn-do-you-need

  12. Narayanan, N.H., Hübscher, R.: Visual language theory: towards a human-computer interaction perspective. In: Marriott, K., Meyer, B. (eds.) Visual Language Theory, pp. 87–128. Springer, New York (1998)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. (OMG), O.M.G.: Business process model and notation (BPMN) version 2.0. Technical report, January 2011. http://taval.de/publications/BPMN20

  14. Plataniotis, G., de Kinderen, S., Proper, H.A.: Ea anamnesis: an approach for decision making analysis in enterprise architecture. Int. J. Inf. Syst. Model. Des. (IJISMD) 5(3), 75–95 (2014). http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ijismd.2014070104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Schuette, R., Rotthowe, T.: The guidelines of modeling - an approach to enhance the quality in information models. In: Ling, T.-W., Ram, S., Lee, M. (eds.) ER 1998. LNCS, vol. 1507, pp. 240–254. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Störrle, H., Fish, A.: Towards an operationalization of the “Physics of Notations” for the analysis of visual languages. In: Moreira, A., Schätz, B., Gray, J., Vallecillo, A., Clarke, P. (eds.) MODELS 2013. LNCS, vol. 8107, pp. 104–120. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. van der Linden, D., Hadar, I.: Cognitive effectiveness of conceptual modeling languages: examining professional modelers. In: Proceedings of the 5th IEEE International Workshop on Empirical Requirements Engineering (EmpiRE). IEEE (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  18. van der Linden, D., Hadar, I.: Evaluating the evaluators - an analysis of cognitive effectiveness improvement efforts for visual notations. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering. INSTICC (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  19. van der Linden, D., Hadar, I.: User involvement in applications of the PoN. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Cognitive Aspects of Information Systems Engineering (COGNISE). Springer (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Van Zee, M., Plataniotis, G., van der Linden, D., Marosin, D.: Formalizing enterprise architecture decision models using integrity constraints. In: 2014 IEEE 16th Conference on Business Informatics (CBI), vol. 1, pp. 143–150. IEEE (2014)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dirk van der Linden .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

van der Linden, D., Zamansky, A., Hadar, I. (2016). 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) Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling. BPMDS EMMSAD 2016 2016. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 248. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39429-9_28

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics