In a recent series of posts ([3], [4], [5]) on similarity in cognitive maps and cause maps I outlined the importance of similarity. I wrote that similarity is one way to find undiscovered links. These new links, in turn, would show where participants (of the Causal Cognitive Mapping exercise) have common grounds. That is important, do not get me wrong. But an overemphasis may be misleading.
Monday
A second order approach to cognitive mapping
That is quite a title. Let's go through the terms and start with...
Cognitive Mapping
Cognitive mapping is about translating the thoughts of a person into a map. Such a map usually consists of statements that capture the thoughts of that person. These statements are usually depicted as rectangles that are linked with arrows that express some relationship between them. So you end up with a crowded map with a bunch of rectangles and arrows. To top it off you can merge cognitive maps of different persons into a single one which then gives you a cause map. Figure 1 shows a zoomed out example.
Figure 1 Cause map of the World3 model [1] (colours represent [scattered] clusters)
Second order approach
Second order approach - that is more difficult.
Cognitive Mapping
Cognitive mapping is about translating the thoughts of a person into a map. Such a map usually consists of statements that capture the thoughts of that person. These statements are usually depicted as rectangles that are linked with arrows that express some relationship between them. So you end up with a crowded map with a bunch of rectangles and arrows. To top it off you can merge cognitive maps of different persons into a single one which then gives you a cause map. Figure 1 shows a zoomed out example.
Figure 1 Cause map of the World3 model [1] (colours represent [scattered] clusters)
Second order approach
Second order approach - that is more difficult.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)