2003
DOI: 10.3758/bf03195536
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

TPL—KATS-card sort: A tool for assessing structural knowledge

Abstract: The study of how individuals organize knowledge has been a popular endeavor for several decades. As a result, techniques have been developed to assess how individuals represent and organize knowledge internally. Although several conceptual knowledge elicitation methods have been developed and used to assess the organization of knowledge, their use is often labor intensive and time consuming. Presented here is a software tool that was developed to reduce the problems associated with manually administering the c… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0
1

Year Published

2005
2005
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
18
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In contrast to other card sorting/grouping tools (e.g., Harper et al 2003;Knauff et al 1997), it is especially designed to use animated icons.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…In contrast to other card sorting/grouping tools (e.g., Harper et al 2003;Knauff et al 1997), it is especially designed to use animated icons.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…In contrast to other card sorting or grouping tools (cf. Harper et al 2003, Knauff et al 1997) the tool developed for this experiment is especially designed to display animated icons. Most of the experimental data was collected directly through the tool.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is probable that a combination of techniques (Shadbolt & Burton, 1989;Harper et al, 2003) may actually be very effective for eliciting competency questions. As mentioned previously, each of the three techniques requires some knowledge of the domain, which can be captured by reviewing available documentation and through unstructured interviews.…”
Section: Approach For Ontology Development and Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%