Extracting Differences in Expert Mental Representations: An Application of a Technique for Characterizing Schemata

A study was conducted to test 1) the validity and generalizability of a technique for characterizing schemata of military intelligence information, and 2) its applicability for explaining differences in expert judgments. The task required tactical intelligence analysts to summarize a military scenario in preparation for a briefing. Ten analysts chose the south avenue of approach, and six chose the north avenue of approach as the correct solution. Extraction of topics from the analysts´ summaries was used to create a schema for each avenue of approach. The results demonstrated considerable agreement between the two derived schemata. However, critical differences were found, and these differences explained the analysts´ different conclusions. Implications for decision aid development and future research are discussed.