Abstract
Numerous visual notations are present in technical and business domains. Notations have to be cognitively effective to ease the planning, documentation, and communication of the domains’ concepts. Semantic transparency (ST) is one of the elementary principles that influence notations’ cognitive effectiveness. However, the principle is criticized for not being well defined and challenges arise in the evaluations and applications of ST. Accordingly, this research’s objectives were to answer how the ST principle is defined, operationalized, and evaluated in present notations as well as applied in the design of new notations in ICT and related areas. To meet these objectives, a systematic literature review was conducted with 94 studies passing the selection process criteria. The results reject one of the three aspects, which define semantic transparency, namely “ST is achieved with the use of icons.” Besides, taxonomies of related concepts and research methods, evaluation metrics, and other findings from this study can help to conduct verifiable ST-related experiments and applications, consequently improving the visual vocabularies of notations and effectiveness of the resulting diagrams.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abraham, R.: Guidelines for architecture models as boundary objects. In: Proper, H.A., Winter, R., Aier, S., de Kinderen, S. (eds.) Architectural Coordination of Enterprise Transformation, pp. 193–210. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69584-6_19
Akiki, P.A.: CHAIN: Developing model-driven contextual help for adaptive user interfaces. J. Syst. Softw. 135, 165–190 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2017.10.017
Algablan, A.S., Some, S.S.: A visual syntax for Larman’s operation contracts. In: 2016 International Conference on Engineering & MIS (ICEMIS), pp. 1–9. IEEE (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEMIS.2016.7745358
Almorsy, M., Grundy, J.: SecDSVL: a domain-specific visual language to support enterprise security modelling. In: 2014 23rd Australian Software Engineering Conference, pp. 152–161. IEEE (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/ASWEC.2014.18
Amrit, C., Tax, N.: Towards understanding the understandability of uml models. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Modeling in Software Engineering, MiSE 2014, p. 49–54. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2014). https://doi.org/10.1145/2593770.2593779
Andersson, A., Krogstie, J.: Implementation and first evaluation of a molecular modeling Language. In: Gaaloul, K., Schmidt, R., Nurcan, S., Guerreiro, S., Ma, Q. (eds.) Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling, vol. 214, pp. 293–308. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19237-6_19
Aranda, J., Ernst, N., Horkoff, J., Easterbrook, S.: A framework for empirical evaluation of model comprehensibility. In: International Workshop on Modeling in Software Engineering (MISE’07: ICSE Workshop 2007), p. 7 (2007)
Bajaj, A., Rockwell, S.: COGEVAL: A Propositional Framework Based on Cognitive Theories To Evaluate Conceptual Models. undefined (2004)
Basak Aydemir, F., Giorgini, P., Mylopoulos, J.: Multi-objective risk analysis with goal models. In: 2016 IEEE Tenth International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science (RCIS), vol. 2016-Augus, pp. 1–10. IEEE (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/RCIS.2016.7549302
Batini, C., Ceri, S., Navathe, S.B.: Conceptual Database Design: An Entity-Relationship Approach. Benjamin-Cummings Publishing Co. Inc, Redwood City (1992)
Bayrak, G., Ocker, F., Vogel-Heuser, B.: Evaluation of selected control programming languages for process engineers by means of cognitive effectiveness and dimensions. J. Softw. Eng. Appl. 10(05), 457–481 (2017). https://doi.org/10.4236/jsea.2017.105026
Van den Bergh, J., Luyten, K., Coninx, K.: Cap3: Context-sensitive abstract user interface specification. In: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems, EICS ’11, pp. 31–40. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2011). https://doi.org/10.1145/1996461.1996491
Bhattacherjee, A.: Social Science Research: Principles, Methods, and Practices, 2nd edn. Global Text Project (2012)
Blackwell, A., Green, T.: Notational systems-the cognitive dimensions of notations framework. In: HCI Models, Theories, and Frameworks: Toward a Multidisciplinary Science, pp. 103–133. Elsevier Inc. (2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-155860808-5/50005-8
Bocanegra, J., Pavlich-Mariscal, J., Carrillo-Ramos, A.: DMLAS: A Domain-Specific Language for designing adaptive systems. In: 2015 10th Computing Colombian Conference (10CCC), pp. 47–54. IEEE (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/ColumbianCC.2015.7333411
Boone, S., Bernaert, M., Roelens, B., Mertens, S., Poels, G.: Evaluating and Improving the Visualisation of CHOOSE, an Enterprise Architecture Approach for SMEs. In: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 197, pp. 87–102. Springer (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45501-2_7
Bork, D., Schrüffer, C., Karagiannis, D.: Intuitive understanding of domain-specific modeling languages: proposition and application of an evaluation technique. In: Laender, A.H.F., Pernici, B., Lim, E.P., de Oliveira, J.P.M. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling, pp. 311–319. Springer, Cham (2019)
Breitenbücher, U., Binz, T., Kopp, O., Leymann, F., Schumm, D.: Vino4TOSCA: A Visual Notation for Application Topologies Based on TOSCA. In: Hutchison, D., Kanade, T., Kittler, J., Kleinberg, J.M., Mattern, F., Mitchell, J.C., Naor, M., Nierstrasz, O., Rangan, C Pandu, Steffen, B., Sudan, M., Terzopoulos, D., Tygar, D., Vardi, M.Y., Weikum, G., Meersman, R., Panetto, H., Dillon, T., Rinderle-Ma, S., Dadam, P., Zhou, X., Pearson, S., Ferscha, A., Bergamaschi, S., Cruz, I.F. (eds.) On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2012, vol. 7565, pp. 416–424. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33606-5_25
Breitenbücher, U., Hirmer, P., Képes, K., Kopp, O., Leymann, F., Wieland, M.: A situation-aware workflow modelling extension. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Information Integration and Web-Based Applications & Services, iiWAS ’15, pp. 1–7. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2015). https://doi.org/10.1145/2837185.2837248
Britton, C., Jones, S.: Untrained eye: how languages for software specification support understanding in untrained users. Human-Comput. Interact. 14(1), 191–244 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.1999.9667269
Britton, C., Jones, S., Kutar, M., Loomes, M., Robinson, B.: Evaluating the intelligibility of diagrammatic languages used in the specification of software. In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), vol. 1889, pp. 376–391. Springer Verlag (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44590-0_32
Brochado De Miranda, T.R.: Software Language Engineering: Interaction and Usability Modeling of Language Editors. Ph.D. thesis, NOVA University of Lisbon (2017)
Burkhard, R.A.: Knowledge visualization The use of complementary visual representations for the transfer of knowledge. A model, a framework, and four new approaches. Ph.D. thesis, SWISS FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ZÜRICH, Zurich (2005). https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-a-005004486
Caire, P., Genon, N., Heymans, P., Moody, D.L.: Visual notation design 2.0: Towards user comprehensible requirements engineering notations. In: 2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pp. 115–124. IEEE (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2013.6636711
Cambridge University Press: Cambridge Dictionary, English Dictionary. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/
Canché, M., Ochoa, S.F., Perovich, D., Gutierrez, F.J.: Analysis of notations for modeling user interaction scenarios in ubiquitous collaborative systems. J. Ambient Intell. Human. Comput. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-019-01578-7
Chandler, D.: Semiotics the Basics, 2nd edn. Routledge, London (2007). http://analepsis.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/69249454-chandler-semiotics.pdf
Chen, L., Babar, M.A., Zhang, H.: Towards an evidence-based understanding of electronic data sources. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, EASE’10, pp. 135–138. BCS Learning & Development Ltd., Swindon, GBR (2010)
