Abstract
Hierarchy has widely been recognized as a viable approach to deal with the complexity of conceptual models. For instance, in declarative business process models, hierarchy is realized by sub-processes. While technical implementations of declarative sub-processes exist, their application, semantics, and the resulting impact on understandability are less understood yet—this research gap is addressed in this work. In particular, we discuss the semantics and the application of hierarchy and show how sub-processes enhance the expressiveness of declarative modeling languages. Then, we turn to the impact on the understandability of hierarchy on a declarative process model. To systematically assess this impact, we present a cognitive-psychology based framework that allows to assess the possible impact of hierarchy on the understandability of the process model.
This research is supported by Austrian Science Fund (FWF): P23699-N23 and the BIT fellowship program.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
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
Parnas, D.L.: On the Criteria to be Used in Decomposing Systems into Modules. Communications of the ACM 15, 1053–1058 (1972)
Goguen, J.A., Varela, F.J.: Systems and Distinctions; Duality and Complementarity. Int. J. Gen. Syst. 5, 31–43 (1979)
Damij, N.: Business process modelling using diagrammatic and tabular techniques. Business Process Management Journal 13, 70–90 (2007)
Sharp, A., McDermott, P.: Workow Modeling: Tools for Process Improvement and Application Development. Artech House (2011)
Kock, N.F.: Product flow, breadth and complexity of business processes: An empirical study of 15 business processes in three organizations. Business Process Re-engineering & Management Journal 2, 8–22 (1996)
Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Seven process modeling guidelines (7pmg). Information & Software Technology 52, 127–136 (2010)
Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H., Sidorova, N., van der Aalst, W.: Constraint-Based Workflow Models: Change Made Easy. In: Proc. CoopIS 2007, pp. 77–94 (2007)
Reijers, H., Mendling, J., Dijkman, R.: Human and automatic modularizations of process models to enhance their comprehension. Inf. Systems 36, 881–897 (2011)
Cruz-Lemus, J.A., Genero, M., Piattini, M.: Using Controlled Experiments for Validating UML Statechart Diagrams Measures. In: Cuadrado-Gallego, J.J., Braungarten, R., Dumke, R.R., Abran, A. (eds.) IWSM-Mensura 2007. LNCS, vol. 4895, pp. 129–138. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Cruz-Lemus, J., Genero, M., Piattini, M., Toval, A.: Investigating the nesting level of composite states in uml statechart diagrams. In: Proc. QAOOSE 2005, pp. 97–108 (2005)
Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., Weber, B.: Toward Enhanced Life-Cycle Support for Declarative Processes. Journal of Software: Evolution and Process 24, 285–302 (2012)
Pesic, M.: Constraint-Based Workflow Management Systems: Shifting Control to Users. PhD thesis, TU Eindhoven (2008)
Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H., van der Aalst, W.: DECLARE: Full Support for Loosely-Structured Processes. In: Proc. EDOC 2007, pp. 287–298 (2007)
Weber, B., Reichert, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Refactoring large process model repositories. Computers in Industry 62, 467–486 (2011)
Weber, B., Reichert, M., Rinderle, S.: Change Patterns and Change Support Features - Enhancing Flexibility in Process-Aware Information Systems. DKE 66, 438–466 (2008)
Soffer, P., Rolland, C.: Combining Intention-Oriented and State-Based Process Modeling. In: Delcambre, L.M.L., Kop, C., Mayr, H.C., Mylopoulos, J., Pastor, Ó. (eds.) ER 2005. LNCS, vol. 3716, pp. 47–62. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., Weber, B., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Assessing the Impact of Hierarchy on Model Understandability—A Cognitive Perspective. In: Proc. EESSMod 2011, pp. 18–27 (2011)
Moody, D.L.: Cognitive Load Effects on End User Understanding of Conceptual Models: An Experimental Analysis. In: Benczúr, A.A., Demetrovics, J., Gottlob, G. (eds.) ADBIS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3255, pp. 129–143. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., Weber, B.: Assessing process models with cognitive psychology. In: Proc. EMISA 2011, pp. 177–182 (2011)
Sweller, J.: Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science 12, 257–285 (1988)
Larkin, J.H., Simon, H.A.: Why a Diagram is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words. Cognitive Science 11, 65–100 (1987)
Scaife, M., Rogers, Y.: External cognition: how do graphical representations work? Int.J. Human-Computer Studies 45, 185–213 (1996)
Sweller, J., Chandler, P.: Why Some Material Is Difficult to Learn. Cognition and Instruction 12, 185–233 (1994)
Cruz-Lemus, J.A., Genero, M., Manso, M.E., Morasca, S., Piattini, M.: Assessing the understandability of UML statechart diagrams with composite states—A family of empirical studies. Empir. Software Eng. 25, 685–719 (2009)
Weber, B., Reijers, H.A., Zugal, S., Wild, W.: The Declarative Approach to Business Process Execution: An Empirical Test. In: van Eck, P., Gordijn, J., Wieringa, R. (eds.) CAiSE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5565, pp. 470–485. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Paas, F., Tuovinen, J.E., Tabbers, H., Gerven, P.W.M.V.: Cognitive Load Measurement as a Means to Advance Cognitive Load Theory. Educational Psychologist 38, 63–71 (2003)
Shoval, P., Danoch, R., Balabam, M.: Hierarchical entity-relationship diagrams: the model, method of creation and experimental evaluation. Requirements Engineering 9, 217–228 (2004)
Cruz-Lemus, J.A., Genero, M., Morasca, S., Piattini, M.: Using Practitioners for Assessing the Understandability of UML Statechart Diagrams with Composite States. In: Hainaut, J.-L., Rundensteiner, E.A., Kirchberg, M., Bertolotto, M., Brochhausen, M., Chen, Y.-P.P., Cherfi, S.S.-S., Doerr, M., Han, H., Hartmann, S., Parsons, J., Poels, G., Rolland, C., Trujillo, J., Yu, E., Zimányie, E. (eds.) ER Workshops 2007. LNCS, vol. 4802, pp. 213–222. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., Weber, B.: The Impact of Testcases on the Maintainability of Declarative Process Models. 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. 163–177. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., Weber, B.: Creating Declarative Process Models Using Test Driven Modeling Suite. In: Nurcan, S. (ed.) CAiSE Forum 2011. LNBIP, vol. 107, pp. 16–32. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J.: A Study into the Factors that Influence the Understandability of Business Process Models. SMCA 41, 449–462 (2011)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Zugal, S., Soffer, P., Pinggera, J., Weber, B. (2012). Expressiveness and Understandability Considerations of Hierarchy in Declarative Business Process Models. In: Bider, I., et al. Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling. BPMDS EMMSAD 2012 2012. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 113. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31072-0_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31072-0_12
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-31071-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-31072-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)