Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Using A Cognitive Analysis Grid to Inform Information Systems Design

649 views

Published on

Following our first conceptualization of a cognitive analysis grid (CA grid) for IS research in 2014, the CA grid was improved and tested in a proof of concept manner. The theory and application of this method are briefly explained, along with lessons learned from a first experiment. The next steps in the validation of this method include applying it to a wider group of naïve participants. This will allow to draw statistical parallels between the cognitive demand of the interface and the performance of the users based on their cognitive profile. Ultimately, this technique should be useful both in NeuroIS research and user experience (UX) tests to guide hypotheses and explain user’s performance.

Authors : Laurence Dumont, Gabrielle Chénier-Leduc, Élaine de Guise, Ana Ortiz de Guinea, Sylvain Sénécal and Pierre-Majorique Léger

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Using A Cognitive Analysis Grid to Inform Information Systems Design

  1. 1. © 2015 Tech3Lab 1 Using a Cognitive Analysis Grid to Inform Information Systems Design LAURENCE DUMONT, GABRIELLE CHÉNIER-LEDUC, ÉLAINE DE GUISE, ANA ORTIZ DE GUINEA, SYLVAIN SÉNÉCAL AND PIERRE-MAJORIQUE LÉGER Gmunden Retreat on NeuroIS 2015 June 2nd 2015, Gmunden, Austria
  2. 2. © 2015 Tech3Lab 2
  3. 3. © 2015 Tech3Lab 3 John is an IS user
  4. 4. © 2015 Tech3Lab 4 John lives in a wonderful world
  5. 5. © 2015 Tech3Lab 5 Everyone is John
  6. 6. © 2015 Tech3Lab 6 John has a brain
  7. 7. © 2015 Tech3Lab 7 All Johns have the same cognitive abilities
  8. 8. © 2015 Tech3Lab 8 John lives in the IS literature
  9. 9. © 2015 Tech3Lab 9 John is doing an IS task
  10. 10. © 2015 Tech3Lab 10
  11. 11. © 2015 Tech3Lab 11 Constant Linear Averaged Normal
  12. 12. © 2015 Tech3Lab 12 John lives in the real world
  13. 13. © 2015 Tech3Lab 13 Learning Automaticity and habits Emotions Disorder Diversity Unconscious
  14. 14. © 2015 Tech3Lab 14
  15. 15. © 2015 Tech3Lab 15 We are all differentJohn
  16. 16. © 2015 Tech3Lab 16 Objective : Provide a pilot study of the cognitive analysis grid with in a task that involves multiple steps
  17. 17. © 2015 Tech3Lab 17 Protocol on how to use the CA grid : 1. Evaluating the cognitive demand of the interface 2. Evaluating the users’ baseline cognitive capacities. 3. Evaluating the users’ cognitive performance in the task.
  18. 18. © 2015 Tech3Lab 18 The CA Grid (Revised)
  19. 19. © 2015 Tech3Lab 19 Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society (2014), 20, 11–19. Copyright E INS. Published by Cambridge University Press, 2013. doi:10.1017/S1355617713001094 SPECIAL SERIES NIH EXAMINER: Conceptualization and Development of an Executive Function Battery Joel H. Kramer,1 Dan Mungas,2 Katherine L. Possin,1 Katherine P. Rankin,1 Adam L. Boxer,1 Howard J. Rosen,1 Alan Bostrom,1 Lena Sinha,1 Ashley Berhel,1 AND Mary Widmeyer3 1Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, California 2Department of Neurology, University of California, Davis, California 3Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science, Chicago, Illinois (RECEIVED March 18, 2013; FINAL REVISION August 23, 2013; ACCEPTED August 30, 2013; FIRST PUBLISHED ONLINE October 8, 2013) Abstract Executive functioning is widely targeted when human cognition is assessed, but there is little consensus on how it should be operationalized and measured. Recognizing the difficulties associated with establishing standard operational definitions of executive functioning, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke entered into a contract with the University of California-San Francisco to develop psychometrically robust executive measurement tools that would be accepted by the neurology clinical trials and clinical research communities. This effort, entitled Executive Abilities: Measures and Instruments for Neurobehavioral Evaluation and Research (EXAMINER), resulted in a series of tasks targeting working memory, inhibition, set shifting, fluency, insight, planning, social cognition and behavior. We describe battery conceptualization and development, data collection, scale construction based on item response theory, and lay the foundation for studying the battery’s utility and validity for specific assessment and research goals. (JINS, 2014, 20, 11–19) Keywords: working memory, cognitive control, fluency, planning, social cognition, item response theory INTRODUCTION Executive deficits are reported in numerous neurobehavioral conditions, and may be the primary locus of cognitive impairment in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (Barkley, 2010), behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (Boone et al., 1999; Hutchinson & Mathias, 2007; Slachevsky et al., 2004), subcortical ischemic vascular disease (Moorhouse et al., 2010; Reed et al., 2004), traumatic brain injury (Caeyenberghs et al., 2012; Levin & Hanten, 2005; Stuss, 2011), multiple sclerosis (Arnett et al., 1997; Chiaravalloti & DeLuca, 2003; Foong et al., 1997), Huntington’s disease (Aron et al., 2003; Paulsen, 2011), progressive supranuclear palsy (Gerstenecker, Mast, Duff, Ferman, & Litvan, 2013), Parkinson’s disease (Ravizza & Ciranni, 2002), and even normal aging (Amieva, Phillips, & Della Sala, 2003; Buckner, 2004). Neuroscientists and cognitive psychologists have begun to parse executive functioning into subcomponents and identify relevant anatomical regions and networks. Clinical assess- ment of executive control, however, has fallen behind these basic science advances. This gap is particularly evident in clinical trials, where despite the importance of executive abilities for daily living (Asimakopulos et al., 2012; Cahn- Weiner, Boyle, & Malloy, 2002), measures of executive ability are often omitted or underrepresented in clinical trial batteries. When executive functioning is targeted in research, there is considerable variability in how it is operationally defined. Tasks purportedly measuring fluency, working memory, concept formation, set shifting, inhibition, organiza- tion, abstract reasoning, and novel problem solving, either individually or in various combinations, are all used as markers of executive functioning, with the implicit assumption that these tasks measure the same construct. Recognizing the challenges associated with conceptualizing and measuring executive functioning, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) awarded a contract to the University of California-San Francisco (UCSF) to develop psychometrically robust executive mea- surement tools that would be accepted by the neurology clinical trials and clinical research communities. Initial goals Correspondence and reprint requests to: Joel H. Kramer, 675 Nelson Rising Lane, Suite 190, MC 1207, San Francisco, CA 94158. E-mail: jkramer@memory.ucsf.edu 11
  20. 20. © 2015 Tech3Lab 20 Examples of cognitive tests Domain : Working memory N-Back task : Spatial working memory Domain : Inhibition Flanker task : Response inhibition and cognitive control Domain : Set Shifting Dimensional set shifting : Measurement of switching costs
  21. 21. © 2015 Tech3Lab 21 Experimental task
  22. 22. © 2015 Tech3Lab 22 Example of completed CA grid
  23. 23. © 2015 Tech3Lab 23

×