An Examination of Procedural and Object‐oriented Systems Analysis Methods: Does Prior Experience Help or Hinder Performance?*
通过实验比较有经验与无经验的系统分析师在使用程序化与面向对象方法时的表现，发现面向对象方法导致更高的主观心理负荷，且新手比有经验者更偏好该方法。
ABSTRACT Interest in object‐oriented analysis (OOA) and object‐oriented design (OOD) has expanded rapidly over the last several years. Proponents of OOA and OOD have called the shift to these methods “revolutionary” and have cited a number of impressive claims with respect to their use. However, empirical research investigating these claims remains in its infancy. Moreover, an examination of the literature reveals inconclusive and often conflicting results for OOA and OOD methods relative to traditional data and/or procedural techniques. This paper presents the results of an empirical study that examined both experienced and novice systems analysts using both procedural and object‐oriented techniques. This research examined whether experience in using procedural methods helped or hindered performance using OOA and compared procedural and OOA methods on the subjective mental workload induced. A human problem‐solving model adopted from Newell and Simon (1972) provided the theoretical framework for this study. Dependent variables include subjective mental workload, solution quality, time to perform task, and attitudinal measures. Although some of these dependent variables have been used in past research, we believe this is the first time that subjective mental workload (SMW) has been examined in an IS context. Our results indicate that both novice and experienced subjects demonstrate higher SMW when using OOA. In addition, as a group, novices prefer object‐oriented techniques and find these techniques easier as compared to experienced subjects.