Where Is It (in the Map)? Recall and Recognition of Spatial Information

Abstract

Findings of empirical studies of spatial memory using maps are direct responses to the successful transfer and processing of map information. The memory performance of map users is an important indication of the quality of a map design. Studies of spatial memory have mainly relied on recall performances, but maps can be used in various ways depending on the map user's task and applied strategy. Therefore, one memory paradigm does not cover the entire spectrum of options for examining the retrieval of map information. Three different experiments were designed to analyze and compare memory performances using different map information in recall and recognition (combining episodic and semantic memory) paradigms. The results demonstrate that map complexity, as varied by the amount of displayed map detail, contributes significantly to memory performance. Moreover, memory enhancement affected by map-structuring elements (grids) depends on the respective paradigm and also on the visual appearance of the structuring elements. Both paradigms for examining the influence of map information on cognitive processing can be applied specifically to analyze the efficiency of map designs. On the basis of the different effects of map information, a reasoned application of these paradigms to test map designs is indispensable.

Effects of visual map complexity on the attentional processing of landmarks

“…Thus, we assume that the relation between location memory performance and map complexity has an inverse u-shape (cf. [19]). Future experiments could investigate this assumption by investigating location memory performance in maps with extensively high visual complexity.…”

“…In case of topographical maps empirical evidence exists showing that object location memory performance improves with increasing map complexity [17][18][19]. These authors also found that artificial map elements (grids) added to a map improve object location memory performance, especially in maps with low complexities.…”

“…Based on the signal detection theory (see 51), responses were scored as hits (correct route was recognized), misses (correct route was not recognized), correct rejections (route deviation was spotted) or false alarms (route deviation was not spotted). Hits, misses, correct rejections and false alarms were then translated into d' values, which represent the proportion of correct and incorrect responses [19,51,52] aggregated per participant to indicate recognition performance (i.e. how well participants are able to differentiate old from new items).…”

“…This counterintuitive finding may be best explained by the assumption that mental representations of space are generated based on spatial relations between single objects [20,21] that serve as reference points. Thus, the higher availability of reference points in complex topographic maps may support the formation of more accurate cognitive maps [1] up to some asymptote where the addition of detail no further improves memory performance (also see discussion in [19]). In case of route memory tasks, no such empirical data exists.…”

Preparing the HoloLens for user Studies: an Augmented Reality Interface for the Spatial Adjustment of Holographic Objects in 3D Indoor Environments

“…Empirical research of cartography, spatial cognition and experimental psychology has recently led to some recommendations for the construction of user cognition-oriented cartographic media. For example, it was reported in user experiments that an additional layer of square grids increases the performances in memory of object locations (Bestgen et al 2017;Kuchinke et al 2016;Edler et al 2014) and in estimating longer linear distances in maps (Dickmann et al 2019). The grid-based memory effect also occurs if the grid structure is physically reduced to indicated ("illusory") lines (Dickmann et al 2017), gets a depth offset or is changed to a hexagonal pattern (Edler et al 2018c).…”