Day, 'COMPUTERIZED TOOLS AS INTERMEDIARIES IN THE COMMUNICATION OF MENTAL MAPS', Arachnet Electronic Journal on Virtual Culture v2n02 (May 16, 1994) URL = http://hegel.lib.ncsu.edu/stacks/serials/aejvc/aejvc-v2n02-day-computerized The Arachnet Electronic Journal on Virtual Culture __________________________________________________________________ ISSN 1068-5723 May 16, 1994 Volume 2 Issue 2 DAY V2N2 ========================================================= COMPUTERIZED TOOLS AS INTERMEDIARIES IN THE COMMUNICATION OF MENTAL MAPS Donald Day Syracuse University dlday@mailbox.syr.edu Abstract At its most basic, "culture" is shared meanings, and the behaviors based upon those meanings. In order to share meanings, communication must take place. In this special issue, that communication takes place via computerized tools, acting as intermediaries among tool developers and tool users. This introduction links the special issue topic to the concept of culture, briefly sketches each of the eight papers, credits the many people whose time and effort have made this issue possible, and lists references by authors whose work was cited by two or more contributors to this issue. 1.0 An Introduction to the Special Issue When this special issue on computerized tools as intermediaries in the communication of mental maps was proposed to editors of the EJVC, they were justifiably skeptical that such an apparently techno-centered approach could be bound to the rich cultural literature. This introduction aims to bridge the apparent gap between technology and culture, by relating the issue's core concepts to information science and cognitive psychology, and cultural anthropology. The concept of intermediaries is drawn primarily from the information science discipline, where it traditionally has represented skilled technical specialists who interpreted users' queries to complex online database systems to ensure efficient and relevant retrieval of documents or other artifacts. An "intermediary", then, is someone or something which bridges a gap between an individual needing some form of information and the source of that information. The concept of mental maps is drawn from the extensive cognitive psychology literature, which attempts to explain how and why individuals rely on structured mental representations of the real world to deal semi-automatically with stimuli in their environments -- without the need to fully evaluate every specific event. In other words, mental models are used to allow stereotypical responses to classes of stimuli, considerably reducing the mental workload of everyday life. As much as anyone except perhaps Everett Rogers and Edward Hall, William Gudykunst has been at the center of the late 20th Century attempt to globalize Euro-American attitudes of culture to incorporate viable models from other regions. His 1988 book with Stella Ting-Toomey, "Culture and Interpersonal Communication" [1], is especially applicable to this special issue because at its most basic the concept espoused here is that computers are a medium for interpersonal communication between tool developers and tool users. Gudykunst and Ting-Toomey take an anthropological perspective on culture which views it either as an adaptive system or as an ideational system. The adaptive approach presumes that cultures link individuals to the ecological settings in which they live; the ideational approach views culture as a cognitive system, a structural system, or a symbolic system. These authors cite the analysis of R. Keesling [2], which maintains that culture must be studied within the social and ecological setting in which humans communicate. At the risk of trying to be all things to all people, this issue embraces both the ecological and ideational approaches. The fact that culture in this context is "virtual" (existing or resulting in essence or effect though not in actual fact [3]), at first seems a mere artifact of the computer medium -- though if one examines the work here of Jozsef Toth, it can be seen that characteristics of the medium itself influence the cultural experience. Regardless of what perspective one adopts in the evaluation of culture, communication among humans is central. In this special issue, that communication takes place via computerized tools. At its most basic, "culture" is shared meanings, and the behaviors based upon those meanings. In order to share meanings, communication must take place. This issue began in June 1993 as a call for papers which envisioned computerized tools as a medium for communication between tool developers and tool users, a theme drawn from the editor's doctoral dissertation. [4] Cognitive aspects were presumed at the outset, as were perceptual and behavioral responses by tool users. However, the breadth and depth of submissions in response to this framework were a surprise to this editor. Essentially, there are three types of communication involved in computerized tools: Communication between tool developers and tool users, communication between tool users and tool developers, and communication among tool users. All three are represented in the eight papers submitted for this special issue. Although implemented in highly complex systems -- some including artificial intelligence components -- the fundamental concept embodied is simple: Tools originally designed as extensions of human skills and talents in fact filter the act of communication (therefore, culture) in ways far in excess of the influence that the term "tools" normally conveys. They in fact communicate tool developer's mental models to tool users. The mental models maintained by every individual are an important part of behavior in reaction to the environment. If the models communicated by the developers of computerized tools impact that behavior, those models are an important component of culture in this virtual environment. 