Research Commentary: Information Systems and Conceptual Modeling—A Research Agenda

References

• Agarwal R., De P., Sinha A. P. Comprehending object and process models: An empirical study. IEEE Trans. Software Engrg. (1999) 25(4):541–556Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R., Sinha A., Tanniru M. Cognitive fit in requirements engineering: A study of object and process models. J. Management Inform. Systems (1996) 13(2):137–162Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson J. R.The Architecture of Cognition (1983) (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Anderson J. R.Learning and Memory: An Integrated Approach (1995) (Wiley, New York) Google Scholar
• Artale A., Franconi E., Guarino N., Pazzi L. Part-whole relations in object-centered systems: An overview. Data & Knowledge Engrg (1996) 20:347–383Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ashenhurst R. L. Ontological aspects of information modeling. Minds and Machines (1996) 6:287–394Crossref, Google Scholar
• Auramaki E., Lehtinen E., Lyytinen K. A speech-act-based office modeling approach. ACM Trans. Office Inform. Systems (1988) 6(2):126–152Crossref, Google Scholar
• Basu A., Blanning R. W. A formal approach to workflow analysis. Inform. Systems Res. (2000) 11(1):17–36Link, Google Scholar
• Batra D., Davis J. G. Conceptual data modeling in database design: Similarities and differences between expert and novice designers. Internat. J. Man-Machine Stud. (1992) 37:83–101Crossref, Google Scholar
• Batra D., Marakas G. M. Conceptual data modeling in theory and practice. Euro. J. Inform. Systems (1995) 4:185–193Crossref, Google Scholar
• Batra D., Hoffer J. A., Bostrom R. P. Comparing representations with relational and EER models. Comm. ACM (1990) 33:126–139Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bodart F., Patel A., Sim M., Weber R. Should optional properties be used in conceptual modeling? A theory and three empirical tests. Inform. Systems Res. (2001) 12(4Link, Google Scholar
• Brosey M., Schneiderman B. Two experimental comparisons of relational and hierarchical database models. Internat. J. Man-Machine Stud. (1978) 10:625–637Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bunge M.Treatise on Basic Philosophy: Volume 3: Ontology I: The Furniture of the World (1977) (Reidel, Boston, MA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burrell G., Morgan G.Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis: Elements of the Sociology of Corporate Life (1979) (Heinemann, London, U.K.) Google Scholar
• Checkland P.Systems Thinking Systems Practice (1981) (Wiley, Chich-ester, U.K.) Google Scholar
• Chen P. P. S. The entity-relationship model: Toward a unified view of data. ACM Trans. Database Systems (1976) 1(1):9–36Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chisholm R. M.A Realistic Theory of Categories—An Essay on Ontology (1996) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.) Google Scholar
• Curtis B., Kellner M. I., Over J. Process modeling. Comm. ACM (1992) 35(9):75–90Crossref, Google Scholar
• Doyle K. G., Wood J. R. G., Wood-Harper A. T. Soft systems and systems engineering: On the use of conceptual models in information systems development. J. Inform. Systems (1993) 3(3):187–198Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dunn C., Grabski S. The effect of field dependence on conceptual modeling performance. Adv. Accounting Inform. Systems (1998) 6:65–77Google Scholar
• Evermann J., Wand Y. Towards ontologically based semantics for UML constructs. Proc. Internat. Conf. Conceptual Modeling (ER) (2001) (Yokohama, Japan) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Floyd C., Olle T. W., Sol H. G., Verrijn-Stuart A. A. A comparative evaluation of system development methods. Information System Design Methodologies: Improving the Practice (1986) (North-Holland, Amsterdam) 19–54Google Scholar
• Gemino A. Empirical methods for comparing system analysis modeling techniques. (1999) (The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada) . Ph.D. thesisGoogle Scholar
• Gemino A., Wand Y. Comparing object oriented with structured analysis techniques in conceptual modeling. (2001) . Working paper 99-MIS-01, Faculty of Commerce and Business Administration, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, CanadaGoogle Scholar
• Gentner D., Stevens A. L.Mental Models (1987) (Erblaum, Hills-dale, NJ) Google Scholar
• Goldstein R. C., Storey V., Lochovsky F. H. Some findings on the intuitiveness of entity-relationship constructs. Entity-Relationship Approach to Database Design (1990) (Elsevier Science Publishers, B. V., North Holland, Amsterdam) 9–23Google Scholar
• Green P. M. An ontological analysis of information systems analysis and design (ISAD) grammars in upper CASE tools. (1996) (The University of Queensland, Australia) . Unpublished Ph.D. thesisGoogle Scholar
• Green P. M., Rosemann M. Integrated process modeling: An ontological evaluation. Inform. Sys. (2000) 25(2):73–87Crossref, Google Scholar
• Halpin T. A.Conceptual Schema and Relational Database Design: A Fact Oriented Approach (1995) 2nd ed.(Prentice-Hall Sydney, Australia) Google Scholar
