Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

Cartographic design for mobile devices: A case study using the UW-Madison interactive campus map

Cartographic design for mobile devices: A case study using the UW-Madison interactive campus map

Brian Davidson
University of Wisconsin-Madison

Smartphones have become an integral part of the daily lives of citizens not only in the United States, but also around the world. It is estimated that by 2016, 80% of the United States population will be using a mobile phone and 50% will be using a tablet. This study investigates the default map scale and level of detail appropriate when designing for mobile maps using the University of Wisconsin-Madison interactive campus map as a case study. Participants were asked to complete wayfinding and identification tasks and were measured based on accuracy, response time, and emotion. Overall, the goal is to provide design considerations for mobile cartography and help open the possibilities for future research in the field of mobile.

Bbaf1d0def6e102c6defedbb84537a2f?s=128

Nathaniel V. KELSO

October 10, 2014
Tweet

Transcript

  1. Cartographic Design for Mobile Devices: A Case Study Using the

    UW-Madison Interactive Campus Map Brian Davidson University of Wisconsin–Madison
  2. http://www.businesskorea.co.kr/sites/default/files/field/image/smartphones.jpg

  3. http://www.kogan.com/media/files/product/iphone4s/KHIP4S8BLK-r2.jpg

  4. Web Maps on a small screen?

  5. Web Maps on a small screen? BLASPHEMY!

  6. None
  7. None
  8. None
  9. None
  10. 1. Should the default map scale of a web map

    differ between mobile device screen sizes? 2. 3. Research Questions
  11. Should the level of detail of a web map differ

    between mobile device screen sizes? 1. Should the default map scale of a web map differ between mobile device screen sizes? 2. 3. Research Questions
  12. Should the level of detail of a web map differ

    between mobile device screen sizes? Are there differences in emotional experiences between mobile device screen sizes? 1. Should the default map scale of a web map differ between mobile device screen sizes? 2. 3. Research Questions
  13. What I did, who participated and how I did it

    (Materials and Methods)
  14. Introductory survey 1. 36 Participants total 2. 3. Two requirements

    that needed to be met Participants
  15. 1. 2. Must be in their first two semesters of

    college Two requirements
  16. Have little to no knowledge of the UW–Madison campus 1.

    2. Must be in their first two semesters of college Two requirements
  17. http://www.kogan.com/media/files/product/iphone4s/KHIP4S8BLK-r2.jpg http://www.clickrepairs.net/cart/images/products/ipad2.jpg Materials - Device Materials - Device

  18. Materials - UW Campus Map

  19. Materials - Functionality

  20. Scale #2 Scale #4 Scale #6 Materials - Scale

  21. ‘Map’ ‘Satellite’ Materials - Level of Detail

  22. 1. 2. Wayfinding Navigating from one building to another Identification

    Pointing at a building in the real world Materials - Task Type
  23. Task Pairing # Participant # 1 2 3 4 5

    6 1 6, M 6, S 4, M 4, S 2, M 2, S 2 2, S 6, M 6, S 4, M 4, S 2, M 3 2, M 2, S 6, M 6, S 4, M 4, S 4 4, S 2, M 2, S 6, M 6, S 4, M 5 4, M 4, S 2, M 2, S 6, M 6, S 6 6, S 4, M 4, S 2, M 2, S 6, M 7 6, M 6, S 4, M 4, S 2, M 2, S 6 = large scale 4 = intermediate scale 2 = small scale M = Map view S = Satellite view Materials - Task Pairing
  24. Task Pairing # Participant # 1 2 3 4 5

    6 1 6, M 6, S 4, M 4, S 2, M 2, S 2 2, S 6, M 6, S 4, M 4, S 2, M 3 2, M 2, S 6, M 6, S 4, M 4, S 4 4, S 2, M 2, S 6, M 6, S 4, M 5 4, M 4, S 2, M 2, S 6, M 6, S 6 6, S 4, M 4, S 2, M 2, S 6, M 7 6, M 6, S 4, M 4, S 2, M 2, S 6 = large scale 4 = intermediate scale 2 = small scale M = Map view S = Satellite view Materials - Task Pairing
  25. 1. Meet participants at predetermined location Methods - Experimental Protocol

  26. Sign consent form and explain study 1. 2. Meet participants

    at predetermined location Methods - Experimental Protocol
  27. 1. 2. 3. Begin Testing Sign consent form and explain

    study Meet participants at predetermined location Methods - Experimental Protocol
  28. A. Wayfinding task, then Identification 1. 2. 3. Begin Testing

    Sign consent form and explain study Meet participants at predetermined location Methods - Experimental Protocol
  29. 1. Accuracy Methods - Metrics

  30. 1. Accuracy A. Whether the participant made it to the

    correct point Methods - Metrics
  31. Response Time 2. 1. Accuracy A. Whether the participant made

    it to the correct point Methods - Metrics
  32. A. Length of time it took the participant to navigate

    or identify Response Time 2. 1. Accuracy A. Whether the participant made it to the correct point Methods - Metrics
  33. A. Length of time it took the participant to navigate

    or identify Response Time 2. Emotions 3. 1. Accuracy A. Whether the participant made it to the correct point Methods - Metrics
  34. A. Length of time it took the participant to navigate

    or identify Response Time 2. Emotions 3. 1. Accuracy A. Whether the participant made it to the correct point A. What emotions participants were feeling during testing Methods - Metrics
  35. 2. 3. 1. 5. 4. Landmark Difficulty Mobile Screen Size

    Overall Performance Default Level of Detail Default Map Scale Methods - Variables
  36. Response Time Accuracy Landmark Difficulty Mobile Screen Size Overall Performance

    Default Level of Detail Emotions Default Map Scale Methods - Metrics Measured
  37. Response Time Accuracy Landmark Difficulty Mobile Screen Size Overall Performance

    Default Level of Detail Emotions Default Map Scale Methods - Metrics Measured
  38. Response Time Accuracy Landmark Difficulty Mobile Screen Size Overall Performance

    Default Level of Detail Emotions Default Map Scale Methods - Metrics Measured
  39. What did I learn and what else can be studied?

    (Conclusions and Recommendations)
  40. Wayfinding Identification What did we learn? - Overall

  41. Wayfinding Identification What did we learn? - Overall

  42. Wayfinding Identification What did we learn? - Landmark Difficulty

  43. Easy = Better Identification Wayfinding What did we learn? -

    Landmark Difficulty
  44. Wayfinding Identification What did we learn? - Mobile Screen Size

  45. Wayfinding Identification What did we learn? - Mobile Screen Size

  46. Wayfinding Identification What did we learn? - Default Map Scale

  47. Wayfinding Identification What did we learn? - Default Map Scale

  48. Wayfinding Identification What did we learn? - Default Level of

    Detail
  49. Wayfinding Identification What did we learn? - Default Level of

    Detail
  50. Small Screen Large Screen What did we learn? - Emotions

  51. Large Screen 7.22 Positive 15 Negative Small Screen 5.67 Positive

    9.44 Negative What did we learn? - Emotions
  52. Prior knowledge of campus 2. Time of year 3. 1.

    Sample size Limitations
  53. • Design • Interactions • Emotions • Functionality Future Directions

  54. • Dr. Robert Roth, Tanya Buckingham, and Dr. Jim Burt

    • Family and Friends • Trewartha Graduate Research Award • 36 anonymous participants Special Thanks
  55. briandaviddavidson.com @brianddavidson

  56. Thank you! Questions?

  57. None