Abstract
Practical experience suggests that usage and understanding of UML diagrams is greatly affected by the quality of their layout. While existing research failed to provide conclusive evidence in support of this hypothesis, our own previous work provided substantial evidence to this effect. When studying different factors like diagram type and expertise level, it became apparent that diagram size plays an important role, too. Since we lack an adequate understanding of this notion, in this paper, we define diagram size metrics and study their impact to modeler performance. We find that there is a strong negative correlation between diagram size and modeler performance. Our results are highly significant. We utilize these results to derive a recommendation on diagram sizes that are optimal for model understanding.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abrahão, S., Gravino, C., Insfrn, E., Scanniello, G., Tortora, G.: Assessing the Effectiveness of Sequence Diagrams in the Comprehension of Functional Requirements: Results from a Family of Five Experiments. IEEE Txn. SE 39(3), 327–342 (2013)
Britton, C., Kutar, M., Anthony, S., Barker, T., Beecham, S., Wilkinson, V.: An empirical study of user preference and performance with UML diagrams. In: Proc. IEEE 2002 Symp. Human Centric Computing Languages and Environments (HCC/LE), pp. 31–33. IEEE (2002)
Dawoodi, S.Y.P.: Assessing the Comprehension of UML Class Diagrams via Eye Tracking. PhD thesis, Kent State University (2007)
Dwyer, T., Lee, B., Fisher, D., Quinn, K.I., Isenberg, P., Robertson, G., North, C.: A Comparison of User-Generated and Automatic Graph Layouts. IEEE Txn. Visualization and Computer Graphics 15(6), 961–968 (2009)
Effinger, P., Jogsch, N., Seiz, S.: On a Study of Layout Aesthetics for Business Process Models Using BPMN. In: Mendling, J., Weidlich, M., Weske, M. (eds.) BPMN 2010. LNBIP, vol. 67, pp. 31–45. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Eichelberger, H.: Aesthetics of class diagrams. In: Proc. 1st Intl. Ws. Visualizing Software for Understanding and Analysis (VISSOFT), pp. 23–31. IEEE (2002)
Eichelberger, H.: Aesthetics and automatic layout of UML class diagrams. PhD thesis, University of Würzburg (2005)
Eichelberger, H.: Automatic layout of UML use case diagrams. In: Proc. 4th ACM Symp. Software Visualization (SOFTVIS), pp. 105–114. ACM (2008)
Eichelberger, H., Schmid, K.: Guidelines on the aesthetic quality of UML class diagrams. Information and Software Technology 51(12), 1686–1698 (2009)
Eiglsperger, M.: Automatic layout of UML class diagrams: A topology-shape-metrics approach. PhD thesis, Universität Tübingen (2003)
Gopher, D., Braune, R.: On the Psychophysics of Workload: Why Bother with Subjective Measures? Human Factors 26(5), 519–532 (1984)
Koffka, K.: Principles of Gestalt Psychology. Routledge & Kegan Paul (1935)
Paas, F., Tuovinen, J.E., Tabbers, H., Van Gerven, P.W.M.: Cognitive Load Measurement as a Means to Advance Cognitive Load Theory. Educational Psychologist 38(1), 63–71 (2003)
Pfleeger, S.L.: Experimental design and analysis in software engineering. Annals of Software Engineering 1(1), 219–253 (1995)
Purchase, H.C., Colpoys, L., Carrington, D.A., McGill, M.: UML Class Diagrams: An Emprical Study of Comprehension, pp. 149–178. Kluwer (2003)
Purchase, H.C.: Metrics for Graph Drawing Aesthtetics. J. Visual Languages and Computing 13(5), 501–516 (2002)
Purchase, H.C., Allder, J.-A., Carrington, D.A.: Graph layout aesthetics in UML diagrams: user preferences. J. Graph Algorithms Applications 6(3), 255–279 (2002)
Purchase, H.C., Carrington, D., Allder, J.-A.: Empirical Evaluation of Aesthetics-based Graph Layout. J. Empirical Software Engineering 7(3), 233–255 (2002)
