Assessing the understandability of UML statechart diagrams with composite states-A family of empirical studies

Empirical Software Engineering

Volumn 14, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 685-719

  Cruz Lemus, José A ^a   Genero, Marcela ^a   Manso, M Esperanza ^b   Morasca, Sandro ^c   Piattini, Mario ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CASTILLA LA MANCHA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VALLADOLID   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF INSUBRIA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Composite states; Family of experiments; UML statechart diagrams; Understandability

Indexed keywords

CLASS DIAGRAMS; COMPOSITE STATE; COMPOSITE STATES; EMPIRICAL STUDIES; FAMILY OF EXPERIMENTS; HIERARCHICAL MODELING; META-ANALYSIS; SOFTWARE SYSTEMS; TIME PERIODS; UML STATECHART DIAGRAMS; UML STATECHARTS; UNDERSTANDABILITY;

COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; GRAPHIC METHODS;

EXPERIMENTS;

EID: 70349217238     PISSN: 13823256     EISSN: 15737616     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10664-009-9106-z     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. R Agarwal P De AP Sinha 1999 Comprehending Object and Process Models: An Empirical Study IEEE Trans Softw Eng 25 4 541 556 10.1109/32.799953
2. E Arisholm DIK Sjøberg 2004 Evaluating the Effect of a Delegated versus Centralized Control Style on the Maintainability of Object-Oriented Software IEEE Trans Softw Eng 30 8 521 534 10.1109/TSE.2004.43
3. C Atkinson T Kühne 2003 Model Driven Development: a Metamodeling Foundation IEEE Trans Softw Eng 20 36 41
4. V Basili F Shull F Lanubile 1999 Building Knowledge through Families of Experiments IEEE Trans Softw Eng 25 456 473 10.1109/32.799939
5. Biostat, Inc. (2006) Meta-Analysis v2. http://www.meta-analysis.com
6. F Bodart A Patel M Sim R Weber 2001 Should Optimal Properties Be Used in Conceptual Modelling? A Theory and Three Empirical Tests Inf Syst Res 12 4 384 405 10.1287/isre.12.4.384.9702
7. N Bolloju FSK Leung 2006 Assisting Novice Analysts in Developing Quality Conceptual Models with UML Commun ACM 49 7 108 112 10.1145/1139922.1139926 (Pubitemid 44076042)
8. L Briand C Bunse J Daly 2001 A Controlled Experiment for Evaluating Quality Guidelines on the Maintainability of Object-Oriented Designs IEEE Trans Softw Eng 27 6 513 530 10.1109/32.926174 (Pubitemid 32611055)
9. Carter J, Jaccheri L, Morasca S, Shull F (2003) Issues in Using Students in Empirical Studies in Software Engineering Education. Proc. 9th International Software Metrics Symposium (METRICS' 03), Sydney, Australia, pp 239-249
10. SD Craig B Gholson DM Driscoll 2002 Animated Pedagogical Agents in Multimedia Educational Environments: Effects of Agent Properties, Picture Features, and Redundancy J Educ Psychol 94 2 428 434 10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.428
11. Cruz-Lemus JA, Genero M, Manso ME, Piattini M (2005a) Evaluating the Effect of Composite States on the Understandability of UML Statechart Diagrams. Proc. 8th International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering, Languages and Systems (MoDELS 2005), Montego Bay, Jamaica, pp 113-125
12. Cruz-Lemus JA, Genero M, Piattini M (2005b) Metrics for UML Statechart Diagrams. In Metrics for Software Conceptual Models. Imperial College Press, UK
13. Cruz-Lemus JA, Genero M, Piattini M, Toval Álvarez JA (2005c) An Empirical Study of the Nesting Level of Composite States within UML Statechart Diagrams. Proc. First International Workshop on Best Practices of UML (BP-UML 2005)-ER 2005 Workshops, Klagenfurt (Austria), pp 12-22
14. Denger C, Ciolkowski M (2003) High Quality Statecharts through Tailored, Perspective-Based Inspections. Proc. 29th EUROMICRO Conference "New Waves in System Architecture", Belek, Turkey, pp 316-325
15. T Dybå E Arisholm DIK Sjøberg JE Hannay F Shull 2007 Are Two Heads Better than One? On the Effectiveness of Pair Programming IEEE Softw 24 6 10 13 10.1109/MS.2007.158 (Pubitemid 350153704)
16. Fenton N, Pfleeger S (1997) Software Metrics: A Rigurous and Practical Approach. International Thompson Publishing Inc, London
17. Firesmith D, Henderson-Sellers B, Graham I (1998) OPEN modeling language (OML) reference manual. Cambridge University Press, New York, USA
18. A Gemino Y Wand 2003 Evaluating Modeling Techniques based on Models of Learning Commun ACM 46 10 79 84 10.1145/944217.944243
19. A Gemino Y Wand 2005 Complexity and Clarity in Conceptual Modeling: Comparison of Mandatory and Optional Properties Data Knowl Eng 55 301 326 10.1016/j.datak.2004.12.009 (Pubitemid 41393722)
20. M Genero ME Manso A Visaggio M Piattini G Canfora 2007 Building Measure-based Prediction Models for UML Class Diagram Maintainability Empir Softw Eng 12 5 527 549 10.1007/s10664-007-9038-4 (Pubitemid 47476816)
21. Genero M, Cruz-Lemus JA, Caivano D, Abrahao S, Insfran E, Carsí JA (2008) Assessing the Influence of Stereotypes on the Comprehension of UML Sequence Diagrams: A Controlled Experiment. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (5301): 11th ACM/IEEE MODELS Conference, 280-294, October
22. Glass GV, McGaw B, Smith ML (1981) Meta-Analysis in Social Research. Sage Publications.
23. C Glezer M Last E Nachmany P Shoval 2005 Quality and Comprehension of UML Interaction Diagrams-An Experimental Comparison Inf Softw Technol 47 675 692 10.1016/j.infsof.2005.01.003 (Pubitemid 40893580)
24. R Harrison S Counsell R Nithi 2000 Experimental Assessment of the Effect of Inheritance on the Maintainability of Object-Oriented Systems J Syst Softw 52 173 179 10.1016/S0164-1212(99)00144-2 (Pubitemid 30868741)
25. Hayes W (1999) Research in Software Engineering: a Case for Meta-Analysis. Proc. 6th IEEE International Symposium on Software Metrics (METRICS' 99), Boca Raton, USA, pp 143-151
26. Hedges LV, Olkin I (1985) Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis. Academia Press.
27. Höst M, Regnell B, Wohlin C (2000) Using Students as Subjects-a Comparative Study of Students & Profesionals in Lead-Time Impact Assessment. Proc. 4th Conference on Empirical Assessment & Evaluation in Software Engineering (EASE 2000), Keele, UK, pp 201-214
28. Z Hu SM Shatz 2006 Explicit Modeling of Semantics Associated with Composite States in UML Statecharts Autom Softw Eng 13 4 423 467 10.1007/s10515-006-0272-6 (Pubitemid 44453812)
29. ISO/IEC (2001) Software Product Evaluation-Quality Characteristics and Guidelines for their Use. ISO/IEC Standard 9126.
30. Juristo N, Moreno A (2001) Basics of Software Engineering Experimentation. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
31. V Kampenes T Dybå JE Hannay DIK Sjoberg 2007 A Systematic Review of Effect Size in Software Engineering Experiments Inf Softw Technol 49 11-12 1073 1086 10.1016/j.infsof.2007.02.015 (Pubitemid 47464910)
32. V Khatri I Vessey PCV Ramesh SJ Park 2006 Understanding Conceptual Schemas: Exploring the Role of Application and IS Domain Knowledge Inf Syst Res 17 1 81 99 10.1287/isre.1060.0081
33. Kirk RE (1995) Experimental Design: Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
34. B Kitchenham S Pfleeger L Pickard P Jones D Hoaglin K El-Emam J Rosenberg 2002 Preliminary Guidelines for Empirical Research in Software Engineering IEEE Trans Softw Eng 28 8 721 734 10.1109/TSE.2002.1027796
35. Laitenberger O, El-Emam K, Harbich T (1999) An Internally Replicated Quasy-Experimental Comparison of Checklist and Perspective-based Reading of Code Documents. 006.99/e. IESE.
36. Lipsey M, Wilson D (2001) Practical Meta-Analysis, Sage.
37. J Miller 2000 Applying Meta-Analytical Procedures to Software Engineering Experiments J Syst Softw 54 29 39 10.1016/S0164-1212(00)00024-8 (Pubitemid 30931121)
38. Pickard LM (2004) Combining Empirical Results in Software Engineering, Univer-sity of Keele, T-R V1.
39. RE Mayer 1989 Models for Understanding Rev Educ Res 59 1 43 64
40. RE Mayer RB Anderson 1991 Animations need Narrations: An Experimental Test of the Dual-Coding Hypothesis J Educ Psychol 83 4 484 490 10.1037/0022-0663.83.4.484
41. Mayer RE (2001) Multimedia Learning. Cambridge University Press.
42. Miller J, McDonald F (1998) Statistical Analysis of Two Experimental Studies. EFoCS-31-98. University of Strathclyde.
