Analysis of Cognitive Artifacts and Their Impact on Employee Performance

The provided document is an assignment that delves into the concept of cognitive artifacts and their significance in enhancing employee performance. It explores various quantitative questions related to cognitive artifacts, employee performance, and the impact of cognitive artifacts on employee performance. Additionally, qualitative questions are included to gather insights into the importance of cognitive artifacts and their application in organizational settings. The document also references several studies and research papers that have investigated the role of cognitive artifacts in human tool use, distributed cognition, alignment, transactive memory, and collective cognitive systems. Overall, this assignment provides a comprehensive analysis of cognitive artifacts and their impact on employee performance.

Running head: CAPSTONE PROJECT
Capstone Project
Impact of cognitive artifacts on the workplace performance of the employees
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1CAPSTONE PROJECT
Acknowledgement
I want to thank my principal Mr./Mrs./Ms. ___________________________________ for giving
me the opportunity to be a part of _______________________ University. I want to express my
gratitude to him for allowing me to precede the research on “Impact of cognitive artifacts on the
workplace performance of the employees” under his college.
I want to thank my mentor Mr./Mrs./Ms. ___________________________________ for
providing me guidance to complete the project.
My classmates and friends have also helped me to get all the necessary details for the research
and their support is highly appreciated.
My parents also hold a special place and encouraged me till the time I have finished this research
and without their support it is not possible to complete the research within time.
Thank you all…!!

2CAPSTONE PROJECT
Abstract
This research highlights an important aspect of human psychology for performing well in their
organization. The topic of this research is “Impact of cognitive artifacts on the workplace
performance of the employees”. This research shows that in a service industry it is important for
the employee to use the cognitive artifacts like making lists, framing the projects and allocation
of resources while making the plan to accomplish the organizational goals and objectives. This
research is focused on a company that is KBR, who provides technological solution to
government agencies and industry like oil and gas sector.
This research is based on primary research which included employee and managers of the same
industry. The sample size of the research is 100 employees and 3 managers. The data obtained
from the research respondents are calculated through regression analysis. The interview
questions are analyzed qualitatively and the answers given by the managers used for
recommendation of the research. The final outcome of the research revealed that there is a
relation between the two research variable that is cognitive artifacts and employee’s
performance.
Keyword: Cognitive Artifacts, Employee’s Performance, System View, Personal View,
Innovation, Memorizing Power

3CAPSTONE PROJECT
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction....................................................................................................................9
1.0. Introduction...........................................................................................................................9
1.1. Background of the study.......................................................................................................9
1.2. Background of the company...............................................................................................10
1.3. Rationale of the study.........................................................................................................10
1.4. Aim of the Research...........................................................................................................11
1.5 Research Hypothesis............................................................................................................11
1.6. Research Objectives............................................................................................................11
1.7. Research Question..............................................................................................................11
Chapter 2: Literature Review.........................................................................................................12
2.1 Theories for cognitive artifacts............................................................................................12
2.1.1 System View.................................................................................................................12
2.1.2 Personal View...............................................................................................................13
2.2 Various components of the cognitive artifacts....................................................................14
2.2.1 Framework the entire job role.......................................................................................14
2.2.2 Memorize the construction of the job role....................................................................14
2.2.3 Computers interaction...................................................................................................15
2.3 Factors that can influence the employee’s performance......................................................15

4CAPSTONE PROJECT
2.3.1 Greater memorizing power...........................................................................................15
2.3.2 Experience of the employees........................................................................................15
2.4 Impact of cognitive artifacts on employee’s performance..................................................16
2.4.1 Improved employee performance.................................................................................16
2.4.2 Innovative strategies for accomplishing the work........................................................16
2.4.3 Effective outcome for the organizational objectives....................................................17
2.5 Conceptual Framework..........................................................................................................0
Chapter 3: Research Methodology..................................................................................................0
3.0. Introduction...........................................................................................................................0
3.1. Research philosophy.............................................................................................................1
3.1.1 Justification of the chosen philosophy................................................................................1
3.2. Research approach................................................................................................................1
3.1.2 Justification of the chosen approach...................................................................................2
3.3 Research Purpose...................................................................................................................2
3.3.1 Justification of the chosen approach...................................................................................2
3.4. Data collection......................................................................................................................2
3.5. Data analysis techniques.......................................................................................................3
3.6. Sampling technique..............................................................................................................4
3.6.1. Sample size....................................................................................................................4
3.7. Ethical consideration............................................................................................................4

5CAPSTONE PROJECT
3.8. Research Timeframe.............................................................................................................4
Chapter 4: Data Analysis and Findings...........................................................................................6
4.1 Quantitative Questions...........................................................................................................6
4.1.1 Demographic Questions..................................................................................................6
4.1.2 Quantitative Questions on cognitive artifacts.................................................................7
4.1.3 Quantitative Questions on employee’s performance....................................................12
4.1.4 Quantitative Questions on impact of cognitive artifacts on employee’s performance. 17
4.2 Qualitative Questions...........................................................................................................24
Chapter 5: Conclusion...................................................................................................................26
Chapter 6: Self reflection...............................................................................................................28
7.0 Reference List and Bibliography.............................................................................................30
8.0 Appendix..................................................................................................................................36
8.1 Questionnaire.......................................................................................................................36

6CAPSTONE PROJECT
Table of Images
Image 1: Conceptual Framework.....................................................................................................0
Image 2: Research Funnel...............................................................................................................0

7CAPSTONE PROJECT
Table of Tables
Table 1: Timeframe for the capstone project...................................................................................5
Table 2: Age of the Employees.......................................................................................................6
Table 3: Years of employment of the Employees...........................................................................7
Table 4: Response for framing the job roles being a factor that represents cognitive artifacts.......7
Table 5: Response for memorizing the construction of the job being a factor that represents
cognitive artifacts.............................................................................................................................9
Table 6: Response for computers interaction being a factor that represents cognitive artifacts. . .10
Table 7: Response for greater memorizing power being a factor that impacts employee’s
performance...................................................................................................................................12
Table 8: Response for experience of an employee being a factor that impacts employee’s
performance...................................................................................................................................13
Table 9: Regression analysis between cognitive artifacts and employee’s performance..............16
Table 10: Response for improvements in employee’s performance due to cognitive artifacts.....17
Table 11: Response for formulation of innovative strategies for accomplishing the work due to
cognitive artifacts...........................................................................................................................19
Table 12: Response for effective outcome for the organizational objectives due to cognitive
artifacts..........................................................................................................................................20
Table 13: Validation of the research outcome...............................................................................23

