Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!cadre.dsl.pitt.edu!pitt!unix.cis.pitt.edu!quinn
From: quinn@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Clark  Quinn)
Newsgroups: comp.cog-eng
Subject: Re: What is the difference between a metaphor and a mental model?
Message-ID: <20216@unix.cis.pitt.edu>
Date: 25 Oct 89 13:26:51 GMT
References: <31966@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <1215@kuling.UUCP> <36145@srcsip.UUCP>
Reply-To: quinn@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Clark  Quinn)
Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh, Comp & Info Services
Lines: 47

In article <36145@srcsip.UUCP> mccarthy@SRC.Honeywell.COM (Jim McCarthy) writes:
>In his posting of 10/23/89, Lars Oestreicher stated:
>
>> The form of the mental model, i.e., it's "shape in the mind" is in most
>> cases impossible to define or study.  In my opinion the representation
>> issue constitutes a less interesting question.
>
>My vested interests (I'm doing research on this topic) prevents me from
>agreeing.
>
>In brief, we discussed the relative efficacy (in obtaining
>valid representations) of two data collection techniques (card sorting and
>pair-wise comparisons) 
>
>My point is this, using techniques such as those discussed here (as well as
>others) researchers are able to obtain functionally useful knowledge
>representations.  I believe that these representation give us a peek at the
>mental models resident in experts and novices in a number of domains.
>
>Jim McCarthy

I agree with Jim (for roughly the same reason :-).  I think we *can*
make distinctions between different people's models, and that we must
if we are going to understand how to conduct instruction and make
useable systems (see also The Psychology Of Everyday Things, by Don
Norman).

Let me suggest another methodology I used for some mental model
research I did in graduate school.  Wanting detailed individual models,
I used a shotgun approach.  I had subjects make predictions in a
situation.  I then had them tell me why they believed what they had
predicted.  I also had them *draw* their idea of what was going on.
(If their explicated model doesn't lead to the predictions they made,
you must push them to revise the model).  I also taped their comments
for later comparison with their written responses and had them list
their experience with the system I was examining.  This technique
proved very effective for determining what the subject's models were
for what was going on in a small system.

-- Clark

Clark N. Quinn
Learning Research and Development Center
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, PA 15260
(412) 624-9581
quinn@unix.cis.pitt.edu