Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
10. Yang, J., Hendrix, T.D., Chang, K.H., Umphress, D.: An empirical validation of
complexity profile graph. In: Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Southeast Regional
Conference. ACM-SE 43, vol. 1, pp. 143-149. ACM, New York (2005)
11. Biggerstaff, T.J., Mitbander, B.G., Webster, D.: The concept assignment problem
in program understanding. In: ICSE 1993: Proceedings of the 15th International
Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 482-498 (1993)
12. Moody, D.L.: Metrics for evaluating the quality of entity relationship models. In:
Ling, T.-W., Ram, S., Li Lee, M. (eds.) ER 1998. LNCS, vol. 1507, pp. 211-225.
Springer, Heidelberg (1998)
13. Kirschner, P.A.: Cognitive load theory: implications of cognitive load theory on the
design of learning. Learning and Instruction 12, 1-10 (2002)
14. Sweller, J.: Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive
Science 12, 257-285 (1988)
15. Moody, D.L.: Cognitive load effects on end user understanding of conceptual mod-
els: An experimental analysis. In: Benczur, A.A., Demetrovics, J., Gottlob, G.
(eds.) ADBIS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3255, pp. 129-143. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
16. Genero, M., Manso, E., Visaggio, A., Canfora, G., Piattini, M.: Building measure-
based prediction models for UML class diagram maintainability. Empirical Soft-
ware Engineering 12, 517-549 (2007)
17. Cant, S.N., Jeffery, D.R.: A conceptual model of cognitive complexity of elements
of the programming process. Information and Software Tech. 37, 351-362 (1995)
18. Melcher, J., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., Seese, D.: On measuring the understand-
ability of process models. In: Rinderle-Ma, S., Sadiq, S., Leymann, F. (eds.) BPM
2009. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 43, pp. 465-476.
Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
19. Khemlani, S., Johnson-Laird, P.N.: Disjunctive illusory inferences and how to elim-
inate them. Memory & Cognition 37, 615-623 (2009)
20. Mendling, J., Neumann, G., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Understanding the occurrence
of errors in process models based on metrics. In: Chung, S. (ed.) OTM 2007, Part
I. LNCS, vol. 4803, pp. 113-130. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
21. Sweller, J.: Cognitive load theory, learning diculty, and instructional design.
Learning and Instruction 4, 295-312 (1994)
22. Vanhatalo, J., Volzer, H., Koehler, J.: The refined process structure tree. Data &
Knowledge Engineering 68, 793-818 (2009)
23. Cant, S., Jeffery, D., Henderson-Sellers, B.: A conceptual model of cognitive com-
plexity of elements of the programming process. Information and Software Tech. 37,
351-362 (1995)
24. Laue, R., Gaddatsch, A.: Measuring the understandability of business process mod-
els - are we asking the right questions? In: 6th International Workshop on Business
Process Design (2010)
25. Nordbotten, J.C., Crosby, M.E.: The effect of graphic style on data model inter-
pretation. Inf. Syst. J. 9, 139-156 (1999)
26. Gilmore, D.J., Green, T.R.G.: Comprehension and recall of miniature programs.
International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 21, 31-48 (1984)
27. Parsons, J., Cole, L.: What do the pictures mean?: guidelines for experimental
evaluation of representation fidelity in diagrammatical conceptual modeling tech-
niques. Data Knowl. Eng. 55, 327-342 (2005)
28. Petre, M.: Why looking isn't always seeing: readership skills and graphical pro-
gramming. Commun. ACM 38, 33-44 (1995)
29. Reijers, H., Freytag, T., Mendling, J., Eckleder, A.: Syntax highlighting in business
process models. Decision Support Systems (2011) (to appear)
