A Research Agenda on Visualizations

in Information Systems Engineering

Jens Gulden

, Dirk van der Linden

and Banu Aysolmaz

University of Duisburg-Essen, Information Systems and Enterprise Modeling Group,

Universit

atsstr. 9, 45141 Essen, Germany

University of Haifa, Department of Information Systems, Mount Carmel, Haifa 31905, Israel

VU University Amsterdam, Business Informatics Group, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Keywords:

Research Agenda, Visualization, Information Systems, Requirements, Human-Computer-Interaction, Cogni-

tive Effectiveness.

Abstract:

Effectively using visualizations in socio-technical artifacts like information systems and software yields a

number of challenges, such as ensuring that they allow for all necessary information to be captured, that visu-

alizations can be efﬁciently and correctly read, and perhaps most important: that communication is fostered,

leading rather to a shared understanding instead of misunderstandings and communication breakdowns. While

over the last years many strides have been made to propose visualizations for speciﬁc purposes (such as mod-

eling language notations, software interfaces, visual methods, and games), there has been less attention for

frameworks and guidelines meant to support the people making such visualizations. When taking a closer

look at the deﬁciencies in research on visualizations in information systems today, it turns out that especially

a deeper understanding of the mental processes behind comprehending visualizations and the way humans are

cognitively affected by visualizations, is required in order to gain advanced theoretic underpinnings for the

creation and use of visualizations in information systems. In this paper we build towards a research agenda on

visualization in information systems engineering by identifying a number of relevant requirements for research

to address, of fundamental, methodical and tool nature.

1 INTRODUCTION

Research on Information Systems (IS) and the engi-

neering thereof has enveloped a large variety of top-

ics over the past decades. Many fundamental ques-

tions on the development and usage of IS together

with analysis of data have been addressed. Due

to advancements in different domains, diversity of

IS usage in various ﬁelds and production of widely

spread complex data, new problems emerged to rep-

resent information and provide interaction with users

of IS (Mezhoudi et al., 2015). Advanced visualiza-

tion techniques are not only required due to technical

advancements such as software, devices and infras-

tructure getting more complex; but also social aspects

such as variety of user characteristics, diversifying us-

ages of IS in work processes and everyday life, and

change of style in using IS such as multiple work-

ing environments and mobile devices (Vanderdonckt,

2005). The availability of vast information makes it

hard to navigate through and grasp an understanding

of interrelations between data (Rouet et al., 2005).

An example of coherency problems between dif-

ferent visual perspectives is shown in Fig. 1. Here

although vast amount of information is visualized in

various dashboards, it is hard for the user to estab-

lish the interrelations between the analysis screen and

navigate through the screens in a structured way. In

addition to variety of visualizations in operational

phase of IS, usage of diagrammatic visualizations to

elicit and communicate requirements, design and de-

velop the system has become a de-facto standard in

pre-operational phase (Stahl et al., 2006). Thus, we

observe a growing need for systematic and scientiﬁc

methods to support the design of visualizations in IS

in all phases of IS.

To address this issue and identify opportunities

for research to contribute to the maturity of visual-

izations used in IS engineering, in the remainder of

this paper we will present a research agenda consist-

ing of a number of requirements for research on visu-

alizations, addressing aspects both on the use and de-

velopment of IS. Section 2 presents the requirements

for developing a research agenda on visualizations in

234

Gulden, J., Linden, D. and Aysolmaz, B.

A Research Agenda on Visualizations in Information Systems Engineering.

In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Software Approaches to Software Engineering (ENASE 2016), pages 234-240

ISBN: 978-989-758-189-2

Figure 1: Examples of visualizations used in contemporary

information systems

IS. Subsection 2.1 includes the requirements with re-

gard to methodological research foundations, subsec-

tion 2.2 covers requirements regarding methods for

creating and using visualizations, and lastly subsec-

tion 2.3 provides requirements towards research on

tooling support. In Section 3, we provide the conclu-

sions and outlook for a research agenda to support the

IS ﬁeld.

