Psychological Evaluation of Path Hypotheses in Cognitive Diagnosis

  • Stellan Ohlsson
  • Pat Langley
Part of the Cognitive Science book series (COGNITIVE SCIEN)


Consider a human being at work locating a fault in a car, proving a mathematical theorem, playing chess—in short, carrying out a cognitive task of some kind. We can capture an individual’s performance on the task by observing his or her actions and by listening to what he or she says. We wish to describe the mental processes that generated that performance. The problem of describing the mental processes of a particular person with respect to a particular task, given a performance record, is here called the problem of cognitive diagnosis. To the psychologist the problem of cognitive diagnosis is the problem of “research method”—how to process empirical observations of subjects. To the teacher it is the problem of “assessment” —how to evaluate the knowledge, or lack of knowledge, of students. To the computer scientist it is part of the problem of “user modeling”—how to construct interfaces that adapt to the individual user.1


Memory Load Problem Space Incorrect Answer Solution Path Psychological Evaluation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Attisha, M., & Yazdani, M. (1984). An expert system for diagnosing children’s multiplication errors. Instructional Science, 13, 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonar, J., & Soloway, E. (1985). Pre-programming knowledge: A major source of misconceptions in novice programmers. Human-Computer Interaction, 1, 133–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown, J. S., & Burton, R. R. (1978). Diagnostic models for procedural bugs in basic mathematical skills. Cognitive Science, 2, 155–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burton, R. (1982). Diagnosing bugs in a simple procedural skill. In D. Sleeman & J. S. Brown (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 157–183). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  6. Ginsburg, H. P. (1983). Cognitive diagnosis of children’s arithmetic. Issues in Cognition: Proceedings of a Joint Conference in Psychology. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences and American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  7. Hayes, J. R., & Simon, H. A. (1974). Understanding written problem instructions. In L. W. Gregg (Ed.), Knowledge and cognition (pp. 167–200). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.Google Scholar
  8. Hull, G. (in press). Research on error and correction. In B. W. McClelland & T. R. Donovan (Eds.), Perspectives on research and scholarship in composition. New York: Modern Language Association.Google Scholar
  9. Langley, P. (1983). Learning search strategies through discrimination. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 18, 513–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Langley, P., & Ohlsson, S. (1984). Automated cognitive modeling. Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Google Scholar
  11. Langley, P., Ohlsson, S., & Sage, S. (1984). A machine learning approach to student modeling. (Tech. Rep. CMU-RI-TR-84–7). Pittsburgh: Carnegie-Mellon University, The Robotics Institute.Google Scholar
  12. Marshall, S. P. (1980). Procedural networks and production systems in adapative diagnosis. Instructional Science, 9, 129–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Marshall, S. P. (1981). Sequential item selection: Optimal and heuristic policies. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 23(2), 134–152.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Michalski, R. S., Carbonell, J. G., & Mitchell, T. M. (Eds.). (1983). Machine learning: An artificial intelligence approach. Palo Alto, CA: Tioga Press.Google Scholar
  15. Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  16. Ohlsson, S., & Langley, P. (1985). Identifying solution paths in cognitive diagnosis (Tech. Rep. CMU-RI-TR-85–2). Pittsburgh: Carnegie-Mellon University, The Robotics Institute.Google Scholar
  17. Resnick, L. B. (1982). Syntax and semantics in learning to subtract. In T. P. Carpenter, J. M. Moser, & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Addition and subtraction: A cognitive perspective (pp. 136–155). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.Google Scholar
  18. Rosenbloom, P. S., & Newell, A. (1983, June). The chunking of goal hierarchies: A generalized model of practice. Proceedings of the International Machine Learning Workshop, Monticello, IL.Google Scholar
  19. Siegler, R. S. (1981). Developmental sequences within and between concepts. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 46 (2, Serial No. 189).Google Scholar
  20. Sleeman, D. (1982). Assessing aspects of competence in basic algebra. In D. Sleeman & J. S. Brown (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 185–199). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  21. VanLehn, K. (1983). Felicity conditions for human skill acquisition: Validating an AI-based theory (Tech. Rep. No. CIS-21). Palo Alto, CA: Xerox PARC.Google Scholar
  22. Wason, P. C., & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1972). Psychology of reasoning: Structure and content. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Waterman, D. A., & Newell, A. (1972). Preliminary results with a system for automatic protocol analysis (CIP Rep. No. 211). Pittsburgh: Carnegie-Mellon University, Department of Psychology.Google Scholar
  24. Williams, M. D., & Hollan, J. D. (1981). The process of retrieval from very-long term memory. Cognitive Science, 5, 87–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stellan Ohlsson
  • Pat Langley

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations