Foundations of Mental Model Research

Ongoing research at the Rockefeller College is exploring the ability of subjects in a computer-based management laboratory to manage the implementation of welfare reform. Reflections on the design of such research have pushed us to develop a firmer theoretical foundation to guide our research on mental models in dynamic decision making. We posit that mental models are multifaceted, including distinguishable submodels focused on ends (goals), means (strategies, tactics, policy levers) and connections between them (the means/ends model). These distinctions, coupled with a view of human judgment from Brunswikean psychology, lead to a rich integrated theory of perception, planning, action, and learning in complex dynamic feedback systems. From that theory we derive classes of testable research hypotheses about decision making in dynamic environments — in particular, “design logic” and “operator logic” hypotheses — that have serious implications for system dynamics research and practice. The operator logic hypothesis suggests that systems interventions focused on understanding detailed system structure will have little impact if they are not captured in easy-to-digest chunks of strategic insight that managers can integrate into relatively simple means-ends associations. Compounding the difficulties of mental model research is the likelihood that individuals’ mental models can not be directly elicited without distortion. 1 Preparation of this paper was supported in part by the National Science Foundation (Decision, Risk, and Management Science Program) under grant no. SES-9211521. Foundations of Mental Model Research Page 1