Scott M. Freundschuh

Cognitive Mapping: Past, present and future

1. Cognitive mapping Rob Kitchin and Scott Freundschuh2. Collecting and analysing cognitive mapping data Rob Kitchin3. Levels and structure of spatial knowledge Barbara Tversky4. Cognitive mapping and spatial decision making Tommy Garling and Reginald G Golledge5. Route learning and way finding Edward H. Cornell and C. Donald Heth6. Understanding and learning maps Robert Lloyd7. Understanding and learning virtual spaces Patrick Peruch, Florence Gaunet, Catherine Thinus-Blanc and Jack Loomis8. Micro and macro spaces Scott Freundschuh9. Cognitive mapping in childhood David Uttal and Lisa Tan10. Ageing and spatial behaviour in the elderly adult K.C. Kirasic11. A view of space through language Holly Taylor12. Sex, gender and cognitive mapping Carole Self and Reg Golledge13. Cognitive mapping without visual experience Simon Ungar14. The future of cognitive mapping research Rob Kitchin and Scott Freundschuh

Spatial Concepts and Cognitive Models for Geographic Information Use

Human spatial cognition appears to operate differently in manipulable (small scale) spaces and in geographic (large scale) spaces. Although some fundamental spatial concepts may apply for both kinds of spaces, the relative salience of the concepts may be quite different. Geographic information systems (GIS) represent geographic spaces and the entities in them, but users interact with these systems as if they were manipulable, through representations that appear in manipulable spaces. This difference in scales of representation and action is not new, as people have long reasoned about geographic spaces while looking at or remembering graphical maps, which, like GIS displays and equipment, are manipulable entities. Part of the power and utility of maps comes from their natural space-in-space representations, but since geographic and manipulable spaces are different in how people think and reason about them, graphical maps to some extent misrepresent the geographic spaces that they show. Montello captured the essence of this dilemma when he asserted: Maps represent [geographical] spaces, but are themselves instances of [manipulable] space...[he] therefore expect[s] the psychological study of map use to draw directly on the psychology of [manipulable] space rather than on the psychology of [geographical] space. [14, p. 315]

Multimedia Technology in Cartography and Geographic Education

We have become players in a rapid paradigm shift, a methodological evolution that has been fuelled by a proliferation of computer and information technology. Communication tools of 20 years ago included primarily the telephone and surface (or snail) mail. Today we add to our list of communication mediums e-mail, voice mail, fax, pager systems and overnight mail. It is probable that in 10 years, we will utilise multimedia mail that will integrate text, graphics, audio and video with this ever-expanding list (Noon 1991). We have seen similar technological changes rush into the classroom, offering educators multimedia tools as a platform for building lectures and practical laboratory experiences. Designers, developers and users of multimedia tools assert that this medium can alter the way people think and learn, how they communicate, and how they understand the world around them (Krygier, et al. 1997). A small but growing body of literature reports that computer assisted instruction can be equal, or superior to conventional instructional methods for student learning and achievement (Kulik, Kulik and Bangert-Drowns 1984; Niemiec and Walberg 1985). Though these results are encouraging, further analysis of this data (Clark 1985) indicated that the advantage of computer assisted learning was larger for short-term studies than longer-term studies, decreasing over time as the novelty of the technology diminished Fletcher (1990) compared instruction via interactive multimedia technologies to conventional instruction in various learning environments, including college level instruction, and found that students learning via multimedia tools had significantly higher achievement scores than students learning via conventional methods. Bosco (1986) found similar results in similar studies using multimedia tools.

Contemporary Thought and Practice in Cognitive Mapping Research: An Introduction

The five papers included in this theme section have their origins in a day-long symposium held at the 1997 Annual Meeting of the Association of American Geographers in Fort Worth, Texas. The focus of this symposium was cognitive mapping in its broadest interpretation, and its aim was two-fold. First, to bring together an international gathering of researchers to exchange ideas and foster research collaborations. Second, to examine recent developments, empirical research, and future directions in cognitive mapping, attempting to gain a coherent summary of cognitive mapping research as currently theorized and practiced. The fact that this symposium was hosted and organized by geographers is not insignificant. For the past forty years, since Lynch’s (1960) seminal book, The Image of the City, geographers have been examining how people think about and behave in geographic space. From the inception of this enterprise, geographers have been adept at lookingbeyonditsdisciplinaryboundaries and taking the lead in trying to foster multidisciplinary research. Indeed, it was geographers who brought together representatives from ten separate disciplines at the 1965 Association of American Geographers’ conference in Columbus, Ohio. This visionary event ultimately lead to the establishment of the Environmental Design and Research Association (EDRA) and to the beginning of the cross-disciplinary journal, Environment and Behavior in 1969 (Kitchin et al. 1997). Since this time, geographers have worked hard to keep these reciprocal, multidisciplinary links strong, confident in the belief that geography often informs, and is informed by, other disciplines. There can be little doubt that the research area of behavioral geography, and in particular the study of spatial cognition, has benefited significantly from cross-disciplinary collaboration, interaction and dissemination. Examples of this cross-disciplinary work can be found in a series of edited collections: Downs and Stea (1973, 1977), Moore and Golledge (1976), Golledge and Rayner (1983), Garling and Evans (1991) and Garling and Golledge (1993). In the 1990s, geographers have been instrumental in continuing to encourage collaboration across the disciplines through the work of the National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (NCGIA). During the ten years of the NCGIA’s existence, the Center has sponsored and funded cross-disciplinary research through its many research initiatives. Examples of these initiatives include Languages of Spatial Relations, Spatio-Temporal Reasoning in GIS, Multiple Representations, User-Interfaces for GIS, Formal Models of CommonSense Geographic Worlds, Formalizing Cartographic Knowledge, Scale and Detail in the Cognition of Geographic Space, Cognitive Models of Dynamic Geographic Phenomena and Representations, and Multiple Modalities and Multiple Reference Frames for Spatial Knowledge. These research initiatives have brought together scientists from Psychology (cognitive, developmental, environmental), Linguistics, Computer Science, Cognitive Science, Philosophy, Information Science, Survey Engineering, and Geography in a forum that FOCUS