Abstract
After visualizing data of various observational experiments on the way in which modelers construct process models, a promising process modeling style (i.e., structured process modeling) was discovered that is expected to cause process model quality to increase. A modeler constructs process models in a structured way if she/he is working on a limited amount of parts of the model simultaneously. This paper describes two cognitive theories that can explain this causal relation. Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) suggests that the amount of errors increases when the limited capacity of our working memory is overloaded. Cognitive Fit Theory (CFT) states that performance is improved when task material representation matches with the task to be executed. Three hypotheses are formulated and the experimental set-up to evaluate these hypotheses is described.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Pinggera, J., Zugal, S., Weber, B.: Investigating the process of process modeling with cheetah experimental platform. In: Mutschler, B., Recker, J., Wieringa, R., Ralyte, J., Plebani, P. (eds.) Proc. ER-POIS 2010, vol. 603, pp. 13–18. CEUR-WS (2010)
Claes, J., Vanderfeesten, I., Pinggera, J., Reijers, H.A., Weber, B., Poels, G.: Visualizing the process of process modeling with pPMCharts. In: La Rosa, M., Soffer, P. (eds.) BPM 2012 Workshops. LNBIP, vol. 132, pp. 744–755. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Pinggera, J., Soffer, P., Zugal, S., Weber, B., Weidlich, M., Fahland, D., Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J.: Modeling styles in business process modeling. In: Bider, I., Halpin, T., Krogstie, J., Nurcan, S., Proper, E., Schmidt, R., Soffer, P., Wrycza, S. (eds.) EMMSAD 2012 and BPMDS 2012. LNBIP, vol. 113, pp. 151–166. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Claes, J., Vanderfeesten, I., Reijers, H.A., Pinggera, J., Weidlich, M., Zugal, S., Fahland, D., Weber, B., Mendling, J., Poels, G.: Tying process model quality to the modeling process: The impact of structuring, movement, and speed. In: Barros, A., Gal, A., Kindler, E. (eds.) BPM 2012. LNCS, vol. 7481, pp. 33–48. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
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)
Pinggera, J., Zugal, S., Weber, B., Fahland, D., Weidlich, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: How the structuring of domain knowledge helps casual process modelers. In: Parsons, J., Saeki, M., Shoval, P., Woo, C., Wand, Y. (eds.) ER 2010. LNCS, vol. 6412, pp. 445–451. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Pinggera, J., Furtner, M., Martini, M., Sachse, P., Reiter, K., Zugal, S., Weber, B.: Investigating the process of process modeling with eye movement analysis. In: La Rosa, M., Soffer, P. (eds.) BPM 2012 Workshops. LNBIP, vol. 132, pp. 438–450. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Soffer, P., Kaner, M., Wand, Y.: Towards understanding the process of process modeling: Theoretical and empirical considerations. In: Daniel, F., Barkaoui, K., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM 2011 Workshops, Part I. LNBIP, vol. 99, pp. 357–369. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Indulska, M., Recker, J., Rosemann, M., Green, P.: Business process modeling: Current issues and future challenges. In: van Eck, P., Gordijn, J., Wieringa, R. (eds.) CAiSE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5565, pp. 501–514. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Verification of workflow nets. In: Azéma, P., Balbo, G. (eds.) ICATPN 1997. LNCS, vol. 1248, pp. 407–426. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)
Atkinson, R., Shiffrin, R.: Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. Psychology of Learning and Motivation 2, 89–195 (1968)
Sperling, G.: A model for visual memory tasks. Human Factors 5, 19–31 (1963)
Sweller, J.: Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review 10, 251–296 (1998)
Miller, G.: The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review 63, 81–97 (1956)
Sweller, J.: Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science 12, 257–285 (1988)
Schrepfer, M., Wolf, J., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: The impact of secondary notation on process model understanding. In: Persson, A., Stirna, J. (eds.) PoEM 2009. LNBIP, vol. 39, pp. 161–175. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Vessey, I., Galletta, D.: Cognitive fit: An empirical study of information acquisition. Information Systems Research 2, 63–84 (1991)
Vessey, I.: Cognitive fit: a theory-based analysis of the graphs versus tables literature. Decision Sciences 22, 219–240 (1991)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Claes, J., Gailly, F., Poels, G. (2013). Cognitive Aspects of Structured Process Modeling. In: Franch, X., Soffer, P. (eds) Advanced Information Systems Engineering Workshops. CAiSE 2013. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 148. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38490-5_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38490-5_15
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-38489-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-38490-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)