Wayfinding characteristics and familiarity indexes in an urban environment

Najafpour, H.; Naghdbishi, R.; Asadi Malekjahan, F.

doi:10.22034/ijhcum.2017.02.01.001

Document Type : ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPER

Authors

¹ Department of Architecture, Rasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran

² Department of Architecture, Roudehen Branch, Islamic Azad University, Roudehen, Iran

10.22034/ijhcum.2017.02.01.001

Abstract

Many people are encountered with finding the best way to reach to their destination. One definition for wayfinding is “the act of travelling to the destination by continuous processes of making route-choices whilst evaluating previous spatial decisions against stable cognition of the environment. General understanding and keen appraisal of the environment can aid decision-making process of how to navigate around an area in the form of mental schemas. However, having a level of familiarity and attachment to a place is the underlying factor. The study is aimed at evaluating what is the level of familiarity of people and what is their attachment to notable landmarks in the town of Muar, Malaysia. To do so, the traditional survey analysis with the focus on data set that is attributed to a specific phenomenon and the quantifiable variable using statistical analysis on the tabularized format is undertaken.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Urban architecture, design, development and planning

References

Allen, G.L., (1999). Cognitive abilities in the service of wayfinding: A functional approach. The Professional Geographer, 51(4): 555-561 (7 pages).

Cornell, E. H.; Heth, C. D., (2000). Route learning and wayfinding. In R., Kitchinand; S., Freundschuh (Eds.), Cognitive mapping: Past, present and future. Routledge, London and New York.

Couclelis, H.; Golledge, R.G.; Gale, N.; Tobler, W., (1987). Exploring the anchor-point hypothesis of spatial cognition. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 7(2): 99-122 (24 pages).

Cox, K.; Golledge, R., (1981). Behavioral Problems in Geography Revisited, Methuen, New York.

Downs, R.; Stea, D., (1977). Maps in Minds: Reflections on Cognitive Mapping, Harper and Row, New York.

Deakin, A.K., (1996). Landmarks as navigational aids on street maps. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems, 23(1): 21-36 (16 pages).

Denis, M., (1997). The description of routes: A cognitive approach to the production of spatial discourse. Cahiers de psychologie cognitive, 16(4): 409-458 (49 pages).

Darken, R. P.; Peterson, B., (2004). Spatial orientation, wayfinding and presentation. In K.M., Stanney (ed.), VE handbook, Vol. 28. Lawrence Erlbaum, London.

Evans, G.W.; Smith, C.; Pezdek, K., (1982). Cognitive maps and urban form. Journal of the American Planning Association, 48(2): 232-244 (13 pages).

Egenhofer, M.J.; Mark, D.M., (1995). September. Naive geography. In International Conference on Spatial Information Theory (pp. 1-15). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Galea, L.A.; Kimura, D., (1993). Sex differences in route-learning. Personality and individual differences, 14(1): 53-65 (13 pages).

Gould, P.; White, R., (1974). Mental Maps, Penguin, Baltimore.

Golledge, R.G., (1999). Human wayfinding and cognitive maps. Wayfinding behavior: Cognitive mapping and other spatial processes, 5-45 (41 pages).

Garling, T.; Book, A.; Lindberg, E., (1984). Cognitive mapping of large-scale environments the interrelationship of action plans, acquisition, and orientation. Environment and Behavior, 16(1): 3-34 (32 pages).

Heth, C.D.; Cornell, E.H.; Alberts, D.M., (1997). Differential use of landmarks by 8-and 12-year-old children during route reversal navigation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17(3): 199-213 (15 pages).

Hong, I., (2006). Communal ontology of landmarks for urban regional navigation. Journal of the Korean Geographical Society, 41(5): 582-599 (18 pages).

Lynch, K., (1960). The image of the city (Vol. 11). Cambridge, MIT Press, MA.

Lovelace, K.L.; Hegarty, M.; Montello, D.R., (1999). Elements of good route directions in familiar and unfamiliar environments. In: Freksa, C. and Mark, D. (Eds.), Spatial Information Theory. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1661. Springer, Berlin, 65-82 (18 pages).

Lawton, C.A.; Kallai, J., (2002). Gender differences in wayfinding strategies and anxiety about wayfinding: A cross-cultural comparison. Sex Roles, 47(9-10): 389-401 (13 pages).

Lyon, L., (1987). The Community in Urban Society, Dorsey Press, Chicago.