Claes, J., Vanderfeesten, I., Pinggera, J., Reijers, H.A., Weber, B., Poels, G.: A visual analysis of the process of process modeling. IseB 13(1), 147–190 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-014-0245-4
Constantine, L., Henderson-Sellers, B.: Notation Matters: Part 1 - Framing the Issues. Tech. rep. (1995)
Cortes-Cornax, M., Dupuy-Chessa, S., Rieu, D., Mandran, N.: Evaluating the appropriateness of the BPMN 2.0 standard for modeling service choreographies: using an extended quality framework. Softw. Syst. Model. 15(1), 219–255 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-014-0398-0
da Silva Teixeira, M.d.G., de Almeida Falbo, R., Guizzardi, G.: Can Ontologies Systematically Help in the Design of Domain-Specific Visual Languages? In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), vol. 8185 LNCS, pp. 737–754. Springer (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41030-7_54
Da Silva Teixeira, Md.G., Quirino, G.K., Gailly, F., Falbo, R.D.A., Guizzardi, G., Barcellos, M.P.: PoN-S: A systematic approach for applying the physics of notation (PoN). Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing 248, 432–447 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39429-9_27
Dangarska, Z., Figl, K., Mendling, J.: An Explorative Analysis of the Notational Characteristics of the Decision Model and Notation (DMN). In: 2016 IEEE 20th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Workshop (EDOCW), pp. 1–9. IEEE (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOCW.2016.7584345
Del-Río-Ortega, A., Resinas, M., Durán, A., Bernárdez, B., Ruiz-Cortés, A., Toro, M.: Visual ppinot: a graphical notation for process performance indicators. Bus. Inform. Syst. Eng. 61(2), 137–161 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0483-3
Diamantopoulou, V., Mouratidis, H.: Applying the physics of notation to the evaluation of a security and privacy requirements engineering methodology. Inform. Comput. Secur. 26(4), 382–400 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1108/ICS-12-2017-0087
Diprose, J.P., MacDonald, B.A., Hosking, J.G.: Ruru: A spatial and interactive visual programming language for novice robot programming. In: 2011 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC), pp. 25–32. IEEE (2011). https://doi.org/10.1109/VLHCC.2011.6070374
Djurica, D., Mendling, J., Figl, K.: The impact of associative coloring and representational formats on decision-making: An eye-tracking study. In: Davis, F.D., Riedl, R., vom Brocke, J., Léger, P.M., Randolph, A., Fischer, T. (eds.) Information Systems and Neuroscience, pp. 305–313. Springer, Cham (2020)
Dobesova, Z.: Using the physics of notation to analyse model builder diagrams. Int. Multidiscip. Sci. GeoConf. Surv. Geolo. Min. Ecol. Manag. SGEM 1, 595–602 (2013). https://doi.org/10.5593/SGEM2013/BB2.V1/S08.039
Dobesova, Z.: Visual Language for geodatabase design. Int. Multidiscip. Sci. GeoConf. Surv. Geolo. Min. Ecol. Manag. SGEM 1, 603–610 (2013). https://doi.org/10.5593/SGEM2013/BB2.V1/S08.040
El-Attar, M.: A comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments. Softw. Syst. Model. 18(6), 3283–3329 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5
El-Attar, M.: Evaluating and empirically improving the visual syntax of use case diagrams. J. Syst. Softw. 156, 136–163 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2019.06.096
El-Attar, M., Luqman, H., Karpati, P., Sindre, G., Opdahl, A.L.: Extending the uml statecharts notation to model security aspects. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 41(7), 661–690 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2015.2396526
El-Ghafar, R.M.A., Ghareeb, A.M., Nasr, E.S.: Designing user comprehensible requirements engineering visual notations: A systematic survey. In: 2014 9th International Conference on Informatics and Systems, pp. SW–10–SW–17. IEEE (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/INFOS.2014.7036686
El Kouhen, A., Gherbi, A., Dumoulin, C., Khendek, F.: On the semantic transparency of visual notations: Experiments with uml. In: Fischer, J., Scheidgen, M., Schieferdecker, I., Reed, R. (eds.) SDL 2015: Model-Driven Engineering for Smart Cities, pp. 122–137. Springer, Cham (2015)
Famelis, M., Santosa, S.: MAV-Vis: A notation for model uncertainty. In: 2013 5th International Workshop on Modeling in Software Engineering (MiSE), pp. 7–12. IEEE (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/MiSE.2013.6595289
Faveri, C.D., Moreira, A., Araujo, J., Amaral, V.: Towards security modeling of e-voting systems. In: 2016 IEEE 24th International Requirements Engineering Conference Workshops (REW), pp. 145–154. IEEE (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/REW.2016.037
Fenk, A.: Symbols and icons in diagrammatic representation. Pragm. Cogn. 6(1–2), 301–334 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.6.1-2.15fen
Figl, K.: Comprehension of procedural visual business process models. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 59(1), 41–67 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-016-0460-2
Figl, K., Derntl, M.: The impact of perceived cognitive effectiveness on perceived usefulness of visual conceptual modeling languages. In: Jeusfeld, M., Delcambre, L., Ling, T.W. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling - ER 2011, pp. 78–91. Springer, Berlin (2011)
Figl, K., Derntl, M., Rodriguez, M.C., Botturi, L.: Cognitive effectiveness of visual instructional design languages. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 21(6), 359–373 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvlc.2010.08.009
Figl, K., Mendling, J., Strembeck, M.: The influence of notational deficiencies on process model comprehension. J. Assoc. Inform. Syst. 14(6), 312–338 (2013). https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00335
Figl, K., Mendling, J., Strembeck, M., Recker, J.: On the cognitive effectiveness of routing symbols in process modeling languages. In: Abramowicz, W., Tolksdorf, R. (eds.) Business Information Systems, pp. 230–241. Springer, Berlin (2010)
Figl, K., Recker, J., Mendling, J.: A study on the effects of routing symbol design on process model comprehension. Decis. Support Syst. 54(2), 1104–1118 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.10.037
Genon, N., Amyot, D., Heymans, P.: Analysing the cognitive effectiveness of the ucm visual notation. In: Kraemer, F.A., Herrmann, P. (eds.) System Analysis and Modeling: About Models, pp. 221–240. Springer, Berlin (2011)
Genon, N., Caire, P., Toussaint, H., Heymans, P., Moody, D.: Towards a More Semantically Transparent i* Visual Syntax. In: Hutchison, D., Kanade, T., Kittler, J., Kleinberg, J.M., Mattern, F., Mitchell, J.C., Naor, M., Nierstrasz, O., Rangan, C Pandu, Steffen, B., Sudan, M., Terzopoulos, D., Tygar, D., Vardi, M.Y., Weikum, G., Regnell, B., Damian, D. (eds.) Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality, vol. 7195, pp. 140–146. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28714-5_12
Genon, N., Heymans, P., Amyot, D.: Analysing the cognitive effectiveness of the BPMN 2.0 visual notation. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) 6563 LNCS(October), 377–396 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19440-5_25
Giraldo, F.D., España, S., Pastor, Ó., Giraldo, W.J.: Considerations about quality in model-driven engineering. Softw. Qual. J. 26(2), 685–750 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-016-9350-6
Gómez, M., Cervantes, J.: User Interface Transition Diagrams for customer-developer communication improvement in software development projects. J. Syst. Softw. 86(9), 2394–2410 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2013.04.022
Gonçalves, E., Almendra, C., Goulão, M., Araújo, J., Castro, J.: Using empirical studies to mitigate symbol overload in iStar extensions. In: Software and Systems Modeling, vol. 19, pp. 763–784. Springer (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-019-00770-9
Goonetilleke, R.S., Shih, H.M., On, H.K., Fritsch, J.: Effects of training and representational characteristics in icon design. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 55(5), 741–760 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.2001.0501