• Hirschheim R., Klein H., Lyytinen K.Information Systems Development and Data Modeling: Conceptual Foundations and Philosophical Foundations (1995) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hitchman S. Practitioner perceptions of the use of some semantic concepts in the entity-relationship model. Euro. J. Inform. Systems (1995) 4:31–40Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hutchins E. L., Hollan J. D., Norman D. A. Direct manipulation interfaces. Human-Comput. Interaction (1985) 1:311–338Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jarvenpaa S. L., Machesky J. J. Data analysis and learning: An experimental study of data modeling tools. Internat. J. Man-Machine Stud. (1989) 31:367–391Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kesh S. Evaluating the quality of entity-relationship models. Inform. Software Tech. (1995) 37(12):681–689Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim J., Hahn J., Hahn H. How do we understand a system with (so) many diagrams? Cognitive integration processes in diagrammatic reasoning. Inform. Systems Res. (2000) 11(3):284–303Link, Google Scholar
• Kim Y. G., March S. Comparing data modeling formalisms. Comm. ACM (1995) 38(4):103–115Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kung C. H., Solvberg A., Olle T. W., Sol H. G., Verrijn-Stuart A. A. Activity modeling and behaviour modeling. Information System Design Methodologies: Improving the Practice (1986) (North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands)145–171Google Scholar
• Larkin J., Simon H. A. When a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Sci (1987) 11(1):65–99Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lindland O. I., Sindre G., Sølvberg A. Understanding quality in conceptual modeling. IEEE Software (1994) 11(2):42–49Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maier R. Benefits and quality of data modeling—Results of an empirical analysis. Proc. 15th Internat. Conf. Entity-Relationship Approach (1996) (Cottbus, Germany) 245–260Google Scholar
• Mayer R. E. Models for understanding. Rev. Educational Res. (1989) 59:43–64Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mayer R. E., Gallini J. K. When is an illustration worth a thousand words? J. Educational Psych. (1990) 82:715–726Crossref, Google Scholar
• Milton S., Kazmierczak E., Dampney C. N. G. Enriching the ontological foundations of modeling in information systems. Proc. Inform. Systems Foundations Workshop—Ontology, Semiotics and Practice 1999 (1999) (Department of Computing, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia) 55–65Google Scholar
• Moody D. L. Metrics for evaluating the quality of entity relationship models. (1998) Proc. 17th Internat. Conf. Conceptual ModelingSingaporeCrossref, Google Scholar
• Moody D. L., Shanks G. Improving the quality of entity-relationship models: An action research programme. Australian Computer J (1998) 30:129–138Google Scholar
• Mylopoulos J. Information modeling in the time of the revolution. Inform. Systems (1998) 23:127–155Crossref, Google Scholar
• Newell A., Simon H. A.Human Problem Solving (1972) (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ) Google Scholar
• Nissen H.-E., Klein H. K., Hirschheim R.Information Systems Research: Contemporary Approaches and Emergent Traditions (1991) (North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands) Google Scholar
• Norman D., Norman D., Draper S. Cognitive engineering. User Centered Design: New Perspectives on Human Computer Interaction (1986) (Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ) 31–61Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oei J. L. H., van Hemmen L. J. G. T., Falkenberg E., Brinkkemper S. The meta model hierarchy: A framework for information systems concepts and techniques. (1982) . Technical Report No.92-17 Department of Information Systems, University of Nijmegen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
• Olle T. W., Sol H. G., Tully C. J.Information System Design Methodologies: A Feature Analysis (1983) (North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands) Google Scholar
• Olle T. W., Sol H. G., Verrijn-Stuart A. A.Information System Design Methodologies: A Comparative Review (1982) (North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands) Google Scholar
• Olle T. W., Sol H. G., Verrijn-Stuar A. A.Information System Design Methodologies: Improving the Practice (1986) (North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands) Google Scholar
• Opdahl A., Henderson-Sellers B. Evaluating and improving OO modeling languages using the BWW-model. Proc. Inform. Systems Foundations Workshop—Ontology, Semiotics and Practice 1999 (1999) (Department of Computing, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia) 31–38Google Scholar
• Opdahl A., Henderson-Sellers B., Barbier F. Ontological analysis of whole-part relationships in OO-models. Inform. Software Tech. (2001) 43:387–399Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parsons J. An information model based on classification theory. Management Sci (1996) 42(10):1437–1453Link, Google Scholar