8CAPSTONE PROJECT
Table of Charts
Chart 1: Response for framing the job roles being a factor that represents cognitive artifacts.......8
Chart 2: Response for memorizing the construction of the job being a factor that represents
cognitive artifacts.............................................................................................................................9
Chart 3: Response for computers interaction being a factor that represents cognitive artifacts....11
Chart 4: Response for greater memorizing power being a factor that impacts employee’s
performance...................................................................................................................................13
Chart 5: Response for experience of an employee being a factor that impacts employee’s
performance...................................................................................................................................14
Chart 6: Regression analysis between cognitive artifacts and employee’s performance..............16
Chart 7: Response for improvements in employee’s performance due to cognitive artifacts.......18
Chart 8: Response for formulation of innovative strategies for accomplishing the work due to
cognitive artifacts...........................................................................................................................19
Chart 9: Response for effective outcome for the organizational objectives due to cognitive
artifacts..........................................................................................................................................21
Chart 10: Validation of the research outcome...............................................................................23

9CAPSTONE PROJECT
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.0. Introduction
A person’s ability to perform a job in a better way is analyzed based on their approach of
accomplishing the work. Tariq et al. (2013) stated that some person know and have clear
perception regarding their ob roles; while, some have to struggle to get a work done in a given
period of time. Thus, the ability to memorize, visualize and representing all the organizational
work is known as cognitive artifacts (Susi 2016). Sellberg and Lindblom (2014) furthermore
stated that people with more cognitive artifacts can perform better than the others; while, those
who have knowledge of such artifacts have to face difficulty in visualizing their job roles and
responsibility. This research will highlight the impact of cognitive artifacts on the workplace
performance of the employees from oil and gas sector. Tariq et al. (2013) stated that in oil and
gas sector people with different roles and responsibilities have to work with effective knowledge
so that no mistake can be occurred. Sellberg and Lindblom (2014) gave an example that an
auditor of an oil and gas sector carries out regular and scheduled audits and produces written
reports of a particular format. These steps need to be done with accuracy and cognitive artifacts
help the auditor to do the similar job with precision. On the other hand, a cementer has to
perform preparation of the slurry for the pumping and perform cementing calculations along with
equipment pressure testing in a regular manner (Piccolo et al. 2014). Thus, for oil and sector
employees it is important to obtain cognitive artifacts.
1.1. Background of the study
KBR is a company that provides solution to different professional services to government
services, technologies and oil and gas sectors (https://www.kbr.com/technologies/offshore). The

10CAPSTONE PROJECT
offshore, onshore, photochemical, refining, coal gasification and LNG-FLNG- Terminal project
need most to do list of all the job roles and responsibility so that no employee can mislead any
project requirements. Thus, cognitive artifacts play a crucial role as it determined how well an
employee can visualize their roles and responsibilities. It is also stated by Susi (2016) that an
employee, who can list their job roles in oil and gas project effectively, will be able to perform
better than other employees, who do their work haphazardly. Thus, this research will highlight
the impact of the employee performance due to the successful attainment of cognitive artifacts.
1.2. Background of the company
KBR is known for their professional services and technologies globally and works within
the Hydrocarbons sectors and Government Services (Kbr.com 2018). This company is providing
their services to the customers of more than 80 countries and serves their operations in 40
countries (Kbr.com 2018). In terms of their services for oil and gas sector, KBR is liable to
provide the role of refinery operators in hydrocarbon sector. They deliver cost effective solutions
and leading edge to the oil refining market (Badiru and Osisanya 2016). Moreover, KBR also
formulates olefins and chemicals from petroleum, natural gas, biomass and coals (Silva et al.
2017). The concerned organization gives best services at a lower cost and also ensures that these
processes does not harm the environment to a greater extent (Kbr.com 2018). The company
employed 34,000 people across the world and these employees are selected not only based on
their educational qualification but also on their performance through the situational assessments.
These situational assessments are evaluated to assess the cognitive ability of the person.
1.3. Rationale of the study
Abdullah (2012) stated that some employees struggle to perform their desired roles and
responsibilities. The reason is that they are unable to illustrate their responsibilities through

11CAPSTONE PROJECT
which they can showcase maximum of their competencies. Wong et al. (2012) on the other hand
argues that some employees can visualize their roles in a clear way and this help them to
accomplished their desired task with more precision. In oil and gas sector, there is not chance to
get any process wrongly proceeded as it will impact the environment and the project. Thus, this
research will highlight the factors that affect the cognitive artifacts which on the other hand
impacts their performance in the project at the workplace.
1.4. Aim of the Research
The aim of the research is to investigate the affect of the cognitive artifacts on the job
performance of the employee in the oil and gas sector.
1.5 Research Hypothesis
H1: There is an impact of cognitive artifacts on the employee’s performance
H0: There is no impact of cognitive artifacts on the employee’s performance
1.6. Research Objectives
 To investigate the various components of the cognitive artifacts
 To evaluate the factors that can impact the employee’s performance
 To assess the affect of cognitive artifacts on employee’s performance
 To suggest strategies that can improve the cognitive artifacts for enhancing the
performances
1.7. Research Question
 What are the various components of the cognitive artifacts?
 What are the factors that can impact the employee’s performance?
 What is the affect of cognitive artifacts on employee’s performance?

12CAPSTONE PROJECT
Chapter 2: Literature Review
2.1 Theories for cognitive artifacts
Heersmink (2013) depict that most of the scientific understanding is due to unaided mind
that comprise of attention, perception, memory, thoughts and actions. Another thing that is
required to focus is the way these people interact with the information processing activities.
Varela et al. (2017) moreover stated that in order to judge the situation of a person it is necessary
to focus on the situation through which these people are going through, nature of other people,
artificial environment and culture. According to the theory proposed by Coles, the cultural
psychology builds on the two major assumptions- one is to create the artifacts and the second is
to acquire the corresponding ability to transmit the knowledge. In present times, the people use
different devices that help them to improve their cognitive abilities. However, Reed (2012)
argued that, the nature of the "interface" between the person and the machine describes the affect
on the task and the use of the artifacts.
Anderson (2014) stated that artifacts are used so that the performance of the human can
be improved. Taken for examples, pulley was invented so that it is easier for human to lift
objects and cars are invented for travelling to the destination fast enough. In the similar way,
artifacts like books, recordings and notes, improves memorizing power. On the other hand,
Neisser (2014) stated that artifacts like physics and mathematics, improves the thought process
of a person. There are two views of the artifacts- system view and the personal view.
2.1.1 System View
It should be noted that artifacts improves the performance of an individual but in order to
do so, they also enhance their ability to understand the things in a better way. Thus, when a

13CAPSTONE PROJECT
person uses an artifacts and other persons sees the incident, they are actually witnessing the
system view in which one is the performing function, task and the artifacts. However Heersmink
(2017) sated that the person, who is liable to accomplish the job is actually witnessing the
personal view that is how the artifacts help them to accomplish the work. In recent time, modern
organization uses this system view to accomplish their tasks. This is to prepare a to-do list in
which all the necessary tools and responsibilities are listed (Reed 2012). This process will help to
achieve all the job roles for the organization. This list will help a person to memorize the things
in a systematic manner and not to omit anything important.
2.1.2 Personal View
In terms of personal view, there are no other people to witness the performing person and
artifacts. Chandrasekharan and Nersessian (2015) represented that, in this view, the person sees
the artifacts or the to-do-list as a task. It is also obvious that if a person does not list all the
things, they have to memorize everything and with the list they have to remember or memorize
the plan a little. Thus, the three important things that need to obtain are- constructing the list,
remembering to consult the list and interpreting the items that is present on the list. Adams and
Garrison (2013) also stated that it is better to prepare the list prior starting the work so that the
mind will distribute the time and resources for accomplishing the entire work. It is also found
that if a person is asked to complete a task with or without the list, they are able to do the task
more accurately and reliability in presence of the list.

