On the effectiveness of the UML object diagrams: A replicated experiment

IET Seminar Digest

Volumn 2011, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 76-85

  Scanniello, G ^a   Ricca, F ^b   Torchiano, M ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BASILICATA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GENOA   (Italy)

^c POLITECNICO DI TORINO   (Italy)

Author keywords

Controlled experiment; Graduated students; Object Diagrams; Replication; UML

Indexed keywords

CLASS DIAGRAMS; COMPREHENSION TASKS; CONTROLLED EXPERIMENT; OBJECT DIAGRAMS; OBJECT-ORIENTED SOFTWARE SYSTEMS; PROFESSIONAL SOFTWARE; REPLICATED EXPERIMENT; REPLICATION; SOFTWARE SYSTEMS; UML; UNDERSTANDABILITY;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE; GRAPHIC METHODS; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; SURVEYS;

EXPERIMENTS;

EID: 82955219695     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1049/ic.2011.0009     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (24)

1. S. Abrahao, E. Insfran, C. Gravino, and G. Scanniello. On the effectiveness of dynamic modeling in UML: Results from an external replication. In Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement conference, pages 468-472. IEEE Computer Society, Oct. 2009.
2. G. Andrew and P. Drew. Use case diagrams in support of use case modeling: Deriving understanding from the picture. Journal of Database Management, 20(1), 2009.
3. J. Aranda, N. Ernst, J. Horkoff, and S. Easterbrook. A framework for empirical evaluation of model comprehensibility. In Modeling in Software Engineering, ICSE Workshop, pages 7-13. IEEE, 2007.
4. V. Basili, F. Shull, and F. Lanubile. Building knowledge through families of experiments. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 25(4):456-473, 1999. (Pubitemid 129304112)
5. B. Bruegge and A. H. Dutoit. Object-Oriented Software Engineering: Using UML, Patterns and Java, 2nd edition. Prentice-Hall, 2003.
6. D. Budgen, A. J. Burn, O. P. Brereton, B. A. Kitchenham, and R. Pretorius. Empirical evidence about the UML: a systematic literature review. Software: Practice and Experience, page to appear, 2010.
7. P. Byckling, P. Gerdt, L. Kuzniarz, and J. Sajaniemi. Increasing comprehensibility of object models: making the roles of attributes explicit in uml diagrams. Nordic J. of Computing, 13:149-161, September 2006.
8. J. Cohen. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1988.
9. M. Fowler and S. Kendall. UML Distilled: A Brief Guide to the Standard Object Modeling Language (4th Edition). Addison-Wesley Professional, 2010.
10. C. Gravino, G. Scanniello, and G. Tortora. An empirical investigation on dynamic modeling in requirements engineering. In Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pages 615-629, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008. IEEE Computer Society.
11. C. Gravino, G. Tortora, and G. Scanniello. An empirical investigation on the relation between analysis models and source code comprehension. In SAC, pages 2365-2366, 2010.
12. A. Gross and J. Doerr. EPC vs. UML activity diagram - two experiments examining their usefulness for requirements engineering. pages 47-56, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 2009. IEEE.
13. N. Juristo and A.M. Moreno. Basics of Software Engineering Experimentation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001.
14. L. Kuzniarz, M. S., and C. Wohlin. An empirical study on using stereotypes to improve understanding of UML models. In Workshop on Program Comprehension, pages 14-23, Bari, Italy, 2004. IEEE Computer Society.
15. A. De Lucia, C. Gravino, R. Oliveto, and G. Tortora. An experimental comparison of ER and UML class diagrams for data modelling. Empirical Software Engineering, 15(5):455-492, 2010.
16. A. Nugroho. Level of detail in UML models and its impact on model comprehension: A controlled experiment. Inf. Softw. Technol., 51:1670-1685, December 2009.
17. OMG. Unified modeling language (omg uml) specification, version 2.3. Technical report, Object Management Group, May 2010.
18. M.C. Otero and J.J. Dolado. An empirical comparison of the dynamic modeling in OML and UML. J. Syst. Softw., 77:91-102, August 2005. (Pubitemid 40612679)
19. F. Ricca, M. Di Penta, M. Torchiano, P. Tonella, and M. Ceccato. The role of experience and ability in comprehension tasks supported by UML stereo-types. In International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 375-384, Minneapolis, MN, USA, May 2007. IEEE Computer Society.
20. F. Ricca, M. Di Penta, M. Torchiano, P. Tonella, and M. Ceccato. How developers' experience and ability influence web application comprehension tasks supported by UML stereotypes: A series of four experiments. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 36(1):96-118, 2010.
21. M. Staron, L. Kuzniarz, and C. Wohlin. Empirical assessment of using stereotypes to improve comprehension of uml models: A set of experiments. 79(5):727-742, 2006.
22. M. Torchiano. Empirical assessment of UML static object diagrams. In 12th International Workshop on Program Comprehension, pages 226-230, 2004.
23. C. Wohlin, P. Runeson, M. Höst, M.C. Ohlsson, B. Regnell, and A. Wesslén. Experimentation in Software Engineering - An Introduction. Kluwer, 2000.
24. S. Yusuf, K. Kagdi, and J. I. Maletic. Assessing the comprehension of UML class diagrams via eye tracking. In 15th International Conference on Program Comprehension, pages 113-122, Washington, DC, USA, 2007. IEEE Computer Society.