Skip to content

A research methodology that uses deliberately constructed fictional scenarios to study system dependency, cognitive scaffolding, documentation drift, and non-reversible transformations across AI, tools, and human coordination.

License

Notifications You must be signed in to change notification settings

leenathomas01/Bounded-Fictional-Analysis

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date

Latest commit

 

History

6 Commits
 
 
 
 

Repository files navigation

Bounded Fictional Analysis

A portable method for making invisible system effects visible.

A methodology for studying system dependency, cognitive scaffolding, and non-reversible transformations


Overview

Bounded Fictional Analysis is a research method for examining how systems reshape cognition, documentation, and coordination over time. It uses deliberately constructed fictional scenarios to isolate dynamics that are difficult or impossible to study through direct observation of real systems.

This approach is particularly useful when:

  • Real systems are too entangled to examine single variables cleanly
  • Gradual changes obscure what's due to system effects vs. other factors
  • Ethical constraints prevent direct experimentation
  • Counterfactual scenarios need exploration before committing to implementation

The Method

Core Framework: Five Phases

The methodology systematically examines system integration through five distinct phases:

1. Baseline — Document pre-system state

  • How do actors function without the system?
  • What are existing capabilities and limitations?
  • What cognitive frameworks are already in use?

2. Introduction — Observe initial adoption

  • What immediate behavioral changes occur?
  • How do habits begin to form?
  • What cognitive restructuring happens?

3. Steady-State — Examine full integration

  • What new capabilities emerge?
  • What old capabilities atrophy?
  • How deeply embedded does the system become?

4. Removal — Track discontinuity effects

  • What happens when the system suddenly disappears?
  • Which behaviors persist despite losing their function?
  • How do cognitive frameworks adapt or fail to adapt?

5. Adaptation — Document long-term equilibrium

  • What remains after the system is gone?
  • Can actors return to pre-system baseline?
  • Is the transformation reversible?

Observable Patterns

The methodology reveals four key patterns across different domains:

Pattern 1: Behavioral Lock-In

Actions that continue after their functional purpose disappears.

Example domains: Deprecated API usage, vestigial workflow steps, phantom limb phenomena

Pattern 2: Orphaned Sophistication

Cognitive frameworks that reference absent infrastructure.

Example domains: Documentation systems, memory architectures, collaborative tools

Pattern 3: Context Discontinuity

Artifacts that persist but lose their interpretive framework.

Example domains: Legacy data formats, archived communications, platform migrations

Pattern 4: Residual Infrastructure

Physical or social structures shaped by systems that no longer exist.

Example domains: Organizational patterns, spatial arrangements, coordination protocols


Application Domains

This methodology applies across multiple fields:

AI Systems

  • LLM memory and context windows
  • Platform discontinuity and API deprecation
  • Tool dependency and migration paths
  • Memory system architecture

Documentation & Knowledge Management

  • Archival practice and metadata preservation
  • Format obsolescence
  • Knowledge transfer across system changes

Cognitive Science

  • Scaffolded thinking and external cognition
  • Tool-mediated perception
  • Habit formation and behavioral persistence

Systems Design

  • Graceful degradation patterns
  • Legacy support requirements
  • Migration path planning

Methodology in Practice

Step 1: Design the Fictional Scenario

Create a bounded world where:

  • The system has clear, observable effects
  • System presence/absence can be cleanly toggled
  • Actors respond in recognizable patterns
  • Multiple levels of analysis are accessible

Step 2: Walk Through the Phases

Systematically examine each phase, documenting:

  • What changes at individual, social, and structural levels
  • Which effects persist across phase transitions
  • What proves reversible vs. irreversible

Step 3: Extract Patterns

Identify:

  • Behaviors that outlast their function
  • Cognitive frameworks orphaned from infrastructure
  • Artifacts that lose context
  • Structures that persist after their cause disappears

Step 4: Map to Real Domains

Test whether fictional patterns help explain real phenomena:

  • Platform shutdowns
  • Memory system changes
  • Tool discontinuation
  • Format obsolescence

What This Approach Can and Cannot Do

Strengths

✓ Isolates confounded variables
✓ Examines counterfactuals safely
✓ Makes invisible dynamics visible
✓ Generates testable hypotheses
✓ Communicates complex ideas accessibly

Limitations

✗ Cannot provide quantitative predictions
✗ Does not replace empirical validation
✗ Cannot settle ontological questions
✗ Does not prove causal mechanisms in real systems
✗ Cannot substitute for direct observation


Validation Criteria

A successful fictional analysis demonstrates:

Cross-domain recognition — People from different fields recognize the patterns
Explanatory power — The framework makes previously confusing phenomena understandable
Predictive utility — It anticipates what happens in similar scenarios
Generative capacity — It reveals new questions or dynamics
Boundary clarity — Limitations are clearly stated


Ethical Considerations

When Studying AI Systems

Critical requirements:

  • Explicit fictional framing
  • Clear consent boundaries
  • No hidden probing or manipulation
  • Transparent documentation of process

Why this matters: Fictional analysis should explore ideas safely, not conduct covert research.

When Generalizing to Humans

Important caveats:

  • Fictional actors aren't real people
  • Patterns suggest hypotheses, not prove facts
  • Individual variation is significant
  • Cultural context matters

Origin

This framework emerged from an earlier experimental thought exercise on system mediation. The analytical approach proved reusable beyond that context and is presented here independently.


Use Cases

Good fit:

  • Exploring system dependency dynamics
  • Understanding non-reversible transformations
  • Examining scaffolding effects
  • Studying documentation feedback loops
  • Investigating context preservation

Poor fit:

  • Measuring specific system performance
  • Validating technical implementations
  • Making policy recommendations
  • Conducting security research
  • Reverse-engineering actual systems

Quick Reference

At each phase, examine:

  • Individual cognition
  • Social coordination
  • Physical infrastructure
  • Temporal persistence

Look for:

  • Behavioral lock-in
  • Orphaned sophistication
  • Context discontinuity
  • Residual infrastructure

Ask:

  • What changes?
  • What persists?
  • What's reversible?
  • What generalizes?

Citation

If referencing this work:

Bounded Fictional Analysis: A methodology for studying system dependency and non-reversible cognitive transformations through deliberately constructed fictional scenarios.


For a complete catalog of related research:
📂 AI Safety & Systems Architecture Research Index


About

A research methodology that uses deliberately constructed fictional scenarios to study system dependency, cognitive scaffolding, documentation drift, and non-reversible transformations across AI, tools, and human coordination.

Topics

Resources

License

Stars

Watchers

Forks

Releases

No releases published

Packages

No packages published