Abstract
Despite the status of united modeling language (UML) as the de facto standard for object oriented modeling, it has received controversial reviews. The most controversial diagram in UML is the use case diagram. Some practitioners claim that use case diagrams are not valuable in requirements analysis and some have even argued that use case diagrams should not be part of UML. This research examined the values of use case diagram in interpreting requirements when use case diagrams are used in conjunction with class diagrams. In other words, the study investigated the possible synergetic values and relationships between the use case and class diagrams in the context of requirements analysis. This study used theories from cognitive psychology as its theoretical and conceptual foundation. The data collection utilized the verbal protocol technique in which subjects were asked to think aloud as they interpreted the use case and class diagrams. The results show that the use case diagrams were more completely interpreted than the class diagrams. The presence or absence of one diagram when interpreting another diagram had no effect on the outcome of the interpretation. From the results, we argue that the use case diagrams and class diagrams depict different aspects of the problem domain, they have very little overlap in the information captured, and both are necessary in requirements analysis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson JR (1983) The architecture of cognition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Anderson JR, Lebiere C (1998) The atomic components of thought. Erlbaum, Mahwah
Bahrami A (1999) Object oriented systems development using the unified modeling language. Irwin McGraw-Hill, Boston
Booch G (1996) Object solutions: managing the object oriented project. Addison-Wesley, Reading
Booch G (1999) UML in action. Commun ACM 42(10):27–28
Booch G, Rumbaugh J, Jacobson I (1999) The unified modeling language user guide. Addison-Wesley, Reading
Brightman H, Schneider H (1992) Statistics for business problem solving. South-Western Publishing Co, Cincinnati
Davis F (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q September :319–339
Dobing B, Parsons J (2000) Understanding the role of use cases in UML: a review and research agenda. J Database Manag 11(4):28–36
Ericsson K, Simon H (1993) Protocol analysis: verbal reports as data, rev edn. MIT Press, Cambridge
Evans GK (1999) Why are use cases so painful? Thinking Objects 1(2). http://evanetics.com/articles/Modeling/UCPainful.htm. Cited on 30 September 2004
Hesse W (2000) RUP—a process model for working with UML? Critical comments on the rational unified process. In: Siau K, Halpin T (eds) Unified modeling language: systems analysis, design, and development issues. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey
Jacobson I, Christerson M, Jonsson P, Overgard G (1992) Object oriented software engineering: a use case driven approach. Addison-Wesley, Reading
Krogstie J (2000) Using a semiotic framework to evaluate UML for the development of models of high quality. In Siau K, Halpin T (eds) Unified modeling language: systems analysis, design, and development issues. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey
Kulak D, Guiney E (2000) Use cases—requirements in context. Addison Wesley, Reading
Maciaszek LA (2001) Requirements analysis and system design. Developing information systems with UML. Addison-Wesley, Reading
Mayer R (1991) Thinking, problem solving, cognition. W.H. Freeman
Pooley R, Stevens P (1999) Using UML: software engineering with objects and components. Addison-Wesley, Harlow
Rosenberg D, Scott K (1999) Use case driven object modeling with UML: a practical approach. Addison-Wesley, Reading
Schenk KD, Vitalari NP, Davis KS (1998) Differences between novice and expert system analysts: what do we know and what do we do? J Inf Syst 15(1):9–50
Siau K (1996) Empirical studies in information modeling: interpretation of the object relationship. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of British Columbia
Siau K (1999) Information modeling and method engineering: a psychological perspective. J Database Manag 10(4):44–50
Siau K (2004) Informational and computational equivalence in comparing information modeling methods. J Database Manag 15(1):73–86
Siau K, Cao Q (2001) Unified modeling language—a complexity analysis. J Database Manag 12(1):26–34
Siau K, Tian Y (2001) The complexity of unified modeling language—a GOMS analysis. In: 14th international conference on information systems (ICIS’01), New Orleans, 16–19 December 2001, pp 443–448
Siau K, Wand Y, Benbasat I (1997) The relative importance of structural constraints and surface semantics in information modeling. Inf Syst 22(2/3):155–170
Smith EE (1989) Concepts and inductions. In: Posner MI (ed) Foundations of cognitive science. MIT Press, Cambridge
Vessey I, Conger S (1994) Requirements specification: learning object, process, and data methodologies. Commun ACM 37:102–113
Villeneuve A, Fedorowicz J (1997) Understanding expertise in information systems design, or, what’s all the fuss about objects? Decis Support Syst 21:111–131
Whitten JL, Bentley LD, Dittman KC (2001) System analysis and design methods. McGraw-Hill Irwin, Boston
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Siau, K., Lee, L. Are use case and class diagrams complementary in requirements analysis? An experimental study on use case and class diagrams in UML. Requirements Eng 9, 229–237 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-004-0203-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-004-0203-7