An empirical study of user preference and performance with UML diagrams

C. Britton, M. Kutar, Sue Anthony, T. Barker, Sarah Beecham, Vitoria Wilkinson
{"title":"An empirical study of user preference and performance with UML diagrams","authors":"C. Britton, M. Kutar, Sue Anthony, T. Barker, Sarah Beecham, Vitoria Wilkinson","doi":"10.1109/HCC.2002.1046338","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Elicitation and validation of user requirements depend, to a large extent, on the effectiveness of the tools and techniques used as a vehicle for discussion between developers and users during the requirements process. This effectiveness may, in turn, be influenced by user preference for a particular approach or requirements technique. This paper describes a study that was carried out to investigate the relationship between user preference for sequence or collaboration diagrams in UML, with their accuracy in understanding information contained in the diagrams. Results showed that user preference for one of the two diagram types before carrying out the task was not reflected in improved performance with that type of diagram compared with the other. However, after carrying out the task, user statements about which type of diagram they preferred working with were matched by improved performance with that type of diagram.","PeriodicalId":298317,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings IEEE 2002 Symposia on Human Centric Computing Languages and Environments","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings IEEE 2002 Symposia on Human Centric Computing Languages and Environments","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/HCC.2002.1046338","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

Elicitation and validation of user requirements depend, to a large extent, on the effectiveness of the tools and techniques used as a vehicle for discussion between developers and users during the requirements process. This effectiveness may, in turn, be influenced by user preference for a particular approach or requirements technique. This paper describes a study that was carried out to investigate the relationship between user preference for sequence or collaboration diagrams in UML, with their accuracy in understanding information contained in the diagrams. Results showed that user preference for one of the two diagram types before carrying out the task was not reflected in improved performance with that type of diagram compared with the other. However, after carrying out the task, user statements about which type of diagram they preferred working with were matched by improved performance with that type of diagram.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用UML图对用户偏好和性能进行实证研究
用户需求的引出和验证在很大程度上依赖于作为需求过程中开发人员和用户之间讨论媒介的工具和技术的有效性。这种有效性可能反过来受到用户对特定方法或需求技术的偏好的影响。本文描述了一项研究,该研究旨在调查用户对UML中序列图或协作图的偏好,以及它们在理解图中包含的信息方面的准确性之间的关系。结果表明,在执行任务之前,用户对两种图表类型中的一种的偏好并没有反映在与另一种图表类型相比,这种图表类型的性能有所提高。然而,在执行任务之后,用户关于他们喜欢使用哪种类型的图的陈述与使用该类型的图的改进性能相匹配。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
W/AGE: the Windsor Attribute Grammar Programming Environment Solving design problems in a logic-based visual design environment Fun learning Stagecast Creator: an exercise in minimalism and collaboration Applying attention investment to end-user programming A data-flow testing methodology for a dataflow based visual programming language
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1