Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
•
Capture confidence, confusion, and/or interest via neurophysiological
indicators that could be associated with each evidence “nugget” gath-
ered to quantify the quality of each evidence item and, eventually, the
analysis as a whole.
•
Diagnose:
•
Identify which specific data elements cause analysts to become more
or less interested, confused, or confident and compare to pre-identified
areas of interest (AoIs).
•
Detect errors (e.g., false alarms, misses) during foraging that negatively
impact the extraction of relevant data elements.
•
Detect narrow search, which indicates potentially relevant information
is being discarded based on top-down processing or “explaining away.”
•
Mediate:
•
Collect, highlight, and/or force review of data elements to which analysts
showed “interest” subconsciously (i.e., detected via neurophysiological
indicators), but did not include in their analysis procedure (e.g., because
they were “explained away” by prior or tacit knowledge).
•
Encourage exploring or monitoring more of the information space,
enriching the data elements that have been collected for analysis by cre-
ating smaller, higher-precision data sets, and exploiting gathered items
through more thorough review if narrow search is detected during the
foraging process.
NEUROTECHNOLOGY FOR MEASUREMENT, DIAGNOSIS,
AND MEDIATION OF SENSE-MAKING SKILLS
Neurotechnology could also be used to enhance the measurement, diagnosis, and
mediation of sense-making skills during training. During bottom-up processing,
sense-making involves fitting evidence into schemas (i.e., representations from which
conclusions can easily be drawn), defining hypotheses/propositions and building sup-
porting cases, and telling the story that is laid out by the evidence (see Figure 3.1).
The schematizing activity focuses on supporting evidence marshaling, where the
analyst begins to build a case by assembling individual pieces of evidence into a
simple schema (Bodnar 2005; Pirolli and Card 2005). The objective of the hypothesis
generation/case building activity is to support theory formulation, which synthesizes
a number of interlocking schemas into a proposed theory. The storytelling activity
focuses on developing a presentation (i.e., present hypotheses with supporting argu-
ments: the ideas, facts, experimental data, intelligence reports, etc. that support/refute
it) through which to convey and disseminate the analysis results. During top-down
processing, sense-making involves questioning, reevaluating hypotheses, searching
for assessment support, and searching for evidence (see Figure 3.1). The objective of
the questioning activity is to reexamine the current story to identify if a new/refined
theory must be considered. The objective of the reevaluating activity is to explic-
itly state a new hypothesis to enable identification of the kinds of evidence to search
for that will support it or refute it. The objective of the search for assessment sup-
port activity is to look for available propositions that support or refute the working
Search WWH ::
Custom Search