IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v25y2014i2p401-419.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research Note ---How Semantics and Pragmatics Interact in Understanding Conceptual Models

Author

Listed:
  • Palash Bera

    (John Cook School of Business, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri 63108)

  • Andrew Burton-Jones

    (University of Queensland, UQ Business School, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia)

  • Yair Wand

    (Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T 1Z2, Canada)

Abstract

Underlying the design of any information system is an explicit or implicit conceptual model of the domain that the system supports. Because of the importance of such models, researchers and practitioners have long focused on how best to construct them. Past research on constructing conceptual models has generally focused on their semantics (their meaning), to discover how to convey meaning more clearly and completely, or their pragmatics (the importance of context in model creation and use), to discover how best to create or use a model in a given situation. We join these literatures by showing how semantics and pragmatics interact. Specifically, we carried out an experiment to examine how the importance of clear semantics in conceptual models---operationalized in terms of ontological clarity---varies depending on the pragmatics of readers' knowledge of the domain shown in the model. Our results show that the benefit of ontological clarity on understanding is concave downward (follows an inverted- U ) as a function of readers' prior domain knowledge. The benefit is greatest when readers have moderate knowledge of the domain shown in the model. When readers have high or low domain knowledge, ontological clarity has no apparent benefit. Our study extends the theory of ontological clarity and emphasizes the need to construct conceptual models with readers' knowledge in mind.

