Map Skills in Education: A Systematic Review of Terminology, Methodology, and Influencing Factors

Abstract

For a few decades, map skills stay at the forefront of not only geographers' and geographic educators' research interest. To identify what has already been accomplished, where the research currently stands and where the potential for future studies lies, a review of the literature was carried out. Specifically, this comprehensive synthesis of map skill research focuses on three perspectives: terminology, methodological approaches, and mainly on investigated factors affecting the map skill level. As nonuniformity in terminology is apparent, an integrative framework of map skill types based on theoretical works and previous studies is proposed. Similarly, methods that can be more suitable and beneficial for future research than now prevailing non-standardized test are presented. These suggestions are mainly based on a variety of identified scarcely used methodological approaches. Furthermore, the synthesis shows that the number of factors which influence on the level of map skills has been tested is substantial. But that, frequently investigated categories of factors are identifiable. In addition, current gaps in map skill research are identified and insufficiently studied, yet potentially important factors are suggested for future studies.It is possible to designate basic categories of factors (i.e., independent variables) which may influence map skill level and its development based on the concept of cartographic communication (Koláčný, 1969; Wood, 1972) or eventually on the concept of cartographic interaction (Roth, 2012). Although the concept of cartographic communication has already been superseded in terms of the mediation of cartographic information, the categorization of factors influencing map skills is still appropriate.This involves factors associated with the map itself (map characteristics) on the one hand and factors, i.e., attributes, associated with the map user (user characteristics) on the other hand. These two categories should be supplemented with a third, which includes the characteristics of the social, learning, etc. environment (external factors). As the cartographer's creation of a map and, particularly, the map user's work with a map can be impeded or promoted by them (e.g., home environment, familiarity with the area, teacher's learning style). . Spatial thinking in geographic information science: Students' geospatial conceptions, map-based reasoning, and spatial visualization ability.

What Went Wrong for Bad Solvers during Thematic Map Analysis? Lessons Learned from an Eye-Tracking Study

“…However, this power depends largely on the user [1][2][3]. Depending on their competencies and abilities, maps can be used in a proper and in-depth manner [4].…”

Numbers on Thematic Maps: Helpful Simplicity or Too Raw to Be Useful for Map Reading?

“…A more complex comparison operation, consisting of providing the ratios of values between units (T2), also showed worse results for maps with proportional symbols, which was demonstrated across all indicators. Therefore, the present study indicates that the comparison operation-which is one of the basic operations performed during map reading, included in many map-use taxonomies [54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61] and used in many empirical studies in the field of map reading (e.g., [28,62])-can be better performed using maps with numbers, i.e., when the use of visual variables and traditional presentation methods is limited. In addition, in tasks in which a summation operation is required (thus, an action more favourable to numbers on maps than proportional symbols), the incorporation of visual elements into the presentation of numbers (a size variable in proportional numbers) reduced the usability of this method.…”

A Systematic Review into Factors Influencing Sketch Map Quality

“…Studies focussing on positional accuracy focussed more often on individual differences (85 cases) than on external factors (49). The predominant individual characteristics studied were sociocultural factors (41), followed by biological (26) and psychological (18) factors. For external factors, the majority of studies focussed on secondary sources (45), with only four such studies focussing on primary sources.…”

“…Moreover, all the studies focus on a rather small sample of analysed papers and use a qualitative methodological approach. This paper, on the other hand, is a systematic review, aiming to complement these qualitative studies by employing a quantitative methodology (according to e.g., [26,27]) and considering a more extensive sample of papers.…”