Mind map: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
←Blanked the page |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Mind maps can be drawn by hand, either as "rough notes" during a lecture, meeting or planning session, for example, or as higher quality pictures when more time is available. |
|||
Mind maps are considered to be a type of [[spider diagram]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/mind-map?q=mind+map |title=Mind Map noun - definition in the British English Dictionary & Thesaurus - Cambridge Dictionaries Online |publisher=Dictionary.cambridge.org |accessdate=2013-07-10}}</ref> A similar concept in the 1970s was "idea [[sunburst chart|sun bursting]]".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mind-mapping.org/mindmapping-learning-study-memory/who-invented-mind-mapping.html |title=Who invented mind mapping |publisher=Mind-mapping.org |accessdate=2013-07-10}}</ref> |
|||
== Origins == |
|||
Although the term "mind map" was first popularized by British [[popular psychology]] author and television personality [[Tony Buzan]], the use of diagrams that visually "map" information using branching and [[Radial tree|radial maps]] traces back centuries. These pictorial methods record knowledge and model systems, and have a long history in learning, [[brainstorming]], [[memory]], [[visual thinking]], and [[problem solving]] by educators, engineers, psychologists, and others. Some of the earliest examples of such graphical records were developed by [[Porphyry of Tyros]], a noted thinker of the 3rd century, as he graphically visualized the concept [[Categories (Aristotle)|categories of Aristotle]]. Philosopher [[Ramon Llull]] (1235–1315) also used such techniques. |
|||
The [[semantic network]] was developed in the late 1950s as a theory to understand human learning and developed further by [[Allan M. Collins]] and [[M. Ross Quillian]] during the early 1960s. Mind maps are similar in radial structure to [[concept map]]s, developed by learning experts in the 1970s, but differ in that the former are simplified by focusing around a single central key concept. |
|||
== Popularisation of the term "mind map" == |
|||
Buzan's specific approach, and the introduction of the term "mind map" arose during a 1974 BBC TV series he hosted, called ''Use Your Head''.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mind-mapping.org/blog/mapping-history/roots-of-visual-mapping/ |title=Roots of visual mapping - The mind-mapping.org Blog |publisher=Mind-mapping.org |date=2004-05-23 |accessdate=2013-07-10}}</ref><ref>Buzan, Tony 1974. Use your head. London: BBC Books.</ref> In this show, and companion book series, Buzan promoted his conception of radial tree, diagramming key words in a colorful, radiant, tree-like structure.<ref>[http://www.knowledgeboard.com/item/2980 Buzan claims mind mapping his invention in interview.] ''KnowledgeBoard'' retrieved Jan. 2010.</ref> |
|||
Buzan says the idea was inspired by [[Alfred Korzybski]]'s [[general semantics]] as popularized in science fiction novels, such as those of [[Robert A. Heinlein]] and [[A. E. van Vogt]]. He argues that while "traditional" outlines force readers to scan left to right and top to bottom, readers actually tend to scan the entire page in a non-linear fashion. Buzan's treatment also uses then-popular assumptions about the functions of [[cerebral hemispheres]] in order to explain the claimed increased effectiveness of mind mapping over other forms of note making. |
|||
==Mind map guidelines== |
|||
Buzan suggests the following guidelines for creating mind maps: |
|||
# Start in the center with an image of the topic, using at least 3 colors. |
|||
# Use images, symbols, codes, and dimensions throughout your mind map. |
|||
# Select key words and print using upper or lower case letters. |
|||
# Each word/image is best alone and sitting on its own line. |
|||
# The lines should be connected, starting from the central image. The lines become thinner as they radiate out from the center. |
|||
