skip to main content
10.1145/1842993.1843030acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaviConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

GPS and road map navigation: the case for a spatial framework for semantic information

Published:26 May 2010Publication History

ABSTRACT

Urban environments require cognitive abilities focused on both spatial overview and detailed understanding of uses and places. These abilities are distinct but overlap and reinforce each other. Our work quantitatively and qualitatively measures the effects on a user's overall understanding of the environment after navigating with either a GPS or a road map in a previously unknown neighborhood. Experimental recall of spatial and semantic information indicates that using a road map enables subjects to demonstrate a significantly better spatial understanding, identify semantic elements more often using common terms, place semantic elements in spatial locations with greater accuracy and recall semantic elements in tighter clusters than when using a GPS. We conclude that a spatial understanding is a necessary framework for organizing semantic information that is useful for inferred tasks.

References

  1. Aguirre, G. K. and D'Esposito, M. 1997. Environmental knowledge is subserved by separable dorsal/ventral neural areas. Journal of Neuroscience, 17(7), 2512--2518.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Appleyard, D. A. 1970. Styles and methods of structuring a city. Environment and Behavior, 2, 100--116.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Burnett, G. E. and Lee, K. 2005. The effect of vehicle navigation systems on the formation of cognitive maps. In Underwood, G (Ed.) Traffic and Transport Psychology: Theory and Application. Elsevier, 407--418.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Chang, R., Butkiewicz, T., Ziemkiewicz, C., Wartell, Z., Pollard, N., Ribarsky, W. 2006. Hierarchical Simplification of City Models to Maintain Urban Legibility. In SIGGRAPH 2006: ACM SIGGRAPH 2006 Sketches. ACM Press, 130. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Chang, R., Wessel, G., Kosara, R., Sauda, E. and Ribarsky, W. 2007. Legible Cities: Focus Dependent Multi-resolution Visualization of Urban Relationships. In Proceedings of the IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 13(6), 1169--1175. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Chown, E. 1999. Error Tolerance and Generalization in Cognitive Maps: Performance without precision. In R. G. Golledge (Ed) Wayfinding Behavior: Cognitive Mapping and other Spatial Processes. London: John Hopkins University Press, 349--369.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Denis, M. 1996. Imagery and The Description of Spatial Configurations. In De Vega, M., Intons-Peterson, M. J., Johnson-Laird, P. M., Denis, M. and Maschark, M. (Eds) Models of Visuospatial Cognition. Oxford, New York, 128--197.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Goodale, M. A. and Milner, A. D. 1992. Separate visual pathways for perception and action. Trends in Neuroscience, 15(1), 20--25.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Graf, S., Spiessl, W., Schmidt, A., Winter, A. and Rigoll, G. 2008. In-car interaction using search-based user interfaces. In Proceedings of CHI 2008, ACM Press, 1685--1688. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Hegarty, M., Richardson, A. E., Montello, D., Lovelace, K., Subbiah I. 2002. Development of a self-report measure of environmental spatial ability. Intelligence, 30(5), 425--447.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Hirtle, S. C. and Jonides, J. 1985. Evidence of hierarchies in cognitive maps. Memory & Cognition, 13(3), 208--217.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Hirtle, S. C. and Mascolo, M. F. 1986. Effect of Semantic Clustering on the Memory of Spatial Locations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12(2), 182--189.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Ishikawa, T., Fujiwara, H., Osamu, I. and Okabe, A. 2008. Wayfinding with a GPS-based mobile navigation system: A comparison with maps and direct experience. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28, 74--82.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Jonsson, I., Harris, H., and Nass, C. 2008. How accurate must In-Car Information System be? In Proceedings of CHI 2008, ACM Press, 1665--1674. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Kaas, J. H. and Hackett, T. A. 2000. "What" and "where" processing in auditory cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 2(12), 1045--1047.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Leshed, G., Velden, T., Rieger, O., Kot, B. and Sengers, P. 2008. In-Car GPS Navigation: Engagement with and Disengagement from the Environment. In Proceedings of CHI 2008, ACM Press, 1675--1684. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Lobben, A. K. 2004. Tasks, Strategies, and Cognitive Processes Associated With Navigational Map Reading: A Review Perspective. The Professional Geographer, 56(2), 270--281.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Lynch, K. Image of the City. 1960. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Mohan, L. and Kashyap, R. L. 1988. An Object-Oriented Knowledge Representation for Spatial Information. In IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 14(5), 675--681. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Oliver, K. J. and Burnett, G. E. 2008. Learning-oriented Vehicle Navigation Systems: A Preliminary Investigation in a Driving Simulator. In Proceedings of ACM conference on Mobile Human-Computer Interaction, Amsterdam, 119--126. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Stevens, A. and Coupe, P. 1978. Distortion in Judged Spatial Relation. Cognitive Psychology, 10, 422--437.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Taylor, H. A. and Tversky, B. 1992. Spatial mental models derived from survey and route descriptions. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 261--282.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Tolman, E. C. 1948. Cognitive Maps in Rats and Man, Psychological Review, 55, 189--208.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Tversky, B. 2005. How to get around by mind and body: Spatial thought, spatial action. In Zilhao, A. (Ed.) Cognition, evolution, and rationality: A cognitive science for the XXIst century. Routledge, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Tversky, B. 1981. Distortions in memory for maps. Cognitive Psychology, 13, 407--433.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Ungerleider, L. and J. Haxby. 1994. What and where in the human brain. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 4, 157--16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. GPS and road map navigation: the case for a spatial framework for semantic information

    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 Other conferences
      AVI '10: Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces
      May 2010
      427 pages
      ISBN:9781450300766
      DOI:10.1145/1842993
      • Editor:
      • Giuseppe Santucci

      Copyright © 2010 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: 26 May 2010

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate107of408submissions,26%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader