Exhibit 1: Cognitive Operators Recall: The participant recalls facts specifically mentioned in the problem. Read: The participant reads words, phrases, or statements from the problem. Know: The participant is certain of some knowledge and to use it. Infer: The participant concludes or adopts as a logical consequence from evi-dence or premises. Evaluate: The participant examines or judges information specified in the prob-lem. Ask/Query: The participant utters a question, inquiry, or a doubt. Recommend: The participant counsels or advises that something be done to solve the problem Search: The participant searches for information about the problem or the solu-tion either on paper or in their memory. References Motivation: Carley, K. M. 1989. “The Value of Cognitive Foundations for Dynamic Social Theory.” Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 14(2-3): 171-208. Robbins, R.W. and Wallace, W.A. 2007. “Decision Support for Ethical Problem Solving: A Multi-agent Ap-proach.” Decision Support Systems, 43:4, p. 1571. Methodology: Gilbert, N., & Troitzsch, K. G. 1999. Simulation for the Social Scientist. Open University Press: Buckingham, UK. Data Collection: Ericsson, A.K. and Simon, H.A.. 1983. Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA. Problem Solving Activities: Lipshitz, R., and Bar-Ilan, O. 1996. “How Problems are Solved: Reconsidering the Phase Theorem.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65:1, p. 48. Cognitive Operators: Fernandez, R, and Simon, H.A. 1999. “A study of how individuals solve complex and ill-structured problems.” Policy Sciences, 32:3, p. 225. Cognitive Architecture: Wooldridge, M.J. and Jennings, N.R. 1995. “Intelligent Agents: Theory and Practice.” The Knowledge Engineering Review, 10:2, p. 115. Social Psychology: Ajzen, I. 1991. “The theory of planned behavior.” Organizational Behavior and Human Deci-sion Processes, 50, p. 179. Case: Chee, E., and Schneberger, S. 1998. British Columbia’s Pharmanet Project. University of Western Ontario. Richard Ivey School of Business. Web Application: Robbins, Wallace, and Puka. 2004. Supporting Ethical Problem Solving: An Exploratory Inves-tigation. ACM SIGMIS CPR 2004. Exhibit 2: Problem Solving Activities Context: The participant is “scanning” and understanding the environment. The participant is realizing that a problem exists. The participant identifies a “high level” problem.Structure: The participant is developing a “low level” analysis of the problem from the “high level” problem that was developed in a context activity. The participant is determining what is important. The participant is identifying sub-problems, is-sues, flaws, opportunities, etc. The participant is synthesizing a “high level” solu-tion. Design: The participant is developing a “low level” solution from the “high level” solution developed during a structuring activity. The participant may be develop-ing “high level” alternative solutions or “low level” alternative solutions that may be combined into a “high level” solution. The participant is creating/identifying ways/options/opportunities to address items identified in the structure activity.
This is the end of the preview.
access the rest of the document.