Performance of 2D versus 3D Topographic Representations for Different Task Types

Abstract

In this study, a performance comparison is made between 2D and 3D topographic representations for solving different tasks. The tasks involved answering questions that either did or did not require elevation information and were either focused or integrative. Integrative questions required understanding the relationship of three separate locations. 2D representations (i.e., contour maps) only showed a clear advantage for focused, non-elevation questions with 3D representations not showing a clear advantage for any other task condition. There were interactions between task type, dimensionality and elevation. In addition, the integrative, elevation questions were clearly more difficult regardless of dimension. In addition, participants' visualization ability, as measured by a paper-folding test, correlated with their task performance. Further work is proposed to look at how experience interacts with these tasks and topographic representations.

Past and Present Practices of Topographic Base Map Database Update in Nepal

“…Though 2D maps are difficult to read by inexperienced users, 2D maps give the precise relative position of any point. Meanwhile, 3D maps are better for understanding the shape and topography of a location [4]. Any location on a 2D map has to be adjusted to the 'Z' value, i.e., the elevation at that place that is easily found in TBMs.…”