Graphical vs. Tabular Notations for Risk Models: On the Role of Textual Labels and Complexity

K. Labunets, F. Massacci, A. Tedeschi

Research output: Chapter in Book / Report / Conference proceedingConference contributionAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

© 2017 IEEE.[Background] Security risk assessment methods in industry mostly use a tabular notation to represent the assessment results whilst academic works advocate graphical methods. Experiments with MSc students showed that the tabular notation is better than an iconic graphical notation for the comprehension of security risks. [Aim] We investigate whether the availability of textual labels and terse UML-style notation could improve comprehensibility. [Method] We report the results of an online comprehensibility experiment involving 61 professionals with an average of 9 years of working experience, in which we compared the ability to comprehend security risk assessments represented in tabular, UML-style with textual labels, and iconic graphical modeling notations. [Results] Tabular notation are still the most comprehensible notion in both recall and precision. However, the presence of textual labels does improve the precision and recall of participants over iconic graphical models. [Conclusion] Tabular representation better supports extraction of correct information of both simple and complex comprehensibility questions about security risks than the graphical notation but textual labels help.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProceedings - 11th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, ESEM 2017
PublisherIEEE Computer Society
Pages267-276
ISBN (Electronic)9781509040391
ISBN (Print)9781509040391
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 7 Dec 2017
Externally publishedYes
Event11th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, ESEM 2017 - Toronto, Canada
Duration: 9 Nov 201710 Nov 2017

Publication series

NameInternational Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement
ISSN (Print)1949-3770
ISSN (Electronic)1949-3789

Conference

Conference11th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, ESEM 2017
Country/TerritoryCanada
CityToronto
Period9/11/1710/11/17

Funding

The research leading to these results has been supported by the SESAR JU WPE under contract 12-120610-C12 (EM-FASE). We would like to thank B. Solhaug and K. Stølen from SINTEF for support in the definition of the CORAS and UML models, F. Paci from University of Southampton for her help with the design of the study and questionnaire, and G. Frau and M. Ragosta from Deep Blue for their help in the implementation of the study and participants recruitment.

FundersFunder number
SESAR JU WPE12-120610-C12

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Graphical vs. Tabular Notations for Risk Models: On the Role of Textual Labels and Complexity'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this