Measuring Psychological Impact on Group Ontology Design and Development: An Empirical Approach

  • Tatiana Gavrilova
  • Ekaterina Bolotnikova
  • Irina Leshcheva
  • Evgeny Blagov
  • Anna Yanson
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 394)


This paper describes the interdisciplinary problems of group ontology design. It highlights the importance of studying individual features of cognitive style and their influence on the specifics of collaborative group ontology design and development. The paper describes the preliminary results of the research project focused on working out a new paradigm for structuring data and knowledge with respect to individual cognitive styles, using recent advances in knowledge engineering and conceptual structuring, aimed at creating new consistent and structurally holistic knowledge bases for various domains. The results of this research effort can be applied to organizing the group ontology design (especially for learning purposes), data structuring and other collaborative analytical work.


ontology cognitive science knowledge engineering 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Mizoguchi, R., Bourdeau, J.: Using Ontological Engineering to Overcome Common AI-ED Problems. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 11(2), 107–121 (2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schreiber, G.: Knowledge Engineering and Management: The CommonKADS Methodology. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dicheva, D., Aroyo, L.: Concepts and Ontologies in Web-based Educational Systems. Int. J. Cont. Engineering Education and Life-long Learning 14(3), 187–190 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dicheva, D., Dichev, C.: Authoring Educational Topic Maps: Can We Make It Easier? In: Proceedings of ICALT, pp. 216–219 (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dicheva, D., Dichev, C.: Helping Courseware Authors to Build Ontologies: The Case of TM4L. In: 13th Int. Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, California, July 9-13, pp. 77–84 (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Knight, C., Gašević, D., Richards, G.: An Ontology-Based Framework for Bridging Learning Design and Learning Content. Educational Technology & Society 9(1), 23–37 (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Davies, J., van Harmelen, F., Fensel, D. (eds.): Towards the Semantic Web: Ontology-Driven Knowledge Management. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gavrilova, T.: Teaching via Using Ontological Engineering. In: Proceedings of XI Int. Conf. Powerful ICT for Teaching and Learning PEG 2003, St.Petersburg, pp. 23–26 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gavrilova, T., Leshcheva, I., Strakhovich, E.: The use of visual conceptual models in teaching. In: Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Management Series, vol. (4), pp. 125–151 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gavrilova, T., Gorovoy, V., Bolotnikova, E.: Evaluation of collective ergonomics of ontology based on the analysis of the graph. Russian Academy of Sciences Journal ”Artificial Intelligence and Decision Making” 3, 33–41 (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gavrilova, T., Bolotnikova, E., Leshcheva, I., Strakhovich, E.: Collective corporate ontologies development. In: The XVth Scientific and Practical Conference Reengineering of Business Processes Based on Contemporary Information Technologies. Systems of knowledge management, Moscow, pp. 39–42 (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sowa, J.F.: Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1994)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jonassen, D.H.: Designing constructivist learning environments. In: Reigeluth, C.M. (ed.) Instructional Design Models and Strategies, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah (1998)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Conlon, T.: Towards Diversity: Advancing Knowledge-based Modelling with Knowledge Acquisition. In: Proceedings of 8th International PEG Conference, Sozopol, Bulgaria, pp. 379–386 (1997)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kinchin, I.M., De-Leij, F.A.A.M., Hay, D.B.: The evolution of a collaborative concept mapping activity for undergraduate microbiology. Journal of Further and Higher Education 29(1), 1–14 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chandrasekaran, B., Johnson, T.R., Benjamins, V.R.: Ontologies: what are they? why do we need them? IEEE Intelligent Systems and Their Applications. Special Issue on Ontologies 14(1), 20–26 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Neches, et al.: Enabling Technology for Knowledge Sharing. AI Magazine, 36–56 (Winter 1991)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gavrilova, T.A., Voinov, A.: Visualized Conceptual Structuring for Heterogeneous Knowledge Acquisition. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, EDMEDIA 1996, pp. 258–264. MIT, Boston (1996)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gavrilova, T., Leshcheva, I., Bolotnikova, E.: Using visual conceptual models in teaching. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Education, ICE-2012, pp. 191–197. Research and Training Institute of East Aegean, Greece (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Strakhovich, E., Gavrilova, T.: Cognitive aspects of educational ontologies design. New Trends in Software Methodologies, Tools, and Techniques. In: Proceedings of the Tenth SoMet 2011, pp. 227–233. IOS Press (2011)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gruber, T.: A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquisition 5, 199–220 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Guarino, N., Giaretta, P.: Ontologies and Knowledge Bases: Towards a Terminological Clarification. In: Towards Very Large Knowledge Bases: Knowledge Building & Knowledge Sharing, pp. 25–32 (1998)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gómez-Pérez, A., Fernández-López, M., Corcho, O.: Ontological Engineering with examples from the areas of Knowledge Management, e-Commerce and the Semantic Web. Springer, London (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Buzan, T.: Mind Map handbook. Thorsons (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Novak, J.D., Cañas, A.J.: The Theory Underlying Concept Maps and How to Construct Them. Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01, Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition (2006),
  26. 26.
    Leshcheva, I., Kotova, E.: Investigation of the relationship between expert’s cognitive style and ontologies built by expert. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium Hybrid and Synergistic Intelligent Systems: Theory and Practice, GISIS 2012. The Publishing House of the Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University (2012)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kholodnaya, M.: Cognitive styles. On the nature of the individual mind, 2nd edn., Piter, Saint Petersburg (2004)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Witkin, H.A., Moore, C.A., Goodenough, D.R., Cox, P.W.: Field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of Educational Research 47, 1–64 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kagan, J.: Reflection-impulsivity: The generality and dynamics of conceptual tempo. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 71(1), 17–24 (1966)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bolotnikova, E., Gavrilova, T., Gorovoy, V.: A method for evaluation of ontologies. Izvestiya RAN, The Theory and Systems of Management 3, 98–110 (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tatiana Gavrilova
    • 1
  • Ekaterina Bolotnikova
    • 2
  • Irina Leshcheva
    • 1
  • Evgeny Blagov
    • 1
  • Anna Yanson
    • 1
  1. 1.Saint Petersburg State UniversitySaint PetersburgRussian Federation
  2. 2.Saint Petersburg State Polytechnic UniversitySaint PetersburgRussian Federation

Personalised recommendations