Expanding Communication Expectations: Examining Audience Understanding of Scripts Through Fold and Swap Strategies

Abstract

This entry presents cognitive-based strategies, called folds and swaps, communication professionals can use to introduce new concepts to different groups. A novel extension of prototype theory and script theory from cognitive psychology and linguistics, these strategies can help create messages that add, or fold, new ideas, activities, or items into existing processes. Communication professionals can also use these strategies to develop messaging that shifts, or swaps, the location individuals associate with performing different activities. Through an application of folds and swap strategies, communication professionals can help audiences contextualize new approaches to everyday activities.

Keywords

behavior cognition design expectations persuasion psychology usability

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Acharya

K. R.

(2019). Improving the quality of health care through human-centered design: Contextualizing design of biotechnology implementation for better health care and patient safety. Present Tense: A Journal of Rhetoric in Society, 7(3), https://www.presenttensejournal.org/volume-7/improving-the-quality-of-health-care-through-human/

Aitchison

(1994). Bad birds and better birds: Prototype theory. In Clark

V. P.

Eschholz

P. A.

,, & Rosa

A. F.

(Eds.), Language: Introductory readings (4th ed., pp. 445–459). St. Martin’s.

Araz

O. M.

Ramirez-Nafarrate

Jehn

Wilsond

F. A.

(2020). The importance of widespread testing for COVID-19 pandemic: Systems thinking for drive-through testing sites. Health Systems, 9(2), 119–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/20476965.2020.1758000

Bargh

J. A.

Morsella

(2008). The unconscious mind. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(1), 73–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00064.x

Barnum

C. M.

(2011). Usability testing essentials: Ready, set . . . test!. Elsevier.

Carliner

(2000). Physical, cognitive, and affective: A three-part framework for information design. Technical Communication, 47(4), 561–576.

Cheung

I. W.

(2017). Plain language to minimize cognitive load: A social justice perspective. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 60(4), 448–457. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2017.2759639

Cook

M. P.

(2006). Visual representations in science education: The influence of prior knowledge and cognitive load theory on instructional design principles. Science Education, 90(6), 1073–1091. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20164

Cooper

(1999). The inmates are running the asylum. Sams Publishing.

10.

Duhigg

(2012). The power of habit: Why we do what we do in life and business. Random House.

11.

Eyal

(2014). Hooked: How to build habit-forming products. Portfolio/Penguin Books.

12.

Feinberg

Murphy

(2000). Applying cognitive load theory to the design of web-based instruction. In Priestley

Longo

(Eds.), IPCC/SIGDOC ‘00: Proceedings of IEEE professional communication society international professional communication conference and proceedings of the 18th annual ACM international conference on computer documentation: Technology & teamwork (pp. 353–360). Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers. https://doi.org/10.1109/IPCC.2000.887293

13.

French

Hulse

Nguyen

Sobotka

Webster

Corman

Aboagye-Nyame

Dion

Johnson

Zalinger

Ewing

(2021). Impact of hospital strain on excess deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic—United States, July 2020–July 2021. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 70(46), 1613–1616. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7046a5

14.

Giordano

(2019). Ethics and accessibility to knowledge in prescription drug commercials in the USA. Anglistica AION: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 23(1), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.19231/angl-aion.2019110

15.

Giordano

(2022). Textual and visual distractors/catalyzers in advertising. Iperstoria, 20(Fall/Winter), 325–350.

16.

Heyes

(2018). Cognitive gadgets: The cultural evolution of thinking. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

17.

Kirschner

P. A.

(2002). Cognitive load theory: Implications on cognitive load theory on learning and design. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00014-7

18.

Kuang

(2019). User friendly: How the hidden rules of design are changing the way we live, work, and play. MCD-Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

19.

Lentz

de Jong

(2009). How do experts assess usability problems? An empirical analysis of cognitive shortcuts. Technical Communication, 56(2), 111–121.

20.

Lindstrom

(2010). Buyology: Truth and lies about why we buy. Broadway Books.

21.

Meek

(2013). Basics of communication: The communication basics we all need to know. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/notes-self/201307/basics-communication

22.

Melonçon

(2017). Patient experience design: Expanding usability methodologies for healthcare. Communication Design Quarterly, 5(2), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1145/3131201.3131203

23.

