Selecting landmarks in novel environments

Miller, Jared; Carlson, Lauri

doi:10.3758/s13423-010-0038-9

Cited by 38 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The path coefficient connecting visual salience and visibility in advance is the second largest of all coefficients and highly significant. This is also in line with the findings by Miller and Carlson (2011) who report on the strong influence visual salience has on object recognition based on a route learning and description study in a VR environment. The highest path coefficient was found for the impact of visibility in advance on structural salience.…”

Section: Discussing the Resultssupporting

confidence: 80%

“…But, the fact that the Cathedral will be identifiable from a greater distance contributes to its salience beyond its visual salience, despite that fact that both are related (cf. Miller and Carlson (2011) who report on the strong influence visual salience has on object recognition). Therefore, visibility in advance must be included in the structural model leading to overall salience, as objects that "are identifiable early on along a route are more useful than those that can only be spotted at the very last moment" (Richter & Winter, 2014, p. 142).…”

Section: Saliencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Miller and Carlson (2011) argue for preferences in probands to use spatial features if the task focuses on navigation-in opposition to visual aspects used, if they are asked to recognize certain objects. Presenting the stimulus on a picture in the in-situ experiment (cf.…”

Section: Criticisms and Their Impact On Empirical Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Participants are, however, required to remember features; but, there is evidence challenging the idea that LMs, which are easy to memorize are comparably useful in navigational tasks (cf. Miller & Carlson, 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Empirically measuring salience of objects for use in pedestrian navigation

Kattenbeck

2015

Proceedings of the 23rd SIGSPATIAL International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Auch wenn sie es vehement von sich weisen würden, so haben meine Eltern großen Anteil an dieser, meiner Dissertation. Sie gaben mir von Kindesbeinen an die Freiheit, mich mit dem Nachdenken auseinanderzusetzen. Glaubt mir, Mama und Papa, ohne diese Freiheit wäre ich heute nicht der, der ich bin.Schließlich danke ich meiner über alles geliebten Frau Anita. Wir sind fast genau so lange verheiratet, wie es gedauert hat, bis ich nun mein Promotionsverfahren erfolgreich abschließen konnte. In diesen Jahren haben wir einiges zusammen erlebt und durchgemacht.Du, Anita, hast immer zu mir gehalten und mich in Allem und mit Allem unterstützt.Ohne Dich, Anita, wäre diese Arbeit undenkbar.Dir, Anita, widme ich diese Arbeit.vi A B S T R A C T background Humans usually refer to landmarks when they give route directions to pedestrians. One of the reasons why current mobile pedestrian navigation systems do not yet mimic this mode of communication is the lack of available data sources. The usefulness of a crowd-sourced data acquisition approach to overcome this problem has long been mooted. However, to date no empirically sound way of measuring the salience of objects by means of surveys exists.goal Given this background, this doctoral work has three goals:1. To achieve a sound way of measuring salience and its subdimensions, i.e. visibility in advance, cognitive salience, prototypicality, structural salience, and visual salience based on taking dimensions revealed in earlier studies systematically and simultaneously into account.2. To find subgroups of visual features among the large number of visual attributes known from the literature.3. To find the most important subdimensions of salience by means of estimating two different structural equation models. Model I is based on assumptions of independence among subdimensions, whereas model II reflects hypotheses of mediation.Taken as a whole, achieving these goals will foster both, the advancement of theories of salience and landmark acquisition methods.methodology A large scale, in-situ experiment was implemented, trying to overcome weaknesses of earlier attempts made to estimate salience. An vii appropriate sample size of buildings and non-buildings was calculated a priori (n obj = 360). Objects were randomly selected based on their geographical coordinates and randomly grouped into n r = 55 routes. Participants were required to rate objects by means of a survey. The questions were derived from empirical evidence found in earlier studies. Each route was walked by two different participants (n = 112), id est (i.e.) two ratings per object were collected for data analysis.findings Model I and model II were analyzed using PLS Path Modeling and consistent PLS Path Modeling, respectively. The measurement models proposed showed a good fit, although some weaknesses were identified for prototypicality and cognitive salience. Geometrical aspects as well as features like (visual) age turned out to have a stronger impact on visual salience than color. Model I did not yield reasonable struct...

show abstract

Section: Discussing the Resultssupporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Saliencementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Criticisms and Their Impact On Empirical Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Empirically measuring salience of objects for use in pedestrian navigation

Kattenbeck

2015

Proceedings of the 23rd SIGSPATIAL International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This discrepancy is explained by the authors by the differing visibility of the four corners from the egocentric perspective. Miller and Carlson (2011) converged on a differentiation between visual and structural salience by investigating recognition performance and spatial descriptions of landmarks in a virtual museum tour. Landmarks varied in their visual salience and were located at choice points, potential choice points, and on-route (i.e., representing different levels of structural salience).…”

Section: Spatial and Perceptual Properties As Determinants Of Landmarmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gaze behavior during incidental and intentional navigation in an outdoor environment

Wenczel

Hepperle

Stülpnagel

2016

Spatial Cognition & Computation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research on landmark selection and route learning derived many of its conclusions from the analysis of memory tasks and verbal route descriptions. We examined the extent to which these findings are reflected in gaze behavior. Wearing a mobile eye tracking device, participants learned the first part of a real-world route incidentally and the second part intentionally. When compared with incidental learning, intentional learning led to a stronger focus on landmarks at structurally salient locations. In contrast, landmarks with a higher level of visual salience attracted generally more fixation time. This finding remained unaffected by learning intention. Our results support the validity of established theoretical frameworks about landmark selection and route learning by extending them to the level of gaze behavior. Additionally, they provide insight into subtle changes of properties determining a landmark's salience as a result of learning intention.

show abstract