New to Theory Mapping?

Theory Mapping is a new and potentially revolutionary method to improve the quality of theories that society uses. It does this by improving the generation, communication, critique, refinement and selection of theories. It is particularly applicable to areas of inquiry which are not amenable to controlled experiment, where it provides a systematic approach to using empirical evidence and logic in the evaluation of theories.

It consists of drafting Argument Maps for each theory (in which ideas and arguments are represented by boxes connected by arrows) and then measuring how coherently they can explain agreed facts.

Whatbeliefs.com is the home of Theory Mapping. For more information the best place to start is the FAQs, which link to all the various posts on the site.
f

Sunday 15 February 2009

Theory Mapping Software

f
The application can either be developed from an existing Argument Mapping software, or developed from scratch. The former is probably most efficient, since the changes required would not be that large.

The best Argument Mapping software currently available is bCisive, which already has a Hypothesis Testing mode that can be used. Although many argument visualisation softwares have the boxes and arrows to allow argument mapping, a key advantage of bCisive is that much of the construction and positioning of boxes and arrows is done automatically. This makes it much faster to use. For instance, if you want to insert a new reason box into the map, you just drag it in, and the layout of the map is automatically adjusted. Whereas if you want to use normal box and arrow software like Inspiration/Webspiration, Compendium, or cMapTools, you have to manually move all the other boxes out of the way first to create space. This is very time-consuming when you are dealing with a large map.

The key modifications to bCisive that are needed to make Theory Mapping sufficiently user-friendly to gain widespread use would be (in order of importance):

  • Web-based: bCisive is currently in the process of being made web-based.
  • Add a ‘Facts panel’: Agreed Facts and Background Facts would be inputted into this in manually (or transferred from a database on the website once this is developed), from which they can be easily dragged onto the map (similar to how different boxes can be dragged onto the map from the Building Panel). bCisive already has a ‘Fact’ box that can be used. When dragged onto a map, only the title of the fact would be shown inside the box (given how long some facts may be), but hovering over the map would show the full text.
  • Notes: allow them to link to two boxes, so that inconsistencies between explanations and theories can be highlighted.
  • Reasons that support more than argument: place these automatically in a layer below the other argument trees, with lines linking them to the arguments. Before this is developed, they can be placed below manually, with a reference to them placed in the top layer so that it is clear to the reader.
  • Incoherence score: automatic calculation of the score based on Objections placed in the Theory Map and the Facts Panel.

Equally, a number of features in bCisive could be taken out in order to simplify the interface e.g. most of the content of the Building Panel and the Text Panel.
f
f

1 comments:

Anna Cumming said...

Thanks for your positive comments about bCisive, Strahan. Here at Austhink Software we're working on 'webCisive'! We're always interested in hearing about different uses to which bCisive owners put the software, and ways they'd like to refine it or customize it.

At the moment we're cutting our web-based teeth on bSelling, a sales process plug-in to Salesforce CRM that incorporates many bCisive features. We're learning a lot that will come in handy for a web-based bCisive down the track.

Post a Comment