On the Cognitive Effectiveness of Routing Symbols in Process Modeling Languages

被引：0
作者：
Figl, Kathrin [1 ]
Mendling, Jan [2 ]
Strembeck, Mark [1 ]
Recker, Jan [3 ]
机构：
[1] Vienna Univ Econ & Business, A-1090 Vienna, Austria
[2] Humboldt Univ, Berlin 10099, Germany
[3] Queensland Univ Technolo, Brisbane, Qld 4000, Australia
来源：
BUSINESS INFORMATION SYSTEMS, PROCEEDINGS | 2010年 / 47卷
关键词：
Process modeling; cognitive analysis; UML; YAWL; BPMN; EPCs; OR-JOINS; LOAD; WORKFLOWS; WORDS;
D O I：
暂无
中图分类号：
TP [自动化技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号：
0812 ;
摘要：
Process models provide visual support for analyzing and improving complex organizational processes. In this paper, we discuss differences of process modeling languages using cognitive effectiveness considerations, to make statements about the ease of use and quality of user experience. Aspects of cognitive effectiveness are of importance for learning a modeling language, creating models, and understanding models. We identify the criteria representational clarity, perceptual discriminability, perceptual immediacy, visual expressiveness, and graphic parsimony to compare and assess the cognitive effectiveness of different modeling languages. We apply these criteria in an analysis of the routing elements of UML Activity Diagrams, YAWL, BPMN, and EPCs, to uncover their relative strengths and weaknesses from a quality of user experience perspective. We draw conclusions that are relevant to the usability of these languages in business process modeling projects.
引用
收藏
页码：230 / +
页数：3
相关论文
共 50 条
[21]   Comparison of Selected Modeling Notations for Process, Decision and System Modeling [J].
Kluza, Krzysztof ;
Wisniewski, Piotr ;
Jobczyk, Krystian ;
Ligeza, Antoni ;
Suchenia Mroczek, Anna .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2017 FEDERATED CONFERENCE ON COMPUTER SCIENCE AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS (FEDCSIS), 2017, :1095-1098
[22]   Towards Understanding the Process of Process Modeling: Theoretical and Empirical Considerations [J].
Softer, Pnina ;
Kaner, Maya ;
Wand, Yair .
BUSINESS PROCESS MANAGEMENT WORKSHOPS, PT I, 2012, 99 :357-+
[23]   Advancing IoT Process Modeling: A Comparative Evaluation of BPMNE4IoT and Traditional BPMN on User-Friendliness, Effectiveness, and Workload [J].
Winter, Michael ;
Kirikkayis, Yusuf ;
Pryss, Rudiger ;
Reichert, Manfred .
INTERNET COMPUTING AND IOT AND EMBEDDED SYSTEMS, CYBER-PHYSICAL SYSTEMS, AND APPLICATIONS, ICOMP 2024, ESCS 2024, 2025, 2260 :98-107
[24]   The ontological deficiencies of process modeling in practice [J].
Recker, Jan ;
Indulska, Marta ;
Rosemann, Michael ;
Green, Peter .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS, 2010, 19 (05) :501-525
[25]   Business process modeling and analysis system [J].
Milewska, Elzbieta .
SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS OF THE MARITIME UNIVERSITY OF SZCZECIN-ZESZYTY NAUKOWE AKADEMII MORSKIEJ W SZCZECINIE, 2010, 24 (96) :59-62
[26]   Methodological Limitations of Modeling Languages BPMN and ARIS [J].
Repa, Vaclav ;
Zeleznik, Ondrej .
2014 15TH INTERNATIONAL CARPATHIAN CONTROL CONFERENCE (ICCC), 2014, :507-512
[27]   Towards Flexible Control of Production Processes: A Requirements Analysis for Adaptive Workflow Management and Evaluation of Suitable Process Modeling Languages [J].
Schultheis, Alexander ;
Jilg, David ;
Malburg, Lukas ;
Bergweiler, Simon ;
Bergmann, Ralph .
PROCESSES, 2024, 12 (12)
[28]   An ontology-driven process modeling framework [J].
Greco, G ;
Guzzo, A ;
Pontieri, L ;
Saccà, D .
DATABASE AND EXPERT SYSTEMS APPLICATIONS, PROCEEDINGS, 2004, 3180 :13-23
[29]   Proposal for an object oriented process modeling language [J].
Anderl, Reiner ;
Malzacher, Jens ;
Rassler, Jochen .
ENTERPRISE INTEROPERABILITY III: NEW CHALLENGES AND INDUSTRIAL APPROACHES, 2008, :533-545
[30]   A Concept for Spreadsheet-Based Process Modeling [J].
Krumnow, Stefan ;
Decker, Gero .
BUSINESS PROCESS MODELING NOTATION, 2010, 67 :63-+
12345