Differential Access Hypothesis: The Effects of Task and Informatior Type on the Validity of Knowledge Acquisition Methods

Abstract

The types of knowledge captured using three knowledge acquisition (KA) methods, conceptual graphs, backward thinking, and sorting tasks, were examined. One hundred and forty-four participants were assigned to one of four conditions: (a) procedural-spatial, (b) procedural-verbal, (c) declarative-spatial, and (d) declarative-verbal. Participants in procedural conditions learned a virtual environment's layout before performing one of three KA tasks. Participants in declarative conditions received a tutorial about McCune-Albright Syndrome before completing a KA task. The procedural and declarative information was presented either spatially or verbally, depending on the condition. The predictive validity of each KA method for each information type (procedural vs. declarative), task type (i.e., spatial vs. verbal), and combinations of information and task types was evaluated by comparing the accuracy of the knowledge depicted by KA methods to various performance measures. Findings indicated that both task type and information type affect the validity of KA methods for capturing knowledge structures.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Cheatham

D. B.

Converse

S. A.

Kahler

Barlow

(2000). Differential access hypothesis: The types of knowledge captured using Pathfinder and conceptual graphs. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 44th Annual Meeting, 1–45.

Chignell

M. H.

Peterson

J. G.

(1988). Strategic issues in knowledge engineering. Human Factors, 30, 381–394.

Converse

S. A.

Cheatham

D. B.

(1997). Differential access hypothesis: The types of knowledge captured using rating tasks and backward thinking. Unpublished manuscript.

Converse

S. A.

Kahler

S. E.

(1992). Knowledge acquisition and the measurement of shared mental models. Contractors Report. Orlando, FL: Naval Training Systems Center, Team Performance Laboratory.

Cooke

N. J.

(1992). Modeling human expertise in expert systems. In Hoffman

R. R.

(Ed.), The psychology of expertise: Cognitive research and empirical AI (pp. 29–60). New York: SpringerVerlag.

Cooke

N. J.

(1994). Varieties of knowledge elicitation techniques. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 41, 801–849.

Gammock

J. G.

(1987). Different techniques and different aspects on declarative knowledge. In Kidd

A. L.

(Ed.), Knowledge acquisition for expert systems (pp. 137–163). New York: Plenum Press.

Hoffman

R. R.

(1992). Doing psychology in an AI context: A personal perspective and introduction to this volume. In Hoffman

R. R.

(Ed.), The psychology of expertise: Cognitive research and empirical AI (pp. 3–11). New York: Springer Verlag.

Shaw

M. L.

Woodward

J. B.

(1990). Modeling of expert knowledge. Knowledge Acquisition, 2, 179–206.

10.

Wilt

G. A.

(1998). A comparison of knowledge elicitation techniques for describing conceptual knowledge in declarative and procedural domains. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia.