SymSys245:
Interaction Analysis
The Symbolic System Program
Stanford University
Professor Jeff Shrager (jshrager@stanford.edu)
SUMMARY
In this course, we investigate how cognitive processes such as perception, learning, reasoning, and problem solving, inform the design and analysis of complex, interactive systems. We both study these important cognitive processes, and analyze the ways in which they operate in important real-world contexts. Major topics include: cognitive architectures, analysis of skilled performance, complex learning and discovery, adaptive and intelligent interfaces, user assistance systems, and special topics according to students' interests. We also try to consider issues related to overlooked populations, such as the elderly, people with special cognitive needs (e.g., dyslexia), and children.
The class takes place in an interactive discussion format, and participation in these discussions is crucial to the learning process. In addition to weekly readings, and small in- and out-of-class projects, students will produce a larger project examining interactive cognition in a real world setting of their own choosing. Although there are no formal prereqs., exposure to cognitive psychology and/or AI will be helpful.
Prep for 5/8: Complex Learning: Mystery Machine Experiment
Last week you should have trained a friend to give verbal protocols in long division. This you'll get them to figure out the ? key in the Mystery Machine. Here are the details. Between last week and this week you should have done PART 1 (practice), and this week you'll do PARTS 2-3 (experiment) AND 4 (analysis). (If you didn't do part one last week, you'll have to do all parts this week.)
___ Reporting: Be sure to check out this example transcript with comments. You don't have to stick to this exact format. And you don't have to transcribe really boring experiments. Focus on the places before and after critical events where the subject realized something important.
___Reading:
Prep for 5/1: Skill Acquisition
___ Read:
→ PART TWO OF: (i.e., pg. 466 to the end) Pirolli, P. (1999). Cognitive Architectures and Cognitive Engineering Models in Human-Computer Interaction. The handbook of applied cognition. John T. Wiley, Sussex, England.[PDF]
→ Agre, PE and Shrager, J (1990). Routine evolution as the microgenetic basis of skill acquisition. In Proceedings Cognitive Science Conference- Boston, pages 694-701. [PDF]
Things to think about: In what way, and to what extent is the Agre & Shrager (A&S) theory a challenge to the theories of skill acquisition discussed in, for example, Pirolli's paper? How does the A&S story of "microgenetic" change fit with your own observations of how you learn things? Can you think of an example of something that you've learned recently by pure practice? How about something you learned through small changes in methods? What sorts of domains does each sort of learning apply to?
___ Mystery Machine experiment -- Part 1:
___Once again, please get familiar with The Mystery Machine and take a look at these notes on it. You should know how the MM works by next week.
In this part of the experiment all you're going to do is to train a friend to give verbal protocols in long division. Next week you'll get them to figure out the ? key in the Mystery Machine.
Here are the details. We're only doing PART 1 this week!
___ Skim: PROTOCOL ANALYSIS: methods for eliciting and analyzing valid verbal reports on thinking.
Here are some helpful notes on think-aloud protocols
___ Conduct: PART 1 of the Mystery Machine and verbal protocols.
___ There is nothing to turn in on this activity this week!
___ Observational Activity:
This week pay special attention to the cognitive operators that we talked about in class this past week, esp. use of various memories, attention, how you keep track of where you are in complex activities, and the use of the "conscious spotlight" that you need to use to reason about things. As usual, Email me (jshrager@stanford.edu) ~1 paragraph on each of two observations - that is, 2 paragraphs all together.
Prep for 4/24: Cognitive Architecture
___ Read:
→ PART ONE OF: Pirolli, P. (1999) Cognitive Architectures ... [PDF] ONLY up to and including page 466
This is a relatively long and complex paper, and there are some mathematical parts. We're going to be reading it in TWO PARTS. This week read ONLY up to and including page 466! Read for the high level concepts, NOT the mathematical detail. (The mathematical detail is probably wrong anyhow.)
Things to think about: Why are some tasks harder than other, very similar tasks? Why is poker harder than solitaire? (Is it?) Why is flying a 747 harder than flying a flight simulator? (Is it?) Why is navigation in a foreign country harder than navigation in an unfamiliar city in a country that you're used to? (Is it?) Choose a few examples of your own and explain what aspects of cognitive architectures help you to figure this out (if any)?
___ Watch: Art Benjamin's TED talk (at least from 10:30 through the end, but the whole thing is fun).
___Try out The Mystery Machine and take a look at these notes on it.
___ Observational Activity: This week you should start using the vocabulary of problem solving: goals and subgoals, impasses, operators, and methods(aka. strategies), and so on, and especially look for interpretations (and mis-interpretations, which are more fun! :-)
Prep for 4/17: Problem Solving and Intro to Interpretation
___ Read: Course Details Document
___ Read (or at least skim):
→ Bibby and Payne reading link [pdf]
→ Pitot/Static system and symptoms of blockage [link] (esp. read the section on blocked static ports).
→ Aircraft accident analysis of Aeroperu 603. [pdf]
Reading notes: First do a "quick read" of Bibby and Payne to get the idea of the device they are studying and the three sorts of device knowledge that they are investigating (diagram, procedures, table). Next study the online explanations of aircraft instruments, and the "pitot-static" system, esp. the section on system malfunctions from blocked static ports. Try to get your own mental model of how they work. Finally, read the analysis of the crash of Aeroperu flight 603, from Aircraft Accident Analysis. Understand what happened as best you can, but really focus on what the pilots were saying; Try to imagine it as a play going on in the cockpit. (There are parts of this that are in "pilot speak", that you won't understand unless you are a pilot. That's okay; I promise that you'll get the idea!)
Some aircraft vocabulary: ATC = Air Traffic Control (i.e., Ground control). Transponder = A radio that automatically sends some information (esp. altitude) to ATC from the airplane. Stall = A plane has to fly above its "stall speed" to maintain lift and stay in the air. If it goes below this speed, it will simply fall out of the sky. Stick Shaker = A gizmo that physically shakes the pilot's steering wheel in order to indicate that the plane is flying too slowly, and is about to stall. (This is an interesting device because it physically simulates the feel of what would actually happen on a smaller airplane when you approach stall speed!) Radial = A compass point (the 360 radial is north, 090 radial is east, etc. If you are, for example, "thirty miles on the two seven zero (270) radial" you are thirty miles due west.) ILS = Instrument Landing System; A radio system, located at the airport, that provides precision altitude and distance information so pilots can land in bad weather. Vectors = Instructions from ATC telling lost pilots how to turn to get someplace. GPWS = Ground Proximity Warning System; A down-looking radar that yells "Too low; Terrain!", and "Pull up!" if you get too close to the ground. (Artificial) Horizon = Gyroscopic instrument that shows the plane's roll and pitch with respect to the ground. (Note that this does not depend upon the pitot/static system! It's just a gyroscope.) Flight director = A sort of combined electronic Horizon and autopilot that tells you how to fly a particular course.
Optional (but worth watching if you want to get a better sense of what this sort of accident entails): There are several interesting (in a horror movie sort of way) videos that depict various aspects of the Aeroperu accident, for example: [this one of the whole CVR] and [this one recreating the last few minutes of the flight].
___ Observational Activity:
Read Notes for the Standing Observational Activity.
Email me (jshrager@stanford.edu) 1-2 paragraphs on each of two observations . (That is, 2-4 paragraphs all together.)
(I strongly suggest just including the observations in the body of the email message, rather than attaching a separate document. If there are pictures, you can attach them.)