@INPROCEEDINGS{Sharafi13-ICPC-EfficiencyTextvsGraph,
   AUTHOR       = {Zohreh Sharafi and Alessandro Marchetto and Angelo Susi and 
      Giuliano Antoniol and Yann-Ga�l Gu�h�neuc},
   BOOKTITLE    = {Proceedings of the 21<sup>st</sup> International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC)},
   TITLE        = {An Empirical Study on the Efficiency of Graphical vs. 
      Textual Representations in Requirements Comprehension},
   YEAR         = {2013},
   OPTADDRESS   = {},
   OPTCROSSREF  = {},
   EDITOR       = {Denys Poshyvanyk and Di Penta, Massimiliano},
   MONTH        = {May},
   NOTE         = {10 pages.},
   OPTNUMBER    = {},
   OPTORGANIZATION = {},
   OPTPAGES     = {},
   PUBLISHER    = {IEEE CS Press},
   OPTSERIES    = {},
   OPTVOLUME    = {},
   KEYWORDS     = {Topic: <b>Program comprehension</b>, Venue: <c>ICPC</c>},
   URL          = {http://www.ptidej.net/publications/documents/ICPC13.doc.pdf},
   PDF          = {http://www.ptidej.net/publications/documents/ICPC13.ppt.pdf},
   ABSTRACT     = {Graphical representations are used to visualise, 
      specify, and document software artifacts in all stages of software 
      development process. In contrast with text, graphical representations 
      are presented in two-dimensional form, which seems easy to process. 
      However, few empirical studies investigated the efficiency of 
      graphical representations vs.\ textual ones in modelling and 
      presenting software requirements. Therefore, in this paper, we report 
      the results of an eye-tracking experiment involving 28 participants 
      to study the impact of structured textual vs.\ graphical 
      representations on subjects' efficiency while performing requirement 
      comprehension tasks. We measure subjects' efficiency in terms of the 
      percentage of correct answers (accuracy) and of the time and effort 
      spend to perform the tasks. We observe no statistically-significant 
      difference in term of accuracy. However, our subjects spent more time 
      and effort while working with the graphical representation although 
      this extra time and effort does not affect accuracy. Our findings 
      challenge the general assumption that graphical representations are 
      more efficient than the textual ones at least in the case of 
      developers not familiar with the graphical representation. Indeed, 
      our results emphasise that training can significantly improve the 
      efficiency of our subjects working with graphical representations. 
      Moreover, by comparing the visual paths of our subjects, we observe 
      that the spatial structure of the graphical representation leads our 
      subjects to follow two different strategies (top-down vs.\ bottomup) 
      and subsequently this hierarchical structure helps developers to ease 
      the difficulty of model comprehension tasks.}
}

{"_id":"LRqxehnvM4oqAw5gD","bibbaseid":"sharafi-marchetto-susi-antoniol-guhneuc-anempiricalstudyontheefficiencyofgraphicalvstextualrepresentationsinrequirementscomprehension-2013","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2018-01-17T20:29:42.343Z","title":"An Empirical Study on the Efficiency of Graphical vs. Textual Representations in Requirements Comprehension","author_short":["Sharafi, Z.","Marchetto, A.","Susi, A.","Antoniol, G.","Gu�h�neuc, Y."],"year":2013,"bibtype":"inproceedings","biburl":"http://www.yann-gael.gueheneuc.net/Work/Publications/Biblio/complete-bibliography.bib","bibdata":{"bibtype":"inproceedings","type":"inproceedings","author":[{"firstnames":["Zohreh"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Sharafi"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Alessandro"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Marchetto"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Angelo"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Susi"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Giuliano"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Antoniol"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Yann-Ga�l"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Gu�h�neuc"],"suffixes":[]}],"booktitle":"Proceedings of the 21^st International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC)","title":"An Empirical Study on the Efficiency of Graphical vs. Textual Representations in Requirements Comprehension","year":"2013","optaddress":"","optcrossref":"","editor":[{"firstnames":["Denys"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Poshyvanyk"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Di","Penta"],"firstnames":["Massimiliano"],"suffixes":[]}],"month":"May","note":"10 pages.","optnumber":"","optorganization":"","optpages":"","publisher":"IEEE CS Press","optseries":"","optvolume":"","keywords":"Topic: <b>Program comprehension</b>, Venue: <c>ICPC</c>","url":"http://www.ptidej.net/publications/documents/ICPC13.doc.pdf","pdf":"http://www.ptidej.net/publications/documents/ICPC13.ppt.pdf","abstract":"Graphical representations are used to visualise, specify, and document software artifacts in all stages of software development process. In contrast with text, graphical representations are presented in two-dimensional form, which seems easy to process. However, few empirical studies investigated the efficiency of graphical representations vs.