Gopalakrishnan, S., Krogstie, J., Sindre, G.: Extending Use and Misuse Case Diagrams to Capture Multi-channel Information Systems. In: Manaf, A Abd, Zeki, A., Zamani, M., Chuprat, S., El-Qawasmeh, E. (eds.) Informatics Engineering and Information Science, vol. 251, pp. 355–369. Springer, Berlin (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25327-0_31
Gopalakrishnan, S., Sindre, G.: Analytical Evaluation of Notational Adaptations to Capture Location of Activities in Process Models. Tech. rep., Department of Computer and Information Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (2011)
Granada, D., Vara, J.M., Brambilla, M., Bollati, V., Marcos, E.: Analysing the cognitive effectiveness of the WebML visual notation. Softw. Syst. Model. 16(1), 195–227 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-014-0447-8
Green, T., Blackwell, A.: Cognitive Dimensions of Information Artefacts: a tutorial. Computer-Based Learning Unit, University of Leeds, Tech. rep. (1998)
Green, T.R., Petre, M.: Usability analysis of visual programming environments: a ‘cognitive dimensions’ framework. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 7(2), 131–174 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1006/jvlc.1996.0009
Gurr, C.A.: Effective diagrammatic communication: syntactic, semantic and pragmatic issues. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 10(4), 317–342 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1006/jvlc.1999.0130
Helming, J., Koegel, M., Schneider, F., Haeger, M., Kaminski, C., Bruegge, B., Berenbach, B.: Towards a unified requirements modeling language. In: 2010 Fifth International Workshop on Requirements Engineering Visualization, pp. 53–57. IEEE (2010). https://doi.org/10.1109/REV.2010.5625659
Henderson-Sellers, B., Low, G., Gonzalez-Perez, C.: Semiotic Considerations for the Design of an Agent-Oriented Modelling Language. In: van der Aalst, W., Mylopoulos, J., Rosemann, M., Shaw, M.J., Szyperski, C., Bider, I., Halpin, T., Krogstie, J., Nurcan, S., Proper, E., Schmidt, R., Soffer, P., Wrycza, S. (eds.) Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling, vol. 113, pp. 422–434. Springer, Berlin (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31072-0_29
Henriques, H., Lourenço, H., Amaral, V., Goulão, M.: Improving the developer experience with a low-code process modelling language. In: Proceedings of the 21th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, MODELS ’18, pp. 200–210. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3239372.3239387
Heyvaert, P., Dimou, A., De Meester, B., Seymoens, T., Herregodts, A.L., Verborgh, R., Schuurman, D., Mannens, E.: Specification and implementation of mapping rule visualization and editing: MapVOWL and the RMLEditor. J. Web Semantics 49(March), 31–50 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2017.12.003
Hoos, E., Wieland, M., Mitschang, B.: Analysis method for conceptual context modeling applied in production environments. In: Abramowicz, W. (ed.) Business Information Systems, pp. 313–325. Springer, Cham (2017)
Howell, W.C., Fuchs, A.H.: Population stereotypy in code design. Organiz. Behav. Hum. Perform. 3(3), 310–339 (1968). https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(68)90012-3
Isherwood, S.J., McDougall, S.J., Curry, M.B.: Icon identification in context: the changing role of icon characteristics with user experience. Hum. Factors 49(3), 465–476 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1518/001872007X200102
ISO Central Secretary: ISO - ISO 7010:2003 - Graphical symbols — Safety colours and safety signs — Registered safety signs. Standard ISO - ISO 7010:2003, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, CH (2003)
ISO Central Secretary: ISO/IEC TR 9126-4:2004 Software engineering—Product quality—Part 4: Quality in use metrics. Standard ISO/IEC TR 9126-4:2004, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, CH (2004)
ISO Central Secretary: ISO - ISO 7001:2007 - Graphical symbols—Public information symbols. Standard ISO - ISO 7001:2007, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, CH (2007)
ISO Central Secretary: ISO - ISO 9186-1:2014 - Graphical symbols—Test methods—Part 1: Method for testing comprehensibility. Standard ISO - ISO 9186-1:2014, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, CH (2014)
Janiesch, C., Fischer, M., Winkelmann, A., Nentwich, V.: Specifying autonomy in the Internet of Things: the autonomy model and notation. IseB 17(1), 159–194 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-018-0379-x
Janiesch, C., Matzner, M.: Bamn: a modeling method for business activity monitoring systems. J. Decis. Syst. 28(3), 185–223 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1080/12460125.2019.1631682
Kascak, L., Rébola, C.B., Braunstein, R., Sanford, J.A.: Icon design for user interface of remote patient monitoring mobile devices. In: SIGDOC 2013 - Proceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Design of Communication, pp. 77–83 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1145/2507065.2507104
Khalajzadeh, H., Abdelrazek, M., Grundy, J., Hosking, J., He, Q.: BiDaML: A suite of visual languages for supporting end-user data analytics. In: 2019 IEEE International Congress on Big Data (BigDataCongress), pp. 93–97. IEEE (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/BigDataCongress.2019.00025
Kitchenham, B., Brereton, P.: A systematic review of systematic review process research in software engineering. Inf. Softw. Technol. 55(12), 2049–2075 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2013.07.010
Kitchenham, B., Charters, S.: Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering (2007). https://doi.org/10.1145/1134285.1134500
Knuplesch, D., Reichert, M.: A visual language for modeling multiple perspectives of business process compliance rules. Softw. Syst. Model. 16(3), 715–736 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-016-0526-0
Krogstie, J., Sindre, G., Jørgensen, H.: Process models representing knowledge for action: A revised quality framework (2006). https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000598
Kuhar, S., Polančič, G.: Semantic transparency principle - systematic literature review. Mendeley Data (2020). https://doi.org/10.17632/5c32jtc8v4.1
Kummer, T.F., Recker, J., Mendling, J.: Enhancing understandability of process models through cultural-dependent color adjustments. Decis. Support Syst. 87, 1–12 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2016.04.004
La Rosa, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Wohed, P., Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Managing process model complexity via concrete syntax modifications. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 7(2), 255–265 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1109/TII.2011.2124467
Larkin, J., Simon, H.: Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cogn. Sci. 11(1), 65–100 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0364-0213(87)80026-5
Laurent, P., Mader, P., Cleland-Huang, J., Steele, A.: A Taxonomy and Visual Notation for Modeling Globally Distributed Requirements Engineering Projects. In: 2010 5th IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering, pp. 35–44. IEEE (2010). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICGSE.2010.55
Le Pallec, X., Dupuy-Chessa, S.: Support for quality metrics in metamodelling. In: Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Graphical Modeling Language Development - GMLD ’13, pp. 23–31. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA (2013). https://doi.org/10.1145/2489820.2489825
Leitner, M., Schefer-Wenzl, S., Rinderle-Ma, S., Strembeck, M.: An Experimental Study on the Design and Modeling of Security Concepts in Business Processes. In: J. Grabis, M. Kirikova, J. Zdravkovic, J. Stirna (eds.) Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 165, pp. 236–250. Springer, Berlin (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41641-5_17
Leutner, D., Leopold, C., Sumfleth, E.: Cognitive load and science text comprehension: effects of drawing and mentally imagining text content. Comput. Hum. Behav. 25(2), 284–289 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.010
van der Linden, D., Hadar, I.: User involvement in applications of the PoN. Lect. Not. Bus. Inform. Process. 249, 109–115 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39564-7_11
