Thought Experiment

524 views

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
524
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Thought Experiment

    1. 1. Thought Experiment <ul><li>Summary: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What is the purpose of previous study? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What is the main findings of these study? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What is the conclusion based on these findings? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Originality/Creativity of Thought/Logic : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What do you think about this research? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Good, why? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Something bad, why? How can you improve it, any thought experiment? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Reference (APA format): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mou, W., & McNamara, T. P. (2002). Intrinsic frames of reference in spatial memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28 , 162-170. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Thorndyke, P. W., & Hayes-Roth, B. (1982). Differences in spatial knowledge acquired from maps and navigation. Cognitive Psychology, 14 , 560-589. </li></ul></ul>
    2. 2. Thorndyke and Hayes-Roth (1982) <ul><li>Study </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Map learning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>2min each time untill they got it </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Over-learning for 30 or 60 min </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Navigation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>1 to 2 months of walking in the halls </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>6 to 12 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>12 to 24 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Test </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Route distance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>The distance from the start point to the destination along the hallways </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Euclidean distance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>The straight-line distance from the start point to the destination along the hallways </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Orientation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Pointing to the destination from the start point </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Simulated orientation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>While in a closed office, pointing to the destination from an imagined position at the start point </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Location </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Indicating the location of the destination on a piece of paper containing the start point and another reference point. </li></ul></ul></ul>
    3. 3. <ul><li>Thorndyke and Hayes-Roth (1982) concluded that navigation group performed better in the orientation task. </li></ul><ul><li>I think it may be because people in the navigation group established spatial reference direction along the building axes but those in the map reading group established spatial reference direction along the map axes as the building was tilted in the map. </li></ul>
    4. 4. <ul><li>I assume that people retrieve spatial relations more easily when the imagined heading aligned with the spatial reference direction than when the imagined heading is misaligned with the spatial reference direction (Mou & McNamara, 2002). </li></ul>
    5. 5. Mou & McNamara (2002) 315 ° 0 °
    6. 6. <ul><li>In the orientation task, the imagined heading was aligned with the building axes. Hence the imagined heading in the navigation group is aligned with the spatial reference direction whereas the imagined heading in the map reading group is misaligned with the spatial reference direction, which may cause the finding that navigation group performed better in the orientation task. </li></ul>
    7. 7. <ul><li>In a thought experiment, I will have the building aligned with the paper edges in the map. In this way the imagined headings for both groups are aligned with the spatial reference direction. Hence the difference performance in the orientation task can only be attributed to the information source. </li></ul>
    8. 8. <ul><li>Test </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Route distance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>The distance from the start point to the destination along the hallways </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Euclidean distance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>The straight-line distance from the start point to the destination along the hallways </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Orientation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Pointing to the destination from the start point </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Simulated orientation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>While in a closed office, pointing to the destination from an imagined position at the start point </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Location </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Indicating the location of the destination on a piece of paper containing the start point and another reference point. </li></ul></ul></ul>
    9. 9. <ul><li>Expected results </li></ul><ul><li>Support or unsupport your hypothesis </li></ul>
    10. 10. <ul><li>Reference: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mou, W., & McNamara, T. P. (2002). Intrinsic frames of reference in spatial memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28 , 162-170. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Thorndyke, P. W., & Hayes-Roth, B. (1982). Differences in spatial knowledge acquired from maps and navigation. Cognitive Psychology, 14 , 560-589. </li></ul></ul>

    ×