ARJUN GOEL HF 700

PAPER 3: PRIOR KNOWLEDGE November 8, 2011

HF 700

Arjun Goel

Introduction
Working mechanism of a human memory has often been viewed as an information-retrieval system, similar to a server database. The information stored in this database, in the form of data chunks, helps us predict and perceive the process of interaction using our past experiences (Gentner & Stevens, 1983). Studies have shown that human perception, amplified by prior knowledge, provides a structure to information flow and enables us to recognize objects, without causing a significant cognitive chaos in our minds (Taylor & Crocker, 1980). After the initial response to the stimulus, the process of object recognition takes place in 150200ms (Palmer 1975). The second time we see an object, connections in the semantic networks promote propagation of single interpretation from among other alternatives. This is termed as initial guess as the memory contains the outcome of the top-down process from the past encounters (Rainer & Miller, 2000). Despite a lot of emphasis laid upon bottom-up process, recent theories prove that top-down analysis plays a critical role in visual recognition (Ullman, 1995). Top-down analysis, based on previous knowledge, allows us to perceive and relate to the data chunks already stored in our memory system. Kenneth Craik, in 1943, named these data chunks as Mental Models. These models or knowledge structures are stored as objects, called schemas. They enable us to construct connections between entities that help us jump to conclusions, without presupposing mental logics and formal rules. A cognitive trigger (Collins M, Elizabeth Loftus 1975), which can be a visual cue, a sense of touch, smell or an audio piece, activate these connections and facilitate the memory search process. This is the reason why a user will be able to relate || as a pause button on a media control panel, but will relate the same symbol as a capacitor symbol when viewed in an electronic circuit. As designers, it is important that we incorporate these concepts in our designs, which will eventually help us bring down the learning curve of the users. The focus of this paper is on prior knowledge. I will begin by discussing mental models and outline how the human brain creates them. I will briefly touch upon the importance of the mental models. To illustrate the concept of prior knowledge, I will use an application called Zinio for the case. Zinio is a mobile reading application for Android / iOS tablets that provides magazine subscriptions in wide range of subjects. I will discuss two concepts of prior knowledge,

Categorization and Metaphors, which are relevant to the case and will help evaluate the application. Evaluation of visual aesthetics will only be used as a means to underline the importance of the concepts discussed in this paper.

HF 700

Arjun Goel

Mental Models
Mental Models are analog representations of an underlying knowledge structure that helps us understand a certain phenomena (Johnson-Laird 1983). Conceptually, these subsets of reality help us rationalize, explain and anticipate events occurring in the physical world (Moshe Bar 2003). During the interaction, multidimensional mental models are created containing information about spatial, temporal and object-based properties under different circumstances (Zwaan &

Radvansky, 1998). For instance, most of us have a well-developed schema representation of a

car that includes attributes such as four tires, seats, headlights, backlights, doors etc. These miniframework of schemas collate to form a single conceptual unit and are easily recognizable (Norman, Gentner, Stevens 1976). In the human memory, schemas are arranged as semantic networks. These networks are a representation of what consists in the learners memory, which eventually lays out the foundation of learning new ideas. Each concept is represented as a node, and properties of each node/concept is placed next to it. Links between the nodes indicate the realationship between the objects. As shown in the figure below, Labrador is a dog, and all dogs are animals, there is no need to represent the fact that a Labrador is an animal since the information can be inferred from the network.

Labrador

Dog

Animal

The activating spreading from two or more concept nodes facilitates the process of memory search in these semantic networks (Quillian, 1966). According to the Spreading Activation theory, each stage of information processing leads to the activation of the information network, called priming. Prior presentation of an object provides a cognitive trigger to object-specific node and makes it accessible. Since activation is not limited to any particular path in the semantic network, similar stimuli can be processed simultaneously. This may cause significant disturbances that can slow down or disrupt the process completely (McClelland, Rumelhart, & Hinton, 1986). The level of activation in these networks determines the rate and the probability of recall and eventually affects the performance on the task (JR Anderson 1989).

HF 700 Categorization

Arjun Goel

Studies (Pazzani 1986) suggest that there is high correlation between accuracy of learning and the persons prior knowledge. The process of learning a new category is not only influenced by the members of the category, but also by the prior knowledge of the other related categories (Evan Heit 1994). Theories assume that events occurring around us consist of basic units of categorizations. The human brain tracks these events, establish representation and use these representations in categorizing these units. Categorization is fundamentally a statistical process that produces generalization, pattern completion, frequency effects and adaptive learning. Many of the early studies on categorization models refuted the idiosyncratic information in the process of establishing definitions (Smith & Medin, 1981). They supported the exemplar model of categorization where a categorys mental representation consisted of the exemplars that compose the category, and an entity belongs to the category that can be compared to its categorys exemplars. For e.g., it is safe to assume that all birds have beaks, all animals that have beaks are birds, and the birds are in category of fly. But it is not safe to assume that an animal with beaks can fly because, for instance, ostrich being a bird cannot fly. This is the reason the theory had an addendum later called prototype, in which category membership did not fully depend on the necessary and sufficient conditions. (Stephen Dopkins & Theresa Gleason ). Taking the case of Zinio, Figure 1, it does a good job of racking different set of variables into categories. The different categories; Art, Entertainment, Home, Lifestyle, (displayed on the left

Figure 1

HF 700

Arjun Goel

side of the screen) use related images on the cover of the magazines that categorize the representations into structural descriptions. Using car wheel close-up in Automotive, a Hollywood actor for Entertainment enables the user to apply general knowledge and draw inferences about the theme. Fundamentally, this prior knowledge becomes the cognitive ability.

Metaphor
Among all the underlying concepts that are critical for a user centric design, characterization of interaction concepts is of them (Werner Kuhn, Andrew U. Frank). This characterization of different concepts is called Metaphors. Johnson [1987] defined metaphors as: "...a pervasive mode of understanding by which we project patterns from one domain of experience in order to structure another domain of a different kind." Metaphors give structure to the application domains and organize tasks for the users. They provide an efficient way of transpiring an idea into the users mind that otherwise would be difficult to achieve using literal language (Dedre Gentner 1988). Metaphors enable the user to map the conceptual entities, properties, relations and structures from a domain of one kind onto a domain of different kind (Lakoff 1980). To illustrate, as in the case of Zinio (Figure 2), the application emulates the effect of an actual magazine using a digital display. It allows the users to buy subscriptions of specific magazine yearly or quarterly, just as for a real magazine. User can flip pages and read it like a normal magazine in the portrait mode. In Figure 1, As in a super market, shopping cart icon is generally understood as the object that consists of items you plan to buy. The display shopping cart icon (on the top right) does exactly what it is suppose to. It allows the user the go back and review the items in the cart and proceed to checkout.

Figure 2

Figure 2

HF 700

Arjun Goel

Conclusion
Interacting with complex systems, such as organizations, devices, and other digital user interfaces has become an integral part of our lives. Cognitive science provides evidence that prior knowledge promotes rapid problem recognition and reduces memory search for the complex systems we come across in our daily lives. Mental models of specific domains help us accomplish tasks not only in an interactive visualization system, but in every field of work. There has been some evidence (Moorman 1999) that prior knowledge may lead to some systematic bias. Inaccurate inferences about a system can lead to a misuse. A user, familiar with the system, has a higher probability that he/she will recall a solution rather than compute a new solution at that point of time. Without discounting these factors, interface designers need to understand the psychology of users and how they interact with a particular system. At this point in time, when a six year old child knows a gingerbread man has a smile and a ninja-bread man has a sword, and every possible information is just one click away, it becomes highly imperative for the designers to utilize these knowledge structures already placed in our minds and design products that are well aligned with them.

HF 700 References

Arjun Goel

Anderson, J. R., & Milson, R. (1989). Human Memory: An Adaptive Perspective. Psychological Review, 96(4), 703719. Retrieved from http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0033-295X.96.4.703 Bar, M. (2003). A cortical mechanism for triggering top-down facilitation in visual object recognition. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 15(4), 600-9. doi:10.1162/089892903321662976 Collins, Allan M. and Elizabeth F. Loftus (1975), A spreading Activation Theory of Semantic Processing, Psychological Review, 82, 407-28 Dopkins, S., & Gleason, T. (1997). Comparing exemplar and prototype models of categorization. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie exprimentale, 51(3), 212-230. doi:10.1037/11961961.51.3.212 Gentner, D. (2001). Mental models, psychology of. International encyclopedia of the social behavioral sciences (pp. 9683-9687). Elsevier. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B7MRM-4MT09VJ22C/2/d9264f7ba04fc42f868db423a41656cc Gentner D (1988) Metaphor as structure mapping : the relational shift.Child Development 59:47-59. Heit, E., & Barsalou, L. (1996). The instantiation principle in natural categories. Memory, 4, 413- 451. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2001). Mental models and deduction. Trends in cognitive sciences, 5(10), 434-442. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11707382 Kuhn, W., & Frank, A. U. (n.d.). A FORMALIZATION OF METAPHORS AND IMAGE-SCHEMAS Frank , A . U ., & Mark , D . M ., eds ). 1991 . Cognitive and Linguistic Aspects of Geographic Space . , , Vol . 63 , NATO ASI Series D , Dordrecht , The Netherlands , Kluwer Academic Publishers ., 63, 1-15. Lakoff, George/Johnson, Mark (1980): Metaphors we live by, Chicago. Moorman, Christine (1999), The Functionality of Knowledge Il- lusions, paper presented at the Association for Consumer Research Conference, Columbus, OH. Norman, D. A., Gentner, S., & Stevens, A. L. (1976). Comments on learning school and memory representations. In D. Klahr (Ed.), Cognitive psychology and instructions. New York: Plenum Press. Palmer, S.E. (1975). The effects of contextual scenes on the identification of objects. Memory & Cognition Pazzani, J., Shulq, T., Silverstein, G., Wisniewrki, E., Bnmk, C., Cain, T., Hume, T., et al. (1989). Influence of Prior Knowledge on Concept Acquisition : Experimental and Computational Results. Quillian, M. R. (1968). Semantic memory. In M. L. Minsky (Ed.), Semantic information processing (pp. 227-259). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

HF 700
Neuron, 27, 179189

Arjun Goel

Rainer, G., & Miller, E. K. (2000). Effects of visual experience on the representation of objects in the prefrontal cortex.

Rumelhart, D. E., McClelland, J., & the PDP Research Group, (1986). Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition (Vol. 1: Foundations.). Cambridge: MIT Press Smith, E. E., & Medin, D. L. (1981). Categories and concepts. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Taylor, S.w. and Crocker, J. (1981). Schematic bases of social information processing. In E.T. Higgins, P. Herman, & M. Zanna, (Eds.), Social cognition: The Ontario symposium, Vol. 1. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum. Ullman, S. (1995). Sequence seeking and counter streams: A computational model for bidirectional information flow in the visual cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 1, 111. Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 162185.