van der Linden, D., Hadar, I., Zamansky, A.: What practitioners really want: requirements for visual notations in conceptual modeling. Softw. Syst. Model. 18(3), 1813–1831 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-018-0667-4
van der Linden, D., Zamansky, A., Hadar, I.: 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, pp. 448–462. Springer, Cham (2016)
Linden, D.V.D., Zamansky, A., Hadar, I.: A Framework for Improving the Verifiability of Visual Notation Design Grounded in the Physics of Notations. Proceedings - 2017 IEEE 25th International Requirements Engineering Conference, RE 2017 pp. 41–50 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2017.37
Liu, J., Grundy, J., Avazpour, I., Abdelrazek, M.: A domain-specific visual modeling language for testing environment emulation. In: 2016 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC), pp. 143–151. IEEE (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/VLHCC.2016.7739677
Luong, T.N., Etcheverry, P., Marquesuzaà, C., Nodenot, T.: A visual programming language for designing interactions embedded in web-based geographic applications. In: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, IUI ’12, p. 207–216. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2012). https://doi.org/10.1145/2166966.2167003
Mäder, P., Cleland-Huang, J.: A visual traceability modeling language. In: Petriu, D.C., Rouquette, N., Haugen, Ø. (eds.) Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp. 226–240. Springer, Berlin (2010)
Maes, A., Poels, G.: Evaluating quality of conceptual modelling scripts based on user perceptions. Data Knowl. Eng. 63(3), 701–724 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.datak.2007.04.008
Masri, K., Parker, D., Gemino, A.: Using iconic graphics in entity-relationship diagrams. J. Database Manag. 19(3), 22–41 (2008). https://doi.org/10.4018/jdm.2008070102
Mayer, N., Feltus, C.: Evaluation of the risk and security overlay of archimate to model information system security risks. In: 2017 IEEE 21st International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Workshop (EDOCW), vol. 2017-Octob, pp. 106–116. IEEE (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOCW.2017.30
McDougall, S.J., Curry, M.B., De Bruijn, O.: Measuring symbol and icon characteristics: norms for concreteness, complexity, meaningfulness, familiarity, and semantic distance for 239 symbols. Behav. Res. Methods Instr. Comput. 31(3), 487–519 (1999). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200730
McDougall, S.J.P., Curry, M.B., de Bruijn, O.: The effects of visual information on users’ mental models: an evaluation of pathfinder analysis as a measure of icon usability. Int. J. Cogn. Ergonom. 5(1), 59–84 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327566IJCE0501_4
Mendling, J., Recker, J.C., Reijers, H.A.: On the usage of labels and icons in business process modeling. Int. J. Inform. Syst. Model. Design 1(2), 40–58 (2010). https://doi.org/10.4018/jismd.2010040103
Michael, J., Mayr, H.C.: Intuitive understanding of a modeling language. In: Proceedings of the Australasian Computer Science Week Multiconference on - ACSW ’17, pp. 1–10. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3014812.3014849. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=3014812.3014849
Miranda, T., Challenger, M., Tezel, B.T., Alaca, O.F., Barišić, A., Amaral, V., Goulão, M., Kardas, G.: Improving the Usability of a MAS DSML. In: Weyns, D., Mascardi, V., Ricci, A. (eds.) Engineering Multi-Agent Systems, vol. 11375, pp. 55–75. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25693-7_4
Mohagheghi, P., Gilani, W., Stefanescu, A., Fernandez, M.A., Nordmoen, B., Fritzsche, M.: Where does model-driven engineering help? Experiences from three industrial cases. Softw. Syst. Model. 12(3), 619–639 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-011-0219-7
Molina, A.I., Redondo, M.A., Ortega, M., Lacave, C.: Evaluating a graphical notation for modeling collaborative learning activities: a family of experiments. Sci. Comput. Program. 88, 54–81 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scico.2014.02.019
Monika, M., Jan, M., Malinova, M., Mendling, J.: The effect of process map design quality on process management success. ECIS 2013 Completed Research pp. 1–12 (2013)
Moody, D.: The physics of notations: toward a scientific basis for constructing visual notations in software engineering. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 35(6), 756–779 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2009.67
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.) Software Language Engineering, pp. 16–34. Springer, Berlin (2009)
Moody, D.L.: Why a Diagram is Only Sometimes Worth a Thousand Words: An Analysis of the BPMN 2.0 Visual Notation. Draft pp. 1–62 (2011)
Moody, D.L., Heymans, P., Matulevicius, R.: Improving the Effectiveness of Visual Representations in Requirements Engineering: An Evaluation of i* Visual Syntax. In: 2009 17th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, pp. 171–180. IEEE (2009). https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2009.44
Moody, D.L., Heymans, P., Matulevičius, R.: Visual syntax does matter: improving the cognitive effectiveness of the i* visual notation. Requir. Eng. 15(2), 141–175 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-010-0100-1
Moody, D.L., Shanks, G.G.: What makes a good data model? Evaluating the quality of entity relationship models. In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), vol. 881 LNCS, pp. 94–111. Springer Verlag (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-58786-1_75
Netto, J.M., Santoro, F.M., Baião, F.A.: Evaluating KIPN for Modeling KIP. In: Lohmann, N., Song, M., Wohed, P. (eds.) Business Process Management Workshops, vol. 171, pp. 549–561. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06257-0_44
Nielsen, J., Molich, R.: Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI ’90, p. 249–256. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (1990). https://doi.org/10.1145/97243.97281
Norman, D.A.: The Design of Everyday Things. MIT Press, London (1988)
Ober, I., Palyart, M., Bruel, J.M., Lugato, D.: On the use of models for high-performance scientific computing applications: an experience report. Softw. Syst. Model. 17(1), 319–342 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-016-0518-0
Obie, H.O., Chua, C., Avazpour, I., Abdelrazek, M., Grundy, J., Bednarz, T.: Pedaviz: Visualising hour-level pedestrian activity. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on Visual Information Communication and Interaction, VINCI ’18, pp. 9–16. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3231622.3231626
Odusote, B., Daramola, O., Adigun, M.: Towards an extended misuse case framework for elicitation of cloud dependability requirements. In: Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists, SAICSIT ’18, pp. 135–144. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3278681.3278698
Paivio, A.: Mental Representations. Oxford University PressOxford University Press, Oxford (1990). https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195066661.001.0001
Peirce, C., Moore, E.: Charles s. peirce: the essential writings (great books in philosophy). Prometheus Books, Amherst (1998)
Petre, M.: Why looking isn’t always seeing: readership skills and graphical programming. Commun. ACM 38(6), 33–44 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1145/203241.203251
Pittl, B., Fill, H.G.: A visual modeling approach for the Semantic Web Rule Language. Semantic Web 11(2), 361–389 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-180340
Polančič, G., Brin, P., Heloisa Thom, L., Sosa, E., Kocbek Bule, M.: An empirical investigation of the intuitiveness of process landscape designs. In: Nurcan, S., Reinhartz-Berger, I., Soffer, P., Zdravkovic, J. (eds.) Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling, pp. 209–223. Springer, Cham (2020)
Polančič, G., Brin, P., Kuhar, S., Jošt, G., Huber, J.: An empirical investigation of the cultural impacts on the business process concepts’ representations. In: Di Ciccio, C., Gabryelczyk, R., García-Bañuelos, L., Hernaus, T., Hull, R., Štemberger, M Indihar, Kő, A., Staples, M. (eds.) Business Process Management: Blockchain and Central and Eastern Europe Forum, pp. 296–311. Springer, Cham (2019)
