Amine Abbad-Andaloussi, Marco Franceschetti, Hugo A López, Clemens Schreiber, Barbara Weber
{"title":"When a model gives you mixed signals: cognitive effects and visual behavior.","authors":"Amine Abbad-Andaloussi, Marco Franceschetti, Hugo A López, Clemens Schreiber, Barbara Weber","doi":"10.1007/s44311-025-00022-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":520481,"journal":{"name":"Process science","volume":"2 1","pages":"19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12500769/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Process science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s44311-025-00022-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/10/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
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.