14CAPSTONE PROJECT
2.2 Various components of the cognitive artifacts
2.2.1 Framework the entire job role
Tollefsen et al. (2013) stated that in order to perform job in a better way, an employee
must have to frame all the necessary work responsibility in their mind. This will help them to
perceive a clear description of the work that they can memorize the work easily. Cress et al.
(2016) thus depict that it is suggested to employee to frame their work in the computer or any
paper that can help them to release their responsibilities. This process is highly used in service
companies like aviation and oil and gas engineering. Silberstein and Chemero (2012) moreover
depicted that it cognitive artifacts tools changes the way one decided to complete the task,
Artifacts can distribute the action across the time and it is known as pre-computation distribute
the actions among the different people and the action is known as distributed cognition and
lastly, to change the action according to the nature of the job (Liang et al. 2013).
2.2.2 Memorize the construction of the job role
Power et al. (2015) stated that in absence of the list to any other artifacts, it is the human,
who has to memorize the task that is needed to accomplish the job role. Muntanyola-Saura
(2014) argued that it might be the case the performance of the people often deteriorates. Mingers
and Willcocks (2014) describes that the activity cycle in accomplishing a task is known as action
flow. It is though important for a person has to show the engagement with the task in order to
prove their consistency. Thus, Michaelian and Sutton (2013) stated that for cohesive activity
flow, the major factors that are responsible are task, artifacts and the environment. However,
Gaba (2013) argues that interruption and unexpected outcome might lower the power of
memorizing the list that can be improved by keeping a computational artifacts to boosts their
memory power.

15CAPSTONE PROJECT
2.2.3 Computers interaction
Human have developed computers so that they can accomplish their work with more
accuracy. Stahl (2012) stated that this also represents the personal view of the cognitive artifacts
where a person can feel the value that computer have played in order to arrange their desire job
roles. Neisser (2014) also stated that automatic behavior is appreciated in any kind of skilled
operation, where there is no place of making any mistakes.
2.3 Factors that can influence the employee’s performance
2.3.1 Greater memorizing power
A person, who is working in a service company, do not have to keep the organizational
objectives in the mind, but also have to outperform the things that is required for the job to
complete. Shute et al. (2015) stated that in services like oil and gas companies and aircraft
industry, the task might sometimes get changed due to critical situation. In such time, the
employees have to utilize their cognitive features to solve the situations. Lunenburg (2012) on
the other hand argued that if these employees only memorize the things of getting the work
completed, there innovativeness might get hampered. However, memorizing through the help of
some artifacts might help the employee to achieve their target faster and with greater precision
(Shuck and Reio Jr 2014).
2.3.2 Experience of the employees
Jensen et al. (2012) stated that with time an employee improve their cognitive power to
do a certain kind of job in their organization. In such situation they might not have to struggle a
lot for doing a job. Thus, it can be said the greater the experience of an employee, the easier it
will be for the person to obtain the work. Moreover, experience also helps the employee to

16CAPSTONE PROJECT
identify shortcuts that can be implemented. In this way, they can complete the work faster than
others and can give time to other works. Their experience also allow them to frame the work
faster by including all the necessary component that helps them to accomplish the desires job
roles and responsibilities (Gin Choi et al. 2013).
2.4 Impact of cognitive artifacts on employee’s performance
2.4.1 Improved employee performance
Computerized artifacts and cognitive artifacts help humans to store the desired list of
doing the work easily. They can also use these artifacts to make the blueprint of the entire job
plan (Heckman and Kautz 2013). This will help them to achieve the organizational goals with
greater accuracy. Moreover, due to cognitive artifacts, employees also know how to develop plan
for the jobs following which the objectives can be attained. This knowledge of utilization of the
artifacts also help them to develop plan for the other task that they will be allocated (Neves and
Eisenberger 2012). This will improve their efficiency and ability to understand the job roles.
2.4.2 Innovative strategies for accomplishing the work
An employee when started planning to frame the entire work, they are able to find what
additional resources and materials are required to complete the desired job role. The framework
also allows them to allocate these additional resources in the plan for better outcome of the task
(Farh et al. 2012). The employee will know how to connect component and this will also allow
them to produce an optimized plan through which the job can be accomplished in an innovative
way.

17CAPSTONE PROJECT
2.4.3 Effective outcome for the organizational objectives
The use of cognitive artifacts to memorize the task responsibility helps an organization to
omit erroneous work. Moreover, this will also help the employee to visualize the entire blueprint
of the plan for the tasks in their mind (Kautz et al. 2014). This will help the employees not to
forget the framework and complete the work according to the plan. The framework drawn also
avoids exclusion of important resources so that the project might not face any problem during the
completion (Schaufeli and Taris 2014).

Cognitive Artifacts Employee Performance
Computers interaction
Memorize the construction of the job
Framework the entire job role
Experience of the employees
Greater memorizing power Improved employee performan
Innovative strategies for accomplishi
Effective outcome for organizational o
Running head: CAPSTONE PROJECT
2.5 Conceptual Framework
Image 1: Conceptual Framework
(Source: Created by Author)

Running head: CAPSTONE PROJECT
Chapter 3: Research Methodology
3.0. Introduction
This chapter will highlight the research process that is used for obtaining the research
objectives. This chapter represents the systematic approach through which the research questions
can be addressed. The details of the research philosophy, approach and purpose is discussed with
proper justification. The data collection methods, data analysis techniques, sampling technique,
sample size, ethical consideration and research timeframe will also be discussed.
Research funnel is also used that indicates the three research components- research
philosophy, research approach and research purpose.
Image 2: Research Funnel
(Source: Created by Author)
Research
Purpose
Research
Approch
Research
Philosophy
Help in gathering data
for the research based
on the sample size
Helps in addressing
the research
hypothesis through
the collected data
Helps in answering
research questions
through the collected data
and literature review

1CAPSTONE PROJECT
3.1. Research philosophy
Neuman (2013) stated that research philosophy is used to gather observation for the
research. Research philosophies are of three types- positivism, realism and interpretivism. In
positivism research philosophy, the sample size is greater and the research should be
accomplished in a systematic and highly structured manner (Coleman 2013). Novikov and
Novikov (2013) moreover stated that in realism philosophy, only the social belief based on the
research topic. Lastly, the interpretivism research philosophy is the combination of both the
positivism and the realism philosophies.
In this research study, interpretivism research philosophy is considered.
3.1.1 Justification of the chosen philosophy
Interpretivism philosophy emphasizes on both the numerical data and social belief from
the respondents. This will help this research to obtain an unbiased outcome that addresses the
research objectives.
3.2. Research approach
There are two types of research approach- deductive and inductive research approaches
and it is used for describing the research hypothesis or formulation of new research hypothesis
from the collected data. Flick (2015) defines that in deductive research approach, the collected
data and obtained literature helps, theories and concepts in deducing the formulated research
hypothesis; whereas, in inductive research approach, new theories and concepts are generated.
In this research study, deductive research approach is utilized.