Polančič, G., Orban, B.: A BPMN-based language for modeling corporate communications. Comput. Stand. Interfaces 65(October 2018), 45–60 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2019.02.001
Popescu, G., Wegmann, A.: Using the Physics of Notations Theory to Evaluate the Visual Notation of SEAM. In: 2014 IEEE 16th Conference on Business Informatics, pp. 166–173. IEEE (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/CBI.2014.21
Razo-Zapata, I.S., Chew, E.K., Proper, E.: VIVA: A VIsual Language to Design VAlue Co-Creation. In: 2018 IEEE 20th Conference on Business Informatics (CBI), vol. 1, pp. 20–29. IEEE (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/CBI.2018.00012
Recker, J., Dreiling, A.: The effects of content presentation format and user characteristics on novice developers’ understanding of process models. Commun. Assoc. Inform. Syst. 28, (2011)
Recker, J., Safrudin, N., Rosemann, M.: How novices design business processes. Inform. Syst. 37(6), 557–573 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2011.07.001
Reinhartz-Berger, I., Figl, K., Haugen, Ø.: Investigating styles in variability modeling: hierarchical vs. constrained styles. Inform. Softw. Technol. 87, 81–102 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2017.01.012
renaud, k., van Biljon, J.: Charting the path towards effective knowledge visualisations. In: Proceedings of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists, SAICSIT ’17, pp. 1–10. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3129416.3129421
Roast, C., Uruchurtu, E.: Reflecting on the physics of notations applied to a visualisation case study. In: Proceedings of the 6th Mexican Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, MexIHC’16, p. 24–31. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2967175.2967383
Roelens, B., Steenacker, W., Poels, G.: Realizing strategic fit within the business architecture: the design of a Process-Goal Alignment modeling and analysis technique. Softw. Syst. Model. 18(1), 631–662 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-016-0574-5
Romuald, D., Mens, T.: Gismo: A domain-specific modelling language for executable prototyping of gestural interaction. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems, EICS ’15, p. 34–43. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2015). https://doi.org/10.1145/2774225.2774838
Ruiz, A., Panach, J.I., Pastor, O., Giraldo, F.D., Arciniegas, J.L., Giraldo, W.J.: Designing the Didactic Strategy Modeling Language (DSML) From PoN: An Activity Oriented EML Proposal. IEEE Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje 13(4), 136–143 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/RITA.2018.2879262
Saeed, M., Saleh, F., Al-Insaif, S., El-Attar, M.: Empirical validating the cognitive effectiveness of a new feature diagrams visual syntax. Inf. Softw. Technol. 71, 1–26 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.10.012
Saleh, F., El-Attar, M.: A scientific evaluation of the misuse case diagrams visual syntax. Inf. Softw. Technol. 66, 73–96 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.05.002
Salnitri, M., Dalpiaz, F., Giorgini, P.: Designing secure business processes with SecBPMN. Softw. Syst. Model. 16(3), 737–757 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-015-0499-4
Sandkuhl, K., Koç, H.: Component-based method development: an experience report. In: Frank, U., Loucopoulos, P., Pastor, Ó., Petrounias, I. (eds.) The Practice of Enterprise Modeling, pp. 164–178. Springer, Berlin (2014)
Santos, M., Gralha, C., Goulão, M., Araújo, J.: Increasing the semantic transparency of the KAOS goal model concrete syntax. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) 11157 LNCS, 424–439 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00847-5_30
Santos, M., Gralha, C., Goulao, M., Araujo, J., Moreira, A.: On the Impact of Semantic Transparency on Understanding and Reviewing Social Goal Models. In: 2018 IEEE 26th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pp. 228–239. IEEE (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2018.00031
Sion, L., Yskout, K., van den Berghe, A., Scandariato, R., Joosen, W.: MASC: Modelling Architectural Security Concerns. In: 2015 IEEE/ACM 7th International Workshop on Modeling in Software Engineering, pp. 36–41. IEEE (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/MiSE.2015.14
Storrle, H.: Modeling Moods. In: 2019 ACM/IEEE 22nd International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems Companion (MODELS-C), pp. 468–477. IEEE (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/MODELS-C.2019.00075
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.) Model-Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp. 104–120. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg (2013)
Tenbergen, B., Weyer, T., Pohl, K.: Hazard Relation Diagrams: a diagrammatic representation to increase validation objectivity of requirements-based hazard mitigations. Requir. Eng. 23(2), 291–329 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-017-0267-9
Thomas, J.C., Diament, J., Martino, J., Bellamy, R.K.E.: Using the “Physics” of notations to analyze a visual representation of business decision modeling. In: 2012 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC), pp. 41–44. IEEE (2012). https://doi.org/10.1109/VLHCC.2012.6344478
Thuy, T.T.H.: Reading Images - the Grammar of Visual Design. VNU Journal of Foreign Studies 33(6) (2017). https://doi.org/10.25073/2525-2445/vnufs.4217
Van Der Linden, D., Hadar, I.: A systematic literature review of applications of the physics of notation. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 45(8), 736–759 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2018.2802910
Wanderley, F., Silva, A., Araujo, J., Silveira, D.S.: SnapMind: A framework to support consistency and validation of model-based requirements in agile development. In: 2014 IEEE 4th International Model-Driven Requirements Engineering Workshop (MoDRE), pp. 47–56. IEEE (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/MoDRE.2014.6890825
Weisenberger, B., Vogel-Heuser, B.: Evaluation of a graphical modeling language for the specification of manufacturing execution systems. In: Proceedings of 2012 IEEE 17th International Conference on Emerging Technologies & Factory Automation (ETFA 2012), pp. 1–7. IEEE (2012). https://doi.org/10.1109/ETFA.2012.6489669
Winn, W.: Encoding and retrieval of information in maps and diagrams. IEEE Trans. Prof. Commun. 33(3), 103–107 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1109/47.59083
Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M.C., Regnell, B., Wesslén, A.: Experimentation in Software Engineering, The Kluwer International Series in Software Engineering, vol. 6. Springer US (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29044-2. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-1-4615-4625-2
Woods, E., Bashroush, R.: Modelling large-scale information systems using ADLs - An industrial experience report. J. Syst. Softw. 99, 97–108 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2014.09.018
Zehnder, E., Mayer, N., Gronier, G.: Evaluation of the Cognitive Effectiveness of the CORAS Modelling Language. In: Woo, C., Lu, J., Li, Z., Ling, T.W., Li, G., Lee, M.L. (eds.) Advances in Conceptual Modeling, vol. 11158, pp. 149–162. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01391-2_21
Zender, M., Mejia, G.M.: Improving icon design: Through focus on the role of individual symbols in the construction of meaning. Visible Language 47, 66 (2013)
Zhou, B., Maines, C., Tang, S., Shi, Q.: A Framework for the Visualisation of Cyber Security Requirements and Its Application in BPMN. In: S. Parkinson, A. Crampton, R. Hill (eds.) Guide to Vulnerability Analysis for Computer Networks and Systems, pp. 339–366. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92624-7_15
Zwaga, H., Boersema, T.: Evaluation of a set of graphic symbols. Appl. Ergonom. 14(1), 43–54 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-6870(83)90220-X
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Communicated by Benoit Combemale.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix: List of selected studies
ID | Title | Author | Source | Year | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
S8 | A Visual Programming Language for Designing Interactions Embedded in Web-Based Geographic Applications | Luong, The Nhan and Etcheverry, Patrick and Marquesuzaà, Christophe and Nodenot, Thierry | Proceedings of the 2012 ACM international conference on Intelligent User Interfaces - IUI ’12 | 2012 | [100] |
