Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
21 in., 50 in., etc. Mostly, the dimensions are rather limited. These limited screen
sizes are compensated by zooming and panning tools that are nowadays available
on most web maps (e.g. Cartwright
2012
; Kraak and Brown
2001
; Peterson
2003
;
van Elzakker and Griffin
2013
). Despite these tools, it is more difficult to have an
overview of the depicted region,
in combination with details of a selected
sub-region.
Since we are living in a digital era, one might wonder why paper documents still
haven
paperless
office
'
is still an ambition: despite the technological advancements, not all paper
documents have been replaced by digital ones. Paper documents have a number of
functions and characteristics that cannot be replaced digitally: their tangibility, they
are used to reduce the cognitive load, obtain an overview of the tasks at hand, to
indicate the state of a task, as visual cues, because they are easier to read, to have an
overview over the complete document, etc. The same arguments can be used to
explain why paper maps still have not disappeared (Hurst and Clough
2013
).
t disappeared. Bondarenko and Janssen (
2009
) indicate that the
'
'
Previous Research
Because both media are still frequently used, it is interesting to study their rela-
tionship to the map users: what do they prefer, what is more efficient, what is more
effective and under what conditions (application, user characteristics, etc.). How-
ever, not many studies have been devoted to this subject. Hurst and Clough (
2013
)
used a web-based questionnaire and a task-based user study to investigate the future
role of paper maps in the digital era. They found that the preference for a certain
medium depended on the task at hand: digital maps for route planning and locating
points of interest; paper maps for navigation on foot. Expert map users also
preferred paper maps for car navigation, whereas novices preferred the digital
navigation aid. The research indicated that paper maps still possess enough qualities
which makes them survive in the foreseeable future. Regarding reading on paper
and on a screen, several authors found a different user behaviour (e.g. Liu
2005
;
O
Hara and Sellens
1997
; Sutherland-Smith
2002
). Nevertheless, reading full texts
is different that a map reading task, which means that these results cannot be
applied directly to cartographic visualisations.
Pederson et al. (
2005
) and Verdi et al. (
2003
) investigated which of both media
(paper or digital) should be used while teaching pupils to read a map. The two
studies agreed in their conclusion: the digital format is efficient, but it could not
surpass the paper maps. It is however, important to include both formats in the
teaching materials.
The present research aims to extent these studies, with a focus on the map users
'
'
attentive behaviour. Previous research has investigated the map users
preference,
satisfaction, efficiency and effectiveness on both media (Hurst and Clough
2013
;
Pederson et al.
2005
; Verdi et al.
2003
). However, when completing a task on a
map, the user will need to read the content of the map. The structure and difficulty
'
