Psychogeography in the Age of the Quantified Self—Mental Map Modelling with Georeferenced Personal Activity Data

Evaluative image 2.0: A web mapping approach to capture people’s perceptions of a city

“…Furthermore, geotagged content from social networks has been employed to capture different prototypes of activity patterns (lines, clusters, dense areas, sparse areas) that can be used to characterize the perception of the city and referred to the five elements (Liu, Zhou, Zhao, & Ryan, 2016). Similar methodologies have been described for visualizing 'crowd-sourced cognitive maps' (Jang & Kim, 2019) and constellations of memorable places (Meier & Glinka, 2017), or for identifying the Lynchian elements from semantic similarities, from user-generated content (Bahrehdar, Adams, & Purves, 2020). In this direction, Huang, Obracht-Prondzynska, Kamrowska-Zaluska, Sun, and Li (2021) advanced and validated a framework to identify the image of the city using crowd-sourced data; by validating their results with the image of the city emerging from questionnaires, sketch maps and official spatial data sets, the authors found that social media content can confidently be used to identify landmarks, paths and districts (at least in Gdańsk, Sopot and Gdynia, Poland).…”

The Quantified Self-in-Place: Opportunities and Challenges for Place-Based N-of-1 Datasets

“…Additionally, researchers must be aware of the contested nature of place terminologies themselves, including UGCoP and other challenges (Kwan, 2012a). Still, recent projects recognizing the "personal and subjective" nature of spatial perception (e.g., two neighbors may define their neighborhood quite differently) provide examples for how these uncertainties might be conceptualized and addressed (Pykett et al, 2020;Meier and Glinka). Furthermore, the moderating influences of environmental perceptions are also important to consider and could be measured with complementary methods, such as EMA (Yi et al, 2019).…”