Simple cognitive modeling in a complex cognitive architecture

Cognitive modeling has evolved into a powerful tool for understanding and predicting user behavior. Higher-level modeling frameworks such as GOMS and its variants facilitate fast and easy model development but are sometimes limited in their ability to model detailed user behavior. Lower-level cognitive architectures such as EPIC, ACT-R, and Soar allow for greater precision and direct interaction with real-world systems but require significant modeling training and expertise. In this paper we present a modeling framework, ACT-Simple, that aims to combine the advantages of both approaches to cognitive modeling. ACT-Simple embodies a "compilation" approach in which a simple description language is compiled down to a core lower-level architecture (namely ACT-R). We present theoretical justification and empirical validation of the usefulness of the approach and framework.

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

[2]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Estimating the relative usability of two interfaces: heuristic, formal, and empirical methods compared , 1993, INTERCHI.

[3]  Frank J. Lee,et al.  Does Learning a Complex Task Have to Be Complex?: A Study in Learning Decomposition , 2001, Cognitive Psychology.

[4]  Erwin R. Boer,et al.  Toward an Integrated Model of Driver Behavior in Cognitive Architecture , 2001 .

[5]  Michael Freed,et al.  Automating CPM-GOMS , 2002, CHI.

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

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

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

[9]  Bonnie E. John.  Extensions of GOMS analyses to expert performance requiring perception of dynamic visual and auditory information , 1990, CHI '90.

[10]  Dario D. Salvucci.  Predicting the effects of in-car interface use on driver performance: an integrated model approach , 2001, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

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

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

[13]  D E Kieras,et al.  A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms. , 1997, Psychological review.

[14]  Michael D. Byrne,et al.  ACT-R/PM and menu selection: applying a cognitive architecture to HCI , 2001, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[15]  David E. Kieras,et al.  Towards a Practical GOMS Model Methodology for User Interface Design , 1988 .

[16]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Serial modules in parallel: the psychological refractory period and perfect time-sharing. , 2001, Psychological review.

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

[18]  Anthony J. Hornof,et al.  Cognitive modeling reveals menu search in both random and systematic , 1997, CHI.