Pen down (in center of page)
Draw circle (1"diameter)
Pen up
Pen down (at base of circle)
Draw vertical line A (2" long, downwards)
Pen up
Pen down (1/2" from base of circle along line A)
Draw horizontal line B (1"long, to the right)
Pen up
Pen down (1/2" from base of circle along line A)
Draw horizontal line C (1" long, to the left)
Pen up
Pen down (at bottom point of line A)
Draw horizontal line D (1/2" long, to the right)
Pen up
Pen down (at bottom point of line A)
Draw horizontal line E (1/2" long, to the left)
Pen up
Pen down (at left end of line E)
Draw vertical line F (1 1/2" long, downwards)
Pen up
Pen down (at right end of line D)
Draw vertical line G (1 1/2" log, downwards)
Pen up
Pen down (at bottom of line F)
Draw horizontal line H (1/2" long, to the left)
Pen up
Pen down (at bottom of line G)
Draw horizontal line I (1/2" long, to the right)
Pen up
The above protocol is the final version. The original had serious weaknesses concerning vagueness in the syntax of the directions and lack of clarification about the direction of the line. However the original was strong in that it had labels for each figure drawn and referenced back to them in order to place the next item. The final version meant to clear up the vagueness from the first version.
All of the commands had parameters except for the command “Pen up”.
The parameters simplified any vagueness concerning length/size, direction, and placement.
Originally, my partner’s protocol was better. It was far clearer about the movement of the pen, something I hadn’t incorporated into my protocol yet. However it was difficult for me to follow since she used angular motion to describe the motion of the pen. It was an interesting problem since for people more mathematically inclined than me (i.e. most people) this would have been a valuable parameter. Within my original protocol, I used more spatial parameters, something more helpful to a visual person but frustratingly unspecific to a mathematical person.
The original task I developed (as stated above) was far more useful to a more visual mind. After developing the protocol, the task became friendlier to both types of people.
There was far more information in the protocol, but it was still very abstracted. There was very little room for ambiguity by the end.