2.0 Contributions to the Special Issue Submissions for this special issue of the EJVC may be organized into three broadly defined groups (although some overlap is inevitable). Included are papers that focus upon the communication process, papers that address issues of knowledge representation, and papers that examine the circumstances of cooperative work. 2.1 The Communication Process The impact of electronic communication upon mental models of other individuals' personalities is addressed by Rodney Fuller. Rodney found that users who communicate electronically consistently perceive their correspondents to be more analytical and more judgmental than do the correspondents themselves. These effects were not observed in subjects who had met face-to-face but had not communicated electronically. Jeremy Roschelle addresses the miscommunication of physics concepts from experts to students via the computer. It is not enough, Jeremy says, to represent concepts with high fidelity. A gap in mental models between expert and learner may prevent learners from assimilating target knowledge to their current world views. Jeremy advocates a mediated collaborative inquiry (MCI) approach in which representations external to the expert- learner interaction mediate communication. Using MCI, learners may construct, negotiate and maintain shared interpretations that allow them increasingly to participate in the expert community's practice of representation use. The role of intelligent machines in bridging gaps in mental models is explored by Lajos Balint. A sufficiently capable computer, he says, should translate, formalize, analyze and re- synthesize human-to-human communications, taking advantage of its knowledge of the mental models of communicating individuals to make adjustments to messages exchanged, thereby ensuring content fidelity. Such a facility would be especially valuable in complex, cooperative man-machine systems. 2.2 Knowledge Representation John Wood and Paul Taylor describe a novel hypertext environment intended to assist researchers and students of art and design by mapping needed information in a multi-dimensional network. The network helps users to develop meaningful mental models of interrelationships from disparate domains. The design philosophy of Buckminster Fuller is the target information in Wood and Taylor's tests of a prototype hypertext system. By navigating through Fuller's work, users become aware of the issue of mapping itself and are sensitized to the mapping process which individuals undergo during human-computer interaction. Fractal geometry, digital video technology and research on spatial cognition are combined in Moose et al's attempt to represent the structure of mental maps. Pointing behaviors and digitized sketch maps are the quantitative measures for the study of individual differences and dynamic properties of mental models. The working hypothesis is that computing fractal dimensions may be similar to what the brain does in discriminating features contained in the data streams arriving from the senses. In this work, users effectively communicate their mental maps to researchers via computerized tools. 2.3 Cooperative Work Munir Mandviwalla describes and analyzes the relationships among the most common world views employed by the developers of collaborative tools. He employs adaptive structuration theory to examine different world views and outline their potential to influence users. Munir investigates the feasibility of matching world views to users and developing tools to support multiple world views. The effective communication of problem understandings among users of group decision support systems (GDSS) is the focus of Ray Paul and Peter Thomas. Their paper describes the use and theoretical foundations of computer-based tools which apply dynamic simulation models to improve the communication of problem understanding among stakeholders. They examine the underpinnings of the mental model concept and argue that it should be expanded to include ways in which computer technology is embedded in complex contexts, designer and user activities, and tasks. Finally, Jozsef Toth reports findings in the realm of computer- mediated small group research in which the use of graphics in a discussion-oriented GDSS setting significantly affected the process and outcome of a standard choice-dilemma decision-making task. He observes that varying the information displayed in two- dimensional interactive graphics can either augment or attenuate normative and informational forms of social influence. Also, with the inclusion of graphics, the first discussant to advocate a position on issues under consideration has a significantly stronger influence on the group decision than when only text is displayed. 