We discuss a computational process model of action selection in routine procedures. The model explains several types of human error—omissions, perseverations, and postcompletion error (PCE)— as natural consequences of its action selection mechanisms. Those mechanisms include associative spreading activation for prospective memory and explicit rehearsal strategies for retrospective memory. The model fits empirical data from multiple tasks and from multiple labs.
References
1.
AltmannE. M. (2002). Functional decay of memory for tasks. Psychol Res, 66 (4), 287-97. doi:10.1007/s00426-002-0102-9
2.
AltmannE. M.TraftonJ. G. (2002). Memory for goals: An activation-based model. Cognitive Science, 26(1), 39-83. Retrieved from Google Scholar.
3.
AltmannE. M.TraftonJ. G. (2007). Timecourse of recovery from task interruption: Data and a model. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(6), 1079-1084.
4.
AltmannE. M.TraftonJ. G.HambrickD. Z. (2014). Momentary interruptions can derail the train of thought. J Exp Psychol Gen. doi:10.1037/a0030986
5.
AndersonJ. R. (2002). Spanning seven orders of magnitude: A challenge for cognitive modeling. Cognitive Science, 26(1), 85-112. Retrieved from Google Scholar.
6.
AndersonJ. R. (2007). How can the human mind exist in the physical universe?New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from Google Scholar.
7.
AndersonJ. R.BothellD.ByrneM. D.DouglassS.LebiereC.QinY. (2004). An integrated theory of the mind. Psychological Review, 111(4), 1036-60. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.111.4.1036
8.
BotvinickM.PlautD. C. (2004). Doing without schema hierarchies: A recurrent connectionist approach to normal and impaired routine sequential action. Psychol Rev, 111(2), 395-429. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.111.2.395
9.
ByrneM. D.BovairS. (1997). A working memory model of a common procedural error. Cognitive Science, 21(1), 31-61. Retrieved from Google Scholar.
10.
CardS. K.MoranT. P.NewellA. (1983). The psychology of human-computer interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
11.
GrayW. D. (2002). Simulated task environments: The role of high-fidelity simulations, scaled worlds, synthetic environments, and laboratory tasks in basic and applied cognitive research. Cognitive Science Quarterly, 2(2), 205-227. Retrieved from Google Scholar.
12.
GrayW. D.Boehm-DavisD. A. (2000). Milliseconds matter: An introduction to microstrategies and to their use in describing and predicting interactive behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6(4), 322-335. doi: 10.1037//1076-898X.6.4.322
13.
JustM. A.CarpenterP. A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99, 122-149. Retrieved from Google Scholar.
14.
NewellA. (1973). You can’t play 20 questions with nature and win: Projective comments on the papers of this symposium. In ChaseW. G. (Ed.), Visual information processing (pp. 283-308). New York: Academic Press. Retrieved from Google Scholar.
15.
RatwaniR. M.TraftonJ. (2010). A generalized model for predicting postcompletion errors. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2(1), 154-167. doi:10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01070.x
16.
RatwaniR. M.TraftonJ.G. (2011). A real-time eye tracking system for predicting and preventing postcompletion errors. Human-Computer Interaction, 26(3), 205-245. doi: 10.1080/07370024.2011.601692
17.
SalvucciD. D.TaatgenN. A. (2008). Threaded cognition: An integrated theory of concurrent multitasking. Psychological Review, 115 (1), 101-30. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.115.1.101
18.
SpiraJ. B. (2005). The high cost of interruptions. KM World, 14(8), 1. Retrieved from Google Scholar.
TraftonJ. G.AltmannE. M.RatwaniR. M. (2009). A memory for goals model of sequence errors. In Proc. 9th international conference of cognitive modeling. Retrieved from Google Scholar.
21.
TraftonJ. G.AltmannE. M.RatwaniR. M. (2011). A memory for goals model of sequence errors. Cognitive Systems Research, 12, 134-143.
22.
WallisC. (2006). The multitasking generation. Time Magazine, 167(13), 48-55. Retrieved from Google Scholar.
