Abstract
The Physics of Notations [9] (PoN) is a design theory presenting nine principles that can be used to evaluate and improve the cognitive effectiveness of a visual notation. The PoN has been used to analyze existing standard visual notations (such as BPMN, UML, etc.), and is commonly used for evaluating newly introduced visual notations and their extensions. However, due to the rather vague and abstract formulation of the PoN’s principles, they have received different interpretations in their operationalization. To address this problem, there have been attempts to formalize the principles, however only a very limited number of principles was covered. This research-in-progress paper aims to better understand the difficulties inherent in operationalizing the PoN, and better separate aspects of PoN, which can potentially be formulated in mathematical terms from those grounded in user-specific considerations.
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
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
Nonetheless, existing work [16] seems to take debatable choices, such as seemingly arbitrary weights for distinguishing visual distance variables, whose objective nature can also be discussed.
References
Giraldo, F.D., España, S., Pineda, M.A., Giraldo, W.J., Pastor, O.: Conciliating model-driven engineering with technical debt using a quality framework. In: Nurcan, S., Pimenidis, E. (eds.) CAiSE Forum 2014. LNBIP, vol. 204, pp. 199–214. Springer, Switzerland (2015)
Granada, D., Vara, J.M., Brambilla, M., Bollati, V., Marcos, E.: Analysing the cognitive effectiveness of the webml visual notation. Softw. Syst. Model., 1–33 (2013)
Green, T.R.G., Petre, M.: Usability analysis of visual programming environments: a cognitive dimensions framework. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 7(2), 131–174 (1996)
Gregor, S.: The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Q. 30, 611–642 (2006)
Gulden, J., Reijers, H.A.: Toward advanced visualization techniques for conceptual modeling. In: Proceedings of the CAiSE Forum 2015 Stockholm, Sweden, 8–12 June, 2015
Halpin, T.: ORM 2. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM-WS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3762, pp. 676–687. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Krogstie, J., Sindre, G., Jørgensen, H.: Process models representing knowledge for action: a revised quality framework. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 15(1), 91–102 (2006)
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., Wyk, E. (eds.) SLE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5452, pp. 16–34. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Moody, D.L.: The physics of notations: toward a scientific basis for constructing visual notations in software engineering. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 35(6), 756–779 (2009)
Moody, D.L., Heymans, P., Matulevičius, R.: Visual syntax does matter: improving the cognitive effectiveness of the i* visual notation. Requirements Eng. 15(2), 141–175 (2010)
zur Muehlen, M., Recker, J.: How much bpmn do you need (2008). http://www.bpm-research.com/2008/03/03/how-much-bpmn-do-you-need
Narayanan, N.H., Hübscher, R.: Visual language theory: towards a human-computer interaction perspective. In: Marriott, K., Meyer, B. (eds.) Visual Language Theory, pp. 87–128. Springer, New York (1998)
(OMG), O.M.G.: Business process model and notation (BPMN) version 2.0. Technical report, January 2011. http://taval.de/publications/BPMN20
Plataniotis, G., de Kinderen, S., Proper, H.A.: Ea anamnesis: an approach for decision making analysis in enterprise architecture. Int. J. Inf. Syst. Model. Des. (IJISMD) 5(3), 75–95 (2014). http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ijismd.2014070104
Schuette, R., Rotthowe, T.: The guidelines of modeling - an approach to enhance the quality in information models. In: Ling, T.-W., Ram, S., Lee, M. (eds.) ER 1998. LNCS, vol. 1507, pp. 240–254. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)
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)
van der Linden, D., Hadar, I.: Cognitive effectiveness of conceptual modeling languages: examining professional modelers. In: Proceedings of the 5th IEEE International Workshop on Empirical Requirements Engineering (EmpiRE). IEEE (2015)
van der Linden, D., Hadar, I.: Evaluating the evaluators - an analysis of cognitive effectiveness improvement efforts for visual notations. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering. INSTICC (2016)
van der Linden, D., Hadar, I.: User involvement in applications of the PoN. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Cognitive Aspects of Information Systems Engineering (COGNISE). Springer (2016)
Van Zee, M., Plataniotis, G., van der Linden, D., Marosin, D.: Formalizing enterprise architecture decision models using integrity constraints. In: 2014 IEEE 16th Conference on Business Informatics (CBI), vol. 1, pp. 143–150. IEEE (2014)
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
van der Linden, D., Zamansky, A., Hadar, I. (2016). 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. BPMDS EMMSAD 2016 2016. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 248. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39429-9_28
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39429-9_28
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)