S9 | Improving the Developer Experience with a Low-Code Process Modelling Language | Henriques, Henrique and Lourenço, Hugo and Amaral, Vasco and Goulão, Miguel | Proceedings of the 21th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems - MODELS ’18 | 2018 | [70] |
S10 | Analysing the Cognitive Effectiveness of the UCM Visual Notation | Genon, Nicolas and Amyot, Daniel and Heymans, Patrick | Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on System Analysis and Modeling: About Models | 2010 | [55] |
S11 | The Impact of Perceived Cognitive Effectiveness on Perceived Usefulness of Visual Conceptual Modeling Languages | Figl, Kathrin and Derntl, Michael | Conceptual Modeling – ER 2011 | 2011 | [50] |
S12 | MAV-Vis: A Notation for Model Uncertainty | Famelis, Michalis and Santosa, Stephanie | 2013 5th International Workshop on Modeling in Software Engineering (MiSE) | 2013 | [46] |
S13 | A Situation-Aware Workflow Modelling Extension | Breitenbücher, Uwe and Hirmer, Pascal and Képes, Kálmán and Kopp, Oliver and Leymann, Frank and Wieland, Matthias | Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Information Integration and Web-based Applications & Services – iiWAS ’15 | 2015 | [19] |
S14 | The Effect of Process Map Design Quality on Process Management Success | Malinova, Monika and Mendling, Jan | 2011 Fifth international conference on research challenges in information science | 2011 | [112] |
S15 | DMLAS: A Domain-Specific Language for designing adaptive systems | J. Bocanegra and J. Pavlich-Mariscal and A. Carrillo-Ramos | 2015 10th Computing Colombian Conference (10CCC) | 2015 | [15] |
S16 | Managing Process Model Complexity via Concrete Syntax Modifications | M. La Rosa and A. H. M. ter Hofstede and P. Wohed and H. A. Reijers and J. Mendling and W. M. P. van der Aalst | IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics | 2011 | [89] |
S17 | Evaluation of the risk and security overlay of archimate to model information system security risks | N. Mayer and C. Feltus | 2017 IEEE 21st International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Workshop (EDOCW) | 2017 | [104] |
S18 | Improving the Effectiveness of Visual Representations in Requirements Engineering: An Evaluation of i* Visual Syntax | D. L. Moody and P. Heymans and R. Matulevicius | 2009 17th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference | 2009 | [116] |
S19 | VIVA: A VIsual Language to Design VAlue Co-Creation | I. S. Razo-Zapata and E. K. Chew and E. Proper | 2018 IEEE 20th Conference on Business Informatics (CBI) | 2018 | [133] |
S20 | BiDaML: A Suite of Visual Languages for Supporting End-User Data Analytics | H. Khalajzadeh and M. Abdelrazek and J. Grundy and J. Hosking and Q. He | 2019 IEEE International Congress on Big Data (BigDataCongress) | 2019 | [82] |
S21 | Modeling Moods | H. Störrle | 2019 ACM/IEEE 22nd International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems Companion (MODELS-C) | 2019 | [149] |
S22 | Designing the Didactic Strategy Modeling Language (DSML) From PoN: An Activity Oriented EML Proposal | A. Ruiz and J. I. Panach and O. Pastor and F. D. Giraldo and J. L. Arciniegas and W. J. Giraldo | IEEE Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje | 2018 | [141] |
S23 | On the Impact of Semantic Transparency on Understanding and Reviewing Social Goal Models | M. Santos and C. Gralha and M. Goulão and J. Araújo and A. Moreira | 2018 IEEE 26th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE) | 2018 | [147] |
S24 | Visual notation design 2.0: Towards user comprehensible requirements engineering notations | P. Caire and N. Genon and P. Heymans and D. L. Moody | 2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE) | 2013 | [24] |
S25 | Using the “Physics” of notations to analyze a visual representation of business decision modeling | J. C. Thomas and J. Diament and J. Martino and R. K. E. Bellamy | 2012 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC) | 2012 | [152] |
ID | Title | Author | Source | Year | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
S26 | A visual syntax for Larman’s operation contracts | A. S. Algablan and S. S. Somé | 2016 International Conference on Engineering & MIS (ICEMIS) | 2016 | [3] |
S27 | Using the Physics of Notations Theory to Evaluate the Visual Notation of SEAM | G. Popescu and A. Wegmann | 2014 IEEE 16th Conference on Business Informatics | 2014 | [132] |
S28 | Towards Security Modeling of e-Voting Systems | C. D. Faveri and A. Moreira and J. Araújo and V. Amaral | 2016 IEEE 24th International Requirements Engineering Conference Workshops (REW) | 2016 | [47] |
S29 | Evaluation of a graphical modeling language for the specification of manufacturing execution systems | B. Weißenberger and B. Vogel-Heuser | Proceedings of 2012 IEEE 17th International Conference on Emerging Technologies & Factory Automation (ETFA 2012) | 2012 | [156] |
S30 | SnapMind: A framework to support consistency and validation of model-based requirements in agile development | F. Wanderley and A. Silva and J. Araujo and D. S. Silveira | 2014 IEEE 4th International Model-Driven Requirements Engineering Workshop (MoDRE) | 2014 | [155] |
S31 | SecDSVL: A Domain-Specific Visual Language to Support Enterprise Security Modelling | M. Almorsy and J. Grundy | 2014 23rd Australian Software Engineering Conference | 2014 | [4] |
S32 | A Taxonomy and Visual Notation for Modeling Globally Distributed Requirements Engineering Projects | P. Laurent and P. Mäder and J. Cleland-Huang and A. Steele | 2010 5th IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering | 2010 | [91] |
S33 | Ruru: A spatial and interactive visual programming language for novice robot programming | J. P. Diprose and B. A. MacDonald and J. G. Hosking | 2011 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC) | 2011 | [37] |
S34 | A domain-specific visual modeling language for testing environment emulation | J. Liu and J. Grundy and I. Avazpour and M. Abdelrazek | 2016 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC) | 2016 | [99] |
S35 | An Explorative Analysis of the Notational Characteristics of the Decision Model and Notation (DMN) | Z. Dangarska and K. Figl and J. Mendling | 2016 IEEE 20th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Workshop (EDOCW) | 2016 | [34] |
S36 | Towards a unified Requirements Modeling Language | J. Helming and M. Koegel and F. Schneider and M. Haeger and C. Kaminski and B. Bruegge and B. Berenbach | 2010 Fifth International Workshop on Requirements Engineering Visualization | 2010 | [68] |
S37 | Increasing the Semantic Transparency of the KAOS Goal Model ConcreteSyntax | Santos, Mafalda and Gralha, Catarina and Goulao, Miguel and Araujo, Joao | Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) | 2018 | [146] |
S38 | Empirical validating the cognitive effectiveness of a new featurediagrams visual syntax | Saeed, Mazin and Saleh, Faisal and Al-Insaif, Sadiq and El-Attar, Mohamed | Information and Software Technology | 2016 | [142] |
S39 | An Experimental Study on the Design and Modeling of Security Concepts inBusiness Processes | Leitner, Maria and Schefer-Wenzl, Sigrid and Rinderle-Ma, Stefanie andStrembeck, Mark | Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing | 2013 | [93] |
S40 | The Influence of Notational Deficiencies on Process Model Comprehension | Figl, Kathrin and Mendling, Jan and Strembeck, Mark | Journal of the Association for Information Systems | 2013 | [52] |
S41 | A study on the effects of routing symbol design on process model comprehension | Figl, Kathrin and Recker, Jan and Mendling, Jan | Decision Support Systems | 2013 | [54] |
S42 | On the Cognitive Effectiveness of Routing Symbols in Process Modeling Languages | Figl, Kathrin and Mendling, Jan and Strembeck, Mark and Recker, Jan | Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing | 2010 | [53] |
S43 | Extending the UML Statecharts Notation to Model Security Aspects | El-Attar, Mohamed and Luqman, Hamza and Karpati, Peter and Sindre, Guttorm and Opdahl, Andreas L. | IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering | 2015 | [43] |
S44 | Modelling large-scale information systems using ADLs – An industrial experience report | Eoin Woods and Rabih Bashroush | Journal of Systems and Software | 2015 | [159] |