3.0 Credits Electronic journals are very new players in the academic marketplace of ideas, compared to traditional print media. As a result, sometimes it is difficult to attract contributors who have the skills and are willing to devote the time required to author papers. Also, restrictions intrinsic to the technological common denominator (e.g., length limitations and prohibition of graphics) make developing a paper for this medium more frustrating than for print publication. A major problem faced by electronic journals is that of prestige or status. Academics categorize print journals according to the perceived impact of having one's work published in a particular title (e.g., an "A" or "B" journal). A significant factor in judgments of prestige or status is the rigor of the review process. Because some electronic journals conduct no peer review of submissions (and others, including the EJVC, contain both reviewed and non-reviewed material), a skepticism is encountered regarding the quality of material published electronically. This skepticism led this special issue to a strong emphasis on implementing review procedures which are every bit as rigorous as for any print journal. First, most papers were double-blind reviewed by three or more individuals (two submissions received only two reviews each). A number of reviewers were eminent authorities in their fields, with experience reviewing submissions for leading print journals. They included practitioners from industry as well as academics. If a submission was felt to require major revisions in its first-pass review, the revised papers were reviewed again by at least one previously critical reviewer before being accepted for publication. As noted earlier, the topic of this special issue is an unusual intermingling of many disciplines. Reviewers are to be complimented for committing their prestige and dedicating their time to helping the EJVC with this project. They include: Ben Anderson Loughborough Univ. of Technology U.K. Andrew Cohill Virginia Tech U.S.A. Elizabeth US West U.S.A. Dykstra-Erickson Douglas Gordin Northwestern Univ. U.S.A. Rachelle Heller George Washington Univ. U.S.A. Munir Mandviwalla Temple Univ. U.S.A. John Murray Univ. of Michigan U.S.A. Max North Georgia Tech U.S.A. Jacob Palme Stockholm Univ. Sweden Frank Ritter Univ. of Nottingham U.K. Bob Root Bellcore U.S.A. Jacques Verville Syracuse Univ. U.S.A. Yvonne Waern Linkoeping Univ. Sweden Marilyn Welles Mitre U.S.A. Credit also is due to Jane Carey (Arizona State Univ. West, U.S.A.), Pierrette Bergeron (Univ. of Montreal, Canada), and Pertti Jaarvinen (Univ. of Tampere, Finland) for distributing the call for papers, and to Diane Kovacs and Ermel Stepp, editors of the EJVC, for their patience, encouragement and willingness to gamble on the unusual theme of this special issue. Finally, the authors are to be commended for their cooperation, responsiveness and patience with schedule slips, reviewer-mandated changes, and my editing of their final manuscripts. 4.0 The Body of Literature One indicator of the degree to which there is in fact a confluence of interests and research focus on this topic is the frequency with which contributors cited the same authors in two or more papers. These mutual references form the core of a body of literature addressing some aspect of the special issue theme. Bodker, S. & Gronbaek, K. (1991). Cooperative prototyping: Users and designers in mutual activity. In J. Greenbaum & M. Kyng (Eds.), Design At Work: Cooperative Design of Computer Systems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Bodker, S. (1991). Through the Interface. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Bowers, J., & Churcher, J. (1988). Local and global structuring of computer mediated communication: Developing linguistic Perspectives on CSCW in COSMOS. CSCW Proceedings 1988, 125- 139. Bowers, J. M., Benford, S. D. (Eds.)(1991). Studies in Computer Supported Cooperative Work: Theory, Practice and Design. Amsterdam: North-Holland. Card, S. K., Moran, T. P. & Newell, A. (1983). The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Galegher, J. & Kraut, R. (1990). Technology for intellectual teamwork: Perspectives on research and design. In Galegher, J., Kraut, R., & Egido, C. (Eds.), Intellectual Teamwork, 1- 20. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Gentner, D. & Stevens, A. L. (Eds.)(1983). Mental Models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Johnson, P. & Nicolosi, E. (1990). Task-based user interface development tools. In D. Diaper et al (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third IFIP TC13 Conference on Human-Computer Interaction Interact'90, 383-387. Amsterdam: North-Holland. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental Models. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Johnson-Laird, P.N. (1985). Mental models. [In] Aitkenhead, A.M., & Slack, J.M. (Eds.), Issues in Cognitive Modeling. Sussex: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Ltd. Lewis, C. (1986). Understanding what's happening in system interactions. In D. A. Norman & S. W. Draper (Eds.), User Centred System Design, 169-185. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Lewis, C. M., & Toth, J. A. (1992). Situated Cognition in Diagrammatic Reasoning. In N. H. Narayanan (Ed.), Working Notes, AAAI Spring Symposium on Reasoning with Diagrammatic Representations, March 25--27, 1992, Stanford University, 47- 52. Moran, T. P. and Anderson, R. J. (1990). The workaday world as a paradigm for CSCW design. Proceedings of the Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, October 7-10, 1990, 381- 393. Los Angeles: ACM. Nickerson, R. S. (1976). On conversational interaction with computers. In R. M. Baecker & W. A. S. Buxton (Eds.)(1987), Readings in Human Computer Interaction, 681-693. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann. Nickerson, R. S., & Adams, M. J. (1979). Long-term memory for a common object. Cognitive Psychology 11, 287-307. Norman, D. A. (1983). Some observations on mental models. In D. Gentner & A. Stevens (Eds.), Mental Models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Norman, D. A. (1987). Cognitive artifacts. In J. M. Carroll (Ed.), Interfacing Thought, 17-38. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Norman, D. A. (1988). The Psychology of Everyday Things. New York: Basic Books. Suchman, L. & Trigg, R. (1991). Understanding practice: Video as a medium for reflection and design. In J. Greenbaum & M. Kyng (Eds.), Design At Work: Cooperative Design of Computer Systems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.. Suchman, L. A. (1987). Plans and Situated Actions: The problem of Human-Computer Communication. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Winograd T. and Flores, C. F. (1986). Understanding computers and cognition: A new foundation for design. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. Winograd, T. (1986). A language/action perspective on the design of cooperative work. CSCW Proceedings 1986, 203-220. Winograd, T. (1987). A language/action perspective on the design of cooperative work. Human Computer Interaction 3, 3-30. References [1] Gudykunst, W. & Ting-Toomey (with E. Chua) (1988). Culture and Interpersonal Communication. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications. [2] Keesling, R. (1974). Theories of culture. Annual Review of Anthropology 3, 73-97. [3] DeVinne, P. (Ed.)(1985). The American Heritage Dictionary, 2d. Ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. [4] Day, D. (1994). Behavioral and perceptual responses to the constraints of computer-mediated design. In Brouwer-Janse, M. & Harrington, T. (Eds.), Human-Machine Communication for Educational Systems Design. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. _____ Articles and Sections of this issue of the _Electronic Journal on Virtual Culture_ may be retrieved via anonymous ftp to byrd.mu.wvnet.edu or via e-mail message addressed to LISTSERV@KENTVM or LISTSERV@KENTVM.KENT.EDU (instructions below) or GOPHER gopher.cic.net Papers may be submitted at anytime by email or send/file to: Ermel Stepp - Editor-in-Chief, _Electronic Journal on Virtual Culture_ M034050@MARSHALL.WVNET.EDU _________________________________ *Copyright Declaration* Copyright of articles published by Electronic Journal on Virtual Culture is held by the author of a given article. If an article is re-published elsewhere it must include a statement that it was originally published by Electronic Journal on Virtual Culture. The EJVC Editors reserve the right to maintain permanent archival copies of all submissions and to provide print copies to appropriate indexing services for for indexing and microforming. _________________________________ _________________________________ _THE ELECTRONIC JOURNAL ON VIRTUAL CULTURE_ ISSN 1068-5327 Ermel Stepp, Marshall University, Editor-in-Chief M034050@Marshall.wvnet.edu Diane (Di) Kovacs, Kent State University, Co-Editor DKOVACS@Kentvm.Kent.edu ____________________________ GOPHER Instructions ____________________________ GOPHER to gopher.cic.net 70 ____________________________ Anonymous FTP Instructions ____________________________ ftp byrd.mu.wvnet.edu login anonymous password: users' electronic address cd /pub/ejvc type EJVC.INDEX.FTP get filename (where filename = exact name of file in INDEX) quit LISTSERV Retrieval Instructions _______________________________ Send e-mail addressed to LISTSERV@KENTVM (Bitnet) or LISTSERV@KENTVM.KENT.EDU Leave the subject line empty. The message must read: GET EJVCV2N2 CONTENTS Use this file to identify particular articles or sections then send e-mail to LISTSERV@KENTVM or LISTSERV@KENTVM.KENT.EDU with the command: GET where is the name of the article or section (e.g., author name) and is the V#N# of that issue of EJVC