The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Soft constraints in interactive behavior: the case of ignoring perfect knowledge in-the-world for imperfect knowledge in-the-head*1, *2
Abstract
Abstract Constraints and dependencies among the elements of embodied cognition form patterns or microstrategies of interactive behavior. Hard constraints determine which microstrategies are possible. Soft constraints determine which of the possible microstrategies are most likely to be selected. When selection is non‐deliberate or automatic the least effort microstrategy is chosen. In calculating the effort required to execute a microstrategy each of the three types of operations, memory retrieval, perception, and action, are given equal weight; that is, perceptual‐motor activity does not have a privileged status with respect to memory. Soft constraints can work contrary to the designer's intentions by making the access of perfect knowledge in‐the‐world more effortful than the access of imperfect knowledge in‐the‐head. These implications of soft constraints are tested in two experiments. In experiment 1 we varied the perceptual‐motor effort of accessing knowledge in‐the‐world as well as the effort of retrieving items from memory. In experiment 2 we replicated one of the experiment 1 conditions to collect eye movement data. The results suggest that milliseconds matter. Soft constraints lead to a reliance on knowledge in‐the‐head even when the absolute difference in perceptual‐motor versus memory retrieval effort is small, and even when relying on memory leads to a higher error rate and lower performance. We discuss the implications of soft constraints for routine interactive behavior, accounts of embodied cognition, and tool and interface design.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Raising the costs of externalisations (e.g., by adding additional physical or temporal demands) increases the use of internal strategies such as memory-based processing, whereas lowering the costs of externalisations increases the use of technical tools (e.g., Cary & Carlson, 2001; Gray & Fu, 2004; Gray et al., 2006; Morgan & Patrick, 2013; O’Hara & Payne, 1998; Schönpflug, 1986).”
From Consequences of cognitive offloading: Boosting performance but diminishing memory (2021) · cites this paper as Gray & Fu, 2004
Citations
Cites
Rational choice and the structure of the environment.
Simon, H. A. (1956) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0042769 · Cited by 5,919
Six views of embodied cognition
Wilson, M. (2002) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03196322 · Cited by 4,782
The Effects of Operator Implementation Cost on Planfulness of Problem Solving and Learning
O'Hara, K. P., & Payne, S. J. (1998) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1006/cogp.1997.0676 · Cited by 155
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Supersizing the Mind: Embodiment, Action, and Cognitive Extension
Clark, A. (2008) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195333213.001.0001 · Cited by 2,201
Embodied cognition and the magical future of interaction design
Kirsh, D. (2013) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/2442106.2442109 · Cited by 465
Gray, W. D., Sims, C. R., Fu, W.-T., & Schoelles, M. J. (2006) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.113.3.461 · Cited by 360
Self-citationConsequences of cognitive offloading: Boosting performance but diminishing memory
Grinschgl, S., Papenmeier, F., & Meyerhoff, H. S. (2021) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1177/17470218211008060 · Cited by 147
Toward a Metacognitive Account of Cognitive Offloading
Dunn, T. L., & Risko, E. F. (2016) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/cogs.12273 · Cited by 122
Metadata
- Authors
- GRAY, W.
- Affiliations
- Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (US)
- Corresponding author
- GRAY, W
- ORCID
- GRAY, W
- Venue
- Cognitive Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-05
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 359-382
- ISSN
- 0364-0213 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4237293291
- Cited by
- 321
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 20
- FWCI
- 5.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Cognitive Science (publishedVersion)
- Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Interactive and Immersive Displays
- Keywords
- soft constraints, embodied cognition, interactive behavior, MicroStrategy, eye movements, routines
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review