I am partly ensconced in exploring a world that appears to have several “cross-overs/parallels with mindfulness and shared mindfulness – indeed sometimes I think that world is so close to the world of mindfulness that, in the main, semantics are the only differences. Sometimes I think that the two worlds are circling each other around the edges - possibly without one knowing about the other. At other times I see differences. The exploration to which I am referring is into the world of collaborative problem solving and external cognition. There is a group of scientists that has been looking at something they are calling “the science of team science” (sites.nationalacademies.org/dbasse/bbcss/currentprojects/dbasse_080231) “External cognition” is the aspect of their work that I am particularly interested in and which I think comes closest to what is being described here as shared mindfulness – indeed I think that there is a possibility that they could be one and the same thing. Here is an extract from a paper about external cognition: EXCERPT BELOW FROM: Fiore, S. M., Rosen, M. A., Smith-Jentsch, K. A., Salas, E., Letsky, M. & Warner, N. (2010). Toward an Understanding of Macrocognition in Teams: Predicting Processes in Complex Collaborative Contexts. Human Factors, 52(2), 203–224. (ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20942251). Extended and Externalized Cognition Recent and promising developments in the cognitive sciences relating the interaction of brain, body, and environment provide important theoretical grounding for macrcocognition in teams. Specifically, the concept of extended or externalized cognition has arisen as a way to describe cognition emerging and unfolding beyond just the brain and highly situated within particular contexts (see Clark, 2001; Clark & Chalmers, 1998; Hutchins, 1995; Rowlands, 1999). Traditional cognitive psychology has focused on cognition as computational rules, treating the mind as an information processing system which acts on and manipulates formal symbols. But the computer metaphor and the view of cognition as “information processing” forced an emphasis on an abstract, algorithmic and logical characterization of mind (Newell & Simon, 1972), and ignored the role of one’s interaction with the environment in the understanding of cognition. Literally, externalization means the placement of something outside its original boundary. In the context of cognition, this implies that what is normally construed as cognition within the brain can occur outside of the head (Clark, 2001; Clark & Chalmers, 2001), much like Norman’s (1980) notion of knowledge in the head and knowledge in the world. A simple example involves note taking or working out a problem on paper. Conventionally, taking notes is not considered “remembering”, but, in the present context, it is seen as an externalized cognitive function (see Clark & Chalmers, 1998). This notion is helpful for understanding macrocognition in teams because it addresses the degree to which collaborating teams use each other, their environment, and tools to solve problems. Specifically, cognition does not occur in a vacuum, but rather within and through a task and a context (see Clark, 2001; Clark & Chalmers, 1998; Hutchins, 1995; Rowlands, 1999). The emphasis is on the practice of cognition “by which internal representations are incomplete contributors in a context-sensitive system rather than fixed determinants of output: and they too focus on the ongoing interactive dance between brain and world” (Sutton, 2006, p. 282). Research into external and distributed problem representations illustrates this type of interplay between person and externalization in problem solving. External representations are viewed as “…knowledge and structure in the environment, as physical symbols, objects, or dimensions… and as external rules, constraints, or relations embedded in physical configurations” (Zhang, 1997, p. 180). Important features of the problem can be distributed across an individual’s internal cognitive system and the environment (Zhang & Norman, 1994; 1995) or between multiple individuals and the environment (Zhang, 1998). Fiore and Schooler (2004) elaborated upon the value of external representations to team problem solving. They suggested that “the degree the team-task requires the construction of a shared understanding, external representational tools can act as a scaffolding to facilitate the building of that shared representation” (p. 134, Fiore & Schooler, 2004). Specifically, externalizations become “a concrete manifestation of the team’s conceptualization of the problem… [noting that these] allow collaborators to visually articulate abstract concepts and manipulate these task artifacts as the problem solving process proceeds [and] act as a scaffolding with which the team can construct a truly shared, and concrete, depiction of the process problem” (p. 144). Additionally, Nemeth and colleagues (2004; 2006) have analyzed the value of externalizations in supporting medical decision making in hospitals. Highlighting the role that schedules, lists and display boards play in distributed decision making they note that, in support of decision making and planning, these tools “mediate collective work… as a way to maintain an overview of the total activity… [and] are products of various work activities that are distributed in time and location” (2006, p. 728). More specifically, in the context of operating room (OR) management, they describe how the “OR Board” is a form of externalized cognition that supports assessment and planning, as well as coordination for contingencies and negotiation of resources. Even in the more general area of collaborative medical decision making, researchers have developed group decision support systems in service of clinical reasoning and problem-solving (e.g., Lu & Lajoie, 2008). Given the uncertainties and complexities associated with this type of decision making, these have been developed as “cognitive-aid structures” (e.g., Rao & Turoff, 2000). The above examples illustrate a small subset of the large variety of types of external representations used in real world problem solving. Different types of external representations can be isomorphic (i.e., represent the same information or knowledge; Zhang & Norman, 1994) but have radically different effects on performance processes and outcomes (e.g., performing mathematical operations with the Roman vs. the Arabic numeral systems; Zhang & Norman, 1995). As such, formally depicting important features of an external representation is a challenge for macrocognition as well as the cognitive sciences more broadly. In short, externalized cognition is a valuable theoretical contribution to macrocognition in teams, particularly when performance is supported by technology and highly situated. However, while externalized cognition is important, the knowledge distributed across team members remains critical. (nationalacademies.org) I wonder how close these worlds are and if the research being done in this area by the science community might be helpful to the exploration of the possibilities for shared mindfulness that we are immersed in here....?
Posted on: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 09:38:20 +0000