cognitive-interface-audit

Cognitive Interface Audit

A comprehensive cognitive interface audit with two modes and a single tier:

Modes:

• Planning (before UI exists) — task model design, user expertise mapping, error tolerance strategy, information architecture
• Audit (on existing UI) — mental model alignment, consistency, error tolerance, cognitive load, visual grounding, accessibility

Single tier: Unlike security auditing, cognitive interface evaluation is methodology-based (GOMS analysis, heuristic evaluation, NASA-TLX scoring), not tool-licensed. No paid software is required. The value is in the analytical framework, not the scanner.

Core question: "Does the interface think the way the user thinks?"

Academic foundations

This skill synthesizes seven research threads into a single audit methodology:

1. Task Model & Error Tolerance (Card, Moran & Newell 1983; Wood & Byrne 2002; Rasmussen 1983) — GOMS models predict how users decompose tasks. Wood's 7-layer defense framework predicts where errors occur and what defenses are needed at each stage. Rasmussen's SRK framework classifies errors by cognitive level (skill-based slips, rule-based misapplication, knowledge-based wrong mental model), each requiring different design countermeasures.

2. Visual Grounding & Common Ground (Gergle, Kraut & Fussell 2004/2013; Gergle et al. 2021) — Shared visual information affects task performance through two distinct mechanisms: situation awareness (does the user understand system state?) and conversational grounding (does the interface provide enough shared context?). Not just availability but the form of visual information differentially affects performance. The Joint Action Storyboard framework maps each interaction to its grounding cost.

3. Cognitive Load (Sweller 1988; Hart & Staveland 1988; Kahneman 2011) — Every interface decision either consumes or conserves working memory. NASA-TLX provides structured evaluation across 6 dimensions. Sweller's distinction between intrinsic load (inherent task complexity), extraneous load (poor design), and germane load (productive learning) guides where to invest and where to cut. Kahneman's Dual-Process Theory (System 1/System 2) identifies where interfaces force slow, deliberate processing when fast, intuitive processing could suffice.