![](bg4.png)
2 METHOD
To test our hypothesis we made use of a method in
which participants solve a difficult geometrical
problem while thinking-out loud. Their
verbalizations were recorded and transcribed.
Subsequently, verbal utterances were coded into the
above specified nine output concepts. The use and
the order of the three above described processing
stages were determined on the basis of the prevailing
‘output concepts’. This way, we were able to
determine whether the observed conceptualization
unfolds according to the stages specified by our
model. This method is rather coarse in that
verbalizations need not be entirely synchronous with
the actual cognitive processing. We assume that the
nine types of output concepts are ‘tied’ to the
respective processing stages of Perception,
Contextualization and Predication (e.g., qualisign,
‘icon’ etc. – Perception; ‘rheme’, ‘dicent’, etc. –
Contextualization).
2.1 Participants
Twenty-eight 8th graders from the primary school in
Nuland, The Netherlands, took part in this
experiment. Age range was 11-12 years. The
participants were assumed not to be familiar with the
problem since it is not a part of their Math course.
This was confirmed by the teachers who reported
that knowledge directly needed to solve this problem
individually has not been acquired. This sample was
chosen because many IA applications are targeting
the respective population. Regarding their cognitive
development, 8th graders are similar to the adults
(Delfos, 2000).
2.2 Task
Participants were presented a problem based on
Plato’s Meno (Plato, 1871). They were shown a
picture of a square and were to find out how to
determine the length of the sides of another square
which is half as large as the first one. We chose this
problem because its solution is straight forward, as
outlined in (Magnani, 2001). At the same time the
problem is complex enough to elicit sufficient
amount of verbal utterances to be analyzed, as
determined in a pilot study involving two
participants. The participants rated the problem as
difficult although at their school level they have
already learned to compute the area of geometrical
figures which is necessary to solve this problem.
2.3 Procedure and Materials
The experiment was conducted using a standard
protocol. All sessions were videotaped. The time
intervals needed to solve the problem were
registered by the experimenter using a stop watch.
The setting was an empty classroom; a familiar work
surrounding for 8th graders. The experiment was
conducted individually. The experimenter was
seated in an L-setting with respect to the pupil in
order to avoid a suggestion of a ‘leadership role’ to
the experimenter since this may affect the pupils’
level of commitment to solving the problem. The
experiment was conducted during regular school
time. The experimenter was instructed not to
interfere with the process of solving the problem
unless this is indicated in the protocol. Each session
started with experimenter giving an instruction about
the task and the procedure. The recordings contained
on average 75 verbal utterances.
Instruction: “First of all you will receive a card
with a drawing on it. The drawing ‘represents’ a
geometrical problem. Your task is to uncover the
problem and to find its solution. While doing this I
would like you to say loudly everything you’re
thinking about this problem.”
This is called ‘thinking-out-loud’ method.
Subsequently, the participants were handed over the
card with the drawing representing the Meno
problem (see Figure 3) and the session started. It
was determined in advance in which situations the
experimenter will interfere and how: If a participant
was stuck with a (part of) the problem
(operationalized as inactive for 20 seconds) or if
he/she made a mistake, the experimenter prompted
him/her to try again and solve the problem or to try
and correct the error. Few types of errors were
anticipated upon which were already described in
Plato’s Meno and which also occurred in the pilot
study. Additional material was developed to
facilitate the problem solving by providing clues to
shift the participants’ focus in problem
interpretation. This material was provided if needed
in 3 different orders assigned randomly. An
illustration of additional material is given in Figure
3.
NEW CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT MODEL - Explorative Study of its Usability in Intelligence Augmentation
291