Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.7838/jsebs.2013.18.1.165

Study on the Use of the Constant Comparison Method : Lessons from Training Novice Modelers  

Kim, Taekyung (College of Business Administration Seoul National University)
Park, Jinsoo (Graduate School of Business Seoul National University)
Rho, Sangkyu (College of Business Administration Seoul National University)
Publication Information
The Journal of Society for e-Business Studies / v.18, no.1, 2013 , pp. 165-189 More about this Journal
Abstract
Conceptual modeling is a critical activity for developing successful business information systems. The objective of this study is to evaluate the possibility of applying the constant comparison method from the grounded theory to conceptual modeling. To achieve the objective, we trained novice modelers and split them into two groups for evaluation. The experimental results show that applying the constant comparison method could increase acceptability from more experienced conceptual modelers. Moreover, while the control group was experienced difficulties when domain knowledge is unfamiliar, the experimental group could handle difficulties more effectively. In addition, applying the constant comparison method also decreased the time to complete analysis for conceptual modeling.
Keywords
Conceptual Modeling; Constant Comparison Method; Training Novice Modelers;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Anaby-Tavor, A., Amid, D., Fisher, A., Ossher, H., Bellamy, R., Callery, M., Desmond, M., Krasikov, S., Roth, T., Simmonds, I., and de Vries J., "An Empirical Study of Enterprise Conceptual Modeling," ER 2009, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2009, Vol. 5829, Springer, Berlin, pp. 55-69, 2009.
2 Banerjee, M., Capozzoli, M., McSweeney, L., and Sinha, D., "Beyond Kappa : a Review of Interrater Agreement Measures," Canadian Journal of Statistics, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 3-23, 1999.   DOI
3 Bera, P., "A Cognitive Perspective on How Experts Develop Conceptual Models," Proceedings of Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2011), August 12-15, Peru, Lima, Paper 422, pp. 1-10, 2010.
4 Boehm, B. W., Software Engineering Economics, Prentice Hall, NJ, 1981.
5 Bolloju, N. and Leung, F. S. K., "Assisting Novice Analysts in Developing Quality Conceptual Models with UML," Communications of the ACM, Vol. 49, No. 7, pp. 108-112, 2006.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Charmaz, K., "Constructing Grounded Theory: a Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis," Sage, London, 2006.
7 Davis, G. B., "Strategies for Information Requirements Determination," IBM Systems Journal, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 4-30, 1982.   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Elmasri, R. and Navathe, S. B., Fundamentals of Database Systems, Addison- Wesley, Boston, 2007.
9 Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., and Straub, D., "Trust and TAM in Online Shopping : an Integrated Model," MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 51-90, 2003.
10 Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L., The Discovery of Grounded Theory : Strategies for Qualitative Research, Aldine de Gruyter, NY, 1967.
11 Goodman, P. and Leyden, D., "Familiarity and Group Productivity," Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 76, pp. 578-586, 1991.   DOI
12 Gwet, K., "Inter-rater Reliability : Dependency on Trait Prevalence and Marginal Homogeneity," Statistical Methods for Inter-Rater Reliability Assessment, Vol. 2, pp. 1-9, 2002.
13 Gwet, K., "Computing Inter-rater Reliability and Its Variance in the Presence of High Agreement," British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, Vol. 61, No. 1, pp. 29-48, 2008.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Kung, C. and Sølvberg, A., "Activity Modeling and Behavior Modeling of Information Systems," In Olle T. W., Sol H. G., and Verrijn-Stuart A. A. (eds), Information Systems Design Methodologies: Improving the Practice, North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 145-171, 1986.
15 Pidgeon, N. F., Turner, B. A., and Blockley, D. I., "The Use of Grounded Theory for Conceptual Analysis in Knowledge Elicitation," International Journal of Man- Machine Studies, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 151- 173, 1991.   DOI
16 Moody, D. L., "Metrics for Evaluating the Quality of Entity Relationship Models," In Ling, T. W., Ram, S., and Lee, M. L. (eds), Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, November 16-19, Singapore, Springer-Verlag, pp. 211-225, 1998.
17 Mylopoulos, J., "Conceptual Modeling and Telos," In Loucopoulos P. and Zicari R. (eds), Conceptual Modeling, Databases and CASE : an Integrated View of Information Systems, Wiley & Sons, NY, pp. 49-68, 1992.
18 Parsons, J. and Wand, Y., "Using Cognitive Principles to Guide Classification in Information Systems Modeling," MIS Quarterly. Vo. 32, No. 4, pp. 839-868, 2010.
19 Schenk, K., Vitalari, N., and Davis, K., "Differences between Novice and Expert Systems Analysts : What Do We Know and What Do We Do?," Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 9-50, 1998.
20 Soffer, P. and Hadar, I., "Applying Ontologybased Rules to Conceptual Modeling : A Reflection on Modeling Decision Making," European Journal of Information Systems Vol. 16, pp. 599-611, 2007.   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Strauss, A. L., Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists, Cambridge University Press, NY, 1987.
22 Strauss, A. L. and Corbin, J., Basics of Qualitative Research, Sage, CA, 1990.
23 Strauss, A., Corbin, J. M., Grounded Theory in Practice, Sage, CA, 1997.
24 Wand, Y. and Weber, R., "Research Commentary : Information Systems and Conceptual Modeling-a Research Agenda," Information Systems Research, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 363-376, 2002.   DOI   ScienceOn
25 Wand, Y., Storey, V. C., and Weber, R., "An Ontological Analysis of the Relationship Construct in Conceptual Modeling," ACM Transactions on Database Systems, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 494-528, 1999.   DOI   ScienceOn