ID FMP: Distributed Cognition Models

Distributed cognition models conceptualize cognitive phenomena as happening across multiple individuals, objects, and internal and external representations of knowledge.  In contrast to the Information Processing Model, which is only focused on activities that happen inside the head, this model focuses on internal and external activities and encompasses External Cognitive Processes and Coordination Mechanisms described in my previous posts.

In comparison to these three frameworks, distributed cognition models provide more precise descriptions of internal and external cognitive activities. They are less abstract because their domain is limited to cognitive activities associated to specific contexts (e.g. piloting an airplane, doing taxes).

The three frameworks previously mentioned provide general descriptions of how human cognition works across all contexts. Their focus is on defining general laws that describe how our brain processes information and leverages the external world to enhance our cognitive capabilities. The distributed cognition model offers a phenomenological perspective that explores cognition as an embodied activity that takes place in specific physical and social contexts.

For example, a distributed cognition model that describes the activities that take place at an agency during creative development would differ considerably from that of a law office. They would feature many commonalities but the important thing is that the differences matter.

This perspective is important because designers need to understand how their product or service will actually fit into people’s day-to-day life. The insights that can be gleaned from the Information Processing and External Cognitive Activities Frameworks do not provide this type of understanding.  Distributed cognition models focuses on mapping these mundane day-to-day activities. They provide insight into how people actually make and share meaning and decisions within specific contexts.

A distributed cognition analysis is usually carried out as the basis for development of a distributed cognition model. Here is an overview of the main areas of examination in these types of analysis. As an example (and to work my brain just a little bit) I’ve carried out a high-level analysis of the distributed cognitive activities that take place at an advertising agency.

• How does distributed problem solving take place? How do people work together to solve problems? In an agency environment, tasks are distributed across several departments with specific areas of expertise (e.g. client services, account & strategic planning, media, production, creative and traffic). People work together by coordinating their actions using documents (such as schedules, briefs, spec sheets and emails), events (such as meetings, phone calls, and presentations), and shared work practices (such as common vocabularies, understandings, and culture).
• What ways does communication take place throughout the collaborative process and how is knowledge shared and accessed? Does it change as the activity progresses? Communications take place via meetings, emails and document artifacts such as presentations, briefs, schedules, conference reports, creative comps and spec sheets. The most important information is documented to facilitate sharing. Many of the document artifacts evolve as the activities progress. For example, a creative brief may be updated to reflect changes in strategy. The creative comps also change via multiple rounds of client reviews.
• What is the role of verbal and non-verbal communication? What types of things are said or implied? Verbal communication is the primary type of communication associated to the management of projects (and communication associated to those projects). Non-verbal communication plays a fundamental important in the activities of the project itself. Layout design, videos, images, graphs, and even experiences are be used to brief creative teams regarding products or brands, and in client and internal presentations. The final creative product delivered by Agencies also employs both verbal and non-verbal communication. To elicit emotional responses from people agencies use non-verbal tools such as images, visuals, videos, sounds, interactions online, and more. In agency communication is often reinforced through by verbal and non-verbal communication.
• What coordinating mechanisms are used? What are the rules and procedures that govern the workflow? There are several important coordination mechanisms that are used in an agency. These mechanism leverage external representations of knowledge such as schedules, job jackets, spec sheets, readers, status reports, conference reports, emails, calendars, scopes of work, etc. They also include meetings such as internal and client reviews, status meetings, and production kick-offs. Many rules and procedures are outlined in the agency’s process manual. These processes govern how work flows through the agency.

[source: Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction, page 129.]

** What the hell is ID FMP? **

ID FMP: Framework for Developing Conceptual Models

We keep on coming back to conceptual models [define]. The reason being, a well-designed conceptual model is a fundamental element of successful product and service systems. To develop a well-articulated conceptual model designers need to think through the main metaphors, concepts, actions, and relationships of the systems they are designing before developing prototypes of any sort (including wireframes, drawings, renderings, etc).

Don Norman’s and Bjoern Hartmann’s model provides insight into how designers’ conceptual models interact and relate to a users’ mental models. It does not, however, provide any guidance to help designer synthesize conceptual models.

Johnson and Herderson’s framework, published in 2002, was developed with this purpose in mind. This framework identifies the standard components of a conceptual model. It provides a blueprint that designer can use to develop conceptual models. Here is an overview of the four components of conceptual model as defined by Johnson and Henderson:

• Major Metaphors and Analogies: Identify important metaphors and analogies used to enable the user to understand what a product does and how to use it.
• Concepts: Define the concepts that users are exposed to and that they need to understand, including the objects the concepts create and manipulate, any relevant attributes, and the operations that can be performed on the concept.
• Relationships and Actions: Identify the relationships between concepts, including whether an object contains another, or is part of it, and the relative importance of objects and actions.
• Mappings: Define the mappings between the metaphors and concepts and the user experience the product is designed to invoke.

Examples of this framework in action (albeit one developed by someone with little to no experience working with it) are available on two of my recent posts:

• The first was developed in response an exercise from the book Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction.
• The second was written as a personal exercise for me to apply this conceptual framework to develop a silly pet product idea that I had been toying around with for a while.

[source: Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction]

** What the hell is ID FMP? **

ID FMP: Map of Relationship Between Conceptual and Mental Models

Developed by Don Norman, the model illustrated below demonstrates how relationship between a designer’s conceptual model and a user’s mental model is mediated by the system image of products or services.

So here is my explanation of what this model means: Designers develop product and service systems based on conceptual models [define] that they create or borrow. I use the terms product and service systems [define] refer to the ecosystem that encompasses products, services and their related artifacts and resources; these can include assets such as manuals and knowledge bases, and resource such as user groups and communities.

Users do not have access to the conceptual models of designers. Their understanding of how a product works is developed based on their interactions with the product itself, their previous experiences with the world, and their existing knowledge and expertise. All of these considerations affect how people interpret their experiences with a product, and the mental model [define] they create to explain how products work.

The term system [define] image refers to the way a product or service system actually appears to a user. System images are always imperfect representations of the conceptual models upon which they were built. For a product to be usable the system image needs to enable users to develop an accurate mental model of how relevant aspects of a product or service works.

An interesting feature of Norman’s 1988 model, is that designers relationship with system images is represented as a one-way phenomenon. This implies that once a product has been designed there is little opportunity for on-going improvements. During the last 20 years advances in technology and design methodology have made it possible for designers to continuously fine-tune product and service systems. This is especially true in the increasingly service-based world of software.

Bjoern Hartmann has revised Norman’s model to reflect the opportunity for designers to play an on-going role in improving the system image of the products they’ve created. The model he proposes includes a feedback loop that enables the user to communicate to the designer via the system image.

Hartmann posits that user-initiated feedback via the system will help identify mismatches between the designer’s conceptual model and the user’s model of how the system functions. Another important consideration is that offering an instantaneous feedback option in the same media on which the interaction is taking place will generate more reliable and richer data than feedback elicited later, or via a different channel.

[Sourced from Don Norman’s website, though I know Norman's framework was also featured in this book The Design of Everyday Things; Paper by Bjoern Hartmann written during graduate studies at Standford]

** What the hell is ID FMP? **