Ventana software support forum

Posted by ""Ahmet Ilker Soydan"" <ilkersoydan@hotmail.com>

Dear all,

I am curious about the methods for eliciting the simplification processes
from the subject's mental model. In other words, when faced with a complex
dynamic problem (probably during an experiment), what and how does the
subject simplify the process, which algoritms, line of reasoning, logic,
mental tool etc. does he/she uses? Why does he/she ignore some issues and
focus on some specific ones and what is his/her rationale for this?

How do you think we can get the most out of his/her mind during
experimentation? In particular case, is it a good/bad idea to ask for
his/her rationale (at each decision point during the simulation) behind the
current decision? Or even to give a reward for documenting his/her rationale
as well as his participation or even scoring?

As far as I read, there are some techniques like asking his/her idea for the
demand on graph chart after the game (for the case of beer game), giving a
scratch paper and collecting them back in the end etc...

Thanks in advance for your comments...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ilker SOYDAN, Phd Candidate
Politecnico di Milano
Dept. of Management, Economics and Industrial Engineering
Via Giuseppe Colombo 40, 20133, Milano
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by ""Ahmet Ilker Soydan"" <ilkersoydan@hotmail.com>
posting date Wed, 11 May 2005 15:32:57 +0000

Posted by ""Thompson, James. P (Jim) A142"" <Jim.Thompson@CIGNA.COM>

Ahmet Ilker Soydan wrote: ""...what and how does the subject simplify the
process, which algoritms, line of reasoning, logic, mental tool etc.
does he/she uses? Why does he/she ignore some issues and focus on some
specific ones and what is his/her rationale for this? How do you think
we can get the most out of his/her mind during experimentation? In
particular case, is it a good/bad idea to ask for his/her rationale (at
each decision point during the simulation) behind the current decision?
Or even to give a reward for documenting his/her rationale as well as
his participation or even scoring?""

Two complementary approaches to thinking about these issues can be found
in:

Radical Constructivism: A Way of Knowing and Learning
by Ernst Von Glasersfeld
Falmer Press (1995)
ISBN: 0750703873

Sensemaking in Organizations by Karl E. Weick
SAGE Publications (1995)
ISBN: 080397177X

In brief, we make sense of an experience by fitting it with other
experiences. If a new experience makes sense (""probably during an
experiment"" qualifies as an experience), we can make meaning from the
new construction composed of accumulated experience plus the new
experience. To make meaning seems to call for reflection followed by
some application -- some use -- of the newly constructed knowledge.

Von Glasersfeld and Weick use the notion of 'mental model' to explain
how individuals construct understanding and knowledge. Von Glasersfeld
is concerned with how individuals learn. Weick is principally concerned
with how individuals in organized groups make sense of experience.
Jim Thompson
jim.thompson@cigna.com
james.thompson@strath.ac.uk
Posted by ""Thompson, James. P (Jim) A142"" <Jim.Thompson@CIGNA.COM>
posting date Thu, 12 May 2005 11:27:19 -0400
-------

Posted by Alfonso Martinez <amvalderrama1@yahoo.com>
Hello,
maybe you can read something in the area of neuroeconomics. This
new area is trying to decode the mechanism of the human (& animal)
brain when making different decisions. I had read two interesting
papers.

One is called Neuroeconomics from C. Camerer (Caltech), G. Loewenstein
(Carnegie-Mellon) & D. Prelec (Sloan School of Management, MIT). I think
the reference is on SD list.

The other is called: ""Physiological Utility Theory and the
Neuroeconomics of Choice"" from Glimcher, P. W., Dorris, M. C. &
Bayer, H.M. (Center for Neural Science, New York).


Saludos,
Alfonso Martinez Valderrama


PD: Let propose a Nobel Prize for the System Dynamics investigation
area as a whole, so it may be more diffused around the world.
Posted by Alfonso Martinez <amvalderrama1@yahoo.com>
posting date Fri, 13 May 2005 01:08:42 -0700 (PDT)

Posted by ""Thompson, James. P (Jim) A142"" <Jim.Thompson@CIGNA.COM>

(Reposted - first sent as SD5280 with formatting error)

Ahmet Ilker Soydan wrote: ""...what and how does the subject simplify the
process, which algoritms, line of reasoning, logic, mental tool etc.
does he/she uses? Why does he/she ignore some issues and focus on some
specific ones and what is his/her rationale for this? How do you think
we can get the most out of his/her mind during experimentation? In
particular case, is it a good/bad idea to ask for his/her rationale (at
each decision point during the simulation) behind the current decision?
Or even to give a reward for documenting his/her rationale as well as
his participation or even scoring?""

