Mental Models Concepts in System Dynamics
Mental Models Concepts in System Dynamics
Introduction
Mental models play a crucial role in the efforts of system dynamics through the improvement of decision making and improvement of learning within complex systems. The human mind functions in creating, manipulating, and storing the internal modes of the dynamic systems. The interaction of the internal models forms a central aspect in Holistic/systematic thinking. The common approach used by system dynamic in their intervention of corporate and educational settings, use mainly the approach based on ‘surfacing’. This is an approach meant to understand the mental models of individuals through making assumptions and assisting in the process of model building.
These dynamists also change the mental models so as to enable them be consistent, dynamic, and complete as part of their intervention. This study will examine the significant limitations associated with the surfacing approach based on the work of Doyle and colleagues (1996). The paper analyses the concept of mental models and present how these models play a significant role in Holistic and systemic thinking. The limitations of the modern approach and method in studying mental models will be presented. Lastly, will assess how mental models can be changed based on the systems thinking approach.
Concept of mental models
The mental models concept forms a central role in systems dynamic especially on its inception. The participant’s mental models do make assumptions be explicit. The mental models form an essential part in systems dynamic filed. Mental models do play a central role in the improvement of the decision making process and improving on learning especially in complex systems. The methodology of system dynamics is a feedback process that uses mental models. This leads to the development of new opportunities that of learning that will improve on the coherence, complexity, and accuracy of the mental processes.
Mental models are no necessarily observable, but the description of its character is through inference based on observations of human behavior. The mental models are also subject to the aspect of ‘mental model uncertainty principle’. This principle shows that the act of measuring or understanding these them may in the process change the models. The difficulty associated with understanding of mental process is the reliance of biased and flawed mental models in the effort to find out their actual character.
Mental model as terms has by various meanings. This term was first used in the work of F.IM Craik, in his book, The Nature of Explanation (1943). For example, mental models, in psychology and other related fields, indicate the mental picture or diagrams, schemas, collection of beliefs, intuitive theories and mental representation. It can also mean knowledge networks. In the fields of controlled laboratory experiments, and mental dynamics on decision making, show that in a complex system, the mental models are subject to various limitations and flaws. For instances, metal models may not put into consideration the nonlinear relationships, time delays, and feedback loops, yet they are vital in determining the behavior of systems.
Furthermore, the limited capacity seen in the working memory makes it impossible for an individual to stimulate mentality the implications of numerous simplified mental models. Based on the system dynamics perspective, the adoption of a feedback perspective and a modeling dynamic system of discipline and adding the advantage of the computer to calculate the mental models dynamic consequences makes it possible to overcome these limitations and flaws.
The term mental model defines the capacity of the working memory. It is a person’s mental workbench that enables him or her to store information temporally as he thinks about it. Because the amount of information is into groups of meaningful information, within a flexible working memory, size of an individual mental model can to some degrees increase as they continue to learn and gain expertise.
Mental models in Systemic and Holistic Thinking
System dynamics is a growing applied discipline just like education assessment, risk communication, and human computer interaction. System dynamics is a concept that views mental models as a vital aspect in problem solving and decision making. This means that the mental models play a central role in holistic/systemic thinking. Based on the systems’ dynamic view, complex system management by human beings, can be interpreted as being a continuous feedback process.
In this process, the action taken by the management team leads to a change in the systems. In return, the system provides feedback that is essential in the formulation of a range of actions meant to bring the design close to the intended state. This means that the system acts to provide feedback that act as perceptible and measurable cues. From these cues, people form a set of perception concerning the stage of the system.
The perception can either be inaccurate or accurate based on the complexity and quality of the present cues. For instance, the absence or presence of error, on linearities, and confounding variables, the perceptions are based on the system’s mental process. The use of the available scanning and attention processes is by the mental model. The mental model influence has an impact on the cues seen from the system’s state that is desired. It may also influence the perception of the feedback. The system’s goals defined the desired state of the system. These conditions do have an impact on the system’s mental model and the reverse versa.
The presence of a gap between the desired state and the perceived state of the system, it means that there is the need to construct a set of alternative rules based on the action. The decision maker has to consider various decisions rules based on his or her reasoning skills, experience, and ability to be a critical thinker. Choosing a discussion rule to take an action may take two or one directions. Normally, many people make used of a new and revised perception of the system state to make changes to their mental models, and they carry out a mental simulations runs or thought experiments in predicting the suture condition of the systems. This is by also considering the alternative decision rules. These simulation effects are capable of moving the system more closely to its desired states that will be adopted.
Another alternative strategy that a person can use is to bypass the loop of the mental model. Instead, one searches his memory for other decision rules that may be potentially effective. People’s memories are full of various decision rules, especially simplifying heuristics that they have in the past led to successful means of solving problems. These decisions are from our experience either from an organization or culture in which a person works or lives. When memory search does not lead to helpful heuristics necessary in making the decision, they one will go beyond to rely of the general default heuristics that are helpful in solving a larger scope of situations.
Therefore, in the heuristic decision–making, people make a decision by looking at their experience in identifying the best way in solving a gap between the desired and perceived state of a system. For many people, the ordinary heuristic loops do dominate due to the mental-model–based loop effectiveness. This approach can however, lead to poor reasoning skills and cognitive limitation. When a decision rule is by the crucial decision–making loop that is dominate, people develop the intention to act or in the development of a basis to act by changing the current repeated cycles and the state of the system.
Delays in terms of time can have a significant impact on several points of the decision-making loops. For example, it can take years for certain vital cues if a system’s state to be clearly apparent. Mostly it can be taken by organizations or individuals to come up with decision rules or taken the right action. These decisions and actions can be mental-model-based or not. Actions can also take some time for their desired effects to be seen.
Based on a system dynamic view, it is clear that the heuristic loop is to a wide range of limitations that may hider one from critical and holistic thinking. This is because heuristic mode of thinking happens within the context of the currently existing mental models. There is minimal effectiveness of this approach as seen in the quality and quantity of experience of the decision maker. This approach is towards cultural norms and organizational norms. Heuristic form of thinking does not aim at improving the currently existing mental model. This makes it suffer from the limitation of not being able to provide effective scanning and attention processes or even develop other more accurate perceptions.
The mental-model loop, on the contrary, offers the potential of effectively solving problems and learning. Mental models can be changed based on this approach in order to support holistic and systemic form of thinking. This is possible through mental simulations that give an insight for the improvement of the appropriateness and specificity of the goals. The main problem faced in system dynamic has been on the way to device the best strategies of changing the dominant process. This means the change of decision making from being the heuristic loop to being the mental-model loop.
The limitations of current methods
The current methods used in studying mental models have limitations of accurately measuring the model systems. The facilitation methods currently used in the study of mental models is to improve the mental processes and to measure them. This results to the alteration of participant’s mental processes during and before measurement. The change in mental processes at the meaning of the measurement processes will not support effective intervention that should be used because it will not be possible to collect data before the intervention. The second limitation is that the change in procedure encountered within the process that is different from the initial procedure. In any intervention, it is necessary to place care at the beginning of theprocess so as to show the mental process of the client.
Little effort is in the current approaches in to gather evidence before the change occurs. This means that the mental models measures after the intervention will be using a different procedure that was considered from the beginning. This leads to lack of a clear way of determining the difference as to whether the change is the mental models or the way the measurement of the mental models. In order to achieve proper assessment, it is crucial to consider the use of similar instruments and procedures from start to the end of the intervention.
Modern researchers in the study of mental models work on the assumption that the more dynamic and improved mental models are by the interventions of systems thinking making them easily stable and acceptable. However, studies on cognitive psychology have indicated that a newly learned mental model, the inferior older mental model does not disapper. It is in memory to fight with the new model. At times of decision making, these two models compete with one another and make connections. Based on this assessment of mental models has to be done after some time to ensure that the change is desirable. This is with the current practices. It is also wrong to assume that the metal models within a group of people are at a shared consensus as seen in current measurement practices.
Comparing of mental processes is instead being done in isolation. Another challenge is with the active role of the facilitator in the processes of measuring mental models. This is involving the work that the facilitator takes in summarizing the participant’s ideas and taking control over the discussion. This leads to experimenter bias where the facilitator can give clues to the participants concerning the best ideas. This means the participants to leave their choices and choose that given by the teacher. Therefore, this practice is another limitation associated with the current measurement of mental models.
Application of the systems thinking approach
Based on systems thinking approach, it is possible to incorporate various mental model elicitations, variety of facilitation, simulation techniques, groups, and individual mental models. Based on this approach the mental model of an individual can be assessed based on the same procedure and instrument that was used during the pretest. The system thinking approach mainly has the advantage is the ability to separate then measuring process and in changing the mental models. Other advantages include; the ability to minimize the experiment influence and bias of the subject. Through this method, it is possible measured model improvement to be those used in making decisions in real life.
In order to prevent errors generated by asking participants to speak out their ideas in an unfamiliar and a new way, the narratives made by the participants is coded is in a casual loop diagram model. This is through experiments that are unaware of the experimental consideration by use of various psychological techniques that help in identifying the implicit and explicit structures within a narrative text. Through this method, it is possible to quantify aspect such as the number of subjects, feedback relations, and connections between variables, structure, post, and pre difference in mental dynamic models, complexity structure, and content. The sharing of mental models among people can also be measured through this approach. This method enables the assessment of an intervention’s effectiveness in the establishment of group consensus.
Conclusion
The field of system dynamic has in the recent past become a recognized aspect in system dynamic model in effectively improving systems. The use of the modern method of measuring metal model has to be changed because it is associated with various limitations that do not present the actual data. The paper has shown that the application of the new and rigorous method of systems thinking approach is able to provide reliable evidence on the actual measurements of mental models after interventions. The major problem analyzed is the merging of new and old mental models that can be easily be generalized in other interventions for systems thinking.
Reference
Doyle, J, Radzicki M & Trees S (1996) measuring the effect of systems thinking interventions on mental models. Worcester polytechnique institute.
Is this your assignment or some part of it?
We can do it for you! Click to Order!
