Untangling Cognitive Processes Underlying Knowledge Work

TL;DR

This paper investigates the cognitive processes involved in knowledge work, revealing that existing classifications are too abstract to effectively guide the development of supportive cognitive tools.

Contribution

It evaluates existing cognitive process classifications using interview data, highlighting their limitations for designing practical cognitive support tools.

Findings

Existing classifications are too abstract for operational use

Many cognitive processes are identified but not sufficiently detailed

Current frameworks do not fully capture the complexity of knowledge work

Abstract

In a post-industrial society, the workplace is dominated primarily by Knowledge Work, which is achieved mostly through human cognitive processing, such as analysis, comprehension, evaluation, and decision-making. Many of these processes have limited support from technology in the same way that physical tasks have been enabled through a host of tools from hammers to shovels and hydraulic lifts. To develop a suite of cognitive tools, we first need to understand which processes humans use to complete work tasks. In the past century several classifications (e.g., Blooms) of cognitive processes have emerged, and we assessed their viability as the basis for designing tools that support cognitive work. This study re-used an existing data set composed of interviews of environmental scientists about their core work. While the classification uncovered many instances of cognitive process, the results showed that the existing cognitive process classifications do not provide a sufficiently comprehensive deconstruction of the human cognitive processes; the work is quite simply too abstract to be operational.