Internal representations, external representations and ergonomics: towards a theoretical integration

Abstract

Ergonomics is concerned with how humans interact with systems to perform tasks that achieve goals. This interaction requires thought processes that construct and manipulate mental representations of situations to enable the selection of task-oriented actions having predicted outcomes. The argument for a link between concepts of mental representation and the concerns of ergonomists is a critical theme in the present review, which assesses the current state of knowledge regarding the nature of mental representations and the way in which they are deployed to enable effective system interaction. Other issues that we tackle head on include: (1) the vast range of existing terminology that underpins discussions about representational constructs; (2) the important role of memory in understanding mental representation; and (3) the tight coupling between external and internal representations during task performance. We conclude by proposing a novel, explanatory framework that aims to integrate disparate notions of mental and external representation.

Case studies of mental models in home heat control: Searching for feedback, valve, timer and switch theories

“…In this study, the associated (self reported) behaviour of participant B closely matched that expected of users holding a 'feedback' theory, so participant B's specific UMM is not of special interest. However, consensus in the literature (e.g Kempton, 1986, Norman, 2002, Peffer et al, 2011, Richardson & Ball, 2009) that UMMs fall into these categories of shared theory is challenged. This suggests that the existence of additional 'shared theories' or unique individual UMMs, that may have a significant impact in terms of energy consuming behaviour, cannot be ruled out.…”

“…Kempton, 1986, Norman, 2002, Richardson & Ball, 2009, Peffer et al, 2011. If large proportions of the general UK population also seek out alternate control devices to the thermostat, when making adjustments, it calls into question the present day relevance of Kempton's (1986) insight.…”

“…the analyst). The risk of bias as a means of causing inaccuracy in mental model research, and the need to take pains to minimize bias is well documented in the literature (Rouse & Morris 1986, Wilson & Rutherford,1989, Bainbridge, 1992, Richardson & Ball, 2009, Revell & Stanton, 2012. Revell & Stanton (2012) developed a 'treering' method in order to identify risk of bias when conducting mental models research, resulting in an adaptable framework (presented in table format).…”

“…The term 'mental model' is used in different domains to mean different things (Wilson & Rutherford, 1989) and even within a domain, can be used to describe internal constructs that differ significantly in terms of content, function or perspective (Richardson & Ball, 2009, Revell & Stanton, 2012. The form of mental model descriptions may have similarities to the way other types of models (e.g.…”

The use of domestic appliances by cognitively impaired users

“…In simulating a mental model, a person must operate the mental model while adhering to its constraints. Once formulated, mental models tend to remain static and resistant to change (Richardson and Ball, 2009), until changes to the functionality of the represented system in the real world requires information to be reprocessed in working memory.…”