ID | Title | Author | Source | Year | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
S45 | Cognitive effectiveness of visual instructional design languages | Kathrin Figl and Michael Derntl and Manuel Caeiro Rodriguez and Luca Botturi | Journal of Visual Languages & Computing | 2010 | [51] |
S46 | Evaluating and empirically improving the visual syntax of use case diagrams | Mohamed El-Attar | Journal of Systems and Software | 2019 | [42] |
S47 | A BPMN-based language for modeling corporate communications | Gregor Polančič and Boštjan Orban | Computer Standards & Interfaces | 2019 | [131] |
S48 | Evaluating a graphical notation for modeling collaborative learning activities: A family of experiments | Ana I. Molina and Miguel A. Redondo and Manuel Ortega and Carmen Lacave | Science of Computer Programming | 2014 | [111] |
S49 | Specification and implementation of mapping rule visualization and editing: MapVOWL and the RMLEditor | Pieter Heyvaert and Anastasia Dimou and Ben De Meester and Tom Seymoens and Aron-Levi Herregodts and Ruben Verborgh and Dimitri Schuurman and Erik Mannens | Journal of Web Semantics | 2018 | [71] |
S50 | A scientific evaluation of the misuse case diagrams visual syntax | Faisal Saleh and Mohamed El-Attar | Information and Software Technology | 2015 | [143] |
S51 | The Effect Of Process Map Design Quality On Process Management Success | Malinova, Monika and Mendling, Jan | ECIS 2013 Proceedings | 2013 | [112] |
S52 | Component-Based Method Development: An Experience Report | Sandkuhl, Kurt and Koç, Hasan | The Practice of Enterprise Modeling | 2014 | [145] |
S53 | MASC: Modelling Architectural Security Concerns | Sion, Laurens and Yskout, Koen and van den Berghe, Alexander and Scandariato, Riccardo and Joosen, Wouter | 2015 IEEE/ACM 7th International Workshop on Modeling in Software Engineering | 2015 | [148] |
S54 | Multi-objective risk analysis with goal models | Basak Aydemir, Fatma and Giorgini, Paolo and Mylopoulos, John | 2016 IEEE Tenth International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science (RCIS) | 2016 | [9] |
S55 | User Interface Transition Diagrams for customer-developer communication improvement in software development projects | Gómez, M. and Cervantes, J. | Journal of Systems and Software | 2013 | [59] |
S56 | VISUAL LANGUAGE FOR GEODATABASE DESIGN | Dobesova, Zdena | International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM | 2013 | [40] |
S57 | Designing secure business processes with SecBPMN | Salnitri, Mattia and Dalpiaz, Fabiano and Giorgini, Paolo | Software & Systems Modeling | 2017 | [144] |
S58 | USING THE PHYSICS OF NOTATION TO ANALYSE MODELBUILDER DIAGRAMS | Dobesova, Zdena | International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM | 2013 | [39] |
S59 | Evaluation of Selected Control Programming Languages for Process Engineers by Means of Cognitive Effectiveness and Dimensions | Bayrak, Gülden and Ocker, Felix and Vogel-Heuser, Birgit | Journal of Software Engineering and Applications | 2017 | [11] |
S60 | CHAIN: Developing model-driven contextual help for adaptive user interfaces | Akiki, Pierre A. | Journal of Systems and Software | 2018 | [2] |
S61 | Using empirical studies to mitigate symbol overload in iStar extensions | Gonçalves, Enyo and Almendra, Camilo and Goulão, Miguel and Araújo, João and Castro, Jaelson | Software and Systems Modeling | 2019 | [60] |
S62 | BAMN: a modeling method for business activity monitoring systems | Janiesch, Christian and Matzner, Martin | Journal of Decision Systems | 2019 | [80] |
ID | Title | Author | Source | Year | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
S63 | A visual modeling approach for the Semantic Web Rule Language | Pittl, Benedikt and Fill, Hans-Georg | Semantic Web | 2018 | [128] |
S64 | Applying the physics of notation to the evaluation of a security and privacy requirements engineering methodology | Diamantopoulou, Vasiliki and Mouratidis, Haralambos | Information and Computer Security | 2018 | [36] |
S65 | Visual ppinot: A Graphical Notation for Process Performance Indicators | del-Río-Ortega, Adela and Resinas, Manuel and Durán, Amador and Bernárdez, Beatriz and Ruiz-Cortés, Antonio and Toro, Miguel | Business & Information Systems Engineering | 2019 | [35] |
S66 | On the use of models for high-performance scientific computing applications: an experience report | Ober, Ileana and Palyart, Marc and Bruel, Jean-Michel and Lugato, David | Software & Systems Modeling | 2018 | [122] |
S67 | Realizing strategic fit within the business architecture: the design of a Process-Goal Alignment modeling and analysis technique | Roelens, Ben and Steenacker, Wout and Poels, Geert | Software & Systems Modeling | 2019 | [139] |
S68 | A visual language for modeling multiple perspectives of business process compliance rules | Knuplesch, David and Reichert, Manfred | Software & Systems Modeling | 2017 | [85] |
S69 | Evaluating the appropriateness of the BPMN 2.0 standard for modeling service choreographies: using an extended quality framework | Cortes-Cornax, Mario and Dupuy-Chessa, Sophie and Rieu, Dominique and Mandran, Nadine | Software & Systems Modeling | 2016 | [31] |
S70 | Analysing the cognitive effectiveness of the WebML visual notation | Granada, David and Vara, Juan Manuel and Brambilla, Marco and Bollati, Verónica and Marcos, Esperanza | Software & Systems Modeling | 2017 | [64] |
S71 | Considerations about quality in model-driven engineering: Current state and challenges | Giraldo, Fáber D. and España, Sergio and Pastor, Óscar and Giraldo, William J. | Software Quality Journal | 2018 | [58] |
S72 | Visual syntax does matter: improving the cognitive effectiveness of the i* visual notation | Moody, Daniel L. and Heymans, Patrick and Matulevičius, Raimundas | Requirements Engineering | 2010 | [117] |
S73 | Analysis Method for Conceptual Context Modeling Applied in Production Environments | Hoos, Eva and Wieland, Matthias and Mitschang, Bernhard | Business Information Systems | 2017 | [72] |
S74 | Specifying autonomy in the Internet of Things: the autonomy model and notation | Janiesch, Christian and Fischer, Marcus and Winkelmann, Axel and Nentwich, Valentin | Information Systems and e-Business Management | 2019 | [79] |
S75 | A visual analysis of the process of process modeling | Claes, Jan and Vanderfeesten, Irene and Pinggera, Jakob and Reijers, Hajo A. and Weber, Barbara and Poels, Geert | Information Systems and e-Business Management | 2015 | [29] |
S76 | Analysis of notations for modeling user interaction scenarios in ubiquitous collaborative systems | Canché, Maximiliano and Ochoa, Sergio F. and Perovich, Daniel and Gutierrez, Francisco J. | Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing | 2019 | [26] |
S77 | Hazard Relation Diagrams: a diagrammatic representation to increase validation objectivity of requirements-based hazard mitigations | Tenbergen, Bastian and Weyer, Thorsten and Pohl, Klaus | Requirements Engineering | 2018 | [151] |
S78 | Evaluating KIPN for Modeling KIP | Netto, Joanne Manhães and Santoro, Flávia Maria and Baião, Fernanda Araujo | Business Process Management Workshops | 2014 | [119] |
S79 | Improving the Usability of a MAS DSML | Miranda, Tomás and Challenger, Moharram and Tezel, Baris Tekin and Alaca, Omer Faruk and Barišić, Ankica and Amaral, Vasco and Goulão, Miguel and Kardas, Geylani | Engineering Multi-Agent Systems | 2019 | [109] |
ID | Title | Author | Source | Year | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
S80 | Vino4TOSCA: A Visual Notation for Application Topologies Based on TOSCA | Breitenbücher, Uwe and Binz, Tobias and Kopp, Oliver and Leymann, Frank and Schumm, David | On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2012 | 2012 | [18] |
S81 | Evaluating and Improving the Visualisation of CHOOSE, an Enterprise Architecture Approach for SMEs | Boone, Sarah and Bernaert, Maxime and Roelens, Ben and Mertens, Steven and Poels, Geert | Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing | 2014 | [16] |
S82 | Semiotic Considerations for the Design of an Agent-Oriented Modelling Language | Henderson-Sellers, Brian and Low, Graham and Gonzalez-Perez, Cesar | Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling | 2012 | [69] |
