Simulating navigation behaviour based on the architecture model Model Human Processor with Real-Time Constraints (MHP/RT)

Navigation behaviour is characterised by a strong interaction between the navigating agent (i.e. human beings) and the environment in which the navigation occurs. As the interaction is time critical, a theory for understanding the navigation behaviour must be capable of simulating navigation along the time dimension. This article introduces the Model Human Processor with Real-Time Constraints (MHP/RT; Toyota, M. and Kitajima, M., 2010a. MHP/RT: model human processor with real time constraints. In: S. Ohlsson and R. Catrambone, eds., Proceedings of the 32nd annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society, 529.) as an architecture model for simulating the human navigation behaviour. MHP/RT was created by combining two seminal works in different fields that deal with human behaviour. The first work is the Model Human Processor (MHP) in the field of applied psychology (Card, S.K., Moran, T.P., and Newell, A., 1983. The psychology of human–computer interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.). MHP successfully simulates the human users' operating information devices to accomplish computerised tasks. The other work focuses on Two Minds that operate in human beings' economical decisions (Evans, J.S.B.T. and Frankish, K., eds., 2009. In Two Minds: dual processes and beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.). This is the basis of the field of behaviour economics founded by D. Kahneman. This study demonstrates how MHP/RT simulates people's navigation behaviour by drawing a concrete example of navigation in a train station. The results of an observational study that was conducted independently of MHP/RT are introduced and further examined by running the processes defined in MHP/RT. The results of the observed navigation behaviour can be plausibly simulated by MHP/RT, confirming the validity of MHP/RT.

[1]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Rules of the Mind , 1993 .

[2]  Muneo Kitajima,et al.  MHP/RT: Model Human Processor with Real Time Constraints , 2010 .

[3]  Allen Newell,et al.  GPS, a program that simulates human thought , 1995 .

[4]  Motoyuki Akamatsu,et al.  Effect of cognitive ability deficits on elderly passengers' mobility at railway stations: Focusing on attention, working memory, planning , 2005 .

[5]  Bonnie E. John Why GOMS? , 1995, INTR.

[6]  Allen Newell,et al.  Human Problem Solving. , 1973 .

[7]  W. Kintsch The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-integration model. , 1988, Psychological review.

[8]  Richard Reviewer-Granger Unified Theories of Cognition , 1991, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[9]  John R. Anderson How Can the Human Mind Occur in the Physical Universe , 2007 .

[10]  Stephen J. Payne,et al.  Display-Based Action at the User Interface , 1991, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[11]  Christopher Olston,et al.  ScentTrails: Integrating browsing and searching on the Web , 2003, TCHI.

[12]  Jonathan Evans,et al.  In two minds: Dual processes and beyond. , 2009 .

[13]  Allen Newell,et al.  The psychology of human-computer interaction , 1983 .

[14]  David E. Kieras,et al.  The GOMS family of user interface analysis techniques: comparison and contrast , 1996, TCHI.

[15]  Werner Kuhn,et al.  A keystroke level analysis of a graphics application: manual map digitizing , 1994, CHI '94.

[16]  Michael E. Atwood,et al.  Project Ernestine: Validating a GOMS Analysis for Predicting and Explaining Real-World Task Performance , 1993, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[17]  C. Lebiere,et al.  The Atomic Components of Thought , 1998 .

[18]  H. Simon,et al.  Rational choice and the structure of the environment. , 1956, Psychological review.

[19]  Allen Newell,et al.  SOAR: An Architecture for General Intelligence , 1987, Artif. Intell..

[20]  T. Kumada,et al.  Effects of age‐related decline of visual attention, working memory and planning functions on use of IT‐equipment , 2010 .

[21]  D. Kahneman A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. , 2003, The American psychologist.

[22]  David E. Kieras,et al.  Using GOMS for user interface design and evaluation: which technique? , 1996, TCHI.

[23]  Makoto Toyota,et al.  MSA: Maximum Satisfaction Architecture: A Basis for Designing Intelligent Autonomous Agents on WEB 2.0 , 2007 .

[24]  Marilyn Hughes Blackmon,et al.  A Comprehension-based Model of Web Navigation and Its Application to Web Usability Analysis , 2000, BCS HCI.

[25]  Wai-Tat Fu,et al.  SNIF-ACT: A Cognitive Model of User Navigation on the World Wide Web , 2007, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[26]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition , 1998 .