A comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments
Abstract Empirical evaluations can be conducted with students or professionals as subjects. Students are much more accessible than professionals and they are inexpensive, allowing a greater number of empirical studies to be conducted. Professionals are preferred over students due to concerns regardi...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
El-Attar, Mohamed [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2019 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Anmerkung: |
© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Software and systems modeling - Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2002, 18(2019), 6 vom: 24. Apr., Seite 3283-3329 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:18 ; year:2019 ; number:6 ; day:24 ; month:04 ; pages:3283-3329 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
OLC2044249413 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | OLC2044249413 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230502181522.0 | ||
| 007 | tu | ||
| 008 | 200820s2019 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)OLC2044249413 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-He213)s10270-019-00720-5-p | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 004 |q VZ |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 004 |q VZ |
| 084 | |a 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines |2 bkl | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a El-Attar, Mohamed |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a A comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2019 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Band |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019 | ||
| 520 | |a Abstract Empirical evaluations can be conducted with students or professionals as subjects. Students are much more accessible than professionals and they are inexpensive, allowing a greater number of empirical studies to be conducted. Professionals are preferred over students due to concerns regarding the external validity of student-based experiments. Professionals are believed to perform differently, most likely better than students. But with respect to evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of software engineering notations, are professionals really better? The literature has suggested that the presentation of information is just as critical as the content it conveys, hence necessitating this type of empirical studies. If professionals are not much better than students, then such important finding can be a springboard to many much-needed empirical evaluations in this field. In this paper, we report on an experiment that compare the performances of professionals and students with respect to syntactical model comprehension, which is a core factor for evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of notations. The experiment involved two groups of professionals and two student groups, totaling 74 professionals and 75 students. The results of the experiment indicate that students can be used as an adequate replacement to professionals in such type of empirical studies. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Statechart modeling | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Use case modeling | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Student-based experiments | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Professional-based experiments | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Software and systems modeling |d Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2002 |g 18(2019), 6 vom: 24. Apr., Seite 3283-3329 |w (DE-627)356568156 |w (DE-600)2092265-6 |w (DE-576)10203768X |x 1619-1366 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:18 |g year:2019 |g number:6 |g day:24 |g month:04 |g pages:3283-3329 |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_OLC | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-MAT | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2018 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2244 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4277 | ||
| 936 | b | k | |a 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines |q VZ |0 181569876 |0 (DE-625)181569876 |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 18 |j 2019 |e 6 |b 24 |c 04 |h 3283-3329 | ||
| author_variant |
m e a mea |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:16191366:2019----::cmaaietdosuetadrfsinlisnatcloec |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2019 |
| bklnumber |
54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines |
| publishDate |
2019 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5 doi (DE-627)OLC2044249413 (DE-He213)s10270-019-00720-5-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 004 VZ 004 VZ 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines bkl El-Attar, Mohamed verfasserin aut A comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments 2019 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019 Abstract Empirical evaluations can be conducted with students or professionals as subjects. Students are much more accessible than professionals and they are inexpensive, allowing a greater number of empirical studies to be conducted. Professionals are preferred over students due to concerns regarding the external validity of student-based experiments. Professionals are believed to perform differently, most likely better than students. But with respect to evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of software engineering notations, are professionals really better? The literature has suggested that the presentation of information is just as critical as the content it conveys, hence necessitating this type of empirical studies. If professionals are not much better than students, then such important finding can be a springboard to many much-needed empirical evaluations in this field. In this paper, we report on an experiment that compare the performances of professionals and students with respect to syntactical model comprehension, which is a core factor for evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of notations. The experiment involved two groups of professionals and two student groups, totaling 74 professionals and 75 students. The results of the experiment indicate that students can be used as an adequate replacement to professionals in such type of empirical studies. Statechart modeling Use case modeling Student-based experiments Professional-based experiments Enthalten in Software and systems modeling Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2002 18(2019), 6 vom: 24. Apr., Seite 3283-3329 (DE-627)356568156 (DE-600)2092265-6 (DE-576)10203768X 1619-1366 nnns volume:18 year:2019 number:6 day:24 month:04 pages:3283-3329 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-MAT GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2244 GBV_ILN_4277 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines VZ 181569876 (DE-625)181569876 AR 18 2019 6 24 04 3283-3329 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5 doi (DE-627)OLC2044249413 (DE-He213)s10270-019-00720-5-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 004 VZ 004 VZ 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines bkl El-Attar, Mohamed verfasserin aut A comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments 2019 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019 Abstract Empirical evaluations can be conducted with students or professionals as subjects. Students are much more accessible than professionals and they are inexpensive, allowing a greater number of empirical studies to be conducted. Professionals are preferred over students due to concerns regarding the external validity of student-based experiments. Professionals are believed to perform differently, most likely better than students. But with respect to evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of software engineering notations, are professionals really better? The literature has suggested that the presentation of information is just as critical as the content it conveys, hence necessitating this type of empirical studies. If professionals are not much better than students, then such important finding can be a springboard to many much-needed empirical evaluations in this field. In this paper, we report on an experiment that compare the performances of professionals and students with respect to syntactical model comprehension, which is a core factor for evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of notations. The experiment involved two groups of professionals and two student groups, totaling 74 professionals and 75 students. The results of the experiment indicate that students can be used as an adequate replacement to professionals in such type of empirical studies. Statechart modeling Use case modeling Student-based experiments Professional-based experiments Enthalten in Software and systems modeling Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2002 18(2019), 6 vom: 24. Apr., Seite 3283-3329 (DE-627)356568156 (DE-600)2092265-6 (DE-576)10203768X 1619-1366 nnns volume:18 year:2019 number:6 day:24 month:04 pages:3283-3329 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-MAT GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2244 GBV_ILN_4277 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines VZ 181569876 (DE-625)181569876 AR 18 2019 6 24 04 3283-3329 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5 doi (DE-627)OLC2044249413 (DE-He213)s10270-019-00720-5-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 004 VZ 004 VZ 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines bkl El-Attar, Mohamed verfasserin aut A comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments 2019 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019 Abstract Empirical evaluations can be conducted with students or professionals as subjects. Students are much more accessible than professionals and they are inexpensive, allowing a greater number of empirical studies to be conducted. Professionals are preferred over students due to concerns regarding the external validity of student-based experiments. Professionals are believed to perform differently, most likely better than students. But with respect to evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of software engineering notations, are professionals really better? The literature has suggested that the presentation of information is just as critical as the content it conveys, hence necessitating this type of empirical studies. If professionals are not much better than students, then such important finding can be a springboard to many much-needed empirical evaluations in this field. In this paper, we report on an experiment that compare the performances of professionals and students with respect to syntactical model comprehension, which is a core factor for evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of notations. The experiment involved two groups of professionals and two student groups, totaling 74 professionals and 75 students. The results of the experiment indicate that students can be used as an adequate replacement to professionals in such type of empirical studies. Statechart modeling Use case modeling Student-based experiments Professional-based experiments Enthalten in Software and systems modeling Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2002 18(2019), 6 vom: 24. Apr., Seite 3283-3329 (DE-627)356568156 (DE-600)2092265-6 (DE-576)10203768X 1619-1366 nnns volume:18 year:2019 number:6 day:24 month:04 pages:3283-3329 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-MAT GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2244 GBV_ILN_4277 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines VZ 181569876 (DE-625)181569876 AR 18 2019 6 24 04 3283-3329 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5 doi (DE-627)OLC2044249413 (DE-He213)s10270-019-00720-5-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 004 VZ 004 VZ 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines bkl El-Attar, Mohamed verfasserin aut A comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments 2019 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019 Abstract Empirical evaluations can be conducted with students or professionals as subjects. Students are much more accessible than professionals and they are inexpensive, allowing a greater number of empirical studies to be conducted. Professionals are preferred over students due to concerns regarding the external validity of student-based experiments. Professionals are believed to perform differently, most likely better than students. But with respect to evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of software engineering notations, are professionals really better? The literature has suggested that the presentation of information is just as critical as the content it conveys, hence necessitating this type of empirical studies. If professionals are not much better than students, then such important finding can be a springboard to many much-needed empirical evaluations in this field. In this paper, we report on an experiment that compare the performances of professionals and