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.

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!
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?