Cognitive dimensions: Achievements, new directions, and open questions

Abstract

The Cognitive Dimensions framework has inspired research both more and less varied than expected. In this paper we revisit the original aims and briefly describe some subsequent research, to consider whether the original aims were too austere in rejecting knowledge-based dimensions; whether the dimensions can be shown to have real-world relevance; and whether their definitions can be improved, either piecemeal or by refactoring the entire set. We mention some issues that remain unexplored, and conclude by describing two different ventures into defining clear procedures for real-life application, operating in very different milieux but both accepting that the framework should be developed from its original formulation.

Obstacles and opportunities with using visual and domain-specific languages in scientific programming

“…Aside from indirect coupling, understanding data complexity might also be difficult when directly-coupled pieces of code or data are scattered across multiple files that cannot be juxtaposed on the same screen. Visual languages are well-known to be highly diffuse, making it difficult to squeeze large programs onto a single screen and interfering with programmers' ability to mentally process algorithmic complexity [7][15]; our results suggest that the diffuseness of DSLs, particularly visual DSLs, also might interfere with scientists' ability to process data complexity.…”

A scientific evaluation of the misuse case diagrams visual syntax

“…Hence, users of the CDs can only apply it in a subjective manner [21,11]. The CDs are based solely on structural properties and hence they exclude visual representation issues [4].…”

An Experimental Study on the Design and Modeling of Security Concepts in Business Processes

“…For example, the Physics of Notations in [17] consists of nine principles to design visual notations effectively. Further language evaluation frameworks include the cognitive dimensions of notations [19,20] that provide a set of dimensions to assist designers of visual notations to evaluate these designs. A framework for evaluating the quality of conceptual models is presented in [21].…”