2 REQUIREMENTS TOWARDS A

RESEARCH AGENDA ON

VISUALIZATIONS IN IS

There are several areas that research in IS can (and

has been identiﬁed to) contribute to. Below is a non-

exhaustive list of recently argued important research

directions, all covering some aspect of requirements

on visualizations. Some of the requirements are also

relevant for other ﬁelds. They are brought to the

foreground here to point out that they lack attention

speciﬁcally in the IS ﬁeld.

We have attempted to focus on requirements that

address known unknowns and unknown unknowns,

which have hitherto received comparatively little at-

tention in conceptual modeling research (Recker,

2015), such as what effective modeling entails, how

differences between people affect (interpretation and

use of) modeling, and with regard to empirical re-

search with practitioners in the ﬁeld instead of student

experiments. As a result of this effort, we provide a

list of requirements identiﬁed based on the literature.

While the current list did not result from an (ex-

haustive) systematic literature review, in our approach

we did follow the more common starting point in in-

formation systems research of ‘snowballing’ litera-

ture through reference lists (Jalali and Wohlin, 2012)

which has been shown to be a good alternative to the

use of systematic database searches (Wohlin, 2014),

especially for new and emerging topics. Following

the guidelines for doing so appropriately (Wohlin,

2014), we focused on ﬁnding recent workshop papers

Sources: www.cleverq.com, www.inetsoft.com, own

illustrations.

proposing research agendas or directions (by search-

ing through titles and abstracts), and from there snow-

balled to other relevant literature discussing needed

research relevant to visualization in information sys-

tems engineering. While this position paper is aimed

to generate discussion and attention towards visual-

ization issues in IS engineering, we plan in further

work to incorporate a systematic literature review to

exhaustively categorize current related research agen-

das and classify ongoing research.

The literature referenced in the requirements point

out to either problems or research needs for visualiza-

tion in IS. In this study, we utilized the problem deﬁ-

nitions and needs in the literature to convert them into

categorized requirements in the following sections.

Thus this paper includes a contemporary and topical

list of related work integrated into requirement deﬁ-

nitions. There may be other factors necessary to the

establishment of well-used visualizations in IS, how-

ever, the selected requirements give an overview of

issues identiﬁed and argued for in recent literature.

The identiﬁed requirements are grouped into

the three categories “methodological foundations”,

“methods”, and “tool support”, relating to respec-

tively the level of scientiﬁc contributions that can be

expected from their fulﬁllment, as conceptualizations

on the theoretical level, with regard to elaborating

methods and procedures, or by fostering the devel-

opment of supporting artifacts.

2.1 Requirements with Regard to

Methodological Research

Foundations

We see a relatively large number of research ques-

tions open about basic conceptualizations of visual-

izations in IS engineering, which appear to stem from

the comparably narrow basis of fundamental research

on visualizations in IS so far. The most relevant are

listed in the following.

Req 1.1: Cognitive Aspects. Research on visualiza-

tions should incorporate reﬂections on how the

human mind works, and especially how the cog-

nitive apparatus of human beings processes vi-

sual impressions (Saffer, 2009; Gulden and Rei-

jers, 2015). As it has been argued that the heart

of cognitive science is the way it handles con-

cepts (Fodor, 1998) research in IS stands to beneﬁt

from deeper understandings into the fundamental

concepts that its actors use every day (cf. (van der

Linden and Proper, 2014; van der Linden et al.,

2012)). For effective comprehension of these con-

cepts, cognitive science provides the tools to de-

A Research Agenda on Visualizations in Information Systems Engineering

235

sign visualizations that facilitate better engage-

ment of users with IS (Moody, 2009).

Req 1.2: Justiﬁed Design Rationales. There is ba-

sically no design rationale for visualization

choices of notations (Moody, 2009). Proper

grounding of the design of visual languages in

existing theory, and applying scientiﬁc theories

of visualization and developments (cf. (Rensink,

2014)) to IS engineering should be aimed at

by corresponding research activities. Develop-

ment of syntactical standards for visualizations

can provide the researchers a basis to specify vi-

sual languages and a rationale for the selection of

choices (Fill, 2009).

