An Enhanced Mental Model Elicitation Technique to Improve Mental Model Accuracy

  • Tasneem Memon
  • Jie Lu
  • Farookh Khadeer Hussain
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8226)


The causal mental model representation has been used extensively in decision support. Due to limited information requirements of this representation, that is concepts and relationships, the users are required to articulate only the mental models, without invoking the corresponding experiential knowledge stored in associative memory. The elicitation of mental models without being endorsed by experiential knowledge may lead to inaccurate, invalidated or biased mental models, and espoused theories, being stored for decision making. We introduce SDA articulation/ elicitation cycle, which invokes a user’s associative memory during the articulation/elicitation process to validate mental models. It is argued in this paper that by engaging associative memory during the mental model articulation/elicitation process, the accuracy and validity of mental models can be improved, the biases can be reduced, and the theories-in-use can be elicited rather than the espoused theories. A case study is presented to demonstrate the working and contributions of the SDA articulation/elicitation cycle.


Mental model representation mental model articulation/ elicitation cognitive biases cognitive decision support 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Chermack, T.J.: Mental models in decision making and implications for human resource development. Advances in Developing Human Resources 5(4), 408–422 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Niu, L., Lu, J., Zhang, G.: Cognition-Driven Decision Support for Business Intelligence. Springer, Hiedelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vosniadou, S.: Mental models in conceptual development. Model-Based Reasoning: Science, Technology, Values, 353–368 (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Endsley, M.R.: Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37(1), 32–64 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schwenk, C.R.: The cognitive perspective on strategic decision making. Journal of Management Studies 25(1), 41–55 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carley, K., Palmquist, M.: Extracting, representing, and analyzing mental models. Social Forces 70(3), 601–636 (1992)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Besnard, D., Greathead, D., Baxter, G.: When mental models go wrong: co-occurrences in dynamic, critical systems. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 60(1), 117–128 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kahneman, D., Lovallo, D., Sibony, O.: The big idea: Before you make that big decision. Harvard Business Review, 50–60 (June 2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Memon, T., Lu, J., Hussain, F.K.: Semantic de-biased associations (SDA) model to improve ill-structured decision support. In: Huang, T., Zeng, Z., Li, C., Leung, C.S. (eds.) ICONIP 2012, Part II. LNCS, vol. 7664, pp. 483–490. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chen, J.Q., Lee, S.M.: An exploratory cognitive dss for strategic decision making. Decision Support Systems 36(2), 147–160 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mintzberg, H.: The Nature of Managerial Work. Harpercollins College Div, New York (1973)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jones, N.A., Ross, H., Lynam, T., Perez, P., Leitch, A.: Mental models: an interdisciplinary synthesis of theory and methods. Ecology and Society 16(1) (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kearney, A.R., Kaplan, S.: Toward a methodology for the measurement of knowledge structures of ordinary people: The conceptual content cognitive map (3cm). Environment and Behavior 29(5), 579–617 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ozesmi, U., Ozesmi, S.L.: Ecological models based on peoples knowledge: a multi-step fuzzy cognitive mapping approach. Ecological Modelling 176(1-2), 43–64 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dray, A., Perez, P., Jones, N., Page, C.L., D’Aquino, P., White, I., Auatabu, T.: The atollgame experience: from knowledge engineering to a computer-assisted role playing game. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 9(1), 6 (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Held, C.: Mental models as objectual representations. In: Carsten Held, M.K., Vosgerau, G. (eds.) Mental Models and the Mind Current Developments in Cognitive Psychology, Neuroscience, and Philosophy of Mind. Advances in Psychology, vol. 138, pp. 237–253. North-Holland (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ubel, P.A., Smith, D.M., Zikmund-Fisher, B.J., Derry, H.A., McClure, J., Stark, A., Wiese, C., Greene, S., Jankovic, A., Fagerlin, A.: Testing whether decision aids introduce cognitive biases: Results of a randomized trial. Patient Education and Counseling 80(2), 158–163 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Maqsood, T., Finegan, A.D., Walker, D.H.T.: Biases and heuristics in judgment and decision making: The dark side of tacit knowledge. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology 1, 295–301 (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Argyris, C., Schon, D.A.: Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. Jossey-Bass, Oxford (1974)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gary, M.S., Wood, R.E.: Mental models, decision rules, and performance heterogeneity. Strategic Management Journal 32(6), 569–594 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211(4481), 453–458 (1981)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tasneem Memon
    • 1
  • Jie Lu
    • 1
  • Farookh Khadeer Hussain
    • 1
  1. 1.Decision Systems and e-Service Intelligence Laboratory (DeSI), Centre for Quantum Computation and Intelligent Systems (QCIS)University of Technology SydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations