Constructive Interaction and the Iterative Process of Understanding
Abstract
When people try to understand complex physical devices (e.g., a sewing machine), they proceed in an iterative fashion. They seem to reach several points at which they claim to “understand” the device. Each point of understanding is incomplete and requires a new level of understanding. As a result, they cycle between understanding and non‐understanding as they traverse different levels. The present study provides a framework to capture the iterative nature of understanding. These points are discussed and illustrated through observations of three pairs of people constructively interacting to understand how a sewing machine works. In addition to the iterative search for understanding, the conceptual point in space from which the speaker appeared to be viewing the machine was important. This conceptual point of view (C‐POV) was reflected in their use of language. The C‐POV appeared to be stable during points of understanding and to shift frequently at points of non‐understanding.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Miyake (1986) found that pairs of people went through cycles of understanding and not understanding as they gained deeper understanding of a sewing machine.
“For example, Miyake (1986) studied how pairs of people worked together to understand how a sewing machine works.She found that they went through cycles of understanding and not understanding as they gained deeper and deeper understanding of the device.”
From The Roles of Mental Animations and External Animations in Understanding Mechanical Systems (2003) · cites this paper as Miyake, 1986
The priority of functional over mechanistic understanding is consistent with previous research on understanding of complex machines.
“The priority of functional over mechanistic understanding is consistent with previous research on understanding of complex machines.”
From The Roles of Mental Animations and External Animations in Understanding Mechanical Systems (2003) · cites this paper as Miyake, 1986
Cites
Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes.
Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.3.231 · Cited by 11,317 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Problems of verbal reports have been discussed extensively (Nisbett & Wilson, 1977; Ericsson & Simon, 1980, 1984), but one unnatural aspect of the traditional protocol is that the subject is forced to talk out loud in a situation that would normally be silent.”
BackgroundEricsson (1993) · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.87.3.215 · Cited by 4,539 · see citing works
Book Review: Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data
Venkatesan, M., Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1986) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3151491 · Cited by 4,361 · see citing works
Point of view in narrative comprehension, memory, and production
Black, J. B., Turner, T. J., & Bower, G. H. (1979) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(79)90118-x · Cited by 294 · see citing works
Conversation as Planned Behavior
Hobbs, J. R., & Evans, D. A. (1980) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog0404_2 · Cited by 128 · see citing works
Miyake, N. (1982) · doi:10.21236/ada119109 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The misunderstood limits of folk science: An illusion of explanatory depth
Rozenblit, L., & Keil, F. (2002) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2605_1 · Cited by 1,032 · see citing works
Explanations From Intelligent Systems: Theoretical Foundations and Implications for Practice1
Gregor, S., & Benbasat, I. (1999) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249487 · Cited by 535 · see citing works
The Roles of Mental Animations and External Animations in Understanding Mechanical Systems
Hegarty, M., Kriz, S., & Cate, C. (2003) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci2104_1 · Cited by 404 · see citing works
Questions programmers ask during software evolution tasks
Sillito, J., Murphy, G. C., & De Volder, K. (2006) · Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering · doi:10.1145/1181775.1181779 · Cited by 270 · see citing works
Capturing motivation and emotion regulation during a learning process
Järvenoja, H., Järvelä, S., Törmänen, T., Näykki, P., Malmberg, J., Kurki, K., Mykkänen, A., & Isohätälä, J. (2018) · frontline Learning Research · doi:10.14786/flr.v6i3.369 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
- Authors
- Miyake, N.
- Affiliations
- University of California San Diego (US)
- Corresponding author
- Miyake, Naomi
- Venue
- Cognitive Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1986-04
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 151-177
- ISSN
- 0364-0213 (ISSN-L)
- 1551-6709
- OpenAlex
- W2154855967
- Cited by
- 445
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 27
- FWCI
- 5.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Cognitive Science (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University of California, San Diego
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
- Keywords
- constructive interaction, sewing machines, non-understanding
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
