Human interaction by models - a theory

Let us start with a simple exercise. Let me name a person and you tell me what you associate that person with.

Albert Einstein, Don Bradman, Mozart, Mahatma Gandhi, Neil Armstrong and Arnold Swarzenegger. The names given here are only for illustration. We can think of any name.

Now let us see what we associated each person with.

• Albert Einstein - great scientist, greatest theoretical physicist, Theory of Relativity, Bose-Einstein condensate, photo-electric effect.
• Don Bradman - greatest batsman ever, greatest Australian cricketer, explosive batsman.
• Mozart - Great composer
• Mahatma Gandhi - Ahimsa or non-violence, Father of the nation (India), freedom fighter, great leader.
• Neil Armstrong - first man on the moon, astronaut
• Arnold Swarzenegger - Terminator, body builder, actor, governor.

Your associations probably match mine. There will, of course, be some differences based on our individual knowledge and understanding. The general idea is that we associate some principal characteristics or properties with a person. Note that all these personalities had many other facets not listed here. They were householders, fathers, brothers etc. Einstein was an accomplished violin player. Swarzenegger is a politician. But only a few characteristics dominate.

Let us study a different example - a resistor.

A resistor is characterised by a V-I (Voltage-Current) relationship. For a resistor this is written as  V = I × R. This means for an applied voltage V, the current I is such that V = I × R, where R is the value of the resistor and is a constant. Conversely, if a current I flows through a resistor of value R, the voltage developed across it would be V. This is the model of the resistor and is used extensively. This simple  model, however, does not take into account the effect of temperature. It assumes the temperature is constant. To factor in temperature effects, R = Ro[1 + £(T-To)], where Ro is the resistance at a given temperature To, say 20°C,  £ is the coefficient of temperature and T is the temperature. Therefore, V = I × Ro[1 + £(T - To)] is a more accurate model of the resistor which factors in the variation in resistance due to variations in temperature. If we require a model accurate to the second degree of the temperature, then V = I × Ro[1 + £1(T -To)+ £2 (T - To)^2)] is the desired equation, where £1 is the coefficient of the first order variation and £2 is the coefficient for the second order. Even this equation would not work for all values of voltages and frequencies. We would have to add terms to account for variation due to these variables.

Thus we see that an equation (model) becomes more and more accurate (and complex !) as terms are added.

Refer to the following links for an educative write-up on resistors.

    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/restmp.html

http://www.edn.com/design/components-and-packaging/4423492/Resistors-aren-t-resistors

We note that:

1. There exists a model for everything - person, thing or situation.
2. A model is a simplified version of the real person, situation or thing (which may be quite complicated).
3. A model describes an input-output relationship.
4. Using a model we can predict the output for a given input.
5. For a given input, the output is only as accurate as the model itself.
6. While we use a real resistor in circuit, all calculations are made based on the model.

The same principle applies to people and situations.

We unconsciously define models for situations and persons in our mind. It is these models that define our interactions with the person or situation and determine our actions and reactions





Fig. 1: Pictorial representation of interaction by models



 

Fig.1 depicts how an interaction between two people, A and B, takes place. A has a model of B in his mind and B has a model of A in his mind. Each also has a model of the situation in his mind. A’s actions and reactions are conditioned essentially by three factors – his own innate nature, his model of the situation and his model of B. Let us see each in more detail.

• A’s innate nature or characteristics: This determines A’s responses based on his self. A’s likes and dislikes, comfort level, preferences, sense of duty etc. form a part of this. This determines his innate response. For example, a person who is methodical will tend to be so in most, if not all, situations.  A person who is a go-getter will prefer action.
• Model of the situation: A situation can be defined as a collective of a number of people and events. This model comprises A’s understanding of the situation. This sets the context. Every interaction between two persons takes place in a specific situation and this situation influences the interaction. The model of this situation is, therefore, important and its accuracy has a bearing on the interaction. This model influences every interaction A has with anyone in that context. For example, if a person is in financial difficulty, all his interactions will be influenced by his difficulties. He may look for opportunities to overcome his difficulties in all his interactions. In the least, his situation would weigh on his mind all the time.
• Model of B: This has a direct and immediate  bearing on the interaction. This is A’s understanding of B. Every interaction with B, in every situation, is influenced by this model. This determines A’s personalised approach towards B. For any given situation, A’s responses would be different for different persons.

A’s actions and reactions are unconsciously modified by these three factors. The same is true for B. Note that while A’s responses are conditioned by the models of B and the situation, it is the real B who will respond to A and vice versa. The more accurate the models, the more accurate the responses. RA is A’s response as conditioned by these three  factors. It is only as accurate as the models. Similar is the argument for RB.

Note that the box showing A’s or B’s nature is not a model. It is the real person. It becomes a model for the other person as shown by the box “Model of A” or “Model of B”. The more accurately the Model of A matches the real A, the more accurate the responses.

This model of interaction evolves continuously as we interact more and more with that person, get a better understanding of the situation  and we ourselves evolve. Let us consider each factor in more detail.

• The more we interact with a person, the more information we gather about him. This gives us a more accurate model.
• The more observant we are of the situation, the more details we gather and the more accurate a model we can form.
• When our model is not accurate, our understanding of the person or situation is not very good and the interaction may not be very fruitful. It may also lead to misunderstandings. If the other person has a very accurate models of us and the situation, the interactions may still be fruitful as he may be able to compensate, to some extent, for our poor model.

The three factors have different weightages. The weightages vary from situation to situation and from person to person. Which factor influences more depends on the situation and the two persons A and B. These three factors are not compartmentalised as distinctly as shown in Fig. 1. They are more overlapped and integrated. Fig.1 is only for a better understanding of the factors.

Let us see some examples of models.

• For example, we would be wary of a short-tempered person and try to avoid him. He may not react the same way every time, but we would be cautious. This is because our model tells us to act like that.
• Let us see another example. Suppose a person is very careless by nature and tends to make mistakes. If we were to give him any work, we would give multiple instructions and would also check his work. It is not necessary that he should make a mistake every time he does something but our action and reaction would be conditioned by the model we have in our mind.
• Stereotyping is another example of a model. Here the model is a commonly accepted one.
• The principle can also be seen in operation when wild life experts get close to wild animals. They seem to get dangerously close to animals like lions without any protection. But the amazing fact is that the animals also do not feel threatened and ignore them. They understand the behaviour of the animals very well and know exactly what they should and should not do. They know the distance of closest approach beyond which the animal would react. They also understand the surroundings very well. Their model is very accurate.
• Let us consider a mobile phone. It has many features. Our model of the mobile phone consists of the features we know. We may not know of all the features. These would be listed and described in the manual. If we were asked to describe  all the features (our model of the mobile phone), our description would be incomplete. This is a simple example as the feature set of a mobile phone would be limited unlike that of a person which would be very vast.

When our model of the situation and person is accurate, our predictions and responses are accurate. When either of the two models is poor, our actions and responses may be incorrect and even prove counter-productive.

A model is dynamic in nature. It changes with time. Generally, we start with a low accuracy model. This becomes more accurate over time. This is maintained for a period of time. Then it loses accuracy over time. This happens because we may have reduced interactions with the person or situation. We may also have impaired faculties as we age.  Fig. 2 illustrates the change in accuracy of the model over time. This is only an example. The actual variation could be more complex.



 Fig. 2: Variation in model accuracy over time

Why do we need a model ? A real person or situation is very complex. We would find it very difficult to factor in all the parameters when dealing with him/it. So we unconsciously form models, which are simpler versions of the real person or situation, to deal with them. The accuracy, and consequently the complexity, of the model depends on various factors.

Disclaimer: This theory is purely a rabbit out of my hat and is based on my personal understanding only. I do not have any data or study to back it up.