Req 1.3: Accommodate Mental Models. The

visual notations used in conceptual modeling

should accommodate the conceptual distinctions

that people make in their own mental models (van

der Linden and Proper, 2014). To support this

requirement, it is critical that research aids in the

design notations that are understandable by end

users from their view (Caire et al., 2013).

Req 1.4: Aesthetic Relevance. Especially with re-

spect to the graphic design of visualizations, sci-

entiﬁc research must acknowledge its paradig-

matic methodological limitations, and should be

open to accept aesthetic judgments besides ratio-

nally justiﬁed design decisions as one component

of creating successful visualizations (Vande Mo-

ere and Purchase, 2011). In other words, it must

not be denied that beauty plays a signiﬁcant role

in creating and using visualizations (Cairo, 2012),

which stands beyond scientiﬁc methodical justiﬁ-

cation.

Req 1.5: Inﬂuence of Personal Factors. The re-

quirements for visual notations used in conceptual

modeling should reﬂect those of their users (van

der Linden, 2015). Personal factors are found

to have important inﬂuences on the understand-

ability of models (Reijers and Mendling, 2011),

yet are not widespread in current research on the

design and use of visual notations and should be

methodically incorporated.

Req 1.6: Eliminate Communication Restrictions.

Visualizations should be used to eliminate

communication problems and noise between

domain experts and modelers in knowledge

elicitation (Brown et al., 2014). This sociological

aspect should as well be represented in the

spectrum of research perspectives on visualiza-

tion in IS engineering, e. g., by reﬂecting on

the discursive interactions among humans who

operate with visualizations.

Req 1.7: Cover the Entire Life-cycle.

Visualization research should cover the en-

tire life-cycle from gathering information,

conceptualizing topologies and structures for

visualizations (Cairo, 2012), graphic design

for rendering appearances of visualizations, the

development of software to display visualiza-

tions and provide interactivity, and the practical

application of visualizations in various contexts.

Req 1.8: Distinguish Different Tasks and Pur

poses. Different

notations and styles for visualizations are used,

ranging from very structured formal represen-

tations (cf. (Van Zee et al., 2014)) to simple

diagrammatic forms and realistic symbolisms.

Depending on the modeling task at hand, different

ways of visualizing information may be more

appropriate (Figl and Recker, 2014). Research

should examine dialectal variations of a visual

notation in order to properly accommodate the

information needs posed by different modeling

tasks (van der Linden and Hadar, 2015).

Req 1.9: New Fields of Applications. Research

should investigate the use of visualizations in

areas that typically lack them. For example, while

rule based modeling languages do not generally

have a visualization (Wang et al., 2014), often

using marked up text like SBVR, they could

beneﬁt from visual approaches such as those used

for fact-based modeling notations like ORM.

Req 1.10: Criteria for Evaluation. Criteria for

evaluating visualizations in information systems

and the research thereof need to be established

in the scientiﬁc community. Especially, it

needs to be discussed whether empiric evalu-

ation by means of questionnaires for users of

visualizations is methodologically sufﬁcient.

2.2 Requirements Regarding Methods

for Creating and using

Visualizations

To support the integration of visualizations in IS en-

gineering, scientiﬁcally elaborated suggestions for

methods and procedures to develop and apply visual-

izations are required. We regard the following points

as centrally relevant and yet missing in IS engineer-

ing.

Req 2.1: Terminology for Visualization Design.

Research activities should focus on elaborating

a domain speciﬁc terminology that takes into

account the characteristics of spatial relationships

ENASE 2016 - 11th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Software Approaches to Software Engineering

236

and cognitive features of perceiving visualiza-

tions (Gulden, 2010). Designers should be able to

describe a visualization in a terminology talking

about balances, patterns, topologies, granulari-

ties, etc. (Cairo, 2012). Such a terminology could

base on elaborated sets of terms that have, e. g.,

been developed in the ﬁelds of interaction design

(Saffer, 2009; Wong et al., 2011), cognitive

sciences (Johnson, 2014) and graphic design.

