Empirical evaluation of test driven modeling

International Journal of Information System Modeling and Design

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 23-43

  Zugal, Stefan ^a   Haisjackl, Cornelia ^a   Pinggera, Jakob ^a   Weber, Barbara ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF INNSBRUCK   (Austria)

Author keywords

Business Process Management; Case Study; Controlled Experiment; Declarative Business Process Model; Empirical Research; Test Driven Modeling

Indexed keywords

BUSINESS PROCESS MANAGEMENT; BUSINESS PROCESS MODEL; CONTROLLED EXPERIMENT; DECLARATIVE PROCESS MODELS; DEGREE OF FLEXIBILITY; EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; VOLATILE ENVIRONMENTS;

ENTERPRISE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT; TESTING;

EXPERIMENTS;

EID: 84893340659     PISSN: 19478186     EISSN: 19478194     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4018/jismd.2013040102     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Agrawal, H., Horgan, J., Krauser, E., & London, S. (1993). Incremental regression testing. In Proceedings of International Conference on Software Maintenance '93, (pp. 348-357).
2. Arisholm, E., & Sjøberg, D. I. (2004). Evaluating the effect of a delegated versus centralized control style on the maintainability of object-oriented software. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 30(8), 521-534. doi:10.1109/TSE.2004.43.
3. Awad, A., Decker, G., & Weske, M. (2008). Efficient compliance checking using BPMN-Q and temporal logics. Proceedings of Business Process Management, 08, 326-341. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-85758-7-24.
4. Beck, K. (1999). Extreme programming explained: Embracing change. Addison-Wesley.
5. Beck, K. (2002). Test driven development: By example. Addison-Wesley.
6. Davis, F. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
7. Dumas, M., van der Aalst, W., & ter Hofstede, A. (2005). Process aware information systems: Bridging people and software through process technology. Wiley-Interscience. doi:10.1002/0471741442.
8. Edwards, S. H. (2003). Using test-driven development in the classroom: providing students with automatic, concrete feedback on performance. In Conference on Education and Information Systems: Technologies and Applications '03, (pp. 421-426).
9. Erdogmus, H., Maurizio, M., & Torchiano, M. (2005). On the effectiveness of the test-first approach to programming. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 31(1), 226-237. doi:10.1109/TSE.2005.37.
10. Fahland, D. (2010). From scenarios to components. Unpublished PhD thesis, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany.
11. George, B., & Williams, L. (2004). A structured experiment of test-driven development. Information and Software Technology, 46(5), 337-342. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2003.09.011.
12. Glinz, M., Seybold, C., & Meier, S. (2007). Simulation-driven creation, validation and evolution of behavioral requirements models. Proceedings of Model-Based Development of Embedded Systems, 07, 103-112.
13. Green, T., & Petre, M. (1996). Usability analysis of visual programming environments: A 'cognitive dimensions framework'. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 7(2), 131-174. doi:10.1006/jvlc.1996.0009.
14. Hoppenbrouwers, S., Lindemann, L., & Proper, E. (2006). Capturing modeling processes - Towards the MoDial Modeling Laboratory (pp. 1241-1252). On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems. doi:10.1007/11915072-27.
15. Höst, M., Regnell, B., & Wohlin, C. (2000). Using Students as subjects - A comparative study of students and professionals in lead-time impact assessment. Empirical Software Engineering, 5(3), 201-214. doi:10.1023/A: 1026586415054.
16. Khatri, V., Vessey, I., Ramesh, P., & Park, S. (2006). Understanding conceptual schemas: Exploring the role of application and IS domain knowledge. Information Systems Research, 17(1), 81-99. doi:10.1287/isre.1060.0081.
17. Lenz, R., & Reichert, M. (2007). IT support for healthcare processes - premises, challenges, perspectives. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 61(1), 39-58. doi:10.1016/j.datak.2006.04.007.
18. Ly, L., Rinderle, S., & Dadam, P. (2008). Integration and verification of semantic constraints in adaptive process management systems. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 64(1), 3-23. doi:10.1016/j.datak.2007.06.007.
