Abstract
Cognitive aspects like executive control functions, reasoning and abstraction have a crucial influence on modeling performance. Yet how are executive functions used in real modeling sessions and what individual differences exist? In this case study we analyse observations of three modeling sessions according to a coding scheme for behavioural observation of executive functions, reasoning and abstraction. We complement the findings with a qualitative, thick description of the sessions. We find that the modelers have unique styles in how they use executive control, that there appears to be a hierarchy in when specific executive functions are used, and that the use of executive control alone does not guarantee modeling progress. Greater awareness of the effects of executive control use in real modeling settings can be very helpful in training modelers to optimize their skills.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Barreteau, O.: The joint use of role-playing games and models regarding negotiation processes: characterization of associations. J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul. 6(2) (2003)
Basadur, M.: The Power of Innovation: How to Make Innovation a Way of Life and Put Creative Solutions to Work. Financial Times Management, Upper Saddle River (1995)
Brown, A.L.: Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation and other more mysterious mechanisms. In: Weinert, F., Kluwe, R.H. (eds.) Metacognition, Motivation, and Understanding, pp. 65–115. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale (1987)
Christoff, K., Keramatian, K., Gordon, A., Smith, R., Mädler, B.: Prefrontal organization of cognitive control according to levels of abstraction. Brain Res. 1286, 94–105 (2009)
Feltovich, P., Spiro, R., Coulson, R., Feltovich, J.: Collaboration within and among minds: mastering complexity, individually and in groups. In: Koschmann, T. (ed.) CSCL: Theory and Practice of An Emerging Paradigm. Computers, Cognition, and Work, pp. 25–44. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah (1996)
Gazzaniga, M.S., Ivry, R.B., Mangun, G.R.: Cognitive Neuroscience: The Biology of the Mind, 2nd edn. W. W. Norton & Company, New York (2002)
Hazzan, O.: Reflections on teaching abstraction and other soft ideas. ACM SIGCSE Bull. 40(2), 40–43 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1145/1383602.1383631
Lee, D., Trauth, E., Farwell, D.: Critical skills and knowledge requirements of IS professionals: a joint academic/industry investigation. MIS Q. 19(3: Special Issue on IS Curricula and Pedagogy), 313–340 (1995)
Lehrer, R., Schauble, L.: Developing model-based reasoning in mathematics and science. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 21(1), 39–48 (2000)
Lincoln, Y.S., Guba, E.G.: Naturalistic Inquiry, SAGE Focus Editions, vol. 75, 1st edn. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks (1985)
Mendling, J., Strembeck, M., Recker, J.: Factors of process model comprehension—Findings from a series of experiments. Decis. Support Syst. 53(1), 195–206 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2011.12.013
Persson, A.: Enterprise modelling in practice: situational factors and their influence on adopting a participative approach. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University (2001)
Ross, D., Goodenough, J., Irvine, C.A.: Software engineering: process, principles, and goals. Computer 8(5), 17–27 (1975)
Salles, P., Bredeweg, B.: A case study of collaborative modelling: building qualitative models in ecology. In: Model Based Systems and Qualitative Reasoning for Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pp. 75–84 (2002)
Schwarz, C., et al.: Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 46(6), 632–654 (2009)
Sins, P.H.M., Savelsbergh, E.R., van Joolingen, W.R.: The Difficult Process of Scientific Modelling: an analysis of novices’ reasoning during computer-based modelling. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 27(14), 1695–1721 (2005)
Sutcliffe, A.G., Maiden, N.A.M.: Analysing the novice analyst: cognitive models in software engineering. Int. J. Man Mach. Stud. 36(5), 719–740 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7373(92)90038-M
Theodorakis, M., Analyti, A., Constantopoulos, P., Spyratos, N.: Contextualization as an abstraction mechanism for conceptual modelling. In: Akoka, J., Bouzeghoub, M., Comyn-Wattiau, I., Métais, E. (eds.) ER 1999. LNCS, vol. 1728, pp. 475–490. Springer, Heidelberg (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-47866-3_32
Van Der Valk, T., Van Driel, J., De Vos, W.: Common characteristics of models in present-day scientific practice. Res. Sci. Educ. 37(4), 469–488 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9036-3
Wilmont, I., Hengeveld, S., Barendsen, E., Hoppenbrouwers, S.: Cognitive mechanisms of conceptual modelling: how do people do it? In: Ng, W., Storey, V.C., Trujillo, J.C. (eds.) ER 2013. LNCS, vol. 8217, pp. 74–87. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41924-9_7
Wilmont, I., Hoppenbrouwers, S., Barendsen, E.: An observation method for behavioral analysis of collaborative modeling skills. In: Metzger, A., Persson, A. (eds.) CAiSE 2017. LNBIP, vol. 286, pp. 59–71. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60048-2_6
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Wilmont, I., Barendsen, E., Hoppenbrouwers, S. (2019). A Case Study of Executive Functions in Real Process Modeling Sessions. In: Proper, H., Stirna, J. (eds) Advanced Information Systems Engineering Workshops. CAiSE 2019. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 349. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20948-3_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20948-3_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-20947-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-20948-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)