How Do Individuals Understand Multiple Conceptual Modeling Scripts?

IF 7 3区 管理学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS Journal of the Association for Information Systems Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.17705/1jais.00750
M. Jabbari, J. Recker, Peter F. Green, K. Werder
{"title":"How Do Individuals Understand Multiple Conceptual Modeling Scripts?","authors":"M. Jabbari, J. Recker, Peter F. Green, K. Werder","doi":"10.17705/1jais.00750","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Because most real-world domains intended to be supported by an information system are complex, practitioners often use multiple different types of conceptual modeling scripts to understand them. We performed two experiments to examine how two theoretical factors of multiple scripts— combined ontological completeness and ontological overlap—influence how users develop an understanding of a real-world domain from multiple scripts. Results of the first experiment show that to some degree, ontological overlap improves participants’ understanding of a domain, more so than combined ontological completeness. In the second experiment, we tracked the eye movement data of participants to understand how ontological overlap between scripts impacts users’ information search and cognitive integration processes. We found that some occurrence of semantically similar constructs between scripts helps individuals to identify and relate constructs presented in different scripts. Users, therefore, can identify and focus on script areas that are relevant to their problem tasks. However, a high level of ontological overlap decreases the attention paid by participants to relevant task-specific areas because they spend more time searching for relevant information. Together, our findings both refine and extend existing conceptual modeling theory. We clarify the dialectics between the full and parsimonious real-world representations offered through multiple scripts and the individual’s understanding of the domain that is represented by those scripts.","PeriodicalId":51101,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association for Information Systems","volume":" 12","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Association for Information Systems","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00750","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Because most real-world domains intended to be supported by an information system are complex, practitioners often use multiple different types of conceptual modeling scripts to understand them. We performed two experiments to examine how two theoretical factors of multiple scripts— combined ontological completeness and ontological overlap—influence how users develop an understanding of a real-world domain from multiple scripts. Results of the first experiment show that to some degree, ontological overlap improves participants’ understanding of a domain, more so than combined ontological completeness. In the second experiment, we tracked the eye movement data of participants to understand how ontological overlap between scripts impacts users’ information search and cognitive integration processes. We found that some occurrence of semantically similar constructs between scripts helps individuals to identify and relate constructs presented in different scripts. Users, therefore, can identify and focus on script areas that are relevant to their problem tasks. However, a high level of ontological overlap decreases the attention paid by participants to relevant task-specific areas because they spend more time searching for relevant information. Together, our findings both refine and extend existing conceptual modeling theory. We clarify the dialectics between the full and parsimonious real-world representations offered through multiple scripts and the individual’s understanding of the domain that is represented by those scripts.
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
个体如何理解多个概念建模脚本?
由于信息系统支持的大多数现实世界领域都是复杂的,从业者通常使用多种不同类型的概念建模脚本来理解它们。我们进行了两个实验来研究多脚本的两个理论因素——结合本体完整性和本体重叠——如何影响用户如何从多个脚本中开发对现实世界领域的理解。第一个实验的结果表明,在某种程度上,本体重叠比组合本体完备性更能提高参与者对领域的理解。在第二项实验中,我们追踪了参与者的眼动数据,以了解文本本体重叠如何影响用户的信息搜索和认知整合过程。我们发现,在不同的文字中出现语义相似的构念有助于个体识别和联系不同的文字中呈现的构念。因此,用户可以识别并关注与他们的问题任务相关的脚本区域。然而,高水平的本体论重叠降低了参与者对相关任务特定领域的关注,因为他们花了更多的时间来搜索相关信息。总之,我们的发现完善和扩展了现有的概念建模理论。我们澄清了通过多脚本提供的完整和简约的现实世界表征与个人对这些脚本所代表的领域的理解之间的辩证法。
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
Journal of the Association for Information Systems
Journal of the Association for Information Systems 工程技术-计算机:信息系统
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
5.20%
发文量
33
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Association for Information Systems (JAIS), the flagship journal of the Association for Information Systems, publishes the highest quality scholarship in the field of information systems. It is inclusive in topics, level and unit of analysis, theory, method and philosophical and research approach, reflecting all aspects of Information Systems globally. The Journal promotes innovative, interesting and rigorously developed conceptual and empirical contributions and encourages theory based multi- or inter-disciplinary research.
期刊最新文献
"My Precious!": A Values-Affordances Perspective on the Adoption of Bitcoin A Warning Approach to Mitigating Bandwagon Bias in Online Ratings: Theoretical Analysis and Experimental Investigations Social Inclusion: The Use of Social Media and the Impact on First-Generation College Students Positively Fearful: Activating the Individual's HERO Within to Explain Volitional Security Technology Adoption The Effectiveness of Highlighting Different Communication Orientations in Promoting Mobile Communication Technology at Work vs. at Home: Evidence from a Field Experiment
×
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