• Paulson D., Wand Y. An automated approach to information systems decomposition. IEEE Trans. Software Engrg. (1992) 18:174–189Crossref, Google Scholar
• Prietula M. J., March S. T. Form and substance in physical database design: An empirical study. Inform. Systems Res. (1991) 2:287–314Link, Google Scholar
• Scheer A.-W.Business Process Frameworks (1999) 2nd ed.(Springer, Berlin, Germany) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Searle J.Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language (1969) (Cambridge University Press, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shanks G. Conceptual data modeling: An empirical study of expert and novice data modelers. Australian J. Inform. Systems (1997) 4(2):63–73Google Scholar
• Siau K.Empirical studies in information modeling: Interpretation of the object relationship (1996) (The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada) . Unpublished Ph.D. thesisGoogle Scholar
• Siau K., Wand Y., Benbasat I., Iiv-ari J., Lyytinen K., Rossi M. A psychological study on the use of the relationship concept—Some preliminary findings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science—Advanced Information Systems Engineering (1995) 932(Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany) 341–354Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siau K., Wand Y., Benbasat I. The relative importance of structural constraints and surface semantics in information modeling. Inform. Systems (1997) 22(2–3):155–170Crossref, Google Scholar
• Soffer P., Golany B., Dori D., Wand Y. Modeling off-the-shelf information systems requirements: An ontological approach. Requirements Engrg (2001) 6:183–199Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sowa J. F.Knowledge Representation: Logical Philosophical, and Computational Foundations (1999) (Brooks/Cole, Pacific Grove, CA) Google Scholar
• Stamper R., Bolland R. J., Hirschheim R. A. Semantics. Critical Issues in Information Systems Research (1987) (John Wiley and Sons, New York) 43–78Google Scholar
• Standish Group (1995) . “Chaos.” Report on Information System Development. <www.standishgroup.com/chaos.html> [version of July 1996]Google Scholar
• Storey V. Meronymic relationships. J. Database Admin. (1991) 2(3):22–35Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sutcliffe A. G., Maiden N. A. M. Analysing the novice analyst: Cognitive models in software engineering. Internat. J. Man-Machine Stud. (1992) 36:719–740Crossref, Google Scholar
• Teorey T. J., Yang D., Fry J. P. A logical design methodology for relational databases using the extended entity-relationship model. ACM Comput. Surveys (1986) 18(2):197–222Crossref, Google Scholar
• van der Aalst W. M. P., ter Hofstede A. H. M., Kiepuszewski B., Barros A. P. Workflow patterns. (2000) . Unpublished paper, < www.tm.tue.nl/it/research/patterns/>Google Scholar
• Varzi A. C. Parts wholes, and part-whole relations: The prospects of mereotopology. Data & Knowledge Engrg (1996) 20:259–286Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vessey I. Cognitive fit: A theory-based analysis of the graphs versus tables literature. Decision Sci (1991) 22(2):219–240Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vessey I., Conger S. Requirements specification: Learning object, process, and data methodologies. Comm. ACM (1994) 37(5):102–113Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wand Y., Weber R. On the ontological expressiveness of information systems analysis and design grammars. J. Inform. Systems (1993) 3:217–237Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wand Y., Weber R. On the deep structure of information systems. Inform. Systems J. (1995) 5:203–223Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wand Y., Woo C. Object oriented analysis—Is it really that simple? (1993) Proc. Workshop on Inform. Technologies and SystemsOrlando, FL:186–195Google Scholar
• Wand Y., Storey V., Weber R. An ontological analysis of the relationship construct in conceptual modeling. ACM Trans. Database Systems (1999) 24:494–528Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wand Y., Monarchi D. E., Parsons J., Woo C. C. Theoretical foundations for conceptual modeling in information systems development. Decision Support Systems (1995) 15:285–304Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weber R. Are attributes entities? A study of database designers' memory structures. Inform. Systems Res. (1996) 7:137–162Link, Google Scholar
• Weber R.Ontological Foundations of Information Systems (1997) (Coopers Ω Lybrand, Melbourne, Australia) Google Scholar
• Wimmer K., Wimmer N. Conceptual modeling based on on-tological principles. Knowledge Acquisition (1992) 4:387–406Crossref, Google Scholar
• Winograd T., Flores F.Understanding Computers and Cognition: A New Foundation for Design (1987) (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA) Google Scholar
• Winston M. E., Chaffin R., Herrman D. A taxonomy of part-whole relations. Cognitive Sci (1987) 11:417–444Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yadav S., Bravoco R., Chatfield A., Rajkumar T. Comparison of analysis techniques for information requirements determination. Comm. ACM (1988) 31(9):1090–1097Crossref, Google Scholar