Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Modeling Difficulties in Data Modeling

Similarities and Differences Between Experienced and Non-experienced Modelers

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Conceptual Modeling (ER 2020)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 12400))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We study modeling difficulties encountered by experienced modelers while performing a data modeling task and compare our observations with findings we obtained from studying modeling processes of non-experienced modelers. Using the concept of cognitive breakdowns, we analyze audio-visual protocols of the modelers’ modeling processes, recordings of modelers’ interactions with the employed modeling software tool and survey data of modelers about their own perceptions of modeling difficulties. Based on a mixed methods research design, we identify typical modeling difficulties modelers face when performing data modeling. The present findings suggest nine types of modeling difficulties related to modeling entity types, generalization hierarchies, relationship types, attributes, and cardinalities. Contrasting the identified modeling difficulties with difficulties encountered by non-experienced modelers contributes to a better and more complete understanding of modeling processes performed by modeling experts and novices—and to inform design science research on specific targeted tool support for overcoming these difficulties at different stages of modelers’ mastering of data modeling.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
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

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Batra, D., Antony, S.R.: Novice errors in conceptual database design. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 3(1), 57–69 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Batra, D.: Cognitive complexity in data modeling: causes and recommendations. Requir. Eng. 12(4), 231–244 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-006-0040-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Batra, D., Davis, J.G.: Conceptual data modelling in database design: similarities and differences between expert and novice designers. Int. J. Man-Mach. Stud. 37(1), 83–101 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bera, P.: Situations that affect modelers’ cognitive difficulties: an empirical assessment. In: 5th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS). Research Paper 254, Detroit, MI (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chen, P.P.S.: The entity-relationship model–toward a unified view of data. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 1(1), 9–36 (1976)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Claes, J., Vanderfeesten, I., Gailly, F., Grefen, P., Poels, G.: The Structured Process Modeling Theory (SPMT) a cognitive view on why and how modelers benefit from structuring the process of process modeling. Inf. Syst. Front. 17(6), 1401–1425 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-015-9585-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Creswell, J.W., Plano Clark, V.L.: Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 3rd edn. Sage, Los Angeles (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ericsson, K.A., Simon, H.A.: Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data, 2nd edn. MIT Press, Cambridge (1993)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Hoppenbrouwers, S.J.B.A., Proper, H.A.E., van der Weide, T.P.: A fundamental view on the process of conceptual modeling. In: Delcambre, L., Kop, C., Mayr, H.C., Mylopoulos, J., Pastor, O. (eds.) ER 2005. LNCS, vol. 3716, pp. 128–143. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/11568322_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Newell, A., Simon, H.A.: Human Problem Solving. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1972)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Nielsen, J.: Estimating the number of subjects needed for a thinking aloud test. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 41(3), 385–397 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Pinggera, J., et al.: Styles in business process modeling: an exploration and a model. Softw. Syst. Model. 14(3), 1055–1080 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-013-0349-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Pinggera, J., Zugal, S., Furtner, M., Sachse, P., Martini, M., Weber, B.: The modeling mind: behavior patterns in process modeling. In: Bider, I., et al. (eds.) BPMDS/EMMSAD -2014. LNBIP, vol. 175, pp. 1–16. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43745-2_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Rosenthal, K., Ternes, B., Strecker, S.: Understanding individual processes of conceptual modeling: a multi-modal observation and data generation approach. In: Modellierung 2020, Vienna, Austria, pp. 77–92 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Rosenthal, K., Strecker, S.: Toward a taxonomy of modeling difficulties: a multi-modal study on individual modeling processes. In: 40th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Munich, Germany (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Rosenthal, K., Strecker, S., Pastor, O.: Supplementary Material for “Modeling Difficulties in Data Modeling: Similarities and Differences Between Experienced and Non-experienced Modelers” (2020). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3992737

  17. Schenk, K., Vitalari, N.P., Davis, K.S.: Differences between novice and expert systems analysts: what do we know and what do we do? J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 15(1), 9–50 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Shanks, G.: Conceptual data modelling: an empirical study of expert and novice data modellers. Australas. J. Inf. Syst. 4(2), 1–11 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Srinivasan, A., Te’eni, D.: Modeling as constrained problem solving: an empirical study of the data modeling process. Manag. Sci. 41(3), 419–434 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Sweller, J.: Cognitive load during problem solving: effects on learning. Cogn. Sci. 12(2), 257–285 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ternes, B., Rosenthal, K., Barth, H., Strecker, S.: TOOL - modeling observatory & tool: an update. In: Short, Workshop and Tools & Demo Papers Modellierung 2020, Vienna, Austria, vol. 2542, pp. 198–202. CEUR-WS, Vienna (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Venable, J.R.: Teaching novice conceptual data modellers to become experts. In: International Conference Software Engineering: Education and Practice, pp. 50–56. IEEE, Dunedin (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Venkatesh, V., Brown, S.A., Sullivan, Y.W.: Guidelines for conducting mixed-methods research: an extension and illustration. Inf. Syst. 17(7), 435–494 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Wilmont, I., Brinkkemper, S., van de Weerd, I., Hoppenbrouwers, S.: Exploring intuitive modelling behaviour. In: Bider, I., et al. (eds.) BPMDS/EMMSAD -2010. LNBIP, vol. 50, pp. 301–313. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13051-9_25

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Enterprise Modelling Research Group, University of Hagen, Hagen, Germany

    Kristina Rosenthal & Stefan Strecker

  2. ProS Research Center, Universitat Politécnica de Valencia, Valencia, Spain

    Oscar Pastor

Authors
  1. Kristina Rosenthal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stefan Strecker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Oscar Pastor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristina Rosenthal .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

    Gillian Dobbie

  2. University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany

    Ulrich Frank

  3. TU Wien, Vienna, Austria

    Gerti Kappel

  4. Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA

    Stephen W. Liddle

  5. University of Klagenfurt, Klagenfurt am Wörthersee, Austria

    Heinrich C. Mayr

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Rosenthal, K., Strecker, S., Pastor, O. (2020). Modeling Difficulties in Data Modeling. In: Dobbie, G., Frank, U., Kappel, G., Liddle, S.W., Mayr, H.C. (eds) Conceptual Modeling. ER 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12400. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62522-1_37

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62522-1_37

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-62521-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-62522-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation