On the importance of flow direction in business process models

ICSOFT-EA 2014 - Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Software Engineering and Applications

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 132-136

  Figl, Kathrin ^a   Strembeck, Mark ^a  

^a VIENNA UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS   (Austria)

Author keywords

Business process models; Flow direction; Model layout; Reading direction

Indexed keywords

ENGINEERING; INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING;

BUSINESS PROCESS; BUSINESS PROCESS MODEL; FLOW DIRECTION; MODELING GUIDELINES; PROCESS MODELING; READING DIRECTION; STANDARD DOCUMENTS; VISUAL APPEARANCE;

APPLICATION PROGRAMS;

EID: 84908876206     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.5220/0005090401320136     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (24)

1. De Soto, C. B., London, M., Handel, S., 1965. Social reasoning and spatial paralogic. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 513-521.
2. Dumas, M., Van Der Aalst, W. M. P., Ter Hofstede, A. H. M. (eds.), 2005. Process Aware Information Systems: Bridging People and Software Through Process Technology, Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
3. Effinger, P., Jogsch, N., Seiz, S., 2011. On a Study of Layout Aesthetics for Business Process Models Using BPMN. In: MENDLING, J., WEIDLICH, M. & WESKE, M. (eds.) Business Process Modeling Notation. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
4. Eichelberger, H., Schmid, K., 2009. Guidelines on the aesthetic quality of UML class diagrams. Information and Software Technology, 51, 1686-1698.
5. Figl, K., Mendling, J., Strembeck, M., 2013a. The Influence of Notational Deficiencies on Process Model Comprehension. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 14.
6. Figl, K., Recker, J., Mendling, J., 2013b. A study on the effects of routing symbol design on process model comprehension. Decision Support Systems, 54, 1104-1118.
7. Gillespie, C. S., 1993. Reading Graphic Displays: What Teachers Should Know. Journal of Reading, 36, 350-54.
8. Handel, S., Desoto, C. B., London, M., 1968. Reasoning and spatial representations. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 7, 351-357.
9. Harsel, Y., Wales, R., 1987. Directional preference in problem solving. International Journal of Psychology, 22, 195-206.
10. Hufschmidt, H.-J., 1985. Zeichnungsrichtung, Schreibrichtung und Blickfelddominanz. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 235, 76-81.
11. Krohn, G. S., 1983. Flowcharts Used for Procedural Instructions. Human Factors, 25, 573-581.
12. Mendling, J., Strembeck, M., Recker, J., 2012. Factors of Process Model Comprehension - Findings from a Series of Experiments. Decision Support Systems, 53, 195-206.
13. Nordbotten, J. C. & Crosby, M. E., 1999. The effect of graphic style on data model interpretation. Information Systems Journal, 9, 139-155.
14. Object Management Group, 2013a. Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) Version 2.0.2.
15. Object Management Group, 2013b. OMG Unified Modeling Language (OMG UML). In: GROUP, T. O. M. (ed.).
16. Petre, M. 1995. Why looking isn't always seeing: readership skills and graphical programming. Commun. ACM, 38, 33-44.
17. Petre, M., 2006. Cognitive dimensions 'beyond the notation'. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 17, 292-301.
18. Reijers, H. A., Mendling, J., Dijkman, R. M., 2011. Human and automatic modularizations of process models to enhance their comprehension. Information Systems, 36, 881-897.
19. Sala, S. D., Darling, S., Logie, R. H., 2010. Items on the left are better remembered. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 848-855.
20. Schrepfer, M., Wolf, J., Mendling, J., Reijers, H. A., 2009. The Impact of Secondary Notation on Process Model Understanding. In: The Practice of Enterprise Modeling, 2nd IFIP WG8.1 Working Conference (PoEM 2009) Stockholm, Sweden.
21. Tversky, B., Kugelmass, S., Winter, A., 1991. Crosscultural and developmental trends in graphic productions. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 515-557.
22. Weske, M., 2007. Business Process Management: Concepts, Languages, Architectures, Springer-Verlag.
23. Winn, W., 1982. The role of diagrammatic representation in learning sequences, identification and classification as a function of verbal and spatial ability. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19, 79-89.
24. Winn, W., 1983. Perceptual strategies used with flow diagrams having normal and unanticipated formats. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 57, 751-762.