Two complementary approaches to thinking about these issues can be found
in:

Radical Constructivism: A Way of Knowing and Learning
by Ernst Von Glasersfeld
Falmer Press (1995)
ISBN: 0750703873

Sensemaking in Organizations by Karl E. Weick
SAGE Publications (1995)
ISBN: 080397177X

In brief, we make sense of an experience by fitting it with other
experiences. If a new experience makes sense (""probably during an
experiment"" qualifies as an experience), we can make meaning from the
new construction composed of accumulated experience plus the new
experience. To make meaning seems to call for reflection followed by
some application -- some use -- of the newly constructed knowledge.

Von Glasersfeld and Weick use the notion of 'mental model' to explain
how individuals construct understanding and knowledge. Von Glasersfeld
is concerned with how individuals learn. Weick is principally concerned
with how individuals in organized groups make sense of experience.
Jim Thompson
jim.thompson@cigna.com
james.thompson@strath.ac.uk
Posted by ""Thompson, James. P (Jim) A142"" <Jim.Thompson@CIGNA.COM>
posting date Thu, 12 May 2005 11:27:19 -0400

Posted by Bill Harris <bill_harris@facilitatedsystems.com>
""Thompson James. P (Jim) A142 Jim.Thompson CIGNA.COM"" <system-dynamics@VENSIM.COM> writes:
>> In brief, we make sense of an experience by fitting it with other
>> experiences. If a new experience makes sense (""probably during an
>> experiment"" qualifies as an experience), we can make meaning from the
>> new construction composed of accumulated experience plus the new
>> experience. To make meaning seems to call for reflection followed by
>> some application -- some use -- of the newly constructed knowledge.


Gary Klein has written a couple of related books some may find of use;
see http://facilitatedsystems.com/weblog/20 ... aited.html
and http://facilitatedsystems.com/weblog/20 ... ition.html
for a brief introduction. And thanks for the books you suggested.

Bill
- --
Bill Harris http://facilitatedsystems.com/weblog/
Facilitated Systems Everett, WA 98208 USA
http://facilitatedsystems.com/
Posted by Bill Harris <bill_harris@facilitatedsystems.com>
posting date Fri, 13 May 2005 10:00:43 -0700

Posted by ""Louis Macovsky"" <dynbiosys@verizon.net>
Mental model creation: I would suggest going back in time and reading David
Hume's Treatise of Human Nature which was published anonymously in two
installments before he was thirty (1739, 1740). From a review by James
Fieser, Univ. of Tenn.: ""The Treatise explores several philosophical topics
such as space, time, causality, external objects, the passions, free will,
and morality, offering original and often skeptical appraisals of these
notions."" Hume explores how are [mental models] build upon primary
intrinsic and extrinsic properties/perceptions. While reading his works one
must remember what was known about the mind and thought at the time was
conjecture. However it would perhaps be a great modeling thesis for some
student.

Louis
Posted by ""Louis Macovsky"" <dynbiosys@verizon.net>
posting date Sat, 14 May 2005 08:15:04 -0700

Posted by Jonah <jfogel@utk.edu>
James Fieser's page... http://www.utm.edu/staff/jfieser/vita/r ... search.htm


Jonah Fogel
University of Tennessee
Posted by Jonah <jfogel@utk.edu>
posting date Sun, 15 May 2005 15:47:04 -0400

Posted by Matzaball50@aol.com
Folks,

There is life after Hume.

May I suggest the epistemology of one Karl Popper.

http://www.eeng.dcu.ie/~tkpw/

IMO, he does Hume, Locke, Kant, and Russell proud. A very nice 20th century
integration and advancement of some of the best of western philosophy.

regards,

Marc
Posted by Matzaball50@aol.com
posting date Mon, 16 May 2005 12:21:53 EDT