2CAPSTONE PROJECT
3.1.2 Justification of the chosen approach
Deductive research analyzes the literature review and data analysis of the data collection
process to answer all the research questions and satisfy the research hypothesis. Since, no new
theories is aimed to be developed, deductive approach is best suited for this research study.
3.3 Research Purpose
Mackey and Gass (2013) stated that there are two types of research purpose- exploratory
and descriptive. The prime reason for utilizing a research purpose shows how the research
questions are answered in order to obtain the research objectives. Exploratory purpose illustrates
that the answer obtained from the literature review and data collection demonstrate a new
direction (Pierre 201). On the other hand, when the research question is properly described with
the formulated literature review and the data collection, descriptive purpose is used.
In this research study, descriptive research purpose is utilized.
3.3.1 Justification of the chosen approach
Descriptive purpose is best suited because through this process, all the research questions
are answered from the findings. No new theories are explored from the research outcome.
3.4. Data collection
The technique to collect the observation or data for the research is data collection
technique. Data collection technique is of two types- primary data collection and secondary data
collection. Sekaran and Bougie (2016) stated that when data for the research is gathered directly
from sources like person of the selected place, it is known as primary data collection technique.
On the other hand, data collected from secondary sources like newspaper article, journals, peer

3CAPSTONE PROJECT
review articles, websites and other research papers, it is known as secondary data collection
process.
In this research primary data collection technique is occurred from the employees of
KBR through questionnaire survey. The survey comprised of 10 questions, out of which first 2
are the demographic questions, next 3 questions on the factors that represents cognitive artifacts,
2 questions n the factors that influences employee’s performances and the last 3 questions
represents the impacts of the cognitive artifacts on performance of the employees. Managers are
also asked some questions on the cognitive artifacts which is asked through interview process.
The interview process is also comprised of three questions.
3.5. Data analysis techniques
The outcome that is drawn from the collected data for the respondents through some tools
is known as data analysis technique or method. Neuman (2013) stated that there are two different
types of data analysis techniques- qualitative method and quantitative method. Whenever,
theoretical information is collected with no numerical data, the outcome is generated based on
qualitative data analysis technique (Creswell and Creswell 2017). On the other hand, when
outcome is found out from numerical data it is known as quantitative analysis technique.
Quantitative and qualitative data analysis technique will be obtained. The data obtained
from the survey is analyzed quantitatively through regression analysis. The regression analysis is
carried out using the tool of Microsoft Excel. On the other hand, the interview data will be
analyzed qualitatively from the answers that are given by the managers on the research question.

4CAPSTONE PROJECT
3.6. Sampling technique
Bernard and Bernard (2012) stated that when respondents for the research are selected
with equal priority, the method is known as probability sampling technique, whereas, when the
respondents for the research is selected with unequal priority is known as non-probability
sampling technique.
Probability sampling technique is used to select the employees of the KBR; whereas, the
manager for the interview process will be selected based on the non-probability sampling
technique. Thus, both the probability and non-probability sampling technique is used.
3.6.1. Sample size
The total number of research respondents participated in the research is known as sample
size for the research (Maxwell 2012). 100 employees are selected from the company and 3
managers are also considered for the interview.
3.7. Ethical consideration
All the primary data collected for the research is protected under the legislation Data
Protection Act (1998). These data are used only for the research and its outcome and no data is
used for official benefits. During the interview and survey, no respondents are forced to change
their answer and their original view is recorded.
3.8. Research Timeframe
Main activities/ stages
Week
1st-2nd
Week
3rd-4th
Week
5th-6th
Week
7th-8th
Week
9th-10th
Week
11th-12th
Topic Selection

5CAPSTONE PROJECT
Literature review
Formation of the research Plan
Selection of the Appropriate
Research Techniques
Primary data collection
Analysis & Interpretation of
Data Collection
Conclusion of the Study
Submission of Final Work
Table 1: Timeframe for the capstone project
(Source: Created by Author)

6CAPSTONE PROJECT
Chapter 4: Data Analysis and Findings
4.1 Quantitative Questions
4.1.1 Demographic Questions
Q1. What is your age?
Options No of respondents Total No. of respondents
Less than 22 years 18 100
23-35 years 45 100
36-50 years 31 100
Greater than 50 years 6 100
Table 2: Age of the Employees
(Source: Created by Author)
Findings
Total 100 of employees are taken into consideration for the research out of which 18
respondents are less than 22 years old, 45 employees belong to the 23 to 35 years group.
Moreover, 31 respondents are from 36 to 50 years old and the remaining 6 respondents are
greater than 50 years old.
Q2. How long you have been employed in this organization?
Options No of respondents Total No. of respondents
Less than 2 Year 15 100
2.1-4 Years 41 100
4.1-7 Years 32 100

7CAPSTONE PROJECT
More than 7 years 12 100
Table 3: Years of employment of the Employees
(Source: Created by Author)
Findings
The findings show that 15 respondents are there, who are working in the organization
from less than 2 years; while, 41 respondents are working greater than 2 but less than 4 years.
Moreover, 32 respondents participated in the research are those who are working for greater than
4 but less than 7 years in the organization. Lastly, remaining 12 respondents are associated for
greater than 7 years with KBR.
4.1.2 Quantitative Questions on cognitive artifacts
Q3. Do you agree that framing the job roles refers to the cognitive artifacts?
Options No of respondents Total respondents
Strongly Agree 46 100
Agree 38 100
Neutral 11 100
Disagree 4 100
Strongly Disagree 1 100
Table 4: Response for framing the job roles being a factor that represents cognitive artifacts
(Source: Created by Author)

8CAPSTONE PROJECT
Chart 1: Response for framing the job roles being a factor that represents cognitive artifacts
(Source: Created by Author)
Findings
It is seen from the above table and chart that 46 and 38 respondents strongly agree and
agree that framing the job roles is a crucial factor that represents cognitive artifacts in an
individual. 11 respondents give a neutral perception while 5 respondents disagree with the same
research question.
Analysis
The literature review also reveals that if an employee formulates the framework of the
task effectively, it is easier for the person to understand the requirement of the task and they can
accomplish the same with greater efficiency. Thus, creating the framework of the task is a crucial
factor that represents the cognitive artifacts in human.