Req 2.2: Interactive Visualizations. Research

should put into focus the relationships between

static diagrams and interactive visualizations,

and more effectively harness human creativity

and intuition in decision-making and problem

solving via interactive visual analytics (Cybulski

et al., 2015). While for several types of diagrams,

e. g., graph networks or tree structures, a rich

body of theoretic knowledge about creating static

visual representation exists (Bertin, 1974; Tufte,

1990), the potential of systematically describing

interactive capabilities should also be exploited,

especially since interaction capabilities are rele-

vant for explorative ex-post analyses (Gulden and

Attﬁeld, 2015).

Req 2.3: Enhance Static Representations of

Models. Methods to express dynamic aspects

of concepts should be scientiﬁcally developed to

enhance static representations used in conceptual

models until now (Gulden, 2014; Aysolmaz

and Reijers, 2015). Various approaches can be

deployed such as the use of animation, narration,

and user interaction to reﬂect the dynamic nature

and enable the users to read the model in a more

comprehensible way.

Req 2.4: Use and Creation in Collaborative

Settings. The importance of the concrete notation

in collaborative visualization efforts has been

revealed in different domains (cf. (Barjis et al.,

2009)), yet recent work on the collaborative

speciﬁcation of (domain-speciﬁc) modeling

languages has been done, it focused only on

syntax and semantics (Izquierdo and Cabot,

2013), neglecting the effect of visual notation

choices on its users. More research is needed

to support the involvement of people from

different backgrounds and capabilities in col-

laborative modeling efforts (van der Linden and

Hoppenbrouwers, 2012).

Req 2.5: Teaching and Training. Given the differ-

ence in reading strategies and efﬁciency be-

tween experienced and less experienced (Petre

and Green, 1993), it is important to ensure that

users of visual notations are well prepared for

their use, which requires more research in under-

standing the different cognitive and educational

processes involved in it, as well as whether to fo-

cus on teaching speciﬁc visualizations or the dif-

ferent aspects behind them (Recker and Dreiling,

2007).

Req 2.6: Reduce Cognitive Load. Research on vi-

sualizations in IS engineering should explicitly

state the question how cognitive load imposed by

visual interaction with IS can be reduced, e. g., by

avoiding navigation steps or lowering the amount

of information that has to be memorized by a hu-

man user over time instead of being visually ac-

cessible (Wong et al., 2011). With less cogni-

tive load allocated to repeated information pro-

cessing tasks, humans can better concentrate on

reacting to new situations and solving non-trivial

problems.

2.3 Requirements Towards Research on

Tooling Support

Some of the research on fundamentals and methods

for visualizations in IS engineering base on the as-

sumption that the technical implementation of visual-

izations can be performed effectively and efﬁciently.

Appropriate tooling support can ensure these assump-

tions to hold, which the remaining set of research re-

quirements is about.

Req 3.1: Automated Design Suggestions.

Research activities should elaborate mech-

anisms that allow to automatically suggest

appropriate visualizations for given classes

of data in speciﬁc use-cases. This should be

made possible by developing generic suggestion

mechanisms (Buckl et al., 2010; Gulden, 2015),

which are not based on preset templates, but

operat with justiﬁed design principles derived

from advanced theoretic insights (see 2.1). For

example, users could be asked to prioritize which

pieces of information they ﬁnd relevant to satisfy

information needs. Then, according to design

principles for visually expressing hierarchies,

contrasts, equality, and relationships, (Spence,

2007; Chen, 2010; Kirk, 2012) the composition

of a visualization can be automatically generated

as a default suggestion to the user. To provide

wider access and standardization, web based

visualization services can be developed that can

semi-automatically generate visualizations based

on user-selected requirements (Fill, 2009).

Req 3.2: Efﬁcient Software Implementation.

