How Do People View Multi-Component Animated Maps?
Citations
173 citations
141 citations
Cites background from "How Do People View Multi-Component ..."
...…of two main purposes: (1) determining how an animation needs to be designed in order to effectively attract attention (e.g., regarding timing, Krassanakis et al., 2016, or regarding visual design, Dong et al., 2014), or (2) investigating how map viewers understand animations (Opach et al., 2014)....
[...]
..., 2014), or (2) investigating how map viewers understand animations (Opach et al., 2014)....
[...]
76 citations
21 citations
Cites background from "How Do People View Multi-Component ..."
...Opach [71] agreed that multi-component dynamic cartographic displays (MCDCD), seem to be an appropriate way in analyzing complex, multivariate, spatial-temporal data as in provides main map window with subs display components offering secondary views on the same data....
[...]
...making tasks the MCDCD should support [71]....
[...]
...Multi-component dynamic cartographic displays (MCDCDs) could be effective to depict spatial-temporal phenomena, but need to be carefully designed as it may cause split attention and misinterpretation when too many information presented in single display [71]....
[...]
...Today, the use of modern visualization technology offers many new prospects to explore, understand, and communicate spatial phenomenon [71]....
[...]
21 citations
Cites background from "How Do People View Multi-Component ..."
...In addition to a pioneering study on animated legends by Kraak et al. (1997), several studies also consider a spatiotemporal dimension of legend design in interactive and animated maps (e.g. Peterson, 1999; Jenny et al., 2009; Opach et al., 2014)....
[...]
References
6,656 citations
"How Do People View Multi-Component ..." refers background in this paper
...Although methodological aspects of the eye tracking technique have been widely presented in literature (Rayner, 1998; Duchowski, 2007; Nielsen and Pernice, 2010), there is still a shortage of clear methodological guidelines for conducting eye movement research on cartographic displays (Opach, 2011)....
[...]
4,485 citations
"How Do People View Multi-Component ..." refers background in this paper
...The outcomes revealed that when viewing the animation the first time, with a visual attention guided mainly by a bottom-up saliency map (Itti and Koch, 2001; Navalpakkam and Itti, 2005), participants tended to focus their attention on the largest animated component, but also on other display’s…...
[...]
...Visual attention is guided by a bottom-up saliency map, and top-down task relevance of all locations in the viewed scene (Itti and Koch, 2001; Navalpakkam and Itti, 2005)....
[...]
...Thus, their visual attention was guided more by a bottomup saliency map, than by a top-down task relevance (Itti and Koch, 2001; Navalpakkam and Itti, 2005)....
[...]
...Several visual features, known in cartography as Bertin’s visual variables, influence a feature’s saliency in the visual scene, such as colour, intensity, orientation (Itti and Koch, 2001) and movement (Andrade et al. 2002)....
[...]
...According to the ‘winner-takes-all’ principle (Itti and Koch, 2001), the map reader selects one object with the highest visual priority which is then cognitively processed....
[...]
3,474 citations
"How Do People View Multi-Component ..." refers methods in this paper
...We chose this so-called free examination task (Yarbus, 1967) as it enables to gain insights on how users intuitively direct their attention to the various...
[...]
2,399 citations
1,658 citations
"How Do People View Multi-Component ..." refers background in this paper
...…attention on the static ‘Land cover’ component is convergent with the finding that animations grab user’s attention more compared to static images (Wolfe and Horowitz, 2004), there is no clear explanation why users spent more of their attention on looking at the ‘Wind speed and direction’…...
[...]
...Additionally, the fact that the static map ‘Land cover’ yielded half the fixation duration, than the equally-sized animated map presenting the wind characteristics, suggests that motion, as predicted in the literature (Wolfe and Horowitz, 2004), indeed attracted viewers’ attention....
[...]
...that motion, as predicted in the literature (Wolfe and Horowitz, 2004), indeed attracted viewers’ attention....
[...]
...Motion turned out to be indeed attention grabbing and a perceptually salient feature in a map display as Wolfe and Horowitz (2004) suggest....
[...]
...While our finding about the lower attention on the static ‘Land cover’ component is convergent with the finding that animations grab user’s attention more compared to static images (Wolfe and Horowitz, 2004), there is no clear explanation why users spent more of their attention on looking at the ‘Wind speed and direction’ component....
[...]