Tree-Based versus Hybrid Graphical-Textual Model Editors: An Empirical Study of Testing Specifications

TY - GEN

T1 - Tree-Based versus Hybrid Graphical-Textual Model Editors: An Empirical Study of Testing Specifications

AU - Predoaia, Ionut

AU - Harbin, James

AU - Gerasimou, Simos

AU - Vasiliou, Christina

AU - Kolovos, Dimitris

AU - García-Domínguez, Antonio

N1 - This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the University’s Research Publications and Open Access policy.

PY - 2024/9/27

Y1 - 2024/9/27

N2 - Tree-based model editors and hybrid graphical-textual model editors have advantages and limitations when editing domain models. Data is displayed hierarchically in tree-based model editors, whereas hybrid graphical-textual model editors capture high-level domain concepts graphically and low-level domain details textually. We conducted an empirical user study with 22 participants to evaluate the implicit assumption of system modellers that hybrid notations are superior, and to investigate the tradeoffs between the default EMF-based tree model editor and a Sirius/Xtext-based hybrid model editor. The results of the user study indicate that users largely prefer the hybrid editor and are more confident with hybrid notations for understanding the meaning of conditions. Furthermore, we found that the tree editor provided superior performance for analysing ordered lists of model elements, whereas activities requiring the comprehension or modelling of complex conditions were carried out faster through the hybrid editor.

AB - Tree-based model editors and hybrid graphical-textual model editors have advantages and limitations when editing domain models. Data is displayed hierarchically in tree-based model editors, whereas hybrid graphical-textual model editors capture high-level domain concepts graphically and low-level domain details textually. We conducted an empirical user study with 22 participants to evaluate the implicit assumption of system modellers that hybrid notations are superior, and to investigate the tradeoffs between the default EMF-based tree model editor and a Sirius/Xtext-based hybrid model editor. The results of the user study indicate that users largely prefer the hybrid editor and are more confident with hybrid notations for understanding the meaning of conditions. Furthermore, we found that the tree editor provided superior performance for analysing ordered lists of model elements, whereas activities requiring the comprehension or modelling of complex conditions were carried out faster through the hybrid editor.

KW - Empirical Study

KW - Fuzz Testing

KW - Hybrid Notations

KW - Model Editors

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85206373247&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1145/3640310.3674102

DO - 10.1145/3640310.3674102

M3 - Conference contribution

SN - 9798400705045

T3 - MODELS '24

SP - 80

EP - 91

BT - Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 27th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems

PB - ACM

CY - New York, NY, USA

T2 - 2024 ACM/IEEE 27th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems

Y2 - 22 September 2024 through 27 September 2024

ER -