↓ Skip to main content

Learning to interpret topographic maps: Understanding layered spatial information

Overview of attention for article published in Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Learning to interpret topographic maps: Understanding layered spatial information
Published in
Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s41235-016-0002-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kinnari Atit, Steven M. Weisberg, Nora S. Newcombe, Thomas F. Shipley

Abstract

Novices struggle to interpret maps that show information about continuous dimensions (typically latitude and longitude) layered with information that is inherently continuous but segmented categorically. An example is a topographic map, used in earth science disciplines as well as by hikers, emergency rescue operations, and other endeavors requiring knowledge of terrain. Successful comprehension requires understanding that continuous elevation information is categorically encoded using contour lines, as well as skill in visualizing the three-dimensional shape of the terrain from the contour lines. In Experiment 1, we investigated whether novices would benefit from pointing and tracing gestures that focus attention on contour lines and/or from three-dimensional shape gestures used in conjunction with three-dimensional models. Pointing and tracing facilitated understanding relative to text-only instruction as well as no instruction comparison groups, but shape gestures only helped understanding relative to the no instruction comparison group. Directing attention to the contour lines may help both in code breaking (seeing how the lines encode elevation) and in shape inference (seeing how the overall configuration of lines encodes shape). In Experiment 2, we varied the language paired with pointing and tracing gestures; key phrases focused either on elevation information or on visualizing shape. Participants did better on items regarding elevation when language highlighted elevation and better on items requiring shape when language highlighted shape. Thus, focusing attention using pointing and tracing gestures on contour lines may establish the foundation on which language can build to support learning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 19%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Master 5 7%
Other 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 21 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 20%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 8 11%
Engineering 8 11%
Environmental Science 3 4%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 24 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 July 2017.
All research outputs
#5,741,214
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
#157
of 318 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,377
of 321,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 318 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 321,009 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.