How Does Mind Processes Information and Represents Knowledge: An EmpiricalStudy

Ananta Kumar Jena*, Bhujendranath Panda**
* Assistant Professor, Department of Education, Assam University, Silchar, India.
** Professor & Head, Department of Education, Regional Institute of Education (NCERT), Bhubaneswar, India
Periodicity:May - July'2017
DOI : https://doi.org/10.26634/jpsy.11.1.13652

Abstract

The study aimed to know how does mind-map software assess the representation of learners' knowledge and how brain tester software assess the performance of left, right, auditory, and visual lobes of the brain to represent information. It also aimed to study the differential effectiveness of audio, visual, and audio-visual information to represent knowledge. Mind map tool used to know the students' knowledge representation in science, and for that purpose, different audio, visual, and audio-visual tools used to know how learners process cognitive information; those were experienced in the study. There was no hypothesis to draw inferences but three working hypotheses or the research questions framed to find out the result. Every individual has an independent information processor in left, right, auditory, and visual lobe of brain to represent information. It was also resulted that audio-visual information was more effective to process and represent knowledge than audio and visual information.

Keywords

Mind Processes Information, Representation of Knowledge, Software

How to Cite this Article?

Jena, A.K., and Panda,B. (2017). How Does Mind Processes Information and Represents Knowledge: An Empirical Study. i-manager’s Journal on Educational Psychology, 11(1), 40-52. https://doi.org/10.26634/jpsy.11.1.13652

References

[1]. Bechtereva, N. P., Gogolitsin, Y. L., Ilyukhina, V. A., Pakhomov, S. V. (1983). Dynamic neurophysiological correlates of mental processes. International Journal of Psychophysiology,1 (1), 49-63.
[2]. Boudelaa, S. & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2004). Allomorphic variation in Arabic: Implications for lexical processing and representation. Brain and Language, 90(1–3), 106-116.
[3]. Brüne, M. & Brüne-Cohrs, U. (2006). Theory of mind evolution, ontogeny, brain mechanisms a n d psychopathology. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 30(4), 437-455.
[4]. Burr, J. E. & Hofer, B. K. (2002). Personal epistemology and theory of mind: Deciphering young children's beliefs about knowledge and knowing. New Ideas in Psychology, 20 (2–3), 199-224.
[5]. Caron, A. J. (2009). Comprehension of the representational mind in infancy. Developmental Review, 29(2), 69-95.
[6]. Chaudhary, S. (1998). Knowledge of language and the multilingual mind. Language Sciences, 20(2), 201- 220.
[7]. De Villiers, J. (2007). The interface of language and Theory of Mind. Lingua, 117(11), 1858-1878.
[8]. Dove, G. (2009). Beyond perceptual symbols: A call for representational pluralism. Cognition, 110(3), 412- 414.
[9]. Esfahani, L. & Kellett, J. (1988). Integrated graphical approach to knowledge representation and acquisition. Knowledge-Based Systems, 1(5), 301-309.
[10]. Fekete, T. & Edelman, S. (2011). Towards a computational theory of experience. Consciousness and Cognition, 20(3), 807-827.
[11]. Fingelkurts, A. A., Fingelkurts, A. A., Neves, C. F. H. (2013). Consciousness as a phenomenon in the operational architectonics of brain organization: Criticality and self-organization considerations. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 55, 13-31.
[12]. Flavell, J. H., Green, F. L., Flavell, E. R. (1990). Developmental changes in young children's knowledge about the mind. Cognitive Development, 5(1), 1-27.
[13]. Gallese, V. & Goldman, A. (1998). Mirror neurons and the simulation theory of mind-reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2(12), 493-501.
[14]. Gallistel, C. R. (2011). Current developments in cognitive psychology, neuroscience, and the philosophy of mind. Advances in Psychology, 138, 2006, 5-22.
[15]. Harvey, J. G. & Harris, D. D. (1996). Enhancing the blackboard concept to produce a flexible, extensible knowledge-based design tool. Knowledge-Based Systems, 9(4), 233-243.
[16]. Hedberg, P. H.& Higgins, E. T. (2011). What remains on your mind after you are done?: Flexible regulation of knowledge accessibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(5), 882-890.
[17]. Hsu, J. S., Liang, T. P., Wu, S. P. J., Klein, G., Jiang, J. J. (2011). Promoting the integration of users and developers to achieve a collective mind through the screening of information system projects. International Journal of Project Management, 29(5), 514-524.
[18]. Khrennikov, A. (2004). Probabilistic pathway representation of cognitive information. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 231(4), 597-613.
[19]. Khrennikov, A. (2011). Quantum-like model of processing of information in the brain based on classical electromagnetic field. Biosystems, 105(3), 250-262.
[20]. Kiefer, M. & Pulvermüller, F. (2012). Conceptual representations in mind and brain: Theoretical developments, current evidence and future directions. Cortex, 48(7), 805-825.
[21]. Knauff, M. (2006). A neuro-cognitive theory of relational reasoning with mental models and visual images. Advances in Psychology, 138, 127-152.
[22]. Laskey, K. B. (2008). MEBN: A language for first-order Bayesian knowledge bases. Artificial Intelligence, 172(2–3), 140-178.
[23]. Lesgold, A. (1993). Beyond A Commodity View of Knowledge in Instruction. Advances in Psychology, 101, 425-433.
[24]. Mainzer, K. (2009). From embodied mind to embodied robotics: Humanities and system theoretical aspects. Journal of Physiology-Paris, 103(3–5), 296-304.
[25]. Maton, K. (2013). Making semantic waves: A key to cumulative knowledge-building. Linguistics and Education, 24(1), 8-22.
[26]. McGeer, V. & Pettit, P. (2002). The self-regulating mind. Language & Communication, 22(3), 281-299.
[27]. McNamara, T.P. (1986). Mental representations of spatial relations. Cognitive Psychology, 18(1), 87-121.
[28]. Merchie, E. & Van Keer, H. (2012). Spontaneous Mind Map Use and Learning from Texts: The Role of Instruction and Student Characteristics. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 1387-1394.
[29]. Obersteiner, A., Reiss, K., Ufer, S. (2013). How training on exact or approximate mental representations of number can enhance first-grade students' basic number processing and arithmetic skills. Learning and Instruction, 23, 125-135.
[30]. O'Brien, G. & Opie, J .(2004). Chapter 1 - Notes Toward a Structuralist Theory of Mental Representation. Representation in Mind: New Approaches to Mental Representation, 1-20.
[31]. Oztop, E., Wolpert, D., Kawato, M. (2005). Mental state inference using visual control parameters. Cognitive Brain Research, 22(2), 129-151.
[32]. Papaxanthis, C., Pozzo, T., Skoura, X., Schieppati, M. (2002). Does order and timing in performance of imagined and actual movements affect the motor imagery process? The duration of walking and writing task. Behavioural Brain Research, 134(1–2), 209-215.
[33]. Peled, A. (2005). Plasticity imbalance in mental disorders the neuroscience of psychiatry: Implications for diagnosis and research. Medical Hypotheses, 65(5), 947- 952.
[34]. Pulvermuller, F. & Mohr, B. (1996). The Concept of Transcortical Cell Assemblies: a Key to the Understanding of Cortical Lateralization and Interhemispheric Interaction. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 20(4), 557-566.
[35]. Purzycki, B. G. (2013). The minds of gods: A comparative study of supernatural agency. Cognition, 129(1), 163-179.
[36]. Rakhlin, N., Kornilov, S. A., Reich, J., Babyonyshev, M., Koposov, R. A.,Grigorenko, E. L. (2011). The relationship between syntactic development and Theory of Mind: Evidence from a small-population study of a developmental language disorder. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 24(4), 476-496.
[37]. Rauhut, H. & Lorenz, J. (2011). The wisdom of crowds in one mind: How individuals can simulate the knowledge of diverse societies to reach better decisions. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 55(2), 191-197.
[38]. Sauvage, C., Jissendi, P., Seignan, S., Manto, M., Habas, C. (2013). Brain areas involved in the control of speed during a motor sequence of the foot: Real movement versus mental imager y. Journal of Neuroradiology, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 21 February 2013.
[39]. Stevens, J. A. (2005). Interference effects demonstrate distinct roles for visual and motor imagery during the mental representation of human action. Cognition, 95(3), 329-350.
If you have access to this article please login to view the article or kindly login to purchase the article

Purchase Instant Access

Single Article

North Americas,UK,
Middle East,Europe
India Rest of world
USD EUR INR USD-ROW
Pdf 35 35 200 20
Online 35 35 200 15
Pdf & Online 35 35 400 25

Options for accessing this content:
  • If you would like institutional access to this content, please recommend the title to your librarian.
    Library Recommendation Form
  • If you already have i-manager's user account: Login above and proceed to purchase the article.
  • New Users: Please register, then proceed to purchase the article.