Cognitive Design

The new view in cognitive science claims we operate in two mental modes – deliberate and automatic. In automatic mode we are unconsciously reacting to the environment around us.  This is not simple stimulus to response. We still “think” in between and even make complex decisions but we do so very fast using whatever information is immediately available exercising no conscious control.  The so-called blink.  In deliberate mode we consciously observe, plan, analyze and control our thoughts, emotions and behaviors.   We are reflective. Operating in deliberate mode is HIGH load  because it requires tremendous mental energy whereas operating in automatic mode is LOW load because it requires little mental energy.  For example, experienced drivers operate vehicles  in LOW or automatic mode and a student driver is in HIGH or deliberate mode. One is skilled the other is reflective.

The bi-modal trait of mind has big implications for cognitive designers so I am always on the look-out for scientific studies that offer a refined view. For example, check out this National Science Foundation press release on research from Vanderbilt University that demonstrates we still exert conscious control during automatic or LOW mode processing.

They studied how errors were processed during typing. Some errors were natural others secretly introduced by the researchers.  Some errors were corrected secretly, some were not.  They looked for a decrease in typing speed and verbal reports to signal errors.

Here is what they found:

* No decrease in typing speed when subjects verbally reported making an error that was secretly introduced by researchers

* A decrease in typing speed when subjects made a real error if the researchers corrected it or not.

Researchers could fool the conscious process but not the automatic one. My fingers know the error had been made even when I was tricked into believing or consciously thinking otherwise. They called this the illusion of authorship.

“What’s cool about our research is that we show there are two error detection processes: an outer loop that supports conscious reports and an inner loop process that slows keystrokes after errors,” said Logan. “Typing slows down after corrected errors just like it slows down after actual errors. It maintains the same speed after inserted errors as after correct responses, as if nothing was wrong.”

These circumstance are strange – false errors and secret corrections being made by experimenters but keep in mind they are trying to see if there are two processes or one at work. Normally the inner loop (automatic) and outer loop (conscious) are using different sources of information to work together. This is what allows us to achieve such outlandish levels of speed and accuracy. However, it is not fully automatic. We are still running with a thin line of conscious control even though we are not thinking about the actions we are taking.  Perhaps this some form of embodied conscious control.

Creating new ways for people and machines to interact that stimulates supercharged levels of decision-making, learning, creativity and other knowledge production is a major innovation trend.  Powered by technologies such as the internet, social media and smart phones and enabled by clever “architectures of participation” that satisfy deep psychological needs we witness the emergence of raves, flash mobs, prediction markets, match-making markets and mass collaboration.  Sometimes the participation is so well wired that a form of cognition emerges that goes far beyond the capacity of all the individuals and anything normal group interaction can produce.  We temporarily get authentic networked intelligence or an emergent mind.

As a cognitive designer I am always on the lookout for new architectures of participation that have the potential to create emergent or networked levels of mental performance. For example, I am currently studying the unconference.   A new way of stimulating a group of intelligent and creative people to interact and share ideas.

Here are initial thoughts on some key features.

- Offer a general theme to select, attract or allow participates to self select. Do not create an agenda. An agenda should emerge from the participants. The design of invitations is important as it conveys the what and why that draw the right participants or not.

- Keep the group small but not tiny. 300 is a magic number for a maximum as any more and the human capacity for intense interaction between all members breaks down

- Bring participants together physically in a stimulating environment in a “get to know you experience”. Let topics, talks and schedules emerge from the group interaction in a self-organizing fashion.  Topics that don’t get critical mass die out.

- Keep talks short (TED style or even lighting style of 5 minutes), hold many sessions concurrently and let things go until people run out of mental energy.

- Planted facilitation using affirmative inquiry, open-talk agenda creation and other group techniques can make or ruin an unconference.

For a good second hand experience check this blog post on SciFoo 2010 an unconference at the Googleplex.  For some how-to tips check out Unconference a blog by Kaliya Hamlin, an experienced designer and facilitator of such events.

I am looking for evidence that the unconference is producing interesting cognitive results beyond what happens at a normal conference or organized meeting.

Every year Bain & Company, a leading management consulting firm, surveys and analyzes what tools are being used by managers around the world. The most recent results are  Management Tools 2009: An Executive’s Guide. They provide a general overview, a 16-page summary and a 130-slide detailed analysis.  You can see the top 10 tools and more by usage and satisfaction in this slide provided by Bain:

                   [Click on image for larger view]

Cognitive design, design thinking or innovating for how minds work did not make the list. Of course I would argue that doing good cognitive design is essential for applying nearly all of the management tools successfully.  Of interest to cognitive designer is this key finding:

Innovation continues to be very important – and difficult

- Eight of ten executives agree that “Innovation is more important than cost reduction for long-term success”, six of ten believe they could dramatically boost innovation by collaborating with other companies” and half say “their entire organization is actively engaged in improving innovation”

- Collaborative Innovation and Voice of the Customer Innovation are two of the five tools that show the largest likely increase in usage from 2008 to 2009

from page 10 of the slide deck.  Cognition-heavy tools are on the list including knowledge management (#15), voice of customer innovation (#21), online communities (#22) and collaborative innovation (#23).