Suggested Citation

  • Palash Bera & Andrew Burton-Jones & Yair Wand, 2014. "Research Note ---How Semantics and Pragmatics Interact in Understanding Conceptual Models," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 401-419, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:25:y:2014:i:2:p:401-419
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.2014.0515
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.2014.0515
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.2014.0515?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John P A Ioannidis, 2005. "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(8), pages 1-1, August.
    2. Calder, Bobby J & Phillips, Lynn W & Tybout, Alice M, 1981. "Designing Research for Application," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 8(2), pages 197-207, September.
    3. M. Genero & G. Poels & M. Piattini, 2003. "Defining and Validating Metrics for Assessing the Maintainability of Entity-Relationship Diagrams," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 03/199, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    4. Frederico Fonseca, 2007. "The double role of ontologies in information science research," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(6), pages 786-793, April.
    5. Vijay Khatri & Iris Vessey & V. Ramesh & Paul Clay & Sung-Jin Park, 2006. "Understanding Conceptual Schemas: Exploring the Role of Application and IS Domain Knowledge," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 81-99, March.
    6. Yair Wand & Ron Weber, 2002. "Research Commentary: Information Systems and Conceptual Modeling—A Research Agenda," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 363-376, December.
    7. Choi, Hoon-Seok & Thompson, Leigh, 2005. "Old wine in a new bottle: Impact of membership change on group creativity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 121-132, November.
    8. Deborah Compeau & Barbara Marcolin & Helen Kelley & Chris Higgins, 2012. "Research Commentary ---Generalizability of Information Systems Research Using Student Subjects---A Reflection on Our Practices and Recommendations for Future Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1093-1109, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lawrence Bunnell & Kweku-Muata Osei-Bryson & Victoria Y. Yoon, 0. "RecSys Issues Ontology: A Knowledge Classification of Issues for Recommender Systems Researchers," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-42.
    2. Lawrence Bunnell & Kweku-Muata Osei-Bryson & Victoria Y. Yoon, 2020. "RecSys Issues Ontology: A Knowledge Classification of Issues for Recommender Systems Researchers," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 1377-1418, December.
    3. Palash Bera, 2021. "Interactions between Analysts in Developing Collaborative Conceptual Models," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 561-573, June.
    4. Roger Clarke & Andrew Burton-Jones & Ron Weber, 2016. "On the Ontological Quality and Logical Quality of Conceptual-Modeling Grammars: The Need for a Dual Perspective," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 365-382, June.
    5. Pedro Antunes & Nguyen Hoang Thuan & David Johnstone, 2022. "Nature and purpose of visual artifacts in design science research," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 515-550, September.
    6. Jan Mendling & Jan Recker & Hajo A. Reijers & Henrik Leopold, 2019. "An Empirical Review of the Connection Between Model Viewer Characteristics and the Comprehension of Conceptual Process Models," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 1111-1135, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jan Mendling & Jan Recker & Hajo A. Reijers & Henrik Leopold, 2019. "An Empirical Review of the Connection Between Model Viewer Characteristics and the Comprehension of Conceptual Process Models," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 1111-1135, October.
    2. Palash Bera, 2021. "Interactions between Analysts in Developing Collaborative Conceptual Models," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 561-573, June.
    3. Andrew Burton-Jones & Peter N. Meso, 2006. "Conceptualizing Systems for Understanding: An Empirical Test of Decomposition Principles in Object-Oriented Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 38-60, March.
    4. Merete Hvalshagen & Roman Lukyanenko & Binny M. Samuel, 2023. "Empowering Users with Narratives: Examining the Efficacy of Narratives for Understanding Data-Oriented Conceptual Models," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 890-909, September.
    5. Roman Lukyanenko & Wolfgang Maass & Veda C. Storey, 2022. "Trust in artificial intelligence: From a Foundational Trust Framework to emerging research opportunities," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(4), pages 1993-2020, December.
    6. Guan, Jian & Levitan, Alan S. & Kuhn, John R., 2013. "How AIS can progress along with ontology research in IS," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 21-38.
    7. Usunier, Jean-Claude, 1998. "Oral pleasure and expatriate satisfaction: an empirical approach," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 89-110, February.
    8. O'Cass, A., 2000. "An assessment of consumers product, purchase decision, advertising and consumption involvement in fashion clothing," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 545-576, October.
    9. Cooper, Marjorie J. & Wakefield, Kirk L. & Tanner, John F., 2006. "Industrial buyers' risk aversion and channel selection," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(6), pages 653-661, June.
    10. Alexander Frankel & Maximilian Kasy, 2022. "Which Findings Should Be Published?," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 1-38, February.
    11. Balaji, M.S. & Roy, Sanjit Kumar & Sadeque, Saalem, 2016. "Antecedents and consequences of university brand identification," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 3023-3032.
    12. Jyotirmoy Sarkar, 2018. "Will P†Value Triumph over Abuses and Attacks?," Biostatistics and Biometrics Open Access Journal, Juniper Publishers Inc., vol. 7(4), pages 66-71, July.
    13. Pino G. Audia & Jack A. Goncalo, 2007. "Past Success and Creativity over Time: A Study of Inventors in the Hard Disk Drive Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(1), pages 1-15, January.
    14. Komal Nagar, 2018. "Assessing the Impact of Online Retailer Models on Consumer’s Attitude and Purchase Intentions," IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, , vol. 7(1), pages 1-12, January.
    15. Mao, Luke Lunhua & Huang, Haiyan, 2016. "Social impact of Formula One Chinese Grand Prix: A comparison of local residents’ perceptions based on the intrinsic dimension," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 306-318.
    16. Stanley, T. D. & Doucouliagos, Chris, 2019. "Practical Significance, Meta-Analysis and the Credibility of Economics," IZA Discussion Papers 12458, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Karin Langenkamp & Bodo Rödel & Kerstin Taufenbach & Meike Weiland, 2018. "Open Access in Vocational Education and Training Research," Publications, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-12, July.
    18. Kevin J. Boyle & Mark Morrison & Darla Hatton MacDonald & Roderick Duncan & John Rose, 2016. "Investigating Internet and Mail Implementation of Stated-Preference Surveys While Controlling for Differences in Sample Frames," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(3), pages 401-419, July.
    19. Vaidyanathan, Rajiv & Aggarwal, Praveen, 2020. "Does MSRP impact women differently? Exploring gender-based differences in the effectiveness of retailer-provided reference prices," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    20. Jelte M Wicherts & Marjan Bakker & Dylan Molenaar, 2011. "Willingness to Share Research Data Is Related to the Strength of the Evidence and the Quality of Reporting of Statistical Results," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(11), pages 1-7, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:25:y:2014:i:2:p:401-419. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.