2019
DOI: 10.4230/lipics.cosit.2019.19
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Future of Geographic Information Displays from GIScience, Cartographic, and Cognitive Science Perspectives (Vision Paper)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our results contradict previous findings that added realism hurts performance, especially for users with low spatial abilities (Hegarty et al, 2009;Wilkening & Fabrikant, 2011). On the other hand, our results are in line with the findings of previous studies that the visualization style does not hinder wayfinders with high-spatial abilities (Hegarty et al, 2009;Kapaj et al, 2021Kapaj et al, , 2023Lanini-Maggi et al, 2021;Thrash et al, 2019;Wilkening & Fabrikant, 2011).…”
Section: Spatial Learningsupporting
confidence: 75%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Our results contradict previous findings that added realism hurts performance, especially for users with low spatial abilities (Hegarty et al, 2009;Wilkening & Fabrikant, 2011). On the other hand, our results are in line with the findings of previous studies that the visualization style does not hinder wayfinders with high-spatial abilities (Hegarty et al, 2009;Kapaj et al, 2021Kapaj et al, , 2023Lanini-Maggi et al, 2021;Thrash et al, 2019;Wilkening & Fabrikant, 2011).…”
Section: Spatial Learningsupporting
confidence: 75%
“…The presence of landmarks as visuospatial cues on navigation map aids is essential for spatial knowledge formation (Ekstrom, 2015;Epstein & Vass, 2014;Ramanoël et al, 2022). Therefore, visualizing navigation-relevant landmarks on mobile maps as 3D buildings with higher visual fidelity compared to less relevant features provides a pedestrian navigator with a more naturalistic depiction of the experienced environment, which in turn facilitates feature identification between the physical world and the mobile map display, and spatial learning (Chrastil & Warren, 2012;Raubal & Winter, 2002;Richter & Winter, 2014;Thrash et al, 2019;Willis et al, 2009). Additionally, users generally prefer fully realistic 3D visualizations, which is attributed to the fact that they provide a more naturalistic representation of the environment and are perceived as recognizable, efficient, intuitive, enjoyable, and fun (Hegarty et al, 2009;Liao et al, 2017;Lokka & Çöltekin, 2019;Oulasvirta et al, 2009;Plesa & Cartwright, 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Designing navigation systems that take into account and adapt to these individual abilities, preferences, and contexts remains a challenge. Several contextual design recommendations have been recently proposed (Thrash et al, 2019), outlined in Table 1. For example, landmarks could be emotionally relevant due to the observer's emotional state or to the emotional valence of the landmark itself (Balaban, Roser, & Hamburger, 2014) and may change performance.…”
Section: Adjusting For Contextmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Design recommendations for geographic information display (GID) elements based on context. Originally appearing inThrash et al, 2019. …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%