Abstract
In mobile information systems, it may be more important to capture where a user is supposed to perform an activity, as well as what type of device is going to be used, than what is the case for traditional, stationary information systems. Yet, mainstream diagram notations like use case diagrams seldom capture such information. In previous papers we have proposed some adaptations to use case diagrams to be able to include location and equipment requirements, but these adaptations have not been evaluated experimentally. This paper reports on a student experiment comparing two different notations, one using colour and the other using symbolic icons. The experiment also includes a task where the models contained both location and equipment information at the same time. In that case, one alternative used colour for locations and icons for equipment, while the other used icons both for colour and equipment. The results showed no significant difference between the two treatment groups, neither in the quality of answers to the experimental tasks, the time needed to perform the tasks, nor in their opinions given in post-task questionnaires about the notations they were exposed to.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Jacobson, I., et al.: Object-Oriented Software Engineering: A Use Case Driven Approach. Addison-Wesley, Boston (1992)
Cockburn, A.: Writing Effective Use Cases. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2001)
Gemino, A., Parker, D.: Use case diagrams in support of use case modeling: deriving understanding from the picture. J. Database Manag. (JDM) 20(1), 1–24 (2009)
Siau, K., Lee, L.: Are use case and class diagrams complementary in requirements analysis? An experimental study on use case and class diagrams in UML. Requirements Eng. 9(4), 229–237 (2004)
Walderhaug, S., Stav, E., Mikalsen, M.: Experiences from model-driven development of homecare services: UML profiles and domain models. In: Chaudron, M.R. (ed.) MODELS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5421, pp. 199–212. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Figl, K., Recker, J.: Exploring cognitive style and task-specific preferences or process representations. Requirements Eng. 21, 1–23 (2014)
Veijalainen, J.: Developing mobile ontologies; who, why, where, and how? In: 2007 International Conference on Mobile Data Management, pp. 398–401. IEEE, Manheim, Germany (2007)
Gopalakrishnan, S., Krogstie, J., Sindre, G.: Extending use and misuse cases to capture mobile information systems. In: Fallmyr, T. (ed.) Norsk Konferanse for Organisasjoners Bruk av Informasjonsteknologi (NOKOBIT). Tapir, Trondheim (2011)
Gopalakrishnan, S., Krogstie, J., Sindre, G.: Extending use and misuse case diagrams to capture multi-channel information systems. In: Zeki, A., Zamani, M., Chuprat, S., El-Qawasmeh, E., Abd Manaf, A. (eds.) ICIEIS 2011, Part I. CCIS, vol. 251, pp. 355–369. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Moody, D.L.: The “physics” of notations: toward a scientific basis for constructing visual notations in software engineering. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 35, 756–779 (2009)
Bertin, J.: Semiology of Graphics: Diagrams, Networks, Maps. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison (1983)
Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., Warshaw, P.R.: User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manag. Sci. 35(8), 982–1003 (1989)
Moody, D.L., et al.: An instrument for empirical testing of frameworks for conceptual model quality frameworks. In: Seventh CAiSE/IFIP8.1 International Workshop on Evaluation of Modeling Methods in Systems Analysis and Design (EMMSAD-02), Toronto, Canada (2002)
Berander, P.: Using students as subjects in requirements prioritization. In: Proceedings of the 2004 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, ISESE 2004 (2004)
Runeson, P.: Using students as experiment subjects – an analysis on graduate and freshmen student data. In: Linkman, S. (ed.) Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Empirical Assessment and Evaluation in Software Engineering (EASE 2003), pp. 95–102. Keele University, Staffordshire, UK (2003)
Carver, J., et al.: Issues in using students in empirical studies in software engineering education. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Software Metrics Symposium (2003)
Sindre, G., Opdahl, A.L.: Eliciting security requirements by misuse cases. In: TOOLS Pacific 2000. IEEE CS Press, Sydney (2000)
Sindre, G.: A look at misuse cases for safety concerns. In: Ralyté, J., Brinkkemper, S., Henderson-Sellers, B. (eds.) Situational Method Engineering: Fundamentals and Experiences. IFIP, vol. 244, pp. 252–266. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Alexander, I.F.: Initial industrial experience of misuse cases in trade-off analysis. In: 10th Anniversary IEEE Joint International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE 2002). IEEE, Essen, Germany (2002)
Saleh, F., El-Attar, M.: A scientific evaluation of the misuse case diagrams visual syntax. Inf. Softw. Technol. 66, 73–96 (2015)
Berenbach, B., Borotto, G.: Metrics for model driven requirements development. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Software Engineering. ACM (2006)
Hausmann, J.H., Heckel, R., Taentzer, G.: Detection of conflicting functional requirements in a use case-driven approach: a static analysis technique based on graph transformation. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering. ACM (2002)
Whittle, J.: Specifying precise use cases with use case charts. In: Bruel, J.-M. (ed.) MoDELS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3844, pp. 290–301. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Johnston, S.: Rational UML Profile for business modeling. IBM Developer Works (2004). http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/5167.html
von der Maßen, T., Lichter, H.: Modeling variability by UML use case diagrams. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Requirements Engineering for Product Lines. Citeseer (2002)
Bühne, S., Halmans, G., Pohl, K.: Modelling dependencies between variation points in use case diagrams. In: Proceeding of 9th International Workshop on Requirements Engineering. Citeseer (2003)
Wegmann, A., Genilloud, G.: The role of “Roles” in use case diagrams. In: Evans, A., Caskurlu, B., Selic, B. (eds.) UML 2000. LNCS, vol. 1939, pp. 210–224. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Gopalakrishnan, S., Sindre, G.: Diagram notations for mobile work processes. In: Johannesson, P., Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A.L. (eds.) PoEM 2011. LNBIP, vol. 92, pp. 52–66. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Gopalakrishnan, S., Krogstie, J., Sindre, G.: Capturing location in process models: comparing small adaptations of mainstream notation. Int. J. Inf. Syst. Model. Design 3(3), 24–25 (2012)
Gopalakrishnan, S., Krogstie, J., Sindre, G.: Adapting UML activity diagrams for mobile work process modelling: experimental comparison of two notation alternatives. In: van Bommel, P., Hoppenbrouwers, S., Overbeek, S., Proper, E., Barjis, J. (eds.) PoEM 2010. LNBIP, vol. 68, pp. 145–161. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Gopalakrishnan, S., Krogstie, J., Sindre, G.: Adapted UML activity diagrams for mobile work processes: experimental comparison of colour and pattern fills. In: Halpin, T., Nurcan, S., Krogstie, J., Soffer, P., Proper, E., Schmidt, R., Bider, I. (eds.) BPMDS 2011 and EMMSAD 2011. LNBIP, vol. 81, pp. 314–331. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
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., Van Wyk, E. (eds.) SLE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5452, pp. 16–34. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Gopalakrishnan, S., Sindre, G. (2016). Use Case Diagrams for Mobile and Multi-channel Information Systems: Experimental Comparison of Colour and Icon Annotations. 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_30
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39429-9_30
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-39428-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-39429-9
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)