216
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

A comparison of performance using extrinsic and intrinsic bivariate cartographic visualizations with respect to cognitive style in experienced map users

ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon show all
Received 10 Jan 2023, Accepted 03 Jul 2023, Published online: 14 Nov 2023

References

  • Baker, M. (2016). 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature, 533(7604), 452–454. https://doi.org/10.1038/533452a
  • Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
  • Brewer, C. A., Hatchard, G. W., & Harrower, M. A. (2003). ColorBrewer in print: A catalog of color schemes for maps. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 30(1), 5–32. https://doi.org/10.1559/152304003100010929
  • Camerer, C. F., Dreber, A., Holzmeister, F., Ho, T. H., Huber, J., Johannesson, M., Kirchler, M., Nave, G., Nosek, B. A., Pfeiffer, T., Altmejd, A., Buttrick, N., Chan, T., Chen, Y., Forsell, E., Gampa, A., Heikensten, E., Hummer, L., Imai, T., … Wu, H. (2018). Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(9), 637–644. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0399-z
  • Carstensen, L. W. (1986). Bivariate choropleth mapping: The effects of axis scaling. The American Cartographer, 13(1), 27–42. https://doi.org/10.1559/152304086783900158
  • Čeněk, J., Tsai, J. L., & Šašinka, Č. (2020). Cultural variations in global and local attention and eye-movement patterns during the perception of complex visual scenes: Comparison of Czech and Taiwanese university students. PLoS One, 15(11), e0242501.
  • Čeněk, J., Tsai, J.-L., Šašinka, Č., & Whitford, V. (2020). Cultural variations in global and local attention and eye-movement patterns during the perception of complex visual scenes: Comparison of Czech and Taiwanese university students. PLoS ONE, 15(11), e0242501. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0242501
  • Dorling, D. (1993). Map design for census mapping. The Cartographic Journal, 30(2), 167–183. https://doi.org/10.1179/caj.1993.30.2.167
  • Elmer, M. E. (2012). Symbol considerations for bivariate thematic mapping. University of Winsconsin-Madison.
  • Eyton, J. R. (1984). Complementary-color, two-variable maps. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 74(3), 477–490. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.1984.tb01469.x
  • Gershon, N. (1998). Visualization of an imperfect world. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 18(4), 43–45. https://doi.org/10.1109/38.689662
  • Graff, M. (2003). Learning from web-based instructional systems and cognitive style. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(4), 407–418. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8535.00338
  • Haining, R. P. (1981). Analysing univariate maps. Progress in Human Geography, 5(1), 58–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/030913258100500104
  • Havelková, L., & Hanus, M. (2018). The impact of the map type on the level of student map skills. Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information & Geovisualization, 53(3), 149–170. https://doi.org/10.3138/cart.53.3.2017-0014
  • Havelková, L., & Hanus, M. (2021). Upper-secondary students’ strategies for spatial tasks. Journal of Geography, 120(5), 176–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2021.1981979
  • Hegarty, M. (2011). The cognitive science of visual-spatial displays: Implications for design. Topics in Cognitive Science, 3(3), 446–474. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2011.01150.x
  • Hornsby, K. S., Claramunt, C., Denis, M., & Ligozat, G. (Eds). (2009). Spatial information theory. COSIT 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5756. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03832-7
  • Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Medicine, 2(8), e124. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
  • Klein, R. A., Vianello, M., Hasselman, F., Adams, B. G., Adams, R. B., Alper, S., Aveyard, M., Axt, J. R., Babalola, M. T., Bahník, Š., Batra, R., Berkics, M., Bernstein, M. J., Berry, D. R., Bialobrzeska, O., Binan, E. D., Bocian, K., Brandt, M. J., Busching, R., … Nosek, B. A. (2018). Many labs 2: Investigating variation in replicability across samples and settings. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(4), 443–490. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918810225
  • Korycka-Skorupa, J., & Gołębiowska, I. (2021). Multivariate mapping for experienced users: Comparing extrinsic and intrinsic maps with univariate maps. Miscellanea Geographica, 25(4), 259–271. https://doi.org/10.2478/mgrsd-2020-0068
  • Kubíček, P., Šašinka, Č., Stachoň, Z., Štěrba, Z., Apeltauer, J., & Urbánek, T. (2017). Cartographic design and usability of visual variables for linear features. The Cartographic Journal, 54(1), 91–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/00087041.2016.1168141
  • Lacko, D., Prošek, T., Čeněk, J., Helísková, M., Ugwitz, P., Svoboda, V., Počaji, P., Vais, M., Halířová, H., Juřík, V., & Šašinka, Č. (2023). Analytic and holistic cognitive style as a set of independent manifests: Evidence from a validation study of six measurement instruments. PloS One, 18(6), e0287057. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287057
  • Lacko, D., Šašinka, Č., Stachoň, Z., Lu, W., & Čeněk, J. (2020). Cross-cultural differences in cognitive style, individualism/collectivism and map reading between central European and east Asian university students. Studia Psychologica, 62(1), 23–43. https://doi.org/10.31577/sp.2020.01.789
  • Lapon, L., Ooms, K., De Wit, B., Vanhaeren, N., & De Maeyer, P. (2020). People’s global-scale cognitive map versus their personal characteristics: A worldwide study. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 47(6), 550–564. https://doi.org/10.1080/15230406.2020.1809524
  • Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11(1), 65–100.
  • Madan, A., & Dubey, S. K. (2012). Usability evaluation methods: A literature review. International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 4(2), 590–599.
  • Mangiafico, S. S. (2016). Summary and analysis of extension program evaluation in R, version 1.19.10. rcompanion.org/handbook/
  • Miller, J. R. (2007). Attribute blocks: Visualizing multiple continuously defined attributes. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 27(3), 57–69. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCG.2007.54
  • Navon, D. (1977). Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception. Cognitive Psychology, 9(1), 353–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(77)90012-3
  • Nelson, E. (2000). The impact of bivariate symbol design on task performance in a map setting. Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization, 37(4), 61–78. https://doi.org/10.3138/V743-K505-5510-66Q5
  • Nelson, E. S. (2000). Designing effective bivariate symbols: The influence of perceptual grouping processes. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 27(4), 261–278. https://doi.org/10.1559/152304000783547786
  • Nisbett, R. E., & Masuda, T. (2003). Culture and point of view. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100(19), 11163–11170. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1934527100
  • Nisbett, R. E., & Miyamoto, Y. (2005). The influence of culture: Holistic versus analytic perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(10), 467–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.08.004
  • Opach, T., Popelka, S., Dolezalova, J., & Rød, J. K. (2018). Star and polyline glyphs in a grid plot and on a map display: Which perform better? Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 45(5), 400–419. https://doi.org/10.1080/15230406.2017.1364169
  • Peterson, E. R., & Deary, I. J. (2006). Examining wholistic–analytic style using preferences in early information processing. Personality and Individual Differences, 41(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.12.010
  • Popelka, S., Stachoň, Z., Šašinka, Č., & Doležalová, J. (2016). EyeTribe tracker data accuracy evaluation and its interconnection with hypothesis software for cartographic purposes. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2016, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/9172506
  • Rezaei, A. R., & Katz, L. (2004). Evaluation of the reliability and validity of the cognitive styles analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(6), 1317–1327. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0191-8869(03)00219-8
  • Rezk, A. A., & Hendawy, M. (2023). Informative cartographic communication: A framework to evaluate the effects of map types on users’ interpretation of COVID-19 geovisualizations. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15230406.2022.2155249
  • Ridding, R., & Cheema, I. (1991). Cognitive styles: An overview and integration. Educational Psychology, 11(3/4), 193–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341910110301
  • Robinson, A. H., Morrison, J. L., Muehrcke, P. C., Kimerling, A. J., & Guptill, S. C. (2009). Elements of Cartography (6th ed.). John Wiley & Son.
  • Roth, R. E. (2012). Cartographic interaction primitives: Framework and synthesis. The Cartographic Journal, 49(4), 376–395.
  • Roth, R. E., Çöltekin, A., Delazari, L., Filho, H. F., Griffin, A., Hall, A., Korpi, J., Lokka, I., Mendonça, A., Ooms, K., & van Elzakker, C. P. J. M. (2017). User studies in cartography: Opportunities for empirical research on interactive maps and visualizations. International Journal of Cartography, 3(sup1), 61–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/23729333.2017.1288534
  • Šašinka, Č., Morong, K., & Stachoň, Z. (2017). The hypothesis platform: An online tool for experimental research into work with maps and behavior in electronic environments. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 6(12), 407.
  • Šašinka, Č., Stachoň, Z., Čeněk, J., Šašinková, A., Popelka, S., Ugwitz, P., Lacko, D., & Gao, S. (2021). A comparison of the performance on extrinsic and intrinsic cartographic visualizations through correctness, response time and cognitive processing. PLoS ONE, 16(4), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250164
  • Šašinka, Č., Stachoň, Z., Kubíček, P., Tamm, S., Matas, A., & Kukaňová, M. (2019). The impact of global/local bias on task-solving in map-related tasks Employing extrinsic and intrinsic visualization of risk uncertainty maps. The Cartographic Journal, 56(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/00087041.2017.1414018
  • Scholz, R. W., & Lu, Y. (2014). Detection of dynamic activity patterns at a collective level from large volume trajectory data. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 28(5), 946–963. https://doi.org/10.1080/13658816.2013.869819
  • Shrout, P. E., & Rodgers, J. L. (2018). Psychology, science, and knowledge construction: Broadening perspectives from the replication crisis. Annual Review of Psychology, 69(1), 487–510. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011845
  • Slocum, T. A. (1981). Analyzing the communicative efficiency of two-sectored pie graphs. Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization, 18(3), 53–65. https://doi.org/10.3138/462R-12GP-G723-8033
  • Slocum, T. A., Blok, C., Jiang, B., Koussoulakou, A., Montello, D. R., Fuhrmann, S., & Hedley, N. R. (2001). Cognitive and usability issues in Geovisualization. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 28(1), 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1559/152304001782173998
  • Slocum, T. A., McMaster, R. B., Kessler, F. C., & Howard, H. H. (2008). Thematic cartography and geovisualization (3rd ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.
  • Stachoň, Z., Šašinka, Č., Čeněk, J., Štěrba, Z., Angsuesser, S., Fabrikant, S. I., Štampach, R., & Morong, K. (2019). Cross-cultural differences in figure–ground perception of cartographic stimuli. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 46(1), 82–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/15230406.2018.1470575
  • Strode, G., Mesev, V., Bleisch, S., Ziewitz, K., Reed, F., & Morgan, J. D. (2020). Exploratory bivariate and multivariate geovisualizations of a social vulnerability index. Cartographic Perspectives, 95, 5–23. https://doi.org/10.14714/CP95.1569
  • Tomczak, M., & Tomczak, E. (2014). The need to report effect size estimates revisited. An overview of some recommended measures of effect size. Trends in Sport Sciences, 1(21), 19–25.
  • Yarkoni, T. (2022). The generalizability crisis. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 45, E1. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X20001685

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.