Digital Image Creation and Analysis as a Means to
Examine Learning and Cognition
Brad Hokanson
Department of Design, Housing, and Apparel
University of Minnesota, U.S.A.
[email protected]
Abstract. This paper presents research on the development of digital collages
and investigations into the cognitive efforts of graphic designers. The research
venue was an upper level undergraduate course in computer graphics. Work in
the course focused on the use of digital imaging software (Adobe Photoshop)
and the creation, manipulation, use and understanding of images. Graphic design students manipulated images to address a series of complex topics. This
study began with a hypothesis: computers may extend our cognitive abilities,
inspired at least in part by the work of McLuhan.
1
Introduction
The research questions remain essential: How. is thought amplified or extended
through the use Off.;Ompllt~rs? How do computers affect the way we think and learn?
How has our method or process of cognition changed through the use of various media; and how has our thought process been structured through the use of symbol systems such as writing, drawing, or speech? These questions are focused through an
examination of images and language.
How we solve problems and create is tied to how we think. We use technology to
solve problems. Examining the process of problem solving sheds light on cognition;
whether the process involves use of the computer or symbol systems such as drawing,
writing, or mathematics.
Changing the process of generation, of creation, changes the process of how we
think. If we generate ideas using different symbol systems or media, we are using
different processes to think. Subsequently, different creative processes mean the
thinking process, cognition itself, will be different. And, as cognition is different, so
too will be learning.
The true goal of learning is not the repetition of facts, but rather an improvement in
cognitive processes.
M. Beynon, c.L. Nehaniv, and K. Dautenhahn (Eds.): CT 2001, LNAI 2117, pp. 226-232, 2001.
© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001
2
Overview
Subjects were 17 undergraduates studying graphic design; three males and 14 females
ranging in age from 20 to 24. All were graphic design students and all were considered advanced students in the program. The course was required of graphic design
majors and centered on the use of digital imagery through the use of Adobe Photoshop and other graphics software.
The study focused specifically on a group of learners with specific characteristics;
a highly developed level of skill in visual material due to choice and education, a
highly educated group, and highly computerized group due to their profession and
education. Examination of the use of a different symbol system than that used by
mainstream society required this selection, and also allowed a more focused examination of the concept of symbol systems themselves. A more 'well-rounded' group
would not have had the interest in developing an understanding of a highly distilled
and rarefied symbol system or computer software.
This paper summarizes the study by examining how the findings support the original hypotheses and answer the initial research questions.
Six methods, including interviews, standardized tests, and image analysis were
used to gather data for the study; meaningful findings will be discussed. How the
findings relate to the body of research literature in the field will be examined, and the
extension of the findings to other areas will be noted. Ideas for future research will
follow, with some concluding remarks.
3
Observations
This investigation began with an understanding of the use of symbol systems, the use
of media in support of thought. Linguistic research extending from Whorf [15] to
recent work by Hunt and Agnoli [3] supports the concept of different 'languages',
different symbol systems directing our thoughts in varied directions. This study, while
not proving their hypotheses on cognition and language, remains a part of that tradition.
Extending Salomon's [12,13] concepts of internalization, it had been anticipated
that a professionally oriented participant group with a high orientation toward visual
or other divergent, non-text symbols would most readily present evidenceof cognitive
activity involving the use of these symbol systems. Extensive and focused use of the
symbol systems was also desired of the study activity. Both of these conditions were
achieved and remain present in the field in general.
The strongest indications of support for the original hypotheses, that computers and
alternative symbol systems advance and assist cognition, are evident in the interviews
and journals maintained by the participants.
Interviews proved most effective in the development of an understanding of the
participants and their thought processes. The interviews presented parallel sets of
ideas in the mixed use of images and words, of integrating words and pictures into
processes. Participants uniformly linked the creation of images to the use and manipulation of words.
the participants. The requirement of translation, of conversion of the written concepts
to visual images is an activity at the boundary between two symbol systems, words
and images.
The measurements and observations of the study illustrated a complex series of
processes that varied within and between individuals. Each participant appeared to
have their own method of working, of creating images.
The most important generalization was the use of an inclusive as opposed to an exclusive process in the creating of images. Simply put, participants would use words
and images in the creation of new images. As illustrated in the interviews, words
acted as a shorthand in the development of new images. Words helped create images.
It appears that in an 'image only' palette or symbol system, where the use of text is
removed from the primary means of expression, words still play an important part in
the development of images, and by extension, ideas.
While most students used simple words or linear lists to summarize or trigger ideas
for image development, the semantic maps originally used as a measurement instrument were adopted by some students and integrated into their methodology. Semantic
maps were viewed as a two dimensional listing of where information should be. In
any case, words remained a strong element in the design process.
What was discovered was a pragmatic, iterative, series of methods chosen for expediency. Through interviews and journals, students noted using tools that matched
their experience, selecting symbol systems as to which was the most expedient. Speed
and pragmatism became the most important elements in choosing the working symbol
system; images were used when most appropriate. Translation back and forth between
symbol systems, between text and image, was a common occurrence.
This pragmatic awareness of efficiency, a form of meta-awareness, is consistent
with published research on ability and computer use in learning. For example, writing
students chose the structures that allowed them the highest probability of success with
the easiest or most expeditious method (ironically, often with counter productive
results for learning) [1]. One must remember that the goal of educational technology
is to make learning more effective, not easier.
The magnitude of efficiency allowed by the computer can make a difference in the
ease and acceptance of use of alternative symbol systems. When learners are comfortable with the computer, and find that creating on the computer is as good and more
expedient than other methods, it will be used [11]. When it is not perceived as more
efficacious, it is not used. In this study, words were used as a fast shorthand; the images never got fast enough, in spite of their acceleration by the computer. The principles of internalization, and creation within a given symbol system may not have been
achieved.
Humans focus on expedient methods of resolving work. For example, the initial
substantial investment in learning to read and write is paid back in the continued ability to gather information and to think. A similar set of phenomena occurs with the use
of imagery and other non-word symbol systems. It takes effort to learn, but after
learning a cognitive medium, the capability is expansive and accelerates cognition.
4.2
The Nature of Intelligence
Olson's [8,9] concept, that "intelligence is skill in a media" was, from the beginning, a
central issue of the study. Recent research in divergent learning "styles" lends some
228
B. Hokanson
It appeared that learning software was the educational focus of the students as op-
posed to any other educational activity. Interviews later noted that skills were developing in communication and in the use of images, and "along the way, we learned
Photoshop." (student interview). This is a critical difference, in that this recognizes
that learning of specific procedural knowledge is required to successfully examine or
present other information or ideas. In other words, you need to know how to paint,
how to write, or how to manipulate digital images before one can communicate or
develop ideas.
The comments made by students in their journals illustrated their development in
the use of a new software program and subsequent use of images. The electronic
journals, while limited in their clarity, provided a series of minor observations that
supported other observations.
Portions of the study, specifically the surveys and the image analysis provide secondary support of the hypothesis. Surveys provided interesting observations. As
would be expected in any successful educational activity, perceptions of skill level
changed in the subject domain; students believed they learned the software. Additionally, a large but not significant change in the participant's perceived writing ability
was recorded. It is hypothesized that this unexpected finding is due to extensive practice in the use of a variety of symbols for communication, and that that use has transferred to their skill with other media, particularly writing. This clearly is a venue for
further research.
Evaluation of the images was limited to the more mechanical aspects of the images, and aesthetic or content based concerns were not included as part of this study.
The images, evolved and got more complex over the course of the study. It was hypothesized that increased complexity of image corresponds to an increased complexity of thought on the given topic.
The final research methods, the Watson/Glazer Critical Thinking Analysis
(WGCTA) and semantic webs were unsupportive of the initial hypothesis. The outside metric used in the study, the Watson/Glazer Critical Thinking Analysis, did not
record significant change. Semantic mapping did not show an improvement in student
cognition or understanding.
4
Discussion
First, two different theoretical interpretations are presented with the goal of unifying
the empirical information and background research into a cohesive whole. Each deals
with how we use language, how we use images, and how we think. First is a discussion of the interplay or interaction that occurs between image and word. Second, there
is included a discussion of the nature of intelligence and media. Woven through these
is the phenomena of efficiency, how the participants communicate and solve problems through the use of various symbols.
4.1
Words and Images Connected
Central to this study is the interaction and intersection between word and image. The
study began with word based information which was translated to visual images by
230
B. Hokanson
support to the use of various systems. The central finding of the study, the intense, bidirectional interaction between words and images advances this aphorism, leading,
perhaps to a redefinition of intelligence.
Initially, one can see through previous published research that various people understand and learn information through different media. There are claimed to be various learning styles, e.g. Kolb [7], Gardner's multiple intelligences in divergent media
[4], varied receptivity toward different languages as noted by Whorf [151 et al., and
the symbol systems of Salomon [12]. Intelligence has been primarily evaluated
through words, and specifically through writing through the past few millennia. Similarly, a word-based test of critical thinking, the WGCTA, found no development as
part of this study. Recognizing the range of symbol systems to communicate and
think, we may find that intelligence may be skill in any medium.
This study leads one to hypothesize that there may be a possible correlation between writing and imaging skills requiring additional investigation. This correlation
or interaction .may imply some transference of skills between different media and
different symbol systems.• The ability to decode a sequence of ·symbols may be applied to a different symbol system, reading words may lead to reading pictures; reading numbers may leadto (or require) reading graphical displays.
The ability to change and· shift media or symbol systems may be a critical element
in the use of computers and multi-media of the future. Intelligence may be skill in
multiple media...using multiple sources of exploration, both perception and thought,
using the symbol system or media that causes the most appropriate benefit.
In the investigation of advancement of cognitive processes, "thinking" more or
faster through the use of different symbol systems, and correspondingly the use of a
different perceptual. method, a wider range of symbol. systems will· need to be employed. Supplemented by a greater access to computing. capability, translation to and
between·various symbol·systemsmay rise in importance. This interaction, developed
asa skill; transferable~also implies that· developing.skill in one media· may improve
skill in others as well.
Intelligence is skill in the use and transferability of symbol systems; it is the use of
multiple systems, highly refined systems for specialized work, and the transfer between various symbol systems in the pursuit of thought.
5
Extension
As with any study, the extension of the study to a larger group or a different situation
will temper the findings. Expanding circles centering on the common student in
graphic design, involved in digital imagery can be constructed. Through that focus on
one aspect of human computer use and its application to thought and communication,
certain generalizations may be made, and which require additional research.
The study involved a small class in a specialized field of study. They developed a
high level of skill in using computer software to manipulate images, a skill that built
on years of study in the visual arts. The results can be considered narrowly generalizable to others in their field, or as part of an understanding of the nature of humans
using symbol systems divergent from the mainstream of text.
Findings of this study could be extended to others of similar populations; specifically those highly skilled in graphic media and familiar with computers. The value of
the study in application to other populations comes from the focused nature of the
personal interaction with the computer and not the specific software or symbol system. By this extension, the findings could shed light on others working intensively
with other software applications. It may also illuminate the use of images and the
nature of problem solving..
While most studies are in some way limited, each begins with a goal of using the
research to understand the larger picture based on a small study. The pragmatic requirements of empirical research must be balanced with the applicability to other and
larger situations. Specifically, this study may increase our knowledge of cognition,
the use of symbol systems, and the use of the computer as an aid to thought.
6
Directions for Further Research
The nature of research is to develop further questions, not just answers. Hence, what
follows is a series of directions for further research examining the border between
image and word, examining the nature of computer use, and continuing to attempt to
understand the nature of intelligence and media.
Some of the research methods employed uncovered interesting information, and
will direct future research. Specific beginning points include a perceived improvement in writing and a substantial interaction between words and images. Additional
study focusing on these two areas may increase our understanding of the use of varied
symbol systems.
The two major observations that integrated results from the varied research methods also suggest future research directions. The first observation, that the use of words
and images was interactive and iterative, is important to the understanding of images,
to visual education, and education in general. It's extension, that intelligence is tied to
our use of media, translation between media is similarly important.
Clearly, research into the efficacy of these switching of symbol systems would be
beneficial in understanding the use of images as a means to thought. Extension of
theoretical understanding on translation of symbol systems can also provide some
understanding: Summarizing, for example, remains important as a tool to understand
information. How does this correlate between translation between symbol systems or
visually summarizing information or concepts? Additional research is needed into
manipulating symbols as a means to stimulate higher order thought.
Other venues that attempt to isolate the use of symbol systems as manipulated,
changed, or applied via computers should also be examined. For example, an investigation as to the changed capabilities of a writer with and without the use of computer
may illuminate differences in ability. Another possible venue is an examination of the
use of and translation between different symbol systems.
7
Conclusion
The computer exists as a meta-medium [6], one with access and ability for a variety
of symbol systems and media. It allows the use of a wider range of symbols and symbol systems, and represents many alternative media in a single cognitive venue. Speed
232
B. Hokanson
and efficiency is of great importance in the use of any media, and that speed of use
has a major impact on the users' and learners' selection of symbol systems... and on
their ability to think. What began with an examination of the use of computers in
accelerating thought is ending with a greater recognition of the diversity of thought.
The study began its investigation with the goal of investigating the assistance one
received through the use of computer based symbols in cognitive processes. The study
focused on the specific use of a given symbol system and the access to that symbol
system through computers. Literature reviewed presented an understanding of symbols in thought, and on the manipulation of symbols. A series of methods were outlined for use in the study and applied. The findings presented a series of mixed results
that partially illuminate the use of the computer and digital imagery.
Words were found to be useful in planning and processing the ideas to be developed. A bridge, cited in journals and interviews, between word, information, and
image was found. It appears that the participants were skilled in the use of words in
the development of ideas; even those students that professed a lack of skill in the use
of words still employed words to some degree in the development of images.
The interaction between symbol systems, between words and elsewhere remains a
valid and interesting area for research and study.
References
1. Cochran-Smith, Marilyn, Paris c.L., and Kahn, 1.L, Learning to Write Differently, Norwood, N.J., Ablex, (1992).
2. Eisner, E. (1997, January). Cognition and representation, The Phi Delta Kappan, pp. 349353.
3. Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York:
Basic Books.
4. Hunt, E. & Angoli, F. (1991) The Whorfian Hypothesis: A cognitive psychology perspective, Psychological Review, 98(3):377-389.
5. Innis, H.A. (1954).Tht Bias of Communication. Toronto: University of Toronto.
6. Kay, A. (1984). Computer Software, Scientific American, 254 (3) 53-59.
7. Kolb, D. (1978). Learning Style Inventory Technical Manual. Boston: McBer.
8. McLuhan, M. (1964) Understanding media, the extensions of man:. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
9. Olson, D.R, (1966). On Cognitive Strategies, in Bruner, 1. S., Olver, RR, and Greenfield,
P.M. et. al., Studies in Cognitive Growth, New York: Wiley and Sons.
10. Olson, David R, (1974). Introduction, Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of
Education ,73d, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11. Perkins, D. N., (1985). The fingertip effect: How information-processing technology shapes
thinking, Educational Researcher, 14(6) p. 11-17.
12. Salomon, G. (1979). Interaction ofMedia, Cognition and Learning: An Exploration ofHow
Symbolic Forms Cultivate Mental Skills and Affect Knowledge Acquisition. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
13. Salomon, G. (1997). Of mind and media; How culture's symbolic forms affect learning and
thinking. Phi Delta Kappan, January 1997.
14. Von Bertalanffy, L. (1965). On the definition of the symbol, in 1.. R. Royce (Ed.), Psychology and the Symbol (pp. 26-72). New York: Random House.
15. Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee
Whorf New York: Wiley.
Meurig Beynon
Chrystopher L. Nehaniv
Kerstin Dautenhahn (Eds.)
Cognitive Technology:
Instruments of Mind
4th International Conference, CT 2001
Coventry, UK, August 6-9, 2001
Proceedings
Springer