9CAPSTONE PROJECT
Q4. How far do you agree that memorizing the construction of the job demonstrates the
cognitive artifact?
Options No of respondents Total respondents
Strongly Agree 38 100
Agree 48 100
Neutral 12 100
Disagree 2 100
Strongly Disagree 0 100
Table 5: Response for memorizing the construction of the job being a factor that represents
cognitive artifacts
(Source: Created by Author)
Chart 2: Response for memorizing the construction of the job being a factor that represents
cognitive artifacts
(Source: Created by Author)

10CAPSTONE PROJECT
Findings
38 and 48 research respondents strongly agree and agree that memorizing the
construction of the job represents the cognitive power of an individual. However, 12 respondents
have neutral perception and the remaining two respondents show negative view on the same
research question.
Analysis
Thus, it can be said that rather than listing the things or job roles and responsibility, if a
person can memorize the entire thing, they can complete the job efficiently. However, from the
literature review it is found that listed down the required things, help people not to forget all the
necessary tasks. However, memorizing things can lead to forget some points due to
unpredictable environment or allocation of other urgent job roles.
Q5. Do you agree that computers interaction illustrates effectiveness of cognitive artifacts?
Options No of respondents Total respondents
Strongly Agree 41 100
Agree 43 100
Neutral 10 100
Disagree 4 100
Strongly Disagree 2 100
Table 6: Response for computers interaction being a factor that represents cognitive artifacts
(Source: Created by Author)

11CAPSTONE PROJECT
Chart 3: Response for computers interaction being a factor that represents cognitive artifacts
(Source: Created by Author)
Findings
It is found that 41 respondents and 43 respondents strongly agree and agree on that fact
that computers interaction is an important factor for representing cognitive artifacts respectively.
Additionally, 10 respondents remain neutral and the rest of the 6 respondents give negative
perception regarding the research question.
Analysis
The literature review also shows that in a personal view, an individual can express the
role of a system to help in accomplishing of the task allocated to them. Maximum of the
respondents also agree that in presence of computers, the formulation of to-do-list become easier
and it is also easy to maintain the list.

12CAPSTONE PROJECT
4.1.3 Quantitative Questions on employee’s performance
Q6. How far do you agree that greater memorizing power can help an employee to perform
better?
Options No of respondents Total respondents
Strongly Agree 49 100
Agree 36 100
Neutral 10 100
Disagree 3 100
Strongly Disagree 2 100
Table 7: Response for greater memorizing power being a factor that impacts employee’s
performance
(Source: Created by Author)

13CAPSTONE PROJECT
Chart 4: Response for greater memorizing power being a factor that impacts employee’s
performance
(Source: Created by Author)
Findings
It is found that a great percentage of 85% of the respondents agrees with the fact that if
employees have greater memory power, they can perform better. On the other hand, 10
respondents give a neutral perception; while, the rest of the 5 respondents shows negative view.
Analysis
Thus, it can be said that if an employee can memorize the working procedure, it is easier
for them to proceed with their working styles in an effective manner. Especially in Service
Company, these employees can easily accomplishing their job roles, if they know or memorize
all the procedure step-wise.
Q7. Do you agree that experience of an employee can influence the performance of an
employee?
Options No of respondents Total respondents
Strongly Agree 44 100
Agree 41 100
Neutral 11 100
Disagree 4 100
Strongly Disagree 0 100
Table 8: Response for experience of an employee being a factor that impacts employee’s
performance

14CAPSTONE PROJECT
(Source: Created by Author)
Chart 5: Response for experience of an employee being a factor that impacts employee’s
performance.
(Source: Created by Author)
Findings
It is found that, 85% of the total respondents agree with the fact that experience of an
employee is a factor that impacts employee’s performance. 11 respondents gives a neutral
perception; while, rest of the four respondents disagree with the same research question
Analysis
Thus, it can be said that an employee if great experience, it is easier for them to recognize
the working pattern and help them to work with more accuracy compared to others. Computers
Moreover, the experience also allow them to frame the work with more effectiveness using

15CAPSTONE PROJECT
system or computers. This ease in framing the work shows their greater cognitive ability that
comes with the experience and impacts their performance in a positive manner.
Regression between two research variables- cognitive artifacts and employee’s performance
SUMMARY OUTPUT
Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.9794745
5
R Square 0.9593703
94
Adjusted
R Square
0.9589558
06
Standard
Error
0.1498268
59
Observati
ons
100
ANOVA
df SS MS F Significan
ce F
Regressio
n
1 51.945
64
51.945
64
2314.0
34
5.59E-70
Residual 98 2.1999
13
0.0224
48

16CAPSTONE PROJECT
Total 99 54.145
56
Coefficien
ts
Standa
rd
Error
t Stat P-
value
Lower
95%
Upper
95%
Lower
95.0%
Upper
95.0%
Intercept 0.1674757
28
0.0369
07
4.5377
52
1.62E-
05
0.094235 0.2407
17
0.0942
35
0.2407
17
X
Variable 1
0.9324852
14
0.0193
85
48.104
41
5.59E-
70
0.894017 0.9709
53
0.8940
17
0.9709
53
Table 9: Regression analysis between cognitive artifacts and employee’s performance
(Source: Created by Author)
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
f(x) = 1.02883174981018 x − 0.101608832160227
R² = 0.95937039408703
Cognitive Artifacts
Employee Performance
Chart 6: Regression analysis between cognitive artifacts and employee’s performance
(Source: Created by Author)
Analysis

17CAPSTONE PROJECT
The main purpose of regression analysis is to show the relation between the research
variable and it also helps in rejecting or accepting the formulated research hypothesis. The
relation shows that there is impact of the independent variable on the dependent variable. In this
research, cognitive artifacts is the independent variables; whereas, the employee performance is
the dependent variable. Through the regression analysis, it is found that the value of the
significance is 5.59E-70 which is lesser than 0.05. This reveals that the null hypothesis is
rejected which shows that it is true that there is an impact of cognitive artifacts on the
employee’s performance. Moreover, the value of the multiple R square is 0.959370394 that
represents that 95 of the dependent variable can be explained by the independent variable and the
goodness of fit is high. Therefore, most of the points will fall within the regression line. There is
random variation of 4.06 % which is normal practical research of this type.
4.1.4 Quantitative Questions on impact of cognitive artifacts on employee’s performance
Q8. How far do you agree that due to cognitive artifacts the employee’s performance can be
improved?
Options No of respondents Total respondents
Strongly Agree 46 100
Agree 39 100
Neutral 11 100
Disagree 1 100
Strongly Disagree 3 100
Table 10: Response for improvements in employee’s performance due to cognitive artifacts
(Source: Created by Author)

18CAPSTONE PROJECT
Chart 7: Response for improvements in employee’s performance due to cognitive artifacts
(Source: Created by Author)
Finding
It is found that 46 and 39 respondents strongly agrees and agrees on the fact that due to
cognitive artifacts the employee’s performance can be improved. 11 respondents have the neutral
perception and the remaining 4 respondents show a negative perception.
Analysis
Thus, it can be said that cognitive artifacts allow a person to frame the entire job
requirement in a list or a visual representation. This will help them to allocate all the necessary
resources required for the job. This approach moreover affects the employee’s performance on a
positive way as they obtained a clear understanding of the task.