\\ textual ones in modelling and presenting software requirements. Therefore, in this paper, we report the results of an eye-tracking experiment involving 28 participants to study the impact of structured textual vs.\\ graphical representations on subjects' efficiency while performing requirement comprehension tasks. We measure subjects' efficiency in terms of the percentage of correct answers (accuracy) and of the time and effort spend to perform the tasks. We observe no statistically-significant difference in term of accuracy. However, our subjects spent more time and effort while working with the graphical representation although this extra time and effort does not affect accuracy. Our findings challenge the general assumption that graphical representations are more efficient than the textual ones at least in the case of developers not familiar with the graphical representation. Indeed, our results emphasise that training can significantly improve the efficiency of our subjects working with graphical representations. Moreover, by comparing the visual paths of our subjects, we observe that the spatial structure of the graphical representation leads our subjects to follow two different strategies (top-down vs.\\ bottomup) and subsequently this hierarchical structure helps developers to ease the difficulty of model comprehension tasks.","bibtex":"@INPROCEEDINGS{Sharafi13-ICPC-EfficiencyTextvsGraph,\r\n AUTHOR = {Zohreh Sharafi and Alessandro Marchetto and Angelo Susi and \r\n Giuliano Antoniol and Yann-Ga�l Gu�h�neuc},\r\n BOOKTITLE = {Proceedings of the 21^st International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC)},\r\n TITLE = {An Empirical Study on the Efficiency of Graphical vs. \r\n Textual Representations in Requirements Comprehension},\r\n YEAR = {2013},\r\n OPTADDRESS = {},\r\n OPTCROSSREF = {},\r\n EDITOR = {Denys Poshyvanyk and Di Penta, Massimiliano},\r\n MONTH = {May},\r\n NOTE = {10 pages.},\r\n OPTNUMBER = {},\r\n OPTORGANIZATION = {},\r\n OPTPAGES = {},\r\n PUBLISHER = {IEEE CS Press},\r\n OPTSERIES = {},\r\n OPTVOLUME = {},\r\n KEYWORDS = {Topic: <b>Program comprehension</b>, Venue: <c>ICPC</c>},\r\n URL = {http://www.ptidej.net/publications/documents/ICPC13.doc.pdf},\r\n PDF = {http://www.ptidej.net/publications/documents/ICPC13.ppt.pdf},\r\n ABSTRACT = {Graphical representations are used to visualise, \r\n specify, and document software artifacts in all stages of software \r\n development process. In contrast with text, graphical representations \r\n are presented in two-dimensional form, which seems easy to process. \r\n However, few empirical studies investigated the efficiency of \r\n graphical representations vs.\\ textual ones in modelling and \r\n presenting software requirements. Therefore, in this paper, we report \r\n the results of an eye-tracking experiment involving 28 participants \r\n to study the impact of structured textual vs.\\ graphical \r\n representations on subjects' efficiency while performing requirement \r\n comprehension tasks. We measure subjects' efficiency in terms of the \r\n percentage of correct answers (accuracy) and of the time and effort \r\n spend to perform the tasks. We observe no statistically-significant \r\n difference in term of accuracy. However, our subjects spent more time \r\n and effort while working with the graphical representation although \r\n this extra time and effort does not affect accuracy. Our findings \r\n challenge the general assumption that graphical representations are \r\n more efficient than the textual ones at least in the case of \r\n developers not familiar with the graphical representation. Indeed, \r\n our results emphasise that training can significantly improve the \r\n efficiency of our subjects working with graphical representations. \r\n Moreover, by comparing the visual paths of our subjects, we observe \r\n that the spatial structure of the graphical representation leads our \r\n subjects to follow two different strategies (top-down vs.\\ bottomup) \r\n and subsequently this hierarchical structure helps developers to ease \r\n the difficulty of model comprehension tasks.}\r\n}\r\n\r\n","author_short":["Sharafi, Z.","Marchetto, A.","Susi, A.","Antoniol, G.","Gu�h�neuc, Y."],"editor_short":["Poshyvanyk, D.","Di Penta, M."],"key":"Sharafi13-ICPC-EfficiencyTextvsGraph","id":"Sharafi13-ICPC-EfficiencyTextvsGraph","bibbaseid":"sharafi-marchetto-susi-antoniol-guhneuc-anempiricalstudyontheefficiencyofgraphicalvstextualrepresentationsinrequirementscomprehension-2013","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"http://www.ptidej.net/publications/documents/ICPC13.doc.pdf"},"keyword":["Topic: <b>Program comprehension</b>","Venue: <c>ICPC</c>"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{"gu�h�neuc, y":"https://bibbase.org/show?bib=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.yann-gael.gueheneuc.net%2FWork%2FPublications%2FBiblio%2Fcomplete-bibliography.bib&msg=embed"}}},"search_terms":["empirical","study","efficiency","graphical","textual","representations","requirements","comprehension","sharafi","marchetto","susi","antoniol","gu�h�neuc"],"keywords":["topic: <b>program comprehension</b>","venue: <c>icpc</c>"],"authorIDs":["AfJhKcg96muyPdu7S"],"dataSources":["8vn5MSGYWB4fAx9Z4","Sed98LbBeGaXxenrM"]}