43. OMG (2003) UML 2.0-2nd Revised Submission. document ptc/03-01-07. Object Management Group.
44. MC Otero JJ Dolado 2004 Evaluation of the Comprehension of the Dynamic Modeling in UML Inf Softw Technol 46 1 35 53 10.1016/S0950-5849(03)00108-3
45. MC Otero JJ Dolado 2005 An Empirical Comparison of the Dynamic Modeling in OML and UML J Syst Softw 77 2 91 102 10.1016/j.jss.2004.11.022
46. Pigoski T (1997) Practical Software Maintenance. New York, USA: Wiley Computer Publishing
47. A Porter M Johnson 1997 Assessing Software Review Measurement: Necessary and Sufficient Properties for Software Measures Inf Softw Technol 42 1 35 46
48. Purchase HC, Colpoys L, McGill M, Carrington D, Britton C (2001) UML Class Diagram Syntax: an Empirical Study of Comprehension. Proc. Australian Symposium on Information Visualisation, Sydney, Australia, pp 113-120
49. Purchase HC, Colpoys L, McGill M, Carrington D (2002) UML Collaboration Diagram Syntax: an Empirical Study of Comprehension. Proc. 1st International Workshop on Visualizing Software for Understanding and Analysis (VISSOFT'02), Paris, France, pp 13-22
50. Ricca F, Di Penta M, Torchiano M, Tonella P, Ceccato M (2007) The Role of Experience and Ability in Comprehension Tasks supported by UML Stereotypes. Proc. 29th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE, 07), Minneapolis, USA, pp 375-384
51. Rosenthal R (1986) Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research. Sage Publications.
52. Rosenthal R (1994) Parametric measures of effect size. In The Handbook of Research Synthesis. Russell Sage Foundation, New York
53. B Selic 2003 The Pragmatics of Model-Driven Development IEEE Softw 20 5 19 25 10.1109/MS.2003.1231146
54. DIK Sjoberg JE Hannay O Hansen V Kampenes A Karahasanovic NK Liborg AC Rekdal 2005 A Survey of Controlled Experiments in Software Engineering IEEE Trans Softw Eng 31 9 733 753 10.1109/TSE.2005.97 (Pubitemid 41555415)
55. SPSS (2003) SPSS 12.0, Syntax Reference Guide. SPSS Inc, Chicago, USA
56. M Staron L Kuzniarz C Wohlin 2006 Empirical Assessment of Using Stereotypes to Improve Comprehension of UML Models: a Set of Experiments J Syst Softw 79 727 742 10.1016/j.jss.2005.09.014
57. Sutton JA, Abrams RK, Jones RD, Sheldon AT, Song F (2001) Methods for Meta-Analysis in Medical Research. John-Wiley & Sons.
58. HK Tabbers 2004 Multimedia Instructions and Cognitive Load Theory: Effects of Modality and Cueing Br J Educ Psychol 74 1 71 81 10.1348/ 000709904322848824
59. D Thomas 2004 MDA: Revenge of the Modelers or UML Utopia IEEE Softw 21 3 15 17 10.1109/MS.2004.1293067
60. WF Tichy 2000 Hints for Reviewing Empirical Work in Software Engineering Empir Softw Eng 5 309 312 10.1023/A:1009844119158 1770449
61. Verelst J (2004) The Influence of the Level of Abstraction on the Evolvability of Conceptual Models of Information Systems. Proc. 3rd International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering (ISESE 2004), Redondo Beach, USA, pp 17-26
62. Webb K (2006) Xholon Digital Watch Project. http://www.primordion.com/ Xholon/samples/watch.htm
63. Winer BJ, Brown DR, Michels KM (1991) Statistical Principles in Experimental Design. McGraw-Hill.
64. Wohlin C, Runeson P, Hast M, Ohlsson MC, Regnell B, Wesslen A (2000) Experimentation in Software Engineering: an Introduction. Kluwer Academic Publisher.
65. Wolf FM (1986) Meta-Analysis: Quantitative Methods for Research Synthesis. Sage Publications.
66. Woodfield SN, Dunsmore HE, Shen VY (1981) The Effect of Modularization and Comments on Program Comprehension. Proc. 5th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 1981), San Diego, USA, pp 215-223
67. Xie S, Kraemer E, Stirewalt REK (2007) Empirical Evaluation of a UML Sequence Diagram with Adornments to Support Understanding of Thread Interactions. Proc. 15th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC'07), Banff, Canada, pp 123-134
68. Yusuf S, Kagdi H, Maletic JI (2007) Assessing the Comprehension of UML Class Diagrams via Eye Tracking. Proc. 15th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC'07), Banff, Canada, pp 113-122