students with respect to syntactical model comprehension, which is a core factor for evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of notations. The experiment involved two groups of professionals and two student groups, totaling 74 professionals and 75 students. The results of the experiment indicate that students can be used as an adequate replacement to professionals in such type of empirical studies. Statechart modeling Use case modeling Student-based experiments Professional-based experiments Enthalten in Software and systems modeling Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2002 18(2019), 6 vom: 24. Apr., Seite 3283-3329 (DE-627)356568156 (DE-600)2092265-6 (DE-576)10203768X 1619-1366 nnns volume:18 year:2019 number:6 day:24 month:04 pages:3283-3329 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-MAT GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2244 GBV_ILN_4277 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines VZ 181569876 (DE-625)181569876 AR 18 2019 6 24 04 3283-3329 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5 doi (DE-627)OLC2044249413 (DE-He213)s10270-019-00720-5-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 004 VZ 004 VZ 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines bkl El-Attar, Mohamed verfasserin aut A comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments 2019 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019 Abstract Empirical evaluations can be conducted with students or professionals as subjects. Students are much more accessible than professionals and they are inexpensive, allowing a greater number of empirical studies to be conducted. Professionals are preferred over students due to concerns regarding the external validity of student-based experiments. Professionals are believed to perform differently, most likely better than students. But with respect to evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of software engineering notations, are professionals really better? The literature has suggested that the presentation of information is just as critical as the content it conveys, hence necessitating this type of empirical studies. If professionals are not much better than students, then such important finding can be a springboard to many much-needed empirical evaluations in this field. In this paper, we report on an experiment that compare the performances of professionals and students with respect to syntactical model comprehension, which is a core factor for evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of notations. The experiment involved two groups of professionals and two student groups, totaling 74 professionals and 75 students. The results of the experiment indicate that students can be used as an adequate replacement to professionals in such type of empirical studies. Statechart modeling Use case modeling Student-based experiments Professional-based experiments Enthalten in Software and systems modeling Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2002 18(2019), 6 vom: 24. Apr., Seite 3283-3329 (DE-627)356568156 (DE-600)2092265-6 (DE-576)10203768X 1619-1366 nnns volume:18 year:2019 number:6 day:24 month:04 pages:3283-3329 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-MAT GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2244 GBV_ILN_4277 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines VZ 181569876 (DE-625)181569876 AR 18 2019 6 24 04 3283-3329 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Software and systems modeling 18(2019), 6 vom: 24. Apr., Seite 3283-3329 volume:18 year:2019 number:6 day:24 month:04 pages:3283-3329 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Software and systems modeling 18(2019), 6 vom: 24. Apr., Seite 3283-3329 volume:18 year:2019 number:6 day:24 month:04 pages:3283-3329 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Statechart modeling Use case modeling Student-based experiments Professional-based experiments |
| dewey-raw |
004 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Software and systems modeling |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
El-Attar, Mohamed @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2019-04-24T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
356568156 |
| dewey-sort |
14 |
| id |
OLC2044249413 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2044249413</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230502181522.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200820s2019 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2044249413</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)s10270-019-00720-5-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">004</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">004</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">El-Attar, Mohamed</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">A comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Empirical evaluations can be conducted with students or professionals as subjects. Students are much more accessible than professionals and they are inexpensive, allowing a greater number of empirical studies to be conducted. Professionals are preferred over students due to concerns regarding the external validity of student-based experiments. Professionals are believed to perform differently, most likely better than students. But with respect to evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of software engineering notations, are professionals really better? The literature has suggested that the presentation of information is just as critical as the content it conveys, hence necessitating this type of empirical studies. If professionals are not much better than students, then such important finding can be a springboard to many much-needed empirical evaluations in this field. In this paper, we report on an experiment that compare the performances of professionals and students with respect to syntactical model comprehension, which is a core factor for evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of notations. The experiment involved two groups of professionals and two student groups, totaling 74 professionals and 75 students. The results of the experiment indicate that students can be used as an adequate replacement to professionals in such type of empirical studies.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Statechart modeling</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Use case modeling</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Student-based experiments</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Professional-based experiments</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Software and systems modeling</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2002</subfield><subfield code="g">18(2019), 6 vom: 24. Apr., Seite 3283-3329</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)356568156</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2092265-6</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)10203768X</subfield><subfield code="x">1619-1366</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:18</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2019</subfield><subfield code="g">number:6</subfield><subfield code="g">day:24</subfield><subfield code="g">month:04</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:3283-3329</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-MAT</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2244</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4277</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield><subfield code="0">181569876</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)181569876</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">18</subfield><subfield code="j">2019</subfield><subfield code="e">6</subfield><subfield code="b">24</subfield><subfield code="c">04</subfield><subfield code="h">3283-3329</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
El-Attar, Mohamed |
| spellingShingle |
El-Attar, Mohamed ddc 004 bkl 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines misc Statechart modeling misc Use case modeling misc Student-based experiments misc Professional-based experiments A comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments |
| authorStr |
El-Attar, Mohamed |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)356568156 |
| format |
Article |
| dewey-ones |
004 - Data processing & computer science |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut |
| collection |
OLC |
| remote_str |
false |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1619-1366 |
| topic_title |
004 VZ 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines bkl A comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments Statechart modeling Use case modeling Student-based experiments Professional-based experiments |
| topic |
ddc 004 bkl 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines misc Statechart modeling misc Use case modeling misc Student-based experiments misc Professional-based experiments |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 004 bkl 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines misc Statechart modeling misc Use case modeling misc Student-based experiments misc Professional-based experiments |
| topic_browse |
ddc 004 bkl 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines misc Statechart modeling misc Use case modeling misc Student-based experiments misc Professional-based experiments |
| format_facet |
Aufsätze Gedruckte Aufsätze |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
nc |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Software and systems modeling |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
356568156 |
| dewey-tens |
000 - Computer science, knowledge & systems |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Software and systems modeling |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)356568156 (DE-600)2092265-6 (DE-576)10203768X |
| title |
A comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)OLC2044249413 (DE-He213)s10270-019-00720-5-p |
| title_full |
A comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments |
| author_sort |
El-Attar, Mohamed |
| journal |
Software and systems modeling |
| journalStr |
Software and systems modeling |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
000 - Computer science, information & general works |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2019 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
3283 |
| author_browse |
El-Attar, Mohamed |
| container_volume |
18 |
| class |
004 VZ 54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines bkl |
| format_se |
Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
El-Attar, Mohamed |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5 |
| normlink |
181569876 |
| normlink_prefix_str_mv |
181569876 (DE-625)181569876 |
| dewey-full |
004 |
| title_sort |
a comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments |
| title_auth |
A comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments |
| abstract |
Abstract Empirical evaluations can be conducted with students or professionals as subjects. Students are much more accessible than professionals and they are inexpensive, allowing a greater number of empirical studies to be conducted. Professionals are preferred over students due to concerns regarding the external validity of student-based experiments. Professionals are believed to perform differently, most likely better than students. But with respect to evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of software engineering notations, are professionals really better? The literature has suggested that the presentation of information is just as critical as the content it conveys, hence necessitating this type of empirical studies. If professionals are not much better than students, then such important finding can be a springboard to many much-needed empirical evaluations in this field. In this paper, we report on an experiment that compare the performances of professionals and students with respect to syntactical model comprehension, which is a core factor for evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of notations. The experiment involved two groups of professionals and two student groups, totaling 74 professionals and 75 students. The results of the experiment indicate that students can be used as an adequate replacement to professionals in such type of empirical studies. © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019 |
| abstractGer |
