What Went Wrong for Bad Solvers during Thematic Map Analysis? Lessons Learned from an Eye-Tracking Study

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11310%2F20%3A10402233" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11310/20:10402233 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=OAco-482rh" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=OAco-482rh</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9010009" target="_blank" >10.3390/ijgi9010009</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

What Went Wrong for Bad Solvers during Thematic Map Analysis? Lessons Learned from an Eye-Tracking Study

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Thematic map analysis is a complex and challenging task that might result in map user failure for many reasons. In the study reported here, we wanted to search for differences between successful and unsuccessful map users, focusing-unlike many similar studies-on strategies applied by users who give incorrect answers. In the eye-tracking study, followed by a questionnaire survey, we collected data from 39 participants. The eye-tracking data were analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively to compare participants&apos; strategies from various perspectives. Unlike the results of some other studies, it turned out that unsuccessful participants show some similarities that are consistent across most analyzed tasks. The main issues that characterize bad solvers relate to improper use of the thematic legend, the inability to focus on relevant map layout elements, as well as on adequate map content. Moreover, they differed in the general problem-solving approach used as they, for example, tended to choose fast, less cautious, strategies. Based on the collected results, we developed tips that could help prevent unsuccessful participants ending with an incorrect answer and therefore be beneficial in map use education.

Název v anglickém jazyce

What Went Wrong for Bad Solvers during Thematic Map Analysis? Lessons Learned from an Eye-Tracking Study

Popis výsledku anglicky

Thematic map analysis is a complex and challenging task that might result in map user failure for many reasons. In the study reported here, we wanted to search for differences between successful and unsuccessful map users, focusing-unlike many similar studies-on strategies applied by users who give incorrect answers. In the eye-tracking study, followed by a questionnaire survey, we collected data from 39 participants. The eye-tracking data were analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively to compare participants&apos; strategies from various perspectives. Unlike the results of some other studies, it turned out that unsuccessful participants show some similarities that are consistent across most analyzed tasks. The main issues that characterize bad solvers relate to improper use of the thematic legend, the inability to focus on relevant map layout elements, as well as on adequate map content. Moreover, they differed in the general problem-solving approach used as they, for example, tended to choose fast, less cautious, strategies. Based on the collected results, we developed tips that could help prevent unsuccessful participants ending with an incorrect answer and therefore be beneficial in map use education.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

10508 - Physical geography

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

S - Specificky vyzkum na vysokych skolach<br>I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2020

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information

ISSN

2220-9964

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

9

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

1

Stát vydavatele periodika

CH - Švýcarská konfederace

Počet stran výsledku

27

Strana od-do

—

Kód UT WoS článku

000514631100025

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85077561962