# Make the lines the same length as the word/image they support. |
|||
# Use multiple colors throughout the mind map, for visual stimulation and also for encoding or grouping. |
|||
# Develop your own personal style of mind mapping. |
|||
# Use emphasis and show associations in your mind map. |
|||
# Keep the mind map clear by using radial hierarchy or outlines to embrace your branches. |
|||
== Uses == |
|||
[[Image:Mindmap.gif|thumb|Rough mindmap notes taken during a course session]] |
|||
As with other diagramming tools, mind maps can be used to [[generation|generate]], [[creative visualization|visualize]], [[structure]], and [[taxonomic classification|classify]] ideas, and as an aid to [[study skills|studying]]<ref>'Mind maps as active learning tools', by Willis, CL. Journal of computing sciences in colleges. ISSN: 1937-4771. 2006. Volume: |
|||
21 Issue: 4</ref> and [[organization|organizing]] information, [[problem solving|solving problems]], [[decision making|making decisions]], and writing. |
|||
Mind maps have many applications in personal, family, [[education]]al, and [[business]] situations, including [[notetaking]], brainstorming (wherein ideas are inserted into the map radially around the center node, without the implicit prioritization that comes from hierarchy or sequential arrangements, and wherein grouping and organizing is reserved for later stages), summarizing, as a [[mnemonic technique]], or to sort out a complicated idea. Mind maps are also promoted as a way to collaborate in color pen creativity sessions. |
|||
In addition to these direct use cases, data retrieved from mind maps can be used to enhance several other applications; for instance [[expert system|expert search systems]], [[search engine]]s and search and tag query recommender.<ref name=Beel2009>{{Cite journal| first=Jöran | last=Beel | first2=Bela| last2=Gipp | first3=Jan-Olaf |last3= Stiller | contribution=Information Retrieval On Mind Maps - What Could It Be Good For? | contribution-url=http://www.sciplore.org/publications_en.php | title=Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications and Worksharing (CollaborateCom'09) | year=2009 | publisher=IEEE | place=Washington | postscript=. -->}}</ref> To do so, mind maps can be analysed with classic methods of [[information retrieval]] to classify a mind map's author or documents that are linked from within the mind map.<ref name=Beel2009 /> |
|||
==Differences from other visualizations== |
|||
* '''Concept maps''' - Mind maps differ from [[concept maps]] in that mind maps focus on ''only'' one word or idea, whereas concept maps connect multiple words or ideas. Also, concept maps typically have text labels on their connecting lines/arms. Mind maps are based on radial hierarchies and [[tree structure]]s denoting relationships with a central governing concept, whereas concept maps are based on connections between concepts in more diverse patterns. However, either can be part of a larger [[personal knowledge base]] system. |
|||
* '''Modelling graphs''' - There is no rigorous right or wrong with mind maps, relying on the arbitrariness of [[mnemonic]] systems. A [[UML diagram]] or a [[semantic network]] has structured elements modelling relationships, with lines connecting objects to indicate relationship. This is generally done in black and white with a clear and agreed iconography. Mind maps serve a different purpose: they help with memory and organization. Mind maps are collections of words structured by the mental context of the author with visual mnemonics, and, through the use of colour, icons and visual links, are informal and necessary to the proper functioning of the mind map. |
|||
==Research== |
|||
'''Effectiveness''' - Cunningham (2005) conducted a user study in which 80% of the students thought "mindmapping helped them understand concepts and ideas in science".<ref name="Cunningham05">{{cite thesis| type=Ph.D.| author={G}lennis {E}dge {C}unningham| title=Mindmapping: Its Effects on Student Achievement in High School Biology| year=2005| publisher=The University of Texas at Austin| accessdate=1 November 2013}}</ref> Other studies also report positive effects through the use of mind maps.<ref name="Holland2004">{{cite journal| author={B}rian {H}olland, {L}ynda {H}olland, {J}enny {D}avies| title=An investigation into the concept of mind mapping and the use of mind mapping software to support and improve student academic performance| year=2004| accessdate=1 November 2013}}</ref><ref name="Antoni2006">{{cite journal| author=D'Antoni, A.V., Zipp, G.P.| title=Applications of the Mind Map Learning Technique in Chiropractic Education: A Pilot Study and Literature| year=2006| accessdate=1 November 2013}}</ref> Farrand, Hussain, and Hennessy (2002) found that [[spider diagram]]s (similar to concept maps) had limited, but significant, impact on memory recall in undergraduate students (a 10% increase over baseline for a 600-word text only) as compared to preferred study methods (a 6% increase over baseline).<ref name= Farrand2002>{{cite journal |author=Farrand, P. |author2=Hussain, F. |author3=Hennessy, E. |year=2002 |title=The efficacy of the mind map study technique |journal=Medical Education |volume=36 |issue=5 |pages=426–431 |url=http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118952400/abstract |accessdate=2009-02-16 |doi=10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01205.x |pmid=12028392}}</ref> This improvement was only robust after a week for those in the diagram group and there was a significant decrease in motivation compared to the subjects' preferred methods of note taking. A meta study about [[concept map]]ping concluded that concept mapping is more effective than "reading text passages, attending lectures, and participating in class discussions".<ref name="Nesbit06">{{cite journal| author={N}esbit, {J}.{C}., {A}desope, {O}.{O}.| title=Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis| journal=Review of Educational Research| year=2006| volume=76| number=3| pages=413| publisher=Sage Publications| accessdate=1 November 2013| doi=10.3102/00346543076003413}}</ref> The same study also concluded that concept mapping is slightly more effective "than other constructive activities such as writing summaries and outlines". In addition, they concluded that low-ability students may benefit more from mind mapping than high-ability students. |
|||
'''Features of Mind Maps''' - Beel & Langer (2011) conducted a comprehensive analysis of the content of mind maps.<ref name="Beel2011d">{{cite book| author={J}oeran {B}eel, {S}tefan {L}anger| chapter=An Exploratory Analysis of Mind Maps| title=Proceedings of the 11th ACM Symposium on Document Engineering (DocEng'11)| year=2011| publisher=ACM| url=http://docear.org/papers/An%20Exploratory%20Analysis%20of%20Mind%20Maps%20--%20preprint.pdf | accessdate=1 November 2013}}</ref> They analysed 19,379 mind maps from 11,179 users of the mind mapping applications [[SciPlore MindMapping]] (now [[Docear]]) and [[MindMeister]]. Results include that average users create only a few mind maps (mean=2.7), average mind maps are rather small (31 nodes) with each node containing about 3 words (median). However, there were exceptions. One user created more than 200 mind maps, the largest mind map consisted of more than 50,000 nodes and the largest node contained ~7500 words. The study also showed that between different mind mapping applications ([[Docear]] vs [[MindMeister]]) significant differences exist related to how users create mind maps. |
|||
'''Automatic Creating of Mind Maps''' - There have been some attempts to create mind maps automatically. Brucks & Schommer created mind maps automatically from full-text streams.<ref name="Brucks2008">{{cite journal| author={C}laudine {B}rucks, {C}hristoph {S}chommer| title=Assembling Actor-based Mind-Maps from Text Stream| journal=CoRR| year=2008| volume=abs/0810.4616| accessdate=1 November 2013}}</ref> Rothenberger et al. extracted the main story of a text and presented it as mind map.<ref name="Rothenberger2008">{{cite journal| author=Rothenberger, T, Oez, S, Tahirovic, E, Schommer, Christoph| title=Figuring out Actors in Text Streams: Using Collocations to establish Incremental Mind-maps| journal=arXiv preprint arXiv:0803.2856| year=2008| accessdate=1 November 2013}}</ref> And there is a patent about automatically creating sub-topics in mind maps.<ref name="Plotkin09">{{cite journal| author={R}obert {P}lotkin| title=Software tool for creating outlines and mind maps that generates subtopics automatically| journal=USPTO Application: 20090119584| year=1009| accessdate=1 November 2013}}</ref> |
|||
'''Pen and Paper vs Computer''' - There are two studies that analyze whether electronic mind mapping or pen based mind mapping is more effective.<ref name="Mahler09">{{cite book| author={M}ahler, {T}., {W}eber, {M}.| chapter=Dimian-Direct Manipulation and Interaction in Pen Based Mind Mapping| title=Proceedings of the 17th World Congress on Ergonomics, IEA 2009| year=2009| accessdate=1 November 2013}}</ref><ref name="Shih09">{{cite journal| author={S}hih, {P}.{C}., {N}guyen, {D}.{H}., {H}irano, {S}.{H}. and {R}edmiles, {D}.{F}., {H}ayes, {G}.{R}.| title=Groupmind: supporting idea generation through a collaborative mind-mapping tool| year=2009| pages=139–148| accessdate=1 November 2013}}</ref> |
|||
==Tools== |
|||
[[List of concept- and mind-mapping software|Mind-mapping software]] can be used to organize large amounts of information, combining spatial organization, dynamic hierarchical structuring and node folding. Software packages can extend the concept of mind-mapping by allowing individuals to map more than thoughts and ideas with information on their computers and the Internet, like spreadsheets, documents, Internet sites and images.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.imdevin.com/top-10-totally-free-mind-mapping-software-tools/|title=Top 10 Totally Free Mind Mapping Software Tools|last=Santos|first=Devin|date=15 February 2013|publisher=IMDevin|accessdate=10 July 2013}}</ref> It has been suggested that mind-mapping can improve learning/study efficiency up to 15% over conventional [[note-taking]].<ref> |
|||
{{cite journal |
|||
| last = Farrand |
|||
| first = Paul |author2=Hussain, Fearzana |author3=Hennessy, Enid |
|||
| title = The efficacy of the 'mind map' study technique |
|||
| journal = Medical Education |
|||
| volume = 36 |
|||
| issue = 5 |
|||
| pages = 426–431 |
|||
| date = May 2002 |
|||
| doi = 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01205.x |
|||
| pmid = 12028392 |
|||
}}</ref> |
|||
==See also== |
|||
* [[Brainstorming]] |
|||
* [[Graph (mathematics)]] |
|||
* [[Idea]] |
|||
* [[List of concept mapping and mind mapping software]] |
|||
* [[Mental literacy]] |
|||
* [[Personal wiki]] |
|||
; Related diagrams |
|||
* [[Argument map]] |
|||
* [[Cognitive map]] |
|||
* [[Concept map]] |
|||
* [[Radial tree]] |
|||
* [[Rhizome (philosophy)]] |
|||
* [[Semantic network]] |
|||
* [[Social map]] |
|||
* [[Tree structure]] |
|||
==References== |
|||
{{reflist|30em}} |
|||
==Further reading== |
|||
* Novak, J.D. (1993), "How do we learn our lesson?: Taking students through the process". ''[[The Science Teacher]]'', 60(3), 50-55 (ISSN 0036-8555) |
|||
==External links== |
|||
*{{Commons category-inline|Mind maps}} |
|||
{{Mindmaps}} |
|||
{{Authority control}} |
|||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Mind Map}} |
|||
[[Category:Articles with inconsistent citation formats]] |
|||
[[Category:Knowledge representation]] |
|||
[[Category:Games of mental skill]] |
|||
[[Category:Creativity]] |
|||
[[Category:Design]] |
|||
[[Category:Educational technology]] |
|||
[[Category:Diagrams]] |
|||
[[Category:Thought]] |
|||
[[Category:Note-taking]] |
|||
[[Category:Reading (process)]] |
|||
[[Category:Deliberative methods]] |
|||
[[Category:Mental structures]] |
|||
[[Category:Zoomable user interfaces]] |
|||
[[Category:Educational devices]] |
|||
[[Category:Articles in Wikipedia Primary School Project SSAJRP]] |
|||