Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

When a model gives you mixed signals: cognitive effects and visual behavior

  • Amine Abbad-Andaloussi*
  • , Marco Franceschetti
  • , Hugo A López
  • , Clemens Schreiber
  • , Barbara Weber
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • University of St. Gallen
  • Karlsruhe Institute of Technology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

17 Downloads (Orbit)

Abstract

Ambiguity in business process models can result in multiple interpretations by model readers. This leads to undesirable outcomes such as misunderstandings, unclear allocation of responsibilities, and unexpected behaviors. Despite these potential consequences, the impact of ambiguity on model readers has received limited attention so far. This article presents an eye-tracking study designed to investigate the effects of various types of ambiguity (i.e., layout, semantic, syntactic, and lexical)
on readers’ cognitive load, comprehension, and visual associations while interpreting process models. In addition, the study delves into the behaviors of model readers when resolving ambiguity in process models. These behaviors are investigated following a qualitative approach combining both eye-tracking and think-aloud data. The results demonstrate that ambiguities significantly influence cognitive load, comprehension, and visual associations, emphasizing the negative effects of ambiguity. Moreover, the qualitative insights suggest that participants exhibit specific behaviors when trying to resolve ambiguities. These findings underscore the need for advanced mechanisms to detect and mitigate ambiguity in process models.
Original languageEnglish
Article number19
JournalProcess Science
Volume2
Number of pages38
ISSN2948-2178
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2025

Keywords

  • Ambiguity
  • Cognitive load
  • Eye-tracking
  • Process models
  • Visual behavior

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'When a model gives you mixed signals: cognitive effects and visual behavior'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this