  Dedicated model transformation languages are claimed to provide many benefits
over the use of general purpose languages for developing model transformations.
However, the actual advantages associated with the use of MTLs are poorly
understood empirically. There is little knowledge and empirical assessment
about what advantages and disadvantages hold and where they originate from. In
a prior interview study, we elicited expert opinions on what advantages result
from what factors and a number of factors that moderate the influence. We aim
to quantitatively asses the interview results to confirm or reject the effects
posed by different factors. We intend to gain insights into how valuable
different factors are so that future studies can draw on these data for
designing targeted and relevant studies. We gather data on the factors and
quality attributes using an online survey. To analyse the data, we use
universal structure modelling based on a structure model. We use significance
values and path coefficients produced bz USM for each hypothesised
interdependence to confirm or reject correlation and to weigh the strength of
influence present. We analyzed 113 responses. The results show that the Tracing
and Reuse Mechanisms are most important overall. Though the observed effects
were generally 10 times lower than anticipated. Additionally, we found that a
more nuanced view of moderation effects is warranted. Their moderating
influence differed significantly between the different influences, with the
strongest effects being 1000 times higher than the weakest. The empirical
assessment of MTLs is a complex topic that cannot be solved by looking at a
single stand-alone factor. Our results provide clear indication that evaluation
should consider transformations of different sizes and use-cases. Language
development should focus on providing transformation specific reuse mechanisms .