19. Marchenko, A., Pekka, A., & Ihme, T. (2009). Long-term effects of test-driven development: A case study. In Proceedings XP '09, (pp. 13-22).
20. Miller, G. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81-97. doi:10.1037/h0043158 PMID:13310704.
21. Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, P. W. (2003). Cognitive Load Measurement as a Means to Advance Cognitive Load Theory. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 63-71. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3801-8.
22. Pančur, M., Ciglarič, M., Trampuš, M., & Vidmar, T. (2003). Towards empirical evaluation of test-driven development in a university environment. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer as a Tool '03, (pp. 83-86).
23. Pesic, M. (2008). Constraint-based workflow management: Shifting control to users. Unpublished PhD thesis, TU Eindhoven.
24. Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H., Sidorova, N., & van der Aalst, W. (2007). Constraint-based workflow models: Change made easy. In Proceedings of International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems '07, (pp. 77-94).
25. Pett, M. (1997). Nonparametric statistics for health care research: Statistics for small samples and unusual distributions. Sage Publications.
26. Pinggera, J., Zugal, S., & Weber, B. (2010). Investigating the process of process modeling with cheetah experimental platform. Proceedings of Empirical Research in Process-Oriented Information Systems, 10, 13-18.
27. Reichert, M., & Dadam, P. (1998). ADEPTflex: Supporting dynamic changes of workflow without losing control. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, 10(2), 93-129. doi:10.1023/A:1008604709862.
28. Rittgen, P. (2007). Negotiating models. In Proceedings of Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering '07, (pp. 561-573).
29. Seeber, I., Weber, B., & Maier, R. (2012). CoPrA: A process analysis technique to investigate collaboration in groups. In Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences '12.
30. Siniaalto, M. (2006). Test driven development: empirical body of evidence (Technical report, ITEA). Information Technology for European Advancement.
31. van Bommel, P., Hoppenbrouwers, S., Proper, E., & van der Weide, T. (2006). Exploring modelling strategies in a meta-modelling context. Proceedings of On the Move to Meaningful Information Systems, 06, 1128-1137.
32. van der Aalst, W. (2005). Case handling: A new paradigm for business process support. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 53(2), 129-162. doi:10.1016/j.datak.2004.07.003.
33. van der Aalst, W., de Beer, H., & van Dongen, B. (2005). Process mining and verification of properties: An approach based on temporal logic. Proceedings of On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems, 05, 130-147.
34. Weber, B., Reichert, M., & Rinderle, S. (2008). Change patterns and change supports features - Enhancing flexibility in process-aware information systems. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 66(3), 438-466. doi:10.1016/j.datak. 2008.05.001.
35. Weber, B., Reijers, H., Zugal, S., & Wild, W. (2009). The declarative approach to business process execution: An empirical test. In Proceedings of Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering '09, (pp. 270-285).
36. Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., & Weber, B. (2011a). Assessing process models with cognitive psychology. Proceedings of Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures, 11, 177-182.
37. Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., & Weber, B. (2011b). Creating declarative process models using test driven modeling suite. In Proceedings of Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering Forum '11, (pp. 16-32).
38. Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., & Weber, B. (2011c). The impact of testcases on the maintainability of declarative process models. In Business Process Modeling, Development, and Support '11, (pp. 163-177).
39. Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., & Weber, B. (2012). Toward enhanced life-cycle support for declarative processes. Journal of Software: Evolution and Process, 24(3), 285-302. doi:10.1002/smr.554.
40. Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., Weber, B., Mendling, J., & Reijers, H. (2011). Assessing the impact of hierarchy on model understandability-a cognitive perspective. Proceedings of Experiences and Empirical Studies in Software Modelling, 11, 123-133.