PSY 2403: Human-Technology Interaction
Lecture no. 4:
The Embodied Mind Paradigm:
Kjell Ivar Øvergård
Cand. Polit
Aim of this lecture
You should:
•
•
•
•
•
Understand the central tenets of The Embodied Mind
approach.
Be able to differentiate Embodiment from the
information processing approach to HumanTechnology Interaction.
Describe what the placement of the Embodied Mindapproach in relation to the design process.
Be able to put the Embodied Mind approach into the
historical perspective of Human Factors-research.
Ask interesting questions during and after the lecture!
The Embodied Mind approach [1]:
History
• Surfaced in the phenomenological philosophy of
of Heidegger (1927) and Merleau-Ponty (1962)
• Appeared in psychology & movement science in
the mid./late1970’s
• Began to influence Human Factors research
during the mid./late 1980’s
• Altered the focus away from information
processing towards meaningful representations
and distributed activity
The embodied mind approach [2]:
Central aspects
• Cognition and bodily movements are inseparable
• There are no disembodied planner or problem solver in
the brain
• The brain is an coordinative organ, not the seat of
problem solving and cognition
• The focus are on human activity as a temporally and
spatially extended process.
• Human cognition and movement are emergent
properties of a reciprocal interaction between a biological
system (the body) and an environment
Embodiment &
Human-Technology Interaction
Embodiment: Two aspects
• There are two different conceptualisations
of ’Embodiment’ (see Hirose, 2002).
• 1) ’The state of being embodied’
– This aspect is partly related to ontology
• 2) ’The act of embodying’
– The way which humans relate to/in the world
’The state of being embodied’
• The mental structures of humans are related
to/shaped by their bodily constitution and the world
that this body inhabits (see Lakoff & Johnson, 1999).
• ”That thought is thus embodied-containing within it
the very essence of our bodily experience. ... What
Infants do in everyday life, what they perceive, how
they act, and what they remember are joined
seamlessly to how they think.” (Thelen, 1995, p. 71)
• ”... thinking grounded in and inseparable from bodily
action.” (Thelen, 1995, p. 71, our italics)
”The act of embodying [1]”
• May be described as the adaptation to new tools or
environments through active use [or training], where the
object are incorporated into the bodily and perceptual
framework of the user.
• ”Once the stick has become a familiar instrument, the
world of feelable things recedes and now begins, not at
the outer sking of the hand, but at the end of the stick. ...
the stick is no longer an object perceived by the blind
man, but an instrument with which he perceives. It is a
bodily auxiliary, and extention of the bodily synthesis.”
(Merleau-Ponty, 1962, pp. 175-176)
”The act of embodying” [2]
• The ”blind man’s stick”-example show that the body does
not end at the skin, but rather can extend out into the
environment through [with the aid of] the tool.
• When the tool/technology is embodied, the user acts
directly on the task.
• The tool becomes nonexistent as an object, and does not
hinder the activity.
• May be said to describe an aspect of what is called
”automated activity” (but this term is problematic as it is
related to a set of different ontological statements!)
The act of embodying [3]
• Embodying is a continuous process, similar to
perceptual adaptation.
• It involves a change in the perception of both self and
the environment.
• Some technologies are difficult to use/learn, -they are
not as easily embodied.
– NOTE: Embodying is NOT the same as ’learning to use’!!
The act of embodying: [4]
Distributed Cognition
• Cognition and problem solving also extends outside the
boundaries of the skull, similarly to the extention of the
body.
• The mental activites of humans are distributed across an
ecological context.
– Called distributed cognition
– Are spatially and temporally distributed (Happen in space, over
time)
• We use external props to guide problem solving, (e.g.
maps and compass to guide navigation by high-speed
boat)
Distributed cognition (1)
•
Example of a text from the
syllabus
•
The important
characteristics of the text
are similar to the other parts
•
However, this text can be
altered to better fit with the
reader (or ’operator’)
Distributed cognition (2)
•
Same text as
previous page, but
now altered to fit the
reader
•
Use of pen and
paper is one of the
most common aids
for problem solving
•
Structuring of the
environment to ease
problem solving
•
This page is as
much a part of
human cognition as
thinking/visualizing/
talking
•
In principle similar to
navigation with maps
and compass.
Embodiment and Design [1]
• Humans are primarily good at pattern recognition &
formation, and at coordinating bodily movements.
• Humans are generally poor at logical reasoning and
planning
– The main elements that cognitive psychology have studied 
• Humans improve their mental computational power by
structuring their environment, thereby allowing more
complex problem solving.
Embodiment and design [2]
• Effective interfaces should have a meaningful and
functional relationship between controls and effects.
• ’Embodied’ Interfaces should (in addition) allow for:
– A Possibility to distibute problem solving activities by
restructuring the working space
– Physical interaction with the interface
– Alteration of the interface to fit changing task demands
Ecological Interaction Properties
• Describes physical/phenomenal characteristics of
interfaces which affects the ’directness’ of the interface
– Directness may be translated as the degree of problemsolving
necessary to effectively interact with an interface
– Direct interaction may be described as natural fluent interaction
based on existing human sensori-motor qualities
– Indirect interaction are equivalent with explicit abstract reasoning
and/or problem solving
– Human-Technology Interaction moves along the direct-indirect
continuum all the time.
– There may be other and/or better description of properties!
EIP [2]
• The Paper by Hoff et al is mainly related to the
phenomenal qualities of interfaces.
• Physical characteristics related to performance
are also possible to describe.
• It is to some degrees possible to predict
performance from physical characteristics
EIP & Embodiment: ”Knowledge in the
World”
• Affordances: Action-possibilies in the
environment
–
–
–
–
Related to the individual actor/observer
Neither subjective nor objective – but both
Directly meaningful for an actor
Can be perceived directly, are specified by the ambient energy
radiated from the environment
References:
Clark, A. (1997). Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again. Cambridge, Mass: The
MIT Press.
Clark, A. (1999). An embodied cognitive science? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(9), 345-351
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Heidegger, M. (1927/1962). Being and Time (Trans. J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson). Oxford, UK:
Blackwell Publishers
Hirose, N. (2002). An ecological approach to embodiment and cognition. Cognitive Systems Research,
3, 289-299.
Hoff, T., Øritsland, T.A. and Bjørkli, C.A. (2002) Exploring the Embodied-Mind Approach to User
Experience. Proceedings of NordiCHI Conference, p.19-23
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in The Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to
Western Thought. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Merleau- Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of Perception. (trans. Colin Smith). London, UK:
Routledge.
Thelen, E. (1995). Time-scale dynamics and the Development of an Embodied Cognition. In R. F. Port
& T. Van Gelder (eds.) Mind As Motion: Exploration in the Dynamics of Cognition. (pp. 69-100).
Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press