Research on visualizations should cover reﬂec-

A Research Agenda on Visualizations in Information Systems Engineering

237

tions on how to efﬁciently create and maintain

software which displays visualizations and pro-

vides interactivity (Gulden, 2015). Visualization

software of this kind represents a speciﬁc class

of software component, which allows to adapt

techniques for abstracting common features

and automating repeated tasks to visualization

software development. Especially model-driven

software development approaches (Kelly and

Tolvanen, 2008) appear to be suitable for this

task.

3 CONCLUSION AND OUTLOOK

In this paper we have argued for the need for more

research into visualizations in IS engineering. This is

due to a lack of research into the way visualizations

are involved during the development and use of in-

formation systems. We have sketched a preliminary

research agenda with requirements based on recently

identiﬁed forward-looking trends in the IS literature,

which especially put cognitive and human-centric as-

pects into focus.

While we have to stress that the resulting require-

ments are not an exhaustive view on needed research

in the ﬁeld, they do represent urgent and immediately

visible calls for research efforts by those working in

the IS ﬁeld. A careful ﬁrst look does seem to show

many requirements for more topics on methodologi-

cal research foundations compared to those on meth-

ods and tool support. This is in line with the trend

in ﬁelds such as requirements engineering, where it

has been shown that a signiﬁcant proportion of pub-

lished research work is design work proposing arti-

facts to resolve an issue, without necessarily going

into the fundamentals of those issues (Wieringa and

Heerkens, 2006). Furthermore, the large number of

requirements, and thus needed research, on such fun-

damental topics is in line with Recker’s call for more

focus on the fringes of conceptual modeling research

(particularly relevant to IS), focused on exploring yet

unknowns (Recker, 2015).

We hope that by explicating this agenda, we can

contribute to the further maturation and development

of research on visualizations in information systems.

Continuing our own work on the realization of ad-

vanced visualization approaches, we hope to also in-

spire more fellow research colleagues working in the

same ﬁeld.

REFERENCES

Aysolmaz, B. and Reijers, H. A. (2015). Towards an Inte-

grated Framework for Invigorating Process Models: A

Research Agenda. In Brown, Ross et al., editor, Pro-

ceedings of the International Workshop on Theory and

Applications of Process Visualization (TaProViz’15).

Springer.

Barjis, J., Kolfschoten, G. L., and Verbraeck, A. (2009).

Collaborative enterprise modeling. In Advances in en-

terprise engineering II, pages 50–62. Springer.

Bertin, J. (1974). Graphische Semiologie. Walter de

Gruyter, Berlin.

Brown, R. et al. (2014). Augmenting and Assisting

Model Elicitation Tasks with 3D Virtual World Con-

text Metadata. In Meersman, R. et al., editors, On

the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2014

Conferences SE - 3, volume 8841 of LNCS, pages 39–

56. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Buckl, S., Gulden, J., and Schweda, C. M. (2010). Support-

ing ad hoc analyses on enterprise models. In Klink, S.

et al., editors, Proceedings of the EMISA2010 Work-

shop, number 172 in Lecture Notes in Informatics

(LNI), Bonn. Gesellschaft fuer Informatik.

Caire, P., Genon, N., Heymans, P., and Moody, D. L. (2013).

Visual notation design 2.0: Towards user comprehen-

sible requirements engineering notations.

Cairo, A. (2012). The Functional Art: An introduction to

information graphics and visualization. Voices That

Matter. Pearson Education.

Chen, C. (2010). Information visualization. Springer, Lon-

don.

Cybulski, J. L., Keller, S., Nguyen, L., and Saundage, D.

(2015). Creative problem solving in digital space us-

ing visual analytics. Computers in Human Behavior,

42.

Figl, K. and Recker, J. (2014). Exploring cognitive style and

task-speciﬁc preferences for process representations.

Requirements Engineering, pages 1–23.

Fill, H.-G. (2009). Visualization for Semantic Information

Systems. Springer, Wiesbaden. p. 218.

Fodor, J. A. (1998). Concepts: Where cognitive science

went wrong. Clarendon Press.

Gulden, J. (2010). Patterns as abstractions of spatial axes.

In Bottoni, P., Guerra, E., and Lara, J. d., editors, Pro-

ceedings of the First Workshop Visual Formalisms for

Patterns 2009 (VFfP’09), volume 25, page 12.

Gulden, J. (2014). Towards a generalized notion of audio as

part of the concrete syntax of business process model-

ing languages. In Ross Brown, Simone Kriglstein, S.

R.-M., editor, Proceedings of the International Work-

shop on Theory and Applications of Process Visual-

ization (TaProViz’14), Berlin, Heidelberg. Springer.

Gulden, J. (2015). A description framework for data visu-

alizations in enterprise information systems. In Pro-

ceedings of the 19th IEEE International Enterprise

Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC

2015) in Adelaide, Australia, 2015-09-22 – 2015-09-

25. IEEE Xplore.

Gulden, J. and Attﬁeld, S. (2015). Business process mod-

els for visually navigating process execution data. In

ENASE 2016 - 11th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Software Approaches to Software Engineering

238

Ross Brown, Simone Kriglstein, S. R.-M., editor, Pro-

ceedings of the International Workshop on Theory and

Applications of Process Visualization (TaProViz’15)

on the conference Business Process Modeling (BPM

2015) in Innsbruck, 2015-08-31, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Springer.

Gulden, J. and Reijers, H. A. (2015). Toward advanced vi-

sualization techniques for conceptual modeling. In

Grabis, J. and Sandkuhl, K., editors, Proceedings of

the CAiSE Forum 2015 Stockholm, Sweden, June 8-

12, 2015, CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR.

Izquierdo, J. L. C. and Cabot, J. (2013). Enabling the collab-

orative deﬁnition of dsmls. In Advanced Information

Systems Engineering, pages 272–287. Springer.

Jalali, S. and Wohlin, C. (2012). Systematic literature stud-

ies: database searches vs. backward snowballing. In

Proceedings of the ACM-IEEE international sympo-

sium on Empirical software engineering and measure-

ment, pages 29–38. ACM.

Johnson, J. (2014). Designing with the Mind in Mind, Sec-

ond Edition: Simple Guide to Understanding User In-

terface Design Guidelines. Morgan Kaufmann Pub-

lishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA, 2nd edition.

Kelly, S. and Tolvanen, J.-P. (2008). Domain Speciﬁc Mod-

eling: enabling full code-generation. Wiley.

Kirk, A. (2012). Data Visualization: a successful design

process. Packt Publishing, Birmingham.

Mezhoudi, N., Perez Medina, J. L., Khaddam, I., Van-

derdonckt, J., et al. (2015). Towards a conceptual

model for uis context-aware adaptation. In 2nd World

Congress on Computer Applications and Information

Systems WCCAIS’2015.

Moody, D. L. (2009). The ”Physics” of Notations: Towards

a Scientiﬁc Basis for Constructing Visual Notations

in Software Engineering. IEEE Transactions on Soft-

ware Engineering, 35(5):756–778.

Petre, M. and Green, T. R. G. (1993). Learning to read

graphics: Some evidence that ‘seeing’ an information

display is an acquired skill. Journal of Visual Lan-

guages & Computing, 4(1):55–70.

Recker, J. (2015). Research on conceptual modelling: less

known knowns and more unknown unknowns, please.

In Proceedings of the 11th Asia-Paciﬁc Conference on

Conceptual Modelling, volume 165, pages 3–8. Aus-

tralian Computer Society.

Recker, J. and Dreiling, A. (2007). Does it matter which

process modelling language we teach or use? an ex-

perimental study on understanding process modelling

languages without formal education. ACIS 2007 Pro-

ceedings, page 38.

Reijers, H. A. and Mendling, J. (2011). A Study Into the

Factors That Inﬂuence the Understandability of Busi-

ness Process Models. IEEE Transactions on Systems,

Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans,

41(3):449–462.

