Eye-tracking analysis of the influence of relief shading on finding labels on tourist maps
S. Popelka
{"title":"Eye-tracking analysis of the influence of relief shading on finding labels on tourist maps","authors":"S. Popelka","doi":"10.37040/geografie2018123030353","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"is paper evaluates the influence of relief shading in finding labels on tourist maps. Two types of maps were compared, one in which terrain was depicted with contour lines and spot heights, and the other enhanced with relief shading. -e task was to find specific hills and villages. Two aspects were investigated – whether shading helped users find hills, and whether shading made it more difficult to find villages. -e eye-tracking method was used for this study. -e results indicate that respondents prefer shaded maps from an aesthetic point of view. Pairwise comparison of individual stimuli pairs and groups of stimuli was performed with the use of five eye-tracking metrics. Most of the eye-tracking metrics were significantly different for most of the stimuli. -e results of the experiment show that shaded maps are less suitable for finding hills and villages. -e least effective result was observed in finding villages on a shaded map. key words cartography – maps – eye-tracking – relief shading – visual perception – map reading popelka, s. (2018): Eye-tracking analysis of the influence of relief shading on finding labels on tourist maps. Geografie, 123, 3, 353–378. Received November 2017, accepted June 2018. © Česká geografická společnost, z. s., 2018 354 geografie 123/3 (2018) / s. popelka 1. State of the art Contouring is the most frequently used technique to provide map readers with elevation information (Dušek, Miřijovský 2009). Contours are isarithms – lines connecting points of equal elevation. Most casual map readers cannot imagine landforms indicated by contour lines. As Castner and Wheate (1979, p. 78) stated: “Relief depiction with contours is not usually immediately interpretable or imaginable, especially for inexperienced users.” Instead, most people recognize shapes primarily by the interplay of light and dark. -is method of portraying the landsurface form is called shading (Robinson et al. 1995). Shaded reliefs are already found in early manuscript maps from the seventeenth century. With the invention of lithography (1798), it became possible to print half-tones. Cartographers began to combine relief shading with other means of terrain display. A_er World War II, many reliefs were drawn by airbrush. Since the end of the twentieth century, relief shading has mostly been generated from digital elevation models (Jenny, Räber 2015). -e angle of lighting must be defined when using shading in maps. Conventional lighting comes from the upper le_ corner of the map – from the northwest in maps of the northern hemisphere (Bernabé-Poveda, Sánchez-Ortega, Çöltekin 2011). A recent publication (Biland, Çöltekin 2016) suggested that NNW illumination is better than NW. Imhof (2007) states that this may be due to people writing from le_ to right, light being on the le_ hand side when holding a pen while the right being in shadow. Even though this situation cannot occur in reality (in the northern hemisphere), this light is psychologically the most effective in perceiving terrain plasticity (Imhof 2007). Most users are accustomed to the light from the northwest, therefore a map illuminated from the south will be perceived negatively (Imhof 2007). -is was demonstrated with the use of eye-tracking in the author’s dissertation (Popelka 2015). -e main aim of relief shading in maps is to provide information about height, but it also has an aesthetic function. Ortag (2009) published a chapter focusing on the variables of aesthetics in maps. In this chapter, the results of focused interviews with more than 150 participants were summarized. Relief or 3D impression was mentioned as a the third most important reason for describing a map as beautiful (a_er color and readability). Usability evaluation of visual representations have gained much attention in recent cartographic and visual analytics research (Coltekin et al. 2009, Fabrikant et al. 2008). “Usability evaluation allows us to obtain data, o_en quantitative, about aspects of a system or user performance with that system which can be used to identify aspects that are problematic for users and highlight potential fixes. -ese methods can also be used for comparative purposes, for example, against established benchmarks or alternative designs or products in order to identify eye-tracking analysis of the influence of relief shading... 355 which is easier to use or identify their relative advantages and disadvantages.” (Fuhrmann et al. 2005, p. 559) -e evaluation of shading on tourist maps is important because it is not known whether shading helps map readers or not. Both map types are available on the market – shaded and non-shaded – but the study of usability of these types of relief visualization has not been previously performed. -e motivation for this case study was to learn whether shading affects search performance when looking for a specific object on a tourist map. -e research questions that guided this study focus on the basic search tasks that can be done with tourist maps. -e first question investigates the search for relief-related objects (hills), the second, the search for non-relief-related objects (villages). -e research questions are: 1. Does shading help participants find hills, as participants need only scan the darkest areas (representing hills), not the whole map? 2. Is searching for villages slower on shaded maps, as these maps are darker by design than maps without shading and may negatively impact its legibility? Maps that include a comprehensive representation of terrain together with a landform relief (topographic or tourist maps) have not been studied from a user perspective as deeply as other types of geovisualizations (i.e., city maps or urban plans; Burian, Šťávová 2009), although their importance remains high in many common tasks, necessitating a high-level understanding of terrain (Putto et al. 2014). In the 1970s, experiments with terrain visualization methods concentrated on legibility studies of different methods of representing topographic information (Chang, Antes, Lenzen 1985). Phillips, Lucia, and Skelton (1975) performed a questionnaire study testing four different types of relief maps (contours, contours with hill shading, layer tints, and spot height maps). In most of the questions, statistically significant differences were found, but no single map type was the best for all 13 map reading questions. Visualization using contour lines with hill shading was an advantage only in questions requiring visualization of the landscape (e.g., visibility, finding the steepest slope). -is result corroborates the study of DeLucia (1972), who found a significant increase in time necessary when extracting required information from a map with hill shading. Similar visualization techniques were investigated in the study of Potash, Farrell, and Jeffrey (1978), who analyzed contour maps and contour maps supplemented by layer tints and shading. -e results of the study showed that layer tints increased reading speed, whereas shading did not and caused a decrease in accuracy. In the study of Castner and Wheate (1979), contour maps and shaded relief were analyzed. -e results showed that in tasks where a search target was associated with a topographic situation, shaded relief was an advantage. 356 geografie 123/3 (2018) / s. popelka In a more recent study, Petrovič and Mašera (2004) created a questionnaire to find out how different 3D cartographic representations of terrain could fulfil a user’s needs. Savage, Wiebe, and Devine (2004) compared performance between 2D and 3D topographic representations in solving different tasks. -e authors learned that “there was no apparent advantage in 3D maps for tasks requiring elevation information, nor was there a disadvantage for integrated tasks which did not require elevation information”. Schobesberger and Patterson (2007) conducted a study comparing conventional (2D) and perspective (3D) trail maps of an outdoor area of the Zion National Park in Utah. Respondents generally agreed that 3D maps depict reality better than conventional maps. Wilkening and Fabrikant (2011) investigated how varying time constraints and different map types influence people’s visuospatial decision making. According to the scheme introduced by Rohrer (2014), evaluation methods can be divided into behavioral (objective) and attitudinal (subjective) methods. In many previous studies, methods such as questionnaires or interviews have been used. -ese methods are attitudinal methods because they show “what people say”. By contrast, eye-tracking can be considered a behavioral (objective) method, because it shows “what people do”. Without an objective evaluation method, it is not possible to reveal the true efficiency of shading in tourist maps. -e advantage of an eye-tracking study over a questionnaire is that not only can a respondent’s answers in solving a task can be analyzed, but also their strategy. Eye-tracking has been used in the field of cognitive cartography since the 1970s, but work with devices of the time was time consuming and expensive. With cheaper technology, eye-tracking has become more widely used in cartographic studies (Brychtová et al. 2013; Coltekin et al. 2014; Fuhrmann, Komogortsev, Tamir 2009; Kubíček et al. 2017a; Kubíček et al. 2017b; Popelka, Brychtová 2013). One of the first eye-tracking studies dealing with terrain visualization was performed by Chang, Antes, Lenzen (1985), who analyzed the effect of experience on reading topographic relief maps. Putto et al. (2014) performed an eye-tracking study evaluating three different terrain visualizations (contour lines, relief shading, and oblique view) in solving three types of spatial tasks (visual search, area selection, and route planning). -e results showed that performance on contour line visualization and shaded relief were comparable (oblique view was the slowest). Popelka and Brychtová (2013) investigated the differences in reading 2D maps with contour lines and p","PeriodicalId":35714,"journal":{"name":"Geografie-Sbornik CGS","volume":"54 1","pages":"353-378"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geografie-Sbornik CGS","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37040/geografie2018123030353","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
is paper evaluates the influence of relief shading in finding labels on tourist maps. Two types of maps were compared, one in which terrain was depicted with contour lines and spot heights, and the other enhanced with relief shading. -e task was to find specific hills and villages. Two aspects were investigated – whether shading helped users find hills, and whether shading made it more difficult to find villages. -e eye-tracking method was used for this study. -e results indicate that respondents prefer shaded maps from an aesthetic point of view. Pairwise comparison of individual stimuli pairs and groups of stimuli was performed with the use of five eye-tracking metrics. Most of the eye-tracking metrics were significantly different for most of the stimuli. -e results of the experiment show that shaded maps are less suitable for finding hills and villages. -e least effective result was observed in finding villages on a shaded map. key words cartography – maps – eye-tracking – relief shading – visual perception – map reading popelka, s. (2018): Eye-tracking analysis of the influence of relief shading on finding labels on tourist maps. Geografie, 123, 3, 353–378. Received November 2017, accepted June 2018. © Česká geografická společnost, z. s., 2018 354 geografie 123/3 (2018) / s. popelka 1. State of the art Contouring is the most frequently used technique to provide map readers with elevation information (Dušek, Miřijovský 2009). Contours are isarithms – lines connecting points of equal elevation. Most casual map readers cannot imagine landforms indicated by contour lines. As Castner and Wheate (1979, p. 78) stated: “Relief depiction with contours is not usually immediately interpretable or imaginable, especially for inexperienced users.” Instead, most people recognize shapes primarily by the interplay of light and dark. -is method of portraying the landsurface form is called shading (Robinson et al. 1995). Shaded reliefs are already found in early manuscript maps from the seventeenth century. With the invention of lithography (1798), it became possible to print half-tones. Cartographers began to combine relief shading with other means of terrain display. A_er World War II, many reliefs were drawn by airbrush. Since the end of the twentieth century, relief shading has mostly been generated from digital elevation models (Jenny, Räber 2015). -e angle of lighting must be defined when using shading in maps. Conventional lighting comes from the upper le_ corner of the map – from the northwest in maps of the northern hemisphere (Bernabé-Poveda, Sánchez-Ortega, Çöltekin 2011). A recent publication (Biland, Çöltekin 2016) suggested that NNW illumination is better than NW. Imhof (2007) states that this may be due to people writing from le_ to right, light being on the le_ hand side when holding a pen while the right being in shadow. Even though this situation cannot occur in reality (in the northern hemisphere), this light is psychologically the most effective in perceiving terrain plasticity (Imhof 2007). Most users are accustomed to the light from the northwest, therefore a map illuminated from the south will be perceived negatively (Imhof 2007). -is was demonstrated with the use of eye-tracking in the author’s dissertation (Popelka 2015). -e main aim of relief shading in maps is to provide information about height, but it also has an aesthetic function. Ortag (2009) published a chapter focusing on the variables of aesthetics in maps. In this chapter, the results of focused interviews with more than 150 participants were summarized. Relief or 3D impression was mentioned as a the third most important reason for describing a map as beautiful (a_er color and readability). Usability evaluation of visual representations have gained much attention in recent cartographic and visual analytics research (Coltekin et al. 2009, Fabrikant et al. 2008). “Usability evaluation allows us to obtain data, o_en quantitative, about aspects of a system or user performance with that system which can be used to identify aspects that are problematic for users and highlight potential fixes. -ese methods can also be used for comparative purposes, for example, against established benchmarks or alternative designs or products in order to identify eye-tracking analysis of the influence of relief shading... 355 which is easier to use or identify their relative advantages and disadvantages.” (Fuhrmann et al. 2005, p. 559) -e evaluation of shading on tourist maps is important because it is not known whether shading helps map readers or not. Both map types are available on the market – shaded and non-shaded – but the study of usability of these types of relief visualization has not been previously performed. -e motivation for this case study was to learn whether shading affects search performance when looking for a specific object on a tourist map. -e research questions that guided this study focus on the basic search tasks that can be done with tourist maps. -e first question investigates the search for relief-related objects (hills), the second, the search for non-relief-related objects (villages). -e research questions are: 1. Does shading help participants find hills, as participants need only scan the darkest areas (representing hills), not the whole map? 2. Is searching for villages slower on shaded maps, as these maps are darker by design than maps without shading and may negatively impact its legibility? Maps that include a comprehensive representation of terrain together with a landform relief (topographic or tourist maps) have not been studied from a user perspective as deeply as other types of geovisualizations (i.e., city maps or urban plans; Burian, Šťávová 2009), although their importance remains high in many common tasks, necessitating a high-level understanding of terrain (Putto et al. 2014). In the 1970s, experiments with terrain visualization methods concentrated on legibility studies of different methods of representing topographic information (Chang, Antes, Lenzen 1985). Phillips, Lucia, and Skelton (1975) performed a questionnaire study testing four different types of relief maps (contours, contours with hill shading, layer tints, and spot height maps). In most of the questions, statistically significant differences were found, but no single map type was the best for all 13 map reading questions. Visualization using contour lines with hill shading was an advantage only in questions requiring visualization of the landscape (e.g., visibility, finding the steepest slope). -is result corroborates the study of DeLucia (1972), who found a significant increase in time necessary when extracting required information from a map with hill shading. Similar visualization techniques were investigated in the study of Potash, Farrell, and Jeffrey (1978), who analyzed contour maps and contour maps supplemented by layer tints and shading. -e results of the study showed that layer tints increased reading speed, whereas shading did not and caused a decrease in accuracy. In the study of Castner and Wheate (1979), contour maps and shaded relief were analyzed. -e results showed that in tasks where a search target was associated with a topographic situation, shaded relief was an advantage. 356 geografie 123/3 (2018) / s. popelka In a more recent study, Petrovič and Mašera (2004) created a questionnaire to find out how different 3D cartographic representations of terrain could fulfil a user’s needs. Savage, Wiebe, and Devine (2004) compared performance between 2D and 3D topographic representations in solving different tasks. -e authors learned that “there was no apparent advantage in 3D maps for tasks requiring elevation information, nor was there a disadvantage for integrated tasks which did not require elevation information”. Schobesberger and Patterson (2007) conducted a study comparing conventional (2D) and perspective (3D) trail maps of an outdoor area of the Zion National Park in Utah. Respondents generally agreed that 3D maps depict reality better than conventional maps. Wilkening and Fabrikant (2011) investigated how varying time constraints and different map types influence people’s visuospatial decision making. According to the scheme introduced by Rohrer (2014), evaluation methods can be divided into behavioral (objective) and attitudinal (subjective) methods. In many previous studies, methods such as questionnaires or interviews have been used. -ese methods are attitudinal methods because they show “what people say”. By contrast, eye-tracking can be considered a behavioral (objective) method, because it shows “what people do”. Without an objective evaluation method, it is not possible to reveal the true efficiency of shading in tourist maps. -e advantage of an eye-tracking study over a questionnaire is that not only can a respondent’s answers in solving a task can be analyzed, but also their strategy. Eye-tracking has been used in the field of cognitive cartography since the 1970s, but work with devices of the time was time consuming and expensive. With cheaper technology, eye-tracking has become more widely used in cartographic studies (Brychtová et al. 2013; Coltekin et al. 2014; Fuhrmann, Komogortsev, Tamir 2009; Kubíček et al. 2017a; Kubíček et al. 2017b; Popelka, Brychtová 2013). One of the first eye-tracking studies dealing with terrain visualization was performed by Chang, Antes, Lenzen (1985), who analyzed the effect of experience on reading topographic relief maps. Putto et al. (2014) performed an eye-tracking study evaluating three different terrain visualizations (contour lines, relief shading, and oblique view) in solving three types of spatial tasks (visual search, area selection, and route planning). -e results showed that performance on contour line visualization and shaded relief were comparable (oblique view was the slowest). Popelka and Brychtová (2013) investigated the differences in reading 2D maps with contour lines and p
