Theoretical and practical issues in evaluating the quality of conceptual models: current state and future directions

By Daniel Laurence Moody. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 2005

550 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Information Systems, Management Information Systems, Management Science and Operations Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/cb41322370ea56ae5e73e7f90b70cc4bb6499ef9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Information Systems

1. J. Recker
2. Hajo Alexander Reijers
3. Jan Mendling
4. Wil M.P. van der Aalst
5. Michael Rosemann
6. Marta Indulska
7. Jorge S. Cardoso
8. Peter F. Green

In Management Information Systems

1. J. Recker
2. Hajo Alexander Reijers
3. Wil M.P. van der Aalst
4. Jan Mendling
5. Marta Indulska
6. Michael Rosemann
7. Peter F. Green
8. Jorge S. Cardoso

In Management Science and Operations Research

1. Wil M.P. van der Aalst
2. Jorge S. Cardoso
3. Hajo Alexander Reijers
4. J. Recker
5. Jan Mendling
6. Wil van der Aalst
7. Bernd Weber
8. Manfred Reichert

Citations in the corpus

• What Makes Process Models Understandable? (2007, methodology): “Since only little research has been conducted on quality aspects of process models so far [3], we approach this area with an experimental design focusing on the understandability of process models (not of process modeling languages).”
• Seven process modeling guidelines (7PMG) (2010, methodology): “[14]) advocating a specification of a quality framework for conceptual modeling in compliance with the ISO 9126 standard [25] for software quality.”
• Business Process Modeling- A Comparative Analysis (2009, background): “Hence, there is a need for a theoretical framework to facilitate these explanations (Phalp, 1998; Moody, 2005).”