19CAPSTONE PROJECT
Q9. Do you agree that cognitive artifacts help an employee to formulate innovative strategies
for accomplishing the work?
Options No of respondents Total respondents
Strongly Agree 45 100
Agree 39 100
Neutral 10 100
Disagree 6 100
Strongly Disagree 0 100
Table 11: Response for formulation of innovative strategies for accomplishing the work due to
cognitive artifacts
(Source: Created by Author)
Chart 8: Response for formulation of innovative strategies for accomplishing the work due to
cognitive artifacts

20CAPSTONE PROJECT
(Source: Created by Author)
Finding
It is seen from the above table and chart that 84% of the respondents agrees with the fact
that cognitive artifacts help an employee to formulate innovative strategies for accomplishing the
work. While, 10 respondents remained neutral and the rest of the 6 respondents disagree with the
same fact.
Analysis
Thus, it is found that when an employee prepares the list of the tasks, they can identify
the required resources that are required for accomplishing the job. In making proper planning,
they can also find some optimized ideas that can be implanted which require lesser resources but
give more effectiveness. In this way, cognitive artifacts helps employee to raise innovation in
their working procedure and job completion technique.
Q10. How far do you agree that utilizing cognitive artifacts results in effective outcome for the
organizational objectives?
Options No of respondents Total respondents
Strongly Agree 38 100
Agree 47 100
Neutral 12 100
Disagree 1 100
Strongly Disagree 2 100
Table 12: Response for effective outcome for the organizational objectives due to cognitive
artifacts

21CAPSTONE PROJECT
(Source: Created by Author)
Chart 9: Response for effective outcome for the organizational objectives due to cognitive
artifacts
(Source: Created by Author)
Finding
Total of 85 respondents agrees with the fact that utilizing cognitive artifacts results in
effective outcome for the organizational objectives; whereas, 12 respondents show a neutral
perception. Remaining 3 respondents disagrees with the same fact.
Analysis
Thus it can be said that cognitive artifacts helps people to frame their work. Identify
necessary resources and visualizing the entire approach, this will automatically improve the
quality of the work as it minimizes the probable faults. Moreover, use of cognitive artifacts also

22CAPSTONE PROJECT
improve the intelligence of the employee that enhances the productivity in them which
furthermore beneficial for the profitability of the organization.
Validation of the data findings
SUMMARY OUTPUT
Regression Statistics
Multiple
R
0.9917016
54
R Square 0.9834721
71
Adjusted
R Square
0.9833035
19
Standard
Error
0.0974640
38
Observati
ons
100
ANOVA
df SS MS F Significan
ce F
Regressio
n
1 55.393
8
55.393
8
5831.3
93
3.99338E-
89
Residual 98 0.9309
25
0.0094
99

23CAPSTONE PROJECT
Total 99 56.324
72
Coefficien
ts
Standa
rd
Error
t Stat P-
value
Lower
95%
Upper
95%
Lower
95.0%
Upper
95.0%
Intercept 0.0333538
22
0.0246
82
1.3513
33
0.1797 -
0.0156271
14
0.0823
35
-
0.0156
3
0.0823
35
X
Variable 1
0.9710165
48
0.0127
16
76.363
56
3.99E-
89
0.9457826
45
0.9962
5
0.9457
83
0.9962
5
Table 13: Validation of the research outcome
(Source: Created by Author)
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
f(x) = 0.971016548463357 x + 0.033353821907014
R² = 0.983472170587809
Impact of cognitive artifacts on employee performance
Mean of research varibales
Chart 10: Validation of the research outcome
(Source: Created by Author)
Analysis

24CAPSTONE PROJECT
The validation shows that the regression outcome drawn from the two research variables
that are cognitive artifacts and employee’s performance is true. Thus, the means values of the
individual research variables are summed up for calculating the average. This average value
checked with the means come from the data collected for the questions that shows there is an
impact of cognitive artifacts on employee’s performance. The cross-checking procedure is done
through regression analysis. The regression value shows the significance of 3.99338E-89 and the
R square value of 0.983472171. This shows that both the obtained R Square values that are
0.959370394 and 0.983472171 are close to each other and almost equal to 1. This validates the
outcome of the regression analysis and proves that there is a relation between two research
variables.
4.2 Qualitative Questions
Q1. How important for you the cognitive artifact is?
First manager- Cognitive artifact is important for improving the intelligence level of the
employee hired for the KBR.
Second Manager- Cognitive artifacts is required to fulfill the need of the organization
objectives. Third Manager- Cognitive artifacts is important for personal development and helps
all the employees to outperform in effective decision making situations.
Q2. Why do you think that concept of cognitive artifacts is applicable for your industry and
help in accomplishing the organizational goals?
First manager- Since, most of our work is relayed with providing technical solutions it is
required for all the employees to know their job roles with greater precision. In oil and gas

25CAPSTONE PROJECT
projects, there is no place for any mistakes and the ability to develop a frame work of the work
will allow employee to perform extra-ordinarily.
Second Manager- If employee utilizes greater cognitive artifacts they will know how much
resource to be used for a project. This will help them to take exact amount of resources to
produce an optimized solution for oil and gas projects.
Third Manager- Cognitive artifacts help people to improve their memorizing skills. This skill
will help them to take effective decisions for a situation.
Q3. What steps your organization has taken to improve the utilization of cognitive artifacts?
First manager- The organization plans for employee training in which several assessments will
be there through which all of them will be directed for using cognitive artifacts. Several
professional trainers were also being available to provide training.
Second Manager- Not all employee know how to utilize the cognitive training. So, apart from
training, those employee, who utilizes the cognitive artifacts as a part if their job, will be
rewarded. This will help them to improve their skills and make everyone in encouraging others
to follow the same.
Third Manager- Employee training and regular organizational situational assessments will be
conducted, which will allow employee to outperform through framing the work according to the
given situation. The training will make them aware of using the cognitive artifacts.