Rensink, R. A. (2014). On the prospects for a science of

visualization. In Handbook of Human Centric Visual-

ization, pages 147–175. Springer.

Rouet, J.-F., Potelle, H., and Goumi, A. (2005). The role of

content representations in hypermedia learning: Ef-

fects of task and learner variables. In Knowledge and

Information Visualization, pages 343–354. Springer.

Saffer, D. (2009). Designing for Interaction: Creating In-

novative Applications and Devices. New Riders Pub-

lishing, Thousand Oaks, 2nd edition.

Spence, R. (2007). Information Visualization (2nd edition).

Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River.

Stahl, T., Voelter, M., and Czarnecki, K. (2006). Model-

Driven Software Development: Technology, Engineer-

ing, Management. John Wiley & Sons.

Tufte, E. R. (1990). Envisioning Information. Graphics

Press, Cheshire, Connecticut.

van der Linden, D. (2015). An argument for more user-

centric analysis of modeling languages’ visual nota-

tion quality. In Persson, A. and Stirna, J., editors, Ad-

vanced Information Systems Engineering Workshops,

volume 215 of Lecture Notes in Business Informa-

tion Processing, pages 114–120. Springer Interna-

tional Publishing.

van der Linden, D. and Hadar, I. (2015). Cognitive ef-

fectiveness of conceptual modeling languages: Ex-

amining professional modelers. In 5th IEEE Inter-

national Workshop on Empirical Requirements Engi-

neering (EmpiRE).

van der Linden, D. and Hoppenbrouwers, S. (2012). Chal-

lenges of identifying communities with shared seman-

tics in enterprise modeling. In The Practice of Enter-

prise Modeling, pages 160–171. Springer.

van der Linden, D., Hoppenbrouwers, S., Lartseva, A., and

Molnar, W. (2012). Beyond terminologies: Using psy-

chometrics to validate shared ontologies. Applied On-

tology, 7(4):471–487.

van der Linden, D. and Proper, H. (2014). On the accommo-

dation of conceptual distinctions in conceptual model-

ing languages. In Proceedings of Modellierung 2014

(MoK 2014), volume 225 of Lecture Notes in Infor-

matics.

van der Linden, D. and Proper, H. A. (2014). Category

structure of language types common to conceptual

modeling languages. In Bider, Ilia et al., editor, En-

terprise, Business-Process and Information Systems

Modeling, volume 175 of LNBIP, pages 317–331.

Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Van Zee, M., Plataniotis, G., van der Linden, D., and

Marosin, D. (2014). Formalizing enterprise architec-

ture decision models using integrity constraints. In

Business Informatics (CBI), 2014 IEEE 16th Confer-

ence on, volume 1, pages 143–150. IEEE.

Vande Moere, A. and Purchase, H. (2011). On the role of

design in information visualization. Information Visu-

alization, 10(4):356–371.

Vanderdonckt, J. (2005). A MDA-Compliant Environment

for Developing User Interfaces of Information Sys-

tems. In Pastor, O. and Falc

ao e Cunha, J., editors,

Advanced Information Systems Engineering SE - 2,

volume 3520 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science,

pages 16–31. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Wang, W., Indulska, M., and Sadiq, S. (2014). Integrated

modelling of business process models and business

rules: a research agenda. In 25th Australasian Con-

ference on Information Systems.

A Research Agenda on Visualizations in Information Systems Engineering

239

Wieringa, R. and Heerkens, J. (2006). The methodologi-

cal soundness of requirements engineering papers: a

conceptual framework and two case studies. Require-

ments engineering, 11(4):295–307.

Wohlin, C. (2014). Guidelines for snowballing in system-

atic literature studies and a replication in software en-

gineering. In Proceedings of the 18th International

Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software

Engineering, page 38. ACM.

Wong, W. et al. (2011). Invisque: Intuitive information ex-

ploration through interactive visualization. In CHI ’11

Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing

Systems, CHI EA ’11, pages 311–316, New York, NY,

USA. ACM.

ENASE 2016 - 11th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Software Approaches to Software Engineering

240