S83 | Extending Use and Misuse Case Diagrams to Capture Multi-channel Information Systems | Gopalakrishnan, Sundar and Krogstie, John and Sindre, Guttorm | Informatics Engineering and Information Science | 2011 | [62] |
S84 | Towards a More Semantically Transparent i* Visual Syntax | Genon, Nicolas and Caire, Patrice and Toussaint, Hubert and Heymans, Patrick and Moody, Daniel | Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality | 2012 | [56] |
S85 | Implementation and First Evaluation of a Molecular Modeling Language | Andersson, Alexander and Krogstie, John | Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling | 2015 | [6] |
S86 | Intuitive Understanding of Domain-Specific Modeling Languages: Proposition and Application of an Evaluation Technique | Bork, Dominik and Schrüffer, Christine and Karagiannis, Dimitris | Conceptual Modeling – ER 2019 | 2019 | [17] |
S87 | Evaluation of the Cognitive Effectiveness of the CORAS Modelling Language | Zehnder, Eloïse and Mayer, Nicolas and Gronier, Guillaume | Advances in Conceptual Modeling | 2018 | [160] |
S88 | Can Ontologies Systematically Help in the Design of Domain-Specific Visual Languages? | da Silva Teixeira, Maria das Graças and de Almeida Falbo, Ricardo and Guizzardi, Giancarlo | Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) | 2013 | [32] |
S89 | A Framework for the Visualisation of Cyber Security Requirements and Its Application in BPMN | Zhou, Bo and Maines, Curtis and Tang, Stephen and Shi, Qi | Guide to Vulnerability Analysis for Computer Networks and Systems | 2018 | [162] |
S90 | Evaluating the Visual Syntax of UML: An Analysis of the Cognitive Effectiveness of the UML Family of Diagrams | Moody, Daniel and van Hillegersberg, Jos | Information Systems Journal | 2009 | [114] |
S91 | Analysing the Cognitive Effectiveness of the BPMN 2.0 Visual Notation | Genon, Nicolas and Heymans, Patrick and Amyot, Daniel | Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) | 2011 | [57] |
S92 | On the Semantic Transparency of Visual Notations: Experiments with UML | El Kouhen, Amine and Gherbi, Abdelouahed and Dumoulin, Cédric and Khendek, Ferhat | 2009 International Conference on Complex, Intelligent and Software Intensive Systems | 2015 | [45] |
S93 | Analytical Evaluation of Notational Adaptations to Capture Location of Activities in Process Models | Gopalakrishnan, Sundar | Department of Computer and Information Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology | 2011 | [63] |
S94 | Software Language Engineering: Interaction and Usability Modeling of Language Editors | Brochado De Miranda, Tomás Rogeiro | Faculty of Sciences and Technology, NOVA University of Lisbon | 2017 | [22] |
Appendix: List of data extraction questions in relation to research questions
RQ No. | Research question | EQ No. | Question condition | Extraction question | Possible answers | Data processing / outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | How is semantic transparency defined? | |||||
1.1 | How is semantic transparency defined across the studies and disciplines? | 1.1.1 | Does the article define ST? | Y/N | count answers, discussion | |
1.1.2 | 1.1.1 – Y | How is the ST defined in the article? | list of answers | count answers, discussion | ||
1.2 | Which theories are related to semantic transparency? | 1.2.1 | 1.1.1 – Y | Which studies are cited for the definition? | list of citations | count answers, discussion |
1.3 | Which synonyms are related to semantic transparency? | 1.3.1 | 1.1.1 – Y | Are there any synonyms specified and if yes, which? | list of synonyms | terminology consolidation |
1.4 | Which concepts are related to semantic transparency? | 1.4.1 | 1.1.1 – Y | Does the article define additional concepts related to ST? | Y/N | count answers, discussion |
1.4.2 | 1.1.1 – Y, 1.4.1 – Y | Which are the additional concepts mentioned in the article that are related to ST? | list of concepts | taxonomy of concepts | ||
1.4.3 | 1.1.1 – Y, 1.4.1 – Y | What is the intended use of additional concepts? | independent, dependent, mediating, moderating | taxonomy of concepts | ||
1.4.4 | 1.1.1 – Y, 1.4.1 – Y | Was the relation of concepts to ST confirmed, rejected, referenced or listed without argument? | confirmed, rejected, referenced, NA | taxonomy of concepts | ||
1.4.5 | 1.1.1 – Y, 1.4.1 – Y | Which studies are cited for additional concepts? | list of citations | count answers, discussion | ||
1.4.6 | Was the ST concept applied in the evaluation or in the design of a new notation? | evaluation, design | count answers, discussion | |||
RQ No. | Research question | EQ No. | Question condition | Extraction question | Possible answers | Data processing / outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2 | How is semantic transparency evaluated? | |||||
2.1 | How is semantic transparency measured? | 2.1.1 | 1.4.6 – evaluation | Does the article define operationalization of ST? | Y/N | count answers, discussion |
2.1.2 | 1.4.6 – evaluation, 2.1.1 – Y | How is the operationalization of ST defined in the article? | list of answers | count answers, discussion | ||
2.1.3 | 1.4.6 – evaluation, 2.1.1 – Y | Which studies are cited for the operationalization definition of ST? | list of citations | count answers, discussion | ||
2.1.4 | 1.4.6 – evaluation | Which variables/metrics were used for evaluation of ST? | list of answers | count answers, discussion | ||
2.2 | Which research methods are applied in the evaluation of semantic transparency? | 2.2.1 | 1.4.6 – evaluation | Which empirical methods were used for evaluation? | survey, case study, expert analysis, focus group, NA | count answers, evaluation taxonomy |
2.2.2 | 1.4.6 – evaluation | Which collection instruments were used for evaluation? | questionnaire, interview, eye-tracking, discussion, modeling experiment, inspection, NA | count answers, evaluation taxonomy | ||
2.2.3 | 1.4.6 – evaluation, 2.2.2 – questionnaire | What kind of questions were used in questionnaires? | open type, closed type, both, NA | count answers, evaluation taxonomy | ||
2.2.4 | 1.4.6 – evaluation | What kind of data type was measured? | quantitative, qualitative, both, NA | count answers, evaluation taxonomy | ||
2.2.5 | 1.4.6 – evaluation | What was the profile of evaluators? | user, article author, NA | count answers, evaluation taxonomy | ||
2.2.6 | 1.4.6 – evaluation | What was the domain of the evaluators? | academia, industry, domain specific, expert in cognitive science, NA | count answers, evaluation taxonomy | ||
2.2.7 | 1.4.6 – evaluation, 2.2.1 – expert analysis | Which protocol did the experts follow during evaluation? | list of answers | count answers, evaluation taxonomy | ||
2.2.8 | 1.4.6 – evaluation, 2.2.5 – user | What was the level of expertise of users? | novice, non-novice, both | count answers, evaluation taxonomy | ||
2.2.9 | 1.4.6 – evaluation, 2.2.5 – user | How many users were involved in the study? | number | count answers, discussion | ||
RQ No. | Research question | EQ No. | Question condition | Extraction question | Possible answers | Data processing / outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3 | How is semantic transparency applied? | |||||
3.1 | How is the application of semantic transparency approached when designing new notations? | 3.1.1 | 1.4.6 – design | How was the application of ST for the design of a notation approached? | list of answers | count answers, discussion |
3.2 | Does the introduction of a new notation cover the complete sets of semantic and visual concepts? | 3.2.1 | 1.4.6 – design | Were all semantic and visual concepts of a proposed notation presented? | Y/N | count answers, discussion |
3.2.2 | 1.4.6 – design | How many elements were visually presented? | number | count answers, discussion | ||
3.2.3 | 1.4.6 – design | How many elements were semantically presented? | number | count answers, discussion | ||
3.3 | Is the design of new signs rationalized? | 3.3.1 | 1.4.6 – design | Was the design rationale provided for the new signs? | Y/N | count answers, discussion |
3.3.2 | 1.4.6 – design, 3.3.1 – Y | For how many elements was the design rationale provided? | number | count answers, discussion | ||
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kuhar, S., Polančič, G. Conceptualization, measurement, and application of semantic transparency in visual notations. Softw Syst Model 20, 2155–2197 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-021-00888-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-021-00888-9