26CAPSTONE PROJECT
Chapter 5: Conclusion
Objective 1: To investigate the various components of the cognitive artifacts
Through the literature review it has been found that ability to develop a framework for
the job, memorizing the construction of the job and ability to form effective computer interaction
are the three factors of the cognitive artifacts. Through these factors, employee of the KBR will
able to manage their resources with the oil and gas project that they will get. They can easily
frame the plan of the project along with identification of the necessary resources. This will help
them to develop innovative idea in certain situation where they can allocate lesser resource for
accurate project outcome.
Objective 2: To evaluate the factors that can impact the employee’s performance
Greater memorizing power and experience of the employees are the two factors that is
identified through this research, It is found that if an employee know how to frame the work r the
entire project, he can visualize the entire system an can proceed accordingly. Moreover, this
visualization of the development of framework also improves with the experience of the
employees. Thus, both the factors that are memorizing power on the procedure if accomplishing
the oil and gas project and experience in this field help the employees to omit any faults. All
these aspects improve the employee’s performance.
Objective 3: To assess the affect of cognitive artifacts on employee’s performance
The impact of the cognitive artifacts on employee’s performance that is found from the
research is improvement in the employee’s performance and productivity, ability of the
employees to formulate innovative ideas for accomplishing the tasks and effective outcome for

27CAPSTONE PROJECT
the organizational objectives. Moreover, from the data analysis section, it is seen that the
regression analysis reject the null hypothesis which shows that there is an impact of the cognitive
artifacts on the employee’s performance. The value of the regression is obtained as 5.58895E-70
which is lesser than 0.05 and rejects the null hypothesis.
Objective 4: To suggest strategies that can improve the cognitive artifacts for enhancing the
performances
Though the interview process, three ways that is identified to improve the utilization of
the cognitive artifacts are providing employee training, conducting regular organizational
situation assessments and rewarding the effort of the employees, who uses the cognitive
artifacts to accomplish the work projects. The employee training will be useful to develop the
traits in the employees to make the framework of the entire project align with the allocation of
resources required for that project. Moreover, the situational assessments based on the oil and
gas management projects help the employees to develop suitable framework. Lastly, the
rewarding system will help the organization to recognize those employees, who voluntarily
utilizes the cognitive artifacts to fulfill their job goals. This will provide encouragement to the
employees to use the same for further projects and also help others to make aware of the benefits
for using the cognitive artifacts.

28CAPSTONE PROJECT
Chapter 6: Self reflection
The entire journey has been great for me as it allows me to learn many things that might
not be possible through other ways. I have opted for this course and project as a part of my
assignment or academic journey. However, starting from the selection of the research topic for
this assessment to the relevant articles from developing content, I have learned about decision
making skills. These skills helped me in deciding which research philosophies, research
approaches and research purpose to be selected for the research. The skills that I have acquired
also helped me to complete this research within the specific time and will also allow me to make
effective decision in the future. I have taken help from many people including my mentors,
classmates, friends and family members and also gathered relevant ideas that I can incorporate in
my research. I have learned that in order to complete a job or a task it is important to work
collaboratively. This collaboration enhances the interpersonal skills in me which allow me to
develop good relation with other and carry out the best in them. I have asked many questions and
theories related to my projects. This interaction with others and mentor helped me to develop my
communication skills. I also want to mention that there are also bad times in this journey when I
did not get required help that I have asked for. Ultimately the reason I found is the lack of proper
communication skills through which the other person could not understand about my problem
that I faced. Thus, regular interaction helped me in conveying my message properly to the target
audience.
I have learned about different methodology styles that I can apply in my research. I have
learned about how to carry a research by following all the basic. This will improve my critical
analysis traits to select the best out of many methods. The best thing that I think is that this

29CAPSTONE PROJECT
ability to critically analyzing the situations and given aspects helps me in choosing the best
suitable option in any phase of the life. Academically, the knowledge I have gather through this
research will help me to conduct many more researches in my academic life. I have also got
support from my parents, who have tried to help me in every possible manner. I have also
learned the procedure of conducting the research. It is important for analyzing the sources first
and completes the work in a systematic manner according to the structure. This process improves
my skills in developing the framework of the research and then identifying the resources through
which the developed research objectives can be addressed. I felt happy that I have personally
utilized the main theme of my research work that is to utilize the cognitive artifacts in
accomplishing desired job roles. Thus, I can say that I have developed a clear understanding
regarding the topic and have the experience to personally utilize the concept.

30CAPSTONE PROJECT
7.0 Reference List and Bibliography
Abdullah, R., 2012. Oil and gas industry: opportunities and challenges ahead. Halliburton,
Malaysia.
Adams, F. and Garrison, R., 2013. The mark of the cognitive. Minds and Machines, 23(3),
pp.339-352.
Altmann, U., Bohrn, I.C., Lubrich, O., Menninghaus, W. and Jacobs, A.M., 2012. The power of
emotional valence—from cognitive to affective processes in reading. Frontiers in human
neuroscience, 6, p.192.
Anderson, N.H., 2014. Contributions to information integration theory: volume 1: cognition.
Psychology Press.
Badiru, A.B. and Osisanya, S.O., 2016. Project management for the oil and gas industry: a world
system approach. CRC Press.
Bandura, A., 2014. Social cognitive theory of moral thought and action. In Handbook of moral
behavior and development(pp. 69-128). Psychology Press.
Bernard, H.R. and Bernard, H.R., 2012. Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative
approaches. Sage.
Bratman, G.N., Hamilton, J.P. and Daily, G.C., 2012. The impacts of nature experience on
human cognitive function and mental health. Annals of the New York Academy of
Sciences, 1249(1), pp.118-136.
Chandrasekharan, S. and Nersessian, N.J., 2015. Building cognition: The construction of
computational representations for scientific discovery. Cognitive science, 39(8), pp.1727-1763.
Coleman, R. ed., 2013. Deleuze and research methodologies. Edinburgh University Press.

31CAPSTONE PROJECT
Cress, U., Feinkohl, I., Jirschitzka, J. and Kimmerle, J., 2016. Mass collaboration as coevolution
of cognitive and social systems. In Mass collaboration and education (pp. 85-104). Springer,
Cham.
Creswell, J.W. and Creswell, J.D., 2017. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage publications.
Farh, C.I., Seo, M.G. and Tesluk, P.E., 2012. Emotional intelligence, teamwork effectiveness,
and job performance: The moderating role of job context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(4),
p.890.
Flick, U., 2015. Introducing research methodology: A beginner's guide to doing a research
project. Sage.
Gaba, D.M., 2013. Perioperative cognitive aids in anesthesia: what, who, how, and why bother?.
Gin Choi, Y., Kwon, J. and Kim, W., 2013. Effects of attitudes vs experience of workplace fun
on employee behaviors: Focused on Generation Y in the hospitality industry. International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 25(3), pp.410-427.
Heckman, J.J. and Kautz, T., 2013. Fostering and measuring skills: Interventions that improve
character and cognition (No. w19656). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Heersmink, R., 2013. A taxonomy of cognitive artifacts: function, information, and
categories. Review of philosophy and psychology, 4(3), pp.465-481.
Heersmink, R., 2017. Extended mind and cognitive enhancement: Moral aspects of cognitive
artifacts. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 16(1), pp.17-32.
Jensen, K., Lahn, L.C. and Nerland, M. eds., 2012. Professional learning in the knowledge
society (Vol. 6). Springer Science & Business Media.