Michon, P.E.; Denis, M., (2001). When and why are Visual Landmarks Used in Giving Directions? In: Montello, D. (Ed.), Spatial Information Theory. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2205. Springer, Berlin, 292-305 (14 pages).

Montello, D.R., (1998). A new framework for understanding the acquisition of spatial knowledge in large-scale environments. Spatial and temporal reasoning in geographic information systems, 143-154 (12 pages).

Nothegger, C.; Winter, S.; Raubal, M., (2004). Selection of salient features for route directions. Spatial cognition and computation, 4(2): 113-136 (24 pages).

Otte, E.; Rousseau, R., (2002). Social network analysis: a powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. Journal of information Science, 28(6): 441-453 (13 pages).

Raubal, M., (2001). Agent-based simulation of human wayfinding: A perceptual model for unfamiliar buildings. Vienna University of Technology.

Raubal, M.; Winter, S., (2002). Enriching wayfinding instructions with local landmarks. In International Conference on Geographic Information Science. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. 243-259 (17 pages).

Kitchin, R.; Freundschuh, S., (2000). Cognitive mapping. Cognitive mapping: Past, present and future, 1-8 (8 pages).

Ruddle, R.A.; Payne, S.J.; Jones, D.M., (1998). Navigating large-scale “desk-top” virtual buildings: Effects of orientation aids and familiarity. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 7(2): 179-192 (14 pages).

Song, D.; Norman, M., (1993). Nonlinear interactive motion control techniques for virtual space navigation. In Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium, 1993 IEEE (pp. 111-117). IEEE.

Sorrows, M.E.; Hirtle, S.C., (1999). The nature of landmarks for real and electronic spaces. In International Conference on Spatial Information Theory (pp. 37-50). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Timpf, S.; Frank, A., (1997). Using hierarchical spatial data structures for hierarchical spatial reasoning. Spatial Information Theory A Theoretical Basis for GIS, 69-83 (15 pages).

Tezuka, T.; Tanaka, K., (2005). Landmark extraction: A web mining approach. In International Conference on Spatial Information Theory. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. 379-396 (18 pages).

Tversky, B.; Franklin, N.; Taylor, H.A.; Bryant, D.J., (1994). Spatial mental models from descriptions. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci., 45(9): 656-668 (13 pages).

Tom, A.; Denis, M., (2003). Referring to landmark or street information in route directions: what difference does it make?. In International Conference on Spatial Information Theory Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 362-374 (13 pages).

Winter, S., Raubal, M., Nothegger, C., (2005). Focalizing measures of salience for route directions. In L. Meng, A. Zipf, and T. Reichenbacher (eds.), Map-based mobile services—Theories, methods and design implementations, Springer, Berlin. 127–142 (16 pages).

Whitaker, L.A.; Cuqlock-Knopp, G., (1992). Navigation in off-road environments: Orienteering interviews. Scientific Journal of Orienteering, 8(2): 55-71 (17 pages).

LETTERS TO EDITOR

International Journal of Human Capital in Urban Management (IJHCUM) welcomes letters to the editor for the post-publication discussions and corrections which allows debate post publication on its site, through the Letters to Editor. Letters pertaining to manuscript published in IJHCUM should be sent to the editorial office of IJHCUM within three months of either online publication or before printed publication, except for critiques of original research. Following points are to be considering before sending the letters (comments) to the editor.

[1] Letters that include statements of statistics, facts, research, or theories should include appropriate references, although more than three are discouraged.

[2] Letters that are personal attacks on an author rather than thoughtful criticism of the author’s ideas will not be considered for publication.

[3] Letters can be no more than 300 words in length.

[4] Letter writers should include a statement at the beginning of the letter stating that it is being submitted either for publication or not.

[5] Anonymous letters will not be considered.

[6] Letter writers must include their city and state of residence or work.

[7] Letters will be edited for clarity and length.

Name *

Email Address *

Affiliation *

Comments *

Security Code *

International Journal of Human Capital in Urban Management

Wayfinding characteristics and familiarity indexes in an urban environment

References

References

Send comment about this article

Volume 2, Issue 1
Winter 2017
Pages 1-16

Wayfinding characteristics and familiarity indexes in an urban environment

References

References

Send comment about this article

Volume 2, Issue 1Winter 2017Pages 1-16

Volume 2, Issue 1
Winter 2017
Pages 1-16