Mirel

Olsen

L. A.

(1998). Social and cognitive effects of professional communication on software usability. Technical Communication Quarterly, 7(2), 197–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572259809364624

24.

Nielsen

(1994). 10 Usability heuristics for user interface design. Nielsen/Norman Group. Retrieved, from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/ten-usability-heuristics/

25.

Norman

(2002). The design of everyday things. Basic Books.

26.

Pass

Renkl

Sweller

(2004). Cognitive load theory: Instructional implications of the interaction between information structures and cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021806.17516.d0

27.

Postle

B. R.

(2016). How does the brain keep information “in mind”? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(3), 151–156. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416643063

28.

Rapaille

(2006). The culture code: An ingenious way to understand why people around the world live and buy as they do. Broadway Books.

29.

Rivers

N. A.

(2011). Future convergences: Technical communication research as cognitive science. Technical Communication Quarterly, 20(4), 412–442. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2011.591650

30.

Rosch

(1978). Principles of categorization. In Rosch

Lloyd

B. B.

(Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 27–48). Lawrence Erlbaum.

31.

Schank

R. C.

Abelson

R. P.

(1977). Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding. Erlbaum Associates.

32.

Schumacher

R. M.

(2010). Foundations and definition. In Schumacher

R. M.

(Ed.), Handbook of global user research (pp. 1–20). Elsevier.

33.

Siau

Tan

(2005). Technical communication in information systems development: The use of cognitive mapping. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 48(3), 269–284. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2005.853933

34.

St.Amant

(2018). Reflexes, reactions, and usability: Examining how prototypes of place can enhance UXD practices. Communication Design Quarterly, 6(1), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1145/3230970.3230976

35.

St.Amant

(2021). Creating scripts for crisis communication: COVID-19 and beyond. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 35(1), 126–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/105065192095919

36.

St.Amant

(2022). Context, cognition, and the dynamics of design thinking: Cognitive methods for understanding the situational variables affecting usable design. Technical Communication, 69(1), 26–38. https://doi.org/10.55177/tc796562

37.

St.Amant

(2023). ARCO mapping the cognitive dynamics of communication expectations: An approach to designing usable content based on audience expectations. Journal of Technical Writing & Communication. Online first: https://doi.org/10.1177/00472816231187

38.

Sweller

(1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4

39.

Thaler

R. H.

Sunstein

C. R.

(2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and user experience basics. Yale University Press.

40.

Tomkins

S. S.

(1978). Script theory: Differential magnification of affects. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 26, 201–236.

41.

Tomkins

S. S.

(1987). Script theory. In Arnoff

Rabin

A. I.

,, & Zucker

R. A.

(Eds.), The emergence of personality (pp. 147–216). Springer.

42.

Tse

Langston

R. F.

Kakeyama

Bethus

Spooner

P. A.

Wood

E. R.

Witter

M. P.

Morris

R. G. M.

(2007). Schemas and memory consolidation. Science, 316(76), 76–82. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1135935

43.

Tyrkiel

(2021). How mental models affect both users and designers. Editor X. Retrieved, from https://www.editorx.com/shaping-design/article/mental-models

44.

UXness. (2018). What is the subconscious mind? https://medium.com/uxness/what-is-the-subconscious-mind-fc7ce9d3162f

45.

van Merrienboer

J. J. G.

Sweller

(2010). Cognitive load theory in health professional education: Design principles and strategies. Medical Education, 44(1), 85–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03498.x

46.

Verhulsdonck

Shalamova

(2020). Creating content that influences people: Considering user experience and behavioral design in technical communication. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 50(4), 376–400. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047281619880286

47.

Vukasovich

C. A.

Kostic

M. N.

(2022). Communicating during COVID-19 and other acute-event scenarios: A practical approach. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 36(4), 524–534. https://doi.org/10.1177/10506519221105493

48.

Wendel

(2020). Designing for behavior change: Applying psychology and behavioral economics. O’Reilly.

49.

(2016). The attention merchants: The epic scramble to get inside our heads. Vintage Books.

50.

Yablonski

(2020). Laws of UX: Using psychology to design better products and services. O’Reilly.

51.

Yamada

Itsukushima

(2013). The effects of schema on recognition memories and subjective experiences for actions and objects. Japanese Psychological Research, 55(4), 366–377. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpr.12016

52.

Yocco

V. S.

(2016). Design for the mind: Seven principles of persuasive design. Manning.