skip to main content
10.1145/501516.501522acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesdocConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Design concepts for learning spatial relationships

Published:21 October 2001Publication History

ABSTRACT

Maps are cognitive artifacts that represent not only the characteristics of the information space but also the use people make of the space. There are three privileged modalities by which humans learn the relationships in existing spaces: path-based learning, landmark-based learning and survey learning. These three modalities are differently sustained by maps and by the real environments. Maps afford Simultaneous experience of the space, Single point of view, Survey knowledge, Secondary spatial activity; while real environments afford Progressive Experience of the space, Multiple point of view, Procedural knowledge, Primary Spatial activity. The most important attempts to modify these differences between maps and real environments, and to merge their properties, have been: a) the creation of visual structures that enable focus + context views; b) the design of information landscapes that enable free flight in 3D space. The principles used to obtain such a view are the combination of Simultaneous and Progressive Experience of the space as a Primary spatial activity.We are designing new views for a graphic information system by merging the affordances of traditional maps and real environments for learning spatial relations. The emerging views will be presented and discussed from a theoretical point of view and exemplified in their application to the design of an information system for a National Park in Italy. The prototype of the information system was tested by human factors specialists and by end-users; the results of the test show both strength, and weakness, in the implementation of the proposed design concepts.

References

  1. 1.Abrams, J. "Muriel Cooper's Visible Wisdom," I.D. Sept./Oct. 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.Card, S. K., J.D. Mackinlay and B. Shneiderman, Editors (1999) Reads in Information Visualization: Using Vision to Think, Morgan Kaufmann, SF, CA Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. 3.Cole, M. (1996). Cultural Psychology, a once and future discipline . Cambridge, Massachusetts: the Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.Cooper, Muriel. "Computers and Design." Design Quarterly, Volume 142, pp. 22-31. 1989Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.Cornell, E. H., Heth, C. D., & Alberts, D. M. (1994). Place recognition and way finding by children and adults. Memory and Cognition, 22 (6), 633-643.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. 6.Darken, R. P., & Sibert, J. (1996). Navigating large virtual spaces. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 8 (1), 49-71. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. 7.Evans, G.W., & Pezdek, K. (1980). Cognitive mapping: Knowledge of real-world distance and location information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6 (1), 13-24.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. 8.Furnas, G. W. 1981. The fisheye view: a new look at structured files. Technical report, Bell LaboratoriesGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.Furnas, G. W. "Generalized fisheye views." In Proceedings of ACM SIGCHI '86 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 16-23, 1986. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. 10.G. W. Furnas, (1999) "The FISHEYE view: a new look at structured files," Bell Laboratories Technical Report, reproduced in Readings in Information Visualization: Using Vision to Think, S. K. Card, J. D. Mackinlay, and B. Shneiderman, Eds. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., 1981, 312-330. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. 11.Glicksohn, J. (1994). Rotation, orientation, and cognitive mapping. American Journal of Psychology, 107 (1), 39-51 .Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. 12.Hunt, E. & Waller, D. (1999). Orientation and wayfinding: A review. Technical Report, University of Washington.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge: the MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.Huttenlocher, J., Hedges, L.V., & Duncan, S. (1991). Categories and particulars: Prototype effects in estimating spatial location. Psychological Review, 98 (3), 352-376.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. 15.Lamping, J., Rao, R. and Pirolli, P. "A Focus+Context Technique Based on Hyperbolic Geometry for Visualizing Large Hierarchies." In ACM SIGCHI'95 Mosaic of Creativity, 401-408, May 7-11 1995, Denver, Colorado, USA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. 16.Lloyd, R. (1989). Cognitive maps: Encoding and decoding information. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 79.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. 17.Mackinlay, J. D., Card, S. and Robertson, G. "Perspective Wall: Detail and Context Smoothly Integrated." In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI'91 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 173-179, New Orleans, La, USA, April 1991. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. 18.Moeser, S. D. (1988). Cognitive mapping in a complex building. Environment and Behavior, 20, (1), 21-49.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. 19.Norman, D. A. (1993). Things that make us smart: Defending human attributes in the age of the machine. Reading, MA. Addison-Wesley. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. 20.Robertson, G. G., Mackinlay, J. D. and Card, S. "Cone Trees: Animated 3D Visualizations of Hierarchical Information." Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI'91 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 189-194, New Orleans, LA, April 1991. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. 21.Rizzo A., Marchigiani E., and Andreadis A. The AVANTI project: prototyping and evaluation with a cognitive walkthrough based on the Norman's model of action; Proceedings of the conference on Designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques, 1997, Pages 305 - 309. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. 22.Rizzo, A. (2000) La natura degli artefatti e la loro progettazione. In sistemi Intelligenti a. XII n.3, Pages 437- 452.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.Siegel, A. W., & White, S. H. (1975). The development of spatial representations of large-scale environments. In H.W. Reese (Ed.) Advances in Child Development and Behavior. 10, 9-55. New York: Academic Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.Stevens, A., & Coupe, P. (1978). Distortions in judged spatial relations. Cognitive Psychology, 10, 422-437.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. 25.Taylor, H. A., & Tversky, B. (1996). Perspective in spatial descriptions. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 371-391.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. 26.Thorndyke, P. W. (1982). Distance estimation from cognitive maps. Cognitive Psychology, 13(4), 526 -550.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. 27.Thorndyke, P. W., & Hayes-Roth, B. (1982). Differences in spatial knowledge acquired from maps and navigation. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 560-589.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. 28.Tversky, B. (1981). Distortions in memory for maps. Cognitive Psychology, 13 (3), 560-589.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. 29.Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.Wartfosky, M. (1973). Models. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.Witmer, B. G., Bailey, J. H., & Knerr, B. W., & Parsons, K.C. (1996). Virtual spaces and real world places: Transfer of route knowledge. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45, 413-428. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. 32.Wurman, R. S. (1997) Information Architects, Peter Bradford Editor, New YorkGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.Zhang, J. and Norman, D. A. (1994) Representations in distributed cognitive tasks. Cognitive Science 18: 87-122.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Design concepts for learning spatial relationships

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          SIGDOC '01: Proceedings of the 19th annual international conference on Computer documentation
          October 2001
          272 pages
          ISBN:1581132956
          DOI:10.1145/501516

          Copyright © 2001 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 21 October 2001

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • Article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate355of582submissions,61%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader