Identification of altitude profiles in 3D geovisualizations: the role of interaction and spatial abilities

Figures & data

Figure 1. Additional depth cues available in different kinds of environments.

Figure 2. Design of the experiment.

Figure 3. The first part of the experiment, the MRT.

Figure 4. An example of the task from the visual comparison sub-test.

Figure 5. An example of the model figure and figure that follows it from the memory recall sub-test.

Figure 6. Detailed schema of the second part of the experiment.

Figure 7. An example of a ‘1:3’ task. The terrain model with a single pair of connected points is rendered on the left side of the screen. Three different altitude profiles are displayed on the right side – one of them corresponds to the terrain in the model. Screenshot from the testing application.

Figure 8. Example of a ‘3:1’ task. The terrain model with three pairs of connected points is rendered on the left side of the screen. A single altitude profile is displayed on the right side. One of the three terrain profiles between the connected points corresponds to the altitude profile. Screenshot was taken from the testing application.

Figure 9. Number of correct answers in the altitude profile estimation. N = 39 in all conditions. Pseudo 3D (static M = 5.00, SD = 1.34; interactive = 5.74, SD = 1.33) and real 3D (static M = 5.15, SD = 1.66; interactive = 5.77, SD = 1.39).

Figure 10. Response time (s) in the altitude profile task. N = 39 in all conditions. Pseudo 3D (static M = 16.30, SD = 5.86; interactive = 20.85, SD = 8.89) and real 3D (static M = 16.72, SD = 5.79; interactive = 20.01, SD = 8.94).

Table 1. Comparison of males (N = 21) and females (N = 18) in the number of correct answers in the altitude profile task.

	M Males	M Females	SD Males	SD Females	t	df	p
Static pseudo 3D	5.33	4.61	1.24	1.38	1.709	34.59	.096
Static real 3D	5.43	4.83	1.57	1.76	1.108	34.47	.276
Interactive pseudo 3D	5.71	5.78	1.45	1.22	–0.149	36.98	.883
Interactive real 3D	6.14	5.33	1.56	1.03	1.938	34.90	.061
Total number of correct answers	22.62	20.56	4.57	4.30	1.452	36.64	.155

Table 2. Comparison of males (N = 21) and females (N = 18) in the number of correct answers in the MRT.

	M Males	M Females	SD Males	SD Females	t	df	p
Visual comparison sub-test	5.95	4.94	1.43	1.86	1.871	31.67	.071
Memory recall sub-test	5.38	4.17	1.63	1.62	2.330	36.16	.025
Total number of correct answers	11.33	9.11	2.56	2.63	2.664	35.74	.012

Table 3. Correlation between MRT (total score) and performance in altitude estimation tasks (correct answers).

	MRT total score (males)		MRT total score (females)
	r	p	r	p
Pseudo 3D and Static	0.06	.8	0.05	.86
Real 3D and Static	0.10	.67	–0.12	.63
Pseudo 3D Interactive	0.27	.24	0.14	.59
Real 3D and Interactive	0.29	.2	–0.10	.69
Total number of correct answers	0.23	.31	–0.02	.93

Table 4. Rating of subjectively experienced difficulty for all conditions in the geographical tasks.

	Static		Interactive
	Mean	Median	Mean	Median
Pseudo 3D	2.74	3	2.08	2
Real 3D	2.13	2	1.49	1

Note: A 5-point Likert scale (1 = very easy, 5 = very difficult) was used.

Table 5. Preference of participants (N = 39) for 1:3 and 3:1 task types, respectively.

Preference of	1:3 type of task	No preference	3:1 type of task
Frequency	17	10	12