Abstract Empirical evaluations can be conducted with students or professionals as subjects. Students are much more accessible than professionals and they are inexpensive, allowing a greater number of empirical studies to be conducted. Professionals are preferred over students due to concerns regarding the external validity of student-based experiments. Professionals are believed to perform differently, most likely better than students. But with respect to evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of software engineering notations, are professionals really better? The literature has suggested that the presentation of information is just as critical as the content it conveys, hence necessitating this type of empirical studies. If professionals are not much better than students, then such important finding can be a springboard to many much-needed empirical evaluations in this field. In this paper, we report on an experiment that compare the performances of professionals and students with respect to syntactical model comprehension, which is a core factor for evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of notations. The experiment involved two groups of professionals and two student groups, totaling 74 professionals and 75 students. The results of the experiment indicate that students can be used as an adequate replacement to professionals in such type of empirical studies. © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019 |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Abstract Empirical evaluations can be conducted with students or professionals as subjects. Students are much more accessible than professionals and they are inexpensive, allowing a greater number of empirical studies to be conducted. Professionals are preferred over students due to concerns regarding the external validity of student-based experiments. Professionals are believed to perform differently, most likely better than students. But with respect to evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of software engineering notations, are professionals really better? The literature has suggested that the presentation of information is just as critical as the content it conveys, hence necessitating this type of empirical studies. If professionals are not much better than students, then such important finding can be a springboard to many much-needed empirical evaluations in this field. In this paper, we report on an experiment that compare the performances of professionals and students with respect to syntactical model comprehension, which is a core factor for evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of notations. The experiment involved two groups of professionals and two student groups, totaling 74 professionals and 75 students. The results of the experiment indicate that students can be used as an adequate replacement to professionals in such type of empirical studies. © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019 |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-MAT GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2244 GBV_ILN_4277 |
| container_issue |
6 |
| title_short |
A comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5 |
| remote_bool |
false |
| ppnlink |
356568156 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
n |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5 |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T22:47:42.745Z |
| _version_ |
1803599859151798272 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2044249413</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230502181522.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200820s2019 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2044249413</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)s10270-019-00720-5-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">004</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">004</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">El-Attar, Mohamed</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">A comparative study of students and professionals in syntactical model comprehension experiments</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Empirical evaluations can be conducted with students or professionals as subjects. Students are much more accessible than professionals and they are inexpensive, allowing a greater number of empirical studies to be conducted. Professionals are preferred over students due to concerns regarding the external validity of student-based experiments. Professionals are believed to perform differently, most likely better than students. But with respect to evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of software engineering notations, are professionals really better? The literature has suggested that the presentation of information is just as critical as the content it conveys, hence necessitating this type of empirical studies. If professionals are not much better than students, then such important finding can be a springboard to many much-needed empirical evaluations in this field. In this paper, we report on an experiment that compare the performances of professionals and students with respect to syntactical model comprehension, which is a core factor for evaluating the cognitive effectiveness of notations. The experiment involved two groups of professionals and two student groups, totaling 74 professionals and 75 students. The results of the experiment indicate that students can be used as an adequate replacement to professionals in such type of empirical studies.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Statechart modeling</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Use case modeling</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Student-based experiments</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Professional-based experiments</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Software and systems modeling</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2002</subfield><subfield code="g">18(2019), 6 vom: 24. Apr., Seite 3283-3329</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)356568156</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2092265-6</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)10203768X</subfield><subfield code="x">1619-1366</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:18</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2019</subfield><subfield code="g">number:6</subfield><subfield code="g">day:24</subfield><subfield code="g">month:04</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:3283-3329</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-019-00720-5</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-MAT</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2244</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4277</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">54.50$jProgrammierung: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield><subfield code="0">181569876</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)181569876</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">18</subfield><subfield code="j">2019</subfield><subfield code="e">6</subfield><subfield code="b">24</subfield><subfield code="c">04</subfield><subfield code="h">3283-3329</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.399351 |