Purchase, H.C., Carrington, D., Allder, J.-A.: Experimenting with aesthetics-based graph layout. In: Anderson, M., Cheng, P., Haarslev, V. (eds.) Diagrams 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1889, pp. 498–501. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Purchase, H.C., Colpoys, L., McGill, M., Carrington, D.: UML Collaboration Diagram Syntax: An Empirical Study of Comprehension. In: Proc. 1st Intl. Ws. Visualizing Software for Understanding and Analysis (VISSOFT), pp. 13–22. IEEE Computer Society (2002)
Reggio, G., Ricca, F., Scanniello, G., Di Cerbo, F., Dodero, G.: On the comprehension of workflows modeled with a precise style: results from a family of controlled experiments. Software & Systems Modeling, 1–24 (2013)
Ricca, F., Penta, M.D., Torchiano, M., Tonella, P., Ceccato, M.: How Developers’ Experience and Ability Influence Web Application Comprehension Tasks Supported by UML Stereotypes: A Series of Four Experiments. IEEE Txn. SE 36(1), 96–118 (2010)
Seemann, J.: Extending the Sugiyama algorithm for drawing UML class diagrams: Towards automatic layout of object-oriented software diagrams. In: DiBattista, G. (ed.) GD 1997. LNCS, vol. 1353, pp. 415–424. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)
Sharif, B., Maletic, J.I.: An empirical study on the comprehension of stereotyped UML class diagram layouts. In: Proc. 17th IEEE Intl. Conf. Program Comprehension (ICPC), pp. 268–272. IEEE (2009)
Sharif, B., Maletic, J.I.: The effect of layout on the comprehension of UML class diagrams: A controlled experiment. In: Proc. 5th IEEE Intl. Ws. Visualizing Software for Understanding and Analysis (VISSOFT), pp. 11–18. IEEE (2009)
Sharif, B., Maletic, J.I.: An eye tracking study on the effects of layout in understanding the role of design patterns. In: Proc. 2010 IEEE Intl. Conf. Software Maintenance (ICSM), pp. 41–48. IEEE (2010)
Sharif, B., Maletic, J.I.: The Effects of Layout on Detecting the Role of Design Patterns. In: Proc. 23rd IEEE Conf. Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEE&T), pp. 41–48. IEEE (2010)
Störrle, H.: On the Impact of Layout Quality to Unterstanding UML Diagrams. In: Proc. IEEE Symp. Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC 2011), pp. 135–142. IEEE Computer Society (2011)
Störrle, H.: On the Impact of Layout Quality to Unterstanding UML Diagrams: Diagram Type and Expertise. In: Costagliola, G., Ko, A., Cypher, A., Nichols, J., Scaffidi, C., Kelleher, C., Myers, B. (eds.) Proc. IEEE Symp. Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC 2012), pp. 195–202. IEEE Computer Society (2012)
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)
Swan, J., Kutar, M., Barker, T., Britton, C.: User Preference and Performance with UML Interaction Diagrams. In: Proc. 2004 IEEE Symp. Visual Languages and Human Centric Computing (VL/HCC), pp. 243–250. IEEE (2004)
Wong, K., Sun, D.: On evaluating the layout of UML diagrams for program comprehension. Software Quality Journal 14(3), 233–259 (2006)
Yusuf, S., Kagdi, H., Maletic, J.I.: Assessing the Comprehension of UML Class Diagrams via Eye Tracking. In: 15th IEEE Intl. Conf. Program Comprehension (ICPC 2007), pp. 113–122. IEEE Computer Society (2007)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Störrle, H. (2014). On the Impact of Layout Quality to Understanding UML Diagrams: Size Matters. In: Dingel, J., Schulte, W., Ramos, I., Abrahão, S., Insfran, E. (eds) Model-Driven Engineering Languages and Systems. MODELS 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8767. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11653-2_32
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11653-2_32
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-11652-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-11653-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)