32CAPSTONE PROJECT
Kautz, T., Heckman, J.J., Diris, R., Ter Weel, B. and Borghans, L., 2014. Fostering and
measuring skills: Improving cognitive and non-cognitive skills to promote lifetime success (No.
w20749). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Kbr.com., 2018. [online] Available at: https://www.kbr.com/technologies/offshore [Accessed 20
Mar. 2018].
Kruglanski, A.W., 2013. Lay epistemics and human knowledge: Cognitive and motivational
bases. Springer Science & Business Media.
Kucewicz, M.T., Cimbalnik, J., Matsumoto, J.Y., Brinkmann, B.H., Bower, M.R., Vasoli, V.,
Sulc, V., Meyer, F., Marsh, W.R., Stead, S.M. and Worrell, G.A., 2014. High frequency
oscillations are associated with cognitive processing in human recognition
memory. Brain, 137(8), pp.2231-2244.
Liang, C., Hsu, Y., Chang, C.C. and Lin, L.J., 2013. In search of an index of imagination for
virtual experience designers. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(4),
pp.1037-1046.
Lindenberger, U., 2014. Human cognitive aging: Corriger la fortune?. Science, 346(6209),
pp.572-578.
Luber, B. and Lisanby, S.H., 2014. Enhancement of human cognitive performance using
transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Neuroimage, 85, pp.961-970.
Lunenburg, F.C., 2012. Power and leadership: an influence process. International journal of
management, business, and administration, 15(1), pp.1-9.
Mackey, A. and Gass, S.M., 2013. Second language research: Methodology and design.
Routledge.

33CAPSTONE PROJECT
Maxwell, J.A., 2012. Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41). Sage
publications.
Michaelian, K. and Sutton, J., 2013. Distributed cognition and memory research: History and
current directions. Review of philosophy and psychology, 4(1), pp.1-24.
Mingers, J. and Willcocks, L., 2014. An integrative semiotic framework for information systems:
The social, personal and material worlds. Information and Organization, 24(1), pp.48-70.
Muntanyola-Saura, D., 2014. A cognitive account of expertise: Why Rational Choice Theory is
(often) a fiction. Theory & Psychology, 24(1), pp.19-39.
Neisser, U., 2014. Cognitive psychology: Classic edition. Psychology Press.
Neubert, F.X., Mars, R.B., Thomas, A.G., Sallet, J. and Rushworth, M.F., 2014. Comparison of
human ventral frontal cortex areas for cognitive control and language with areas in monkey
frontal cortex. Neuron, 81(3), pp.700-713.
Neuman, W.L., 2013. Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches.
Pearson education.
Neves, P. and Eisenberger, R., 2012. Management communication and employee performance:
The contribution of perceived organizational support. Human Performance, 25(5), pp.452-464.
Novikov, A.M. and Novikov, D.A., 2013. Research methodology: From philosophy of science to
research design(Vol. 2). CRC Press.
Perlovsky, L., 2013. A challenge to human evolution—cognitive dissonance. Frontiers in
Psychology, 4, p.179.
Piccolo, L.S., Baranauskas, C., Fernandez, M., Alani, H. and De Liddo, A., 2014, October.
Energy consumption awareness in the workplace: technical artefacts and practices. In

34CAPSTONE PROJECT
Proceedings of the 13th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 41-
50). Sociedade Brasileira de Computação.
Pierre, E.A.S., 2012. Post qualitative research. Collecting and interpreting qualitative
materials, 3.
Power, D.J., Sharda, R. and Burstein, F., 2015. Decision support systems. John Wiley & Sons,
Ltd.
Reed, S.K., 2012. Cognition: Theories and applications. CENGAGE learning.
Schaufeli, W.B. and Taris, T.W., 2014. A critical review of the Job Demands-Resources Model:
Implications for improving work and health. In Bridging occupational, organizational and
public health (pp. 43-68). Springer Netherlands.
Sekaran, U. and Bougie, R., 2016. Research methods for business: A skill building approach.
John Wiley & Sons.
Sellberg, C. and Lindblom, J., 2014. Comparing methods for workplace studies: a theoretical and
empirical analysis. Cognition, technology & work, 16(4), pp.467-486.
Shuck, B. and Reio Jr, T.G., 2014. Employee engagement and well-being: A moderation model
and implications for practice. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 21(1), pp.43-58.
Shute, V.J., Ventura, M. and Ke, F., 2015. The power of play: The effects of Portal 2 and
Lumosity on cognitive and noncognitive skills. Computers & education, 80, pp.58-67.
Silberstein, M. and Chemero, A., 2012. Complexity and extended phenomenological‐cognitive
systems. Topics in cognitive science, 4(1), pp.35-50.
Silva, D.C., Silva, A.A., Melo, C.F. and Marques, M.R.C., 2017. Production of oil with potential
energetic use by catalytic co-pyrolysis of oil sludge from offshore petroleum industry. Journal of
Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis, 124, pp.290-297.

35CAPSTONE PROJECT
Stahl, G., 2012. Cognizing mediating: Unpacking the entanglement of artifacts with collective
minds. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(2), pp.187-191.
Susi, T., 2016. Social cognition, artefacts, and stigmergy revisited: Concepts of coordination.
Cognitive Systems Research, 38, pp.41-49.
Tariq, A., Georgiou, A. and Westbrook, J., 2013. Medication errors in residential aged care
facilities: A distributed cognition analysis of the information exchange process. International
Journal of medical informatics, 82(5), pp.299-312.
Tollefsen, D.P., Dale, R. and Paxton, A., 2013. Alignment, transactive memory, and collective
cognitive systems. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 4(1), pp.49-64.
Vaesen, K., 2012. The cognitive bases of human tool use. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35(4),
pp.203-218.
Varela, F.J., Thompson, E. and Rosch, E., 2017. The embodied mind: Cognitive science and
human experience. MIT press.
Wang, Y., Patel, S. and Patel, D., 2013. The cognitive process and formal models of human
attentions. International Journal of Software Science and Computational Intelligence
(IJSSCI), 5(1), pp.32-50.
Whiten, A. and Erdal, D., 2012. The human socio-cognitive niche and its evolutionary
origins. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 367(1599),
pp.2119-2129.
Wong, L.H., Chen, W. and Jan, M., 2012. How artefacts mediate small‐group co‐creation
activities in a mobile‐assisted seamless language learning environment?. Journal of Computer
Assisted Learning, 28(5), pp.411-424.

36CAPSTONE PROJECT
8.0 Appendix
8.1 Questionnaire
Quantitative Questions
Demographic Question
Q1. What is your age?
 Less than 22 years
 23-35 years
 36-50 years
 Greater than 50 years
Q2. How long you have been employed in this organization?
 Less than 2 Year
 2.1-4 Years
 4.1-7 Years
 More than 7 years
Quantitative Questions on cognitive artifacts
Q3. Do you agree that framing the job roles refers to the cognitive artifacts?
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree

37CAPSTONE PROJECT
Q4. How far do you agree that memorizing the construction of the job demonstrates the cognitive
artifact?
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree
Q5. Do you agree that computers interaction illustrates effectiveness of cognitive artifacts?
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree
Quantitative Questions on employee’s performance
Q6. How far do you agree that greater memorizing power can help an employee to perform
better?
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree
Q7. Do you agree that experience of an employee can influence the performance of an
employee?