Enhancing meaning with a visual vocabulary

A frequently cited weakness of software mind maps is the lack of explicit relationship between pieces of information in the map. By contrast, Concept Maps use linking words on the relationship between two items to form a proposition. For example, “cod” and “fish” can be linked with “is a type of", to form the proposition “Cod is a type of fish”. In a mind map, “cod” and “fish” are clearly related, but the exact nature of their relationship is only implied in the map.

Without the linking words, the mind map version could have several meanings, depending on the purpose of the map and the intentions of the author. Given that the map is a hierarchy, we could expect that siblings of “cod” would be similar in nature, but this is by no means guaranteed. "Water" and "Sushi" would be reasonable branches in a mind map.

So if we want to move forwards from loosely coupled brainstorms to meaningful structures, what do we do next?

Relationships in MindManager (arrows joining topics) can have "Callout" topics attached, but Relationships can be overwhelming if used extensively, and are not designed for use between parent and child topics. A neater solution is to use visual markers on branches in the map to clarify their relationship with their parents. At first, you might think that there would be too many possible relationships or linking words for this to be a useful technique. But, just like the way that we only use a tiny fraction of our vocabulary on a regular basis, the number of different link types does not have to be very large to be useful.

I find the following basic set of linking words can clarify meaning in a wide range of maps:

• Is an example or type of…
• Is an option or choice of…
• Is a consequence of...
• Is a requirement of...
• Is an advantage of...
• Is a disadvantage of...
• Is a risk of...
• Is the definition of...
• Is an explanation of...
• Strengthens or contributes to...
• Weakens or detracts from...

The order in which these are read is:

1. the child topic name,
2. the linking words, then
3. the parent topic name

The above reads "Cod is a type of fish". The advantage of using a visual marker is that you can easily see what kind of information you have about something, without interpreting the words. Compare the following:

The second version reads: "Lead time is a disadvantage of product redesign; research will be necessary for a product redesign; a higher power version is an option, and the current version not being competitive contributes towards (the need for) a product redesign".

When consistency and completeness are important, it is helpful to see whether you have comparable information. For example, if you are making a decision and mapping out the properties of each of the options, the ability to quickly confirm that you have considered similar attributes for each option is important. Conversely, the existence of the markers acts as a trigger when developing knowledge maps. They remind you to seek examples, explanations and richer relationships between concepts, to enhance meaning and value.

Example map
Click the image for a full-sized, version, or click here to download the MindManager map in a zip file

Comments

[Marc Orchant]

Brilliant post Nick! I've circulated a link to my entire team. I htink a common map marker "vocabulary" will add substantial value ot how we use maps.

[iwan roberts]

Any chance of a downloadable version of the example map?

(ND) Thanks Iwan - I have added a link above to a zip file download. You need MindManager X5 or X5 Pro to use this map.

[Raymond Hermans]

Indeed very good thing.

Now dont take this as neg comment... but didn't the software allow to add grafics in the firstplace ? I never used it but have been using Visimap for perhaps 8+ years and I think they always had the grafics option BUT indeed it is true YOU take the full credit for creating a set of icons with meaning.

Are they up for use in eg Visimap ? Under the CC-plot I read about here ( first time ).

By the way : whats your position on mindmaps created on the computer but -without- the use of specific software. This means using simple drawing software. Problem with specific software is that it is rarely available on multi-platform and that might be a big handicap. I use Windows + Pocket daily, and sometimes Linux, and then your in trouble since its impossible to update the files under the different OS's.

Cheers,

Ray

[Nick Duffill]

Ray - thanks for the comments. You are of course right that almost all mapping software has the ability to add icons or graphics. But I rarely see this feature being systematically used to enhance meaning, and the relationships between branches in a map is where the real meaning lies. I agree with you about the platform-dependence of mapping applications, but while an electronic hand drawn map (or a scanned image of a map) is great for personal use, it is much less versatile as a collaborative tool.
Regards, Nick