浮雕阴影对旅游地图上寻找标签影响的眼动分析
本文评价了浮雕阴影在旅游地图上寻找标签的影响。比较了两种类型的地图,其中一种地图用等高线和点高度来描绘地形,另一种地图用浮雕阴影来增强地形。我们的任务是找到特定的山丘和村庄。研究人员从两个方面进行了调查——遮阳是否能帮助用户找到山丘,以及遮阳是否会让用户更难找到村庄。本研究采用-e眼动追踪法。结果表明,从美学角度来看,受访者更喜欢阴影地图。使用五种眼动追踪指标对单个刺激、对刺激和组刺激进行两两比较。大多数眼球追踪指标对大多数刺激都有显著不同。实验结果表明,阴影地图不太适合寻找山丘和村庄。在阴影地图上寻找村庄的效果最差。地图学-地图-眼动追踪-浮雕阴影-视觉感知-地图阅读popelka, s.(2018):浮雕阴影对旅游地图寻找标签影响的眼动追踪分析。地理,123,3,353-378。2017年11月收稿,2018年6月收稿。©Česká geografick<s:1> spole<e:1> nost, z. s., 2018 354 geografie 123/3 (2018) / s. popelka等高线是向地图读者提供高程信息最常用的技术(Dušek, Miřijovský 2009)。等高线是等高线——连接等高点的线。大多数漫不经心的地图读者无法想象等高线所表示的地形。正如Castner和Wheate(1979,第78页)所述:“带有轮廓的浮雕描绘通常不能立即解释或想象,特别是对于没有经验的用户。”相反,大多数人主要通过光与暗的相互作用来识别形状。他描绘地表形态的方法被称为阴影(Robinson et al. 1995)。在17世纪早期的地图手稿中已经发现了阴影浮雕。随着平版印刷术(1798年)的发明,印制半色调成为可能。制图师开始将浮雕阴影与其他地形显示方法结合起来。在第二次世界大战期间,许多浮雕都是用喷枪画的。自20世纪末以来,浮雕阴影主要由数字高程模型生成(Jenny, Räber 2015)。当在地图中使用阴影时,照明的角度必须定义。传统的照明来自地图的左上角——北半球地图的西北方向(bernab<s:1> - poveda, Sánchez-Ortega, Çöltekin 2011)。最近的一份出版物(Biland, Çöltekin 2016)表明,NNW的照明优于NW。Imhof(2007)指出,这可能是由于人们从左向右书写,当拿笔时,光线在左手边,而右手在阴影中。尽管这种情况在现实中不可能发生(在北半球),但这种光在心理上是感知地形可塑性最有效的(Imhof 2007)。大多数用户习惯了来自西北的光线,因此从南方照明的地图会被认为是负面的(Imhof 2007)。-在作者的论文中使用眼动追踪(Popelka 2015)进行了演示。浮雕阴影在地图上的主要目的是提供关于高度的信息,但它也有一个审美功能。Ortag(2009)发表了一章关于地图美学变量的内容。在本章中,对150多名参与者的重点访谈结果进行了总结。浮雕或3D印象被认为是描述地图美丽的第三个最重要的原因(颜色和可读性)。视觉表现的可用性评估在最近的制图和视觉分析研究中获得了很多关注(Coltekin et al. 2009, Fabrikant et al. 2008)。“可用性评估使我们能够获得关于系统或用户性能方面的数据,甚至是定量的数据,这些数据可用于识别用户存在问题的方面,并突出潜在的修复方法。-这些方法也可用于比较目的,例如,与既定基准或替代设计或产品进行比较,以确定对浮雕阴影影响的眼动跟踪分析。哪个更容易使用或确定它们的相对优点和缺点。(Fuhrmann et al. 2005, p. 559) -e评价旅游地图上的阴影很重要,因为不知道阴影是否有助于地图读者。市场上有两种类型的地图-阴影和非阴影-但以前没有对这些类型的地形可视化的可用性进行过研究。这个案例研究的动机是了解当在旅游地图上寻找特定对象时,阴影是否会影响搜索性能。 指导本研究的研究问题集中在旅游地图可以完成的基本搜索任务上。第一个问题调查了与救援相关的物体(山丘)的搜索,第二个问题调查了与救援无关的物体(村庄)的搜索。-e研究问题有:1。阴影是否能帮助参与者找到山丘,因为参与者只需要扫描最暗的区域(代表山丘),而不是整个地图?2. 在阴影地图上搜索村庄是否会更慢,因为这些地图比没有阴影的地图设计得更暗,可能会对其可读性产生负面影响?包括地形和地形起伏的综合表示的地图(地形图或旅游地图)没有像其他类型的地理可视化(即城市地图或城市规划;Burian, Šťávová 2009),尽管它们在许多常见任务中的重要性仍然很高,需要对地形有高层次的了解(Putto等人,2014)。20世纪70年代,地形可视化方法的实验主要集中在不同地形信息表示方法的易读性研究(Chang, Antes, Lenzen 1985)。Phillips、Lucia和Skelton(1975)进行了一项问卷调查研究,测试了四种不同类型的地形图(等高线、带山丘阴影的等高线、图层色调和点高度图)。在大多数问题中,发现了统计学上显著的差异,但没有一种地图类型对所有13个地图阅读问题都是最好的。只有在需要可视化景观的问题(例如,能见度,找到最陡的斜坡)中,使用带有山丘阴影的等高线进行可视化才有优势。这一结果证实了DeLucia(1972)的研究,DeLucia发现从带有山丘阴影的地图中提取所需信息所需的时间显著增加。在Potash、Farrell和Jeffrey(1978)的研究中也研究了类似的可视化技术,他们分析了等高线图和辅以层色调和阴影的等高线图。研究结果表明,图层色彩增加了阅读速度,而阴影没有,并导致准确性下降。在Castner和Wheate(1979)的研究中,分析了等高线地图和阴影浮雕。-e结果表明,在搜索目标与地形情况相关的任务中,阴影浮雕是一种优势。在最近的一项研究中,petrovinik和Mašera(2004)制作了一份调查问卷,以了解地形的不同3D地图表示如何满足用户的需求。Savage, Wiebe和Devine(2004)比较了二维和三维地形表示在解决不同任务时的表现。-e作者了解到“对于需要高程信息的任务,3D地图没有明显的优势,对于不需要高程信息的集成任务也没有劣势”。Schobesberger和Patterson(2007)进行了一项研究,比较了犹他州锡安国家公园户外地区的传统(2D)和透视(3D)步道地图。受访者普遍认为,3D地图比传统地图更能描绘现实。Wilkening和Fabrikant(2011)研究了不同的时间约束和不同的地图类型如何影响人们的视觉空间决策。根据Rohrer(2014)提出的方案,评价方法可以分为行为(客观)和态度(主观)两种方法。在以前的许多研究中,使用了问卷调查或访谈等方法。这些方法是态度方法,因为它们显示“人们说什么”。相比之下,眼动追踪可以被认为是一种行为(客观)方法,因为它显示了“人们在做什么”。如果没有客观的评价方法,就不可能揭示旅游地图遮阳的真实效果。与问卷调查相比,眼球追踪研究的优势在于,不仅可以分析被调查者在解决任务时的答案,还可以分析他们的策略。自20世纪70年代以来,眼动追踪技术已被应用于认知制图领域,但当时使用的设备既耗时又昂贵。随着技术成本的降低,眼动追踪在制图研究中得到了更广泛的应用(brychtov<e:1> et al. 2013;Coltekin et al. 2014;Fuhrmann, Komogortsev, Tamir 2009;Kubíček等,2017a;Kubíček等,2017b;Popelka, brychtov<e:1>, 2013)。Chang, Antes, Lenzen(1985)是第一批处理地形可视化的眼动追踪研究之一,他们分析了经验对阅读地形图的影响。Putto等人(2014)进行了一项眼动追踪研究,评估了三种不同的地形可视化(等高线、地形阴影和斜视)在解决三种类型的空间任务(视觉搜索、区域选择和路线规划)中的效果。-e结果显示,在等高线可视化和阴影浮雕上的表现相当(倾斜视图最慢)。 Popelka和brychtov<e:1>(2013)研究了阅读等高线和p的2D地图的差异
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。