This paper discusses an approach for the development of visualizations intended to support cognitive processes deemed fundamental in the maintenance of Situation Awareness under conditions of uncertainty. We integrate ideas on external cognition from the cognitive sciences with methods for interactive visualization to help cognitive engineering examine how visualizations, and interacting with them, alter cognitive processing and decision-making. From this, we illustrate how designers and researchers can study principled variations in visualizations of uncertainty drawing from extended and enactive cognition theory.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BisantzA. M.CaoD.JenkinsM.PennathurP. R.FarryM.RothE.…PfautzJ. (2011). Comparing uncertainty visualizations for a dynamic decision-making task. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 5(3), 277-293.
2.
ClarkA. (2001). Mindware: an introduction to the philosophy of cognitive science. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
3.
ClarkA. (2008). Supersizing the Mind: Embodiment, Action, and Cognitive Extension. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4.
ClarkA.ChalmersD. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7–19.
EndsleyM. R.JonesD. G. (Eds.). (2011). Designing for situation awareness: an approach to user-centered design. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
7.
FioreS. M.RosenM. A.Smith-JentschK. A.SalasE.LetskyM.WarnerN. (2010). Toward an understanding of macrocognition in teams: predicting processes in complex collaborative contexts. Human Factors, 52(2), 203–224.
8.
FioreS. M.WiltshireT. J. (2016). Technology as Teammate: Examining the Role of External Cognition in Support of Team Cognitive Processes. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1531.
9.
GallagherS.VargaS. (2014). Social constraints on the direct perception of emotions and intentions. Topoi, 33(1), 185–199.
10.
GoodwinM. S.WiltshireT.FioreS. M. (2015). Applying research in the cognitive sciences to the design and delivery of instruction in virtual reality learning environments. In ShumakerR.LackeyS. (Eds.), Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality (Vol. 9179, pp. 280–291). Springer.
11.
General Accounting Office (2001). Military Transformation: Navy efforts should be more integrated and focused. (GAO Publication No. 01-853). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
12.
HenglT. (2003). Visualisation of uncertainty using the HIS colour model: Computations with colours. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on GeoComputation, Southampton, United Kingdom (pp. 8-17).
13.
HutchinsE. (1995). How a cockpit remembers its speeds. Cognitive Science, 19(3), 265–288.
14.
Johnson-GlenbergM. C.BirchfieldD. A.TolentinoL.KoziupaT. (2014). Collaborative embodied learning in mixed reality motion-capture environments: two science studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(1), 86–104.
15.
KirschenbaumS. S.TraftonJ. G.SchunnC. D.TrickettS. B. (2013). Visualizing uncertainty: The impact on performance. Human Factors, 56(3), 509-520.
MacEachrenA. M.RothR. E.O’BrienJ.LiB.SwingleyD.GaheganM. (2012). Visual semiotics & uncertainty visualization: An empirical study. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 18(12), 2496–2505.
18.
McLoughlinC.LucaJ. (2002). A learner-centered approach to developing team skills through web-based learning and assessment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(5), 571-582.
19.
MeyerJ.ThomasJ.DiehlS.FisherB. D.KeimD. A.LaidlawD.…YnnermanA. (2010). From Visualization to Visually Enabled Reasoning. Scientific Visualization: Advanced Concepts, 1, 227-245.
20.
PatrickJ.MorganP. L. (2010). Approaches to understanding, analysing and developing situation awareness. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 11(1–2), 41–57.
21.
SedigK.ParsonsP. (2013). Interaction design for complex cognitive activities with visual representations: a pattern-based approach. AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction, 5(2), 84–133.
22.
StowersK.KasdaglisN.NewtonO.LakhmaniS.WohleberR.ChenJ. (2016). Intelligent agent transparency: the design and evaluation of an interface to facilitate human and intelligent agent collaboration. Proceedings of the HFES Annual Meeting, 60(1), 1706–1710.
23.
VicenteK. J. (2002). Ecological interface design: progress and challenges. Human Factors, 44(1), 62–78.
24.
WilsonM. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 625–636.
25.
ZhangJ. (1997). The nature of external representations in problem solving. Cognitive Science, 21(2), 179–217.
26.
ZsambokC. E.KleinG. A. (Eds.). (1997). Naturalistic decision making. Mahwah, N.J: L. Erlbaum Associates.
27.
ZukT.CarpendaleS. (2007). Visualization of uncertainty and reasoning. In ButzAndreasFisherB.KrügerA.OlivierP.OwadaS. (Eds.), Smart Graphics (pp. 164–177). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
