Agent Skills: Cognitive Foundations

Apply cognitive science and HCI research to design decisions. Use when you need the scientific 'why' behind usability, explaining user behavior, understanding perception/memory/attention limits, evaluating cognitive load, assessing mental model alignment, predicting performance with Fitts's/Hick's Law, or grounding interface decisions in research rather than opinion.

UncategorizedID: petekp/claude-skills/cognitive-foundations

Skill Files

Browse the full folder contents for cognitive-foundations.

Download Skill

Loading file tree…

skills/cognitive-foundations/SKILL.md

Skill Metadata

Name
cognitive-foundations
Description
Apply cognitive science and HCI research to design decisions. Use when you need the scientific 'why' behind usability, explaining user behavior, understanding perception/memory/attention limits, evaluating cognitive load, assessing mental model alignment, predicting performance with Fitts's/Hick's Law, or grounding interface decisions in research rather than opinion.

Cognitive Foundations

The science of how minds work, and what that means for design.

When to Use This Skill

  • Explaining why a design works or fails (grounded in research, not opinion)
  • Evaluating cognitive load or working memory demands
  • Predicting user performance (Fitts, Hick-Hyman)
  • Diagnosing mental model misalignment
  • Justifying design decisions to stakeholders with evidence
  • Understanding attention, perception, or memory failures

Output Contracts

For Single-Principle Analysis

## Cognitive Principle: [Name]

**Principle**: [1-sentence explanation]

**Evidence in Design**: [Where/how this applies]

**Implication**: [Specific, actionable recommendation]

**Confidence**: [High/Medium/Low] — [rationale]

For Cognitive Audit (Comprehensive)

## Cognitive Audit: [Screen/Flow Name]

### Working Memory Load
- Items requiring recall: [count]
- Cross-screen memory demands: [Y/N]
- Verdict: [Acceptable / High / Overloaded]

### Attention Demands
- Preattentive features for critical info: [Y/N]
- Competing attention demands: [list]
- Change blindness risk: [areas where changes may go unnoticed]

### Mental Model Alignment
- Expected user model: [what users likely think]
- System behavior: [what actually happens]
- Gap: [mismatch, if any]

### Predictive Laws
- Fitts's Law concerns: [target size/distance issues]
- Hick's Law concerns: [choice overload areas]

### Gulf Analysis
- Gulf of Execution: [unclear how to act?]
- Gulf of Evaluation: [unclear what happened?]

### Violations of Nielsen's Heuristics
| Heuristic | Violation | Severity |
|-----------|-----------|----------|
| ... | ... | 1-4 |

### Recommendations
1. [Highest priority fix]
2. [Second priority]
3. [Third priority]

For Explaining a Failure

## Failure Analysis: [What Went Wrong]

**Observed Behavior**: [What users did]

**Cognitive Explanation**: [Which principle explains this]

**Root Cause**: [Design element that caused it]

**Fix**: [Specific change]

Quick Reference: Predictive Laws

| Law | Formula | Rule of Thumb | |-----|---------|---------------| | Fitts's Law | MT = a + b × log₂(2D/W) | Bigger + closer = faster. Screen edges are infinite. | | Hick-Hyman | RT = a + b × log₂(n+1) | More choices = slower. Reduce or organize options. | | Steering Law | T = a + b × (A/W) | Narrow paths are slow. Cascading menus are hard. | | Power Law | T = a × N^(-b) | Practice helps. Design for learnability. |


Quick Reference: Nielsen's 10 Heuristics

| # | Heuristic | Quick Test | |---|-----------|------------| | 1 | Visibility of system status | Can user always tell what's happening? | | 2 | Match system ↔ real world | Language familiar? Metaphors sensible? | | 3 | User control and freedom | Easy undo? Clear exits? | | 4 | Consistency and standards | Same words/actions mean same things? | | 5 | Error prevention | Constraints prevent errors before they occur? | | 6 | Recognition over recall | Options visible? No memory required? | | 7 | Flexibility and efficiency | Shortcuts for experts? | | 8 | Aesthetic and minimalist | Only relevant info? No clutter? | | 9 | Error recovery | Errors explained in plain language with fix? | | 10 | Help and documentation | Searchable, task-focused, concise? |


Quick Reference: Working Memory

  • Capacity: ~4 chunks (not 7)
  • Duration: ~20 seconds without rehearsal
  • Test: Count items user must hold in mind across screens/steps

Red flags:

  • "Remember this code and enter it on the next page"
  • Multi-step forms without visible progress/state
  • Complex comparisons requiring mental tracking

Quick Reference: Preattentive Features

Detected in <200ms, no focused attention required:

  • Color (hue, saturation)
  • Size (length, area)
  • Orientation (angle)
  • Motion (flicker, direction)
  • Shape (curvature, enclosure)

Use for: Critical info, errors, changes, status Don't use for: Everything (loses signal value)


Cognitive Load Checklist

Quick assessment for any interface:

| Factor | Low Load | High Load | |--------|----------|-----------| | Choices visible | 2-4 options | 10+ options | | Memory demands | Recognition | Recall | | Steps to goal | 1-3 clicks | 5+ clicks | | Interruptions | None | Frequent modals | | Novel elements | Familiar patterns | New conventions | | Error recovery | Clear undo | Destructive actions | | Visual complexity | Clean, grouped | Dense, undifferentiated |

Scoring: Each "High Load" = +1. Score >3 = redesign needed.


Common Violations → Principle

| Symptom | Likely Violation | Fix | |---------|------------------|-----| | Users don't notice changes | Change blindness | Animate, highlight transitions | | Users can't find the button | Poor Fitts's Law | Increase size, reduce distance | | Users freeze at options | Hick's Law overload | Reduce choices, progressive disclosure | | Users forget mid-task | Working memory exceeded | Show state, don't require recall | | Users misunderstand state | Gulf of Evaluation | Better feedback, visibility | | Users click wrong thing | Poor affordance/signifier | Clearer visual treatment | | Users make same error repeatedly | Mode error | Visible mode indicators | | Users abandon complex forms | Cognitive load | Chunk, scaffold, save progress |


Process

  1. Identify cognitive demands — What is the interface asking the user to perceive, remember, decide, or do?
  2. Match to principles — Which cognitive constraints or laws apply?
  3. Evaluate alignment — Does the design respect or violate these?
  4. Recommend changes — Specific modifications grounded in the principle

Deep Reference Files

For comprehensive principles and research:

  • PSYCHOLOGY.md — Perception, memory, attention, biases, emotion, motivation
  • HCI-THEORY.md — Norman's model, predictive laws, error theory, research methods, heuristics

Primary Sources


Key Researchers

  • Don Norman: Affordances, gulfs, emotional design
  • Daniel Kahneman: Dual process theory, heuristics and biases
  • Stuart Card: GOMS, information foraging, Fitts's Law
  • Anne Treisman: Feature integration, preattentive processing
  • Jakob Nielsen: Usability heuristics, discount usability
  • Ben Shneiderman: Direct manipulation, golden rules

Remember

  • Cognitive science explains why design principles work
  • Individual differences exist—design for variability, not averages
  • Lab findings may not generalize (ecological validity matters)
  • Theory informs but doesn't replace observing real users
  • When in doubt, reduce cognitive load—users have less capacity than you think