This is Part 4 in the Learning in Ill-Structured Domains Series. Read the previous part here.
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://commoncog.com/ill-structured-domains-not-wicked/
This is Part 4 in the Learning in Ill-Structured Domains Series. Read the previous part here.
Chris Wong commented on something I wrote and cited this piece.
While writing out my response, I realized perhaps I should address my questions here instead. So here it goes
And so here’s my point: ill-structuredness is a separate property from the kindness or wickedness of a domain. It is totally possible to operate in a well-structured domain but within a wicked learning environment (where feedback is — for some godforsaken reason — withheld from you), or in an ill-structured domain but within a kinder learning environment (where it is relatively easy to track the outcome of decisions on highly variable concepts over long periods of time).
I observed the following distinctions:
Cedric seems to say property1 and property2 are different. But I am not sure how they are different. Or more importantly, how they are related.
The confusion is especially acute here.
Most importantly, though, Hogarth wrote that you may influence the validity of your intuitions — and the way that you do so is by picking the sorts of learning environments that you develop your expertise in.
In other words, kind learning structures and wicked learning structures are orthogonal to the kindness or wickedness of an operating domain.
First, Cedric cited Hogarth (I also haven’t read)
Then, he took Hogarth’s learning environments and turn into learning structures.
I am unsure if Cedric means
M1: “property1:kindess learning environments are orthogonal to the property1:kindess of a domain”
M2: “property2:structuredness learning environments are orthogonal to the property1:kindess of a domain”
Also there’s another possibility I have considered when Cedric chose the words kind learning structures instead of the original Hogarth’s words “kind learning environments”
M3: at the environments level, property1:kindness and property2:structuredness are one and the same. but at the domains level, they are different.
Finally,
M4: at the environments level, both property1 and property2 are orthogoanl to property1 at the domains level. property1 and 2 are different regardless at which class level (environments vs domains)
So which of M1, M2, M3, M4 does Cedric mean?
Hogarth uses the words learning structure and learning environment interchangeably.
The two things (ill/well structuredness and kind/wicked) are unrelated.
Medicine is an ill structured domain. But there can be kind and wicked learning environments in it:
Investing is an ill structured domain. But there can be kind and wicked learning environments in it:
You can carve out kinder learning structures inside an ill-structured domain. For instance, certain long-only hedge funds do case studies that compress investing decisions that would normally take place over the course of a decade into the space of an hour.
Similarly, high school math is a well structured domain but I can trivially create a wicked learning environment for you: I’ll just hand you a scoring rubric that scores your answers randomly for every test and I send it to you via post two months after you complete a mock exam.