Document Open Access Logo

Not Arbitrary, Systematic! Average-Based Route Selection for Navigation Experiments

Authors Bartosz Mazurkiewicz , Markus Kattenbeck , Peter Kiefer, Ioannis Giannopoulos



PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.GIScience.2021.I.8.pdf
  • Filesize: 3.64 MB
  • 16 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Bartosz Mazurkiewicz
  • TU Wien, Austria
Markus Kattenbeck
  • TU Wien, Austria
Peter Kiefer
  • ETH Zurich, Switzerland
Ioannis Giannopoulos
  • TU Wien, Austria

Cite AsGet BibTex

Bartosz Mazurkiewicz, Markus Kattenbeck, Peter Kiefer, and Ioannis Giannopoulos. Not Arbitrary, Systematic! Average-Based Route Selection for Navigation Experiments. In 11th International Conference on Geographic Information Science (GIScience 2021) - Part I. Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 177, pp. 8:1-8:16, Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2020)
https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.GIScience.2021.I.8

Abstract

While studies on human wayfinding have seen increasing interest, the criteria for the choice of the routes used in these studies have usually not received particular attention. This paper presents a methodological framework which aims at filling this gap. Based on a thorough literature review on route choice criteria, we present an approach that supports wayfinding researchers in finding a route whose characteristics are as similar as possible to the population of all considered routes with a predefined length in a particular area. We provide evidence for the viability of our approach by means of both, synthetic and real-world data. The proposed method allows wayfinding researchers to justify their route choice decisions, and it enhances replicability of studies on human wayfinding. Furthermore, it allows to find similar routes in different geographical areas.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Information systems → Geographic information systems
  • Information systems → Location based services
  • Information systems → Decision support systems
  • General and reference → Empirical studies
Keywords
  • Route Selection
  • Route Features
  • Human Wayfinding
  • Navigation
  • Experiments
  • Replicability

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads

References

  1. Vanessa Joy A. Anacta, Jia Wang, and Angela Schwering. Routes to remember: Comparing verbal instructions and sketch maps. In Joaquín Huerta, Sven Schade, and Carlos Granell, editors, Connecting a Digital Europe Through Location and Place - International AGILE'2014 Conference, Castellon, Spain, 13-16 June, 2014, Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography, pages 311-322. Springer, 2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03611-3_18.
  2. Crystal J. Bae and Daniel R. Montello. Dyadic route planning and navigation in collaborative wayfinding. In Sabine Timpf, Christoph Schlieder, Markus Kattenbeck, Bernd Ludwig, and Kathleen Stewart, editors, 14th International Conference on Spatial Information Theory, COSIT 2019, September 9-13, 2019, Regensburg, Germany, volume 142 of LIPIcs, pages 24:1-24:20. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.COSIT.2019.24.
  3. Christina Bauer and Bernd Ludwig. Schematic maps and indoor wayfinding. In Sabine Timpf, Christoph Schlieder, Markus Kattenbeck, Bernd Ludwig, and Kathleen Stewart, editors, 14th International Conference on Spatial Information Theory, COSIT 2019, September 9-13, 2019, Regensburg, Germany, volume 142 of LIPIcs, pages 23:1-23:14. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.COSIT.2019.23.
  4. Mark de Berg, Otfried Cheong, Marc van Kreveld, and Mark Overmars. Computational Geometry: Algorithms and Applications. Springer-Verlag TELOS, Santa Clara, CA, USA, 3rd ed. edition, 2008. Google Scholar
  5. Geoff Boeing. Planarity and street network representation in urban form analysis. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/2399808318802941.
  6. Kenneth Bollen, John T. Cacioppo, Robert M. Kaplan, Jon A. Krosnick, and James L. Olds. Social, behavioral, and economic sciences perspectives on robust and reliable science. Report of the Subcommittee on Replicability in Science Advisory Committee to the National Science Foundation Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences, 2015. last access on Mar 5th, 2020. URL: https://www.nsf.gov/sbe/AC_Materials/SBE_Robust_and_Reliable_Research_Report.pdf.
  7. Tad T. Brunyé, Shaina B. Martis, Breanne Hawes, and Holly A. Taylor. Risk-taking during wayfinding is modulated by external stressors and personality traits. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 19(4):283-308, 2019. Google Scholar
  8. Vincenzo Carletti, Pasquale Foggia, Alessia Saggese, and Mario Vento. Challenging the time complexity of exact subgraph isomorphism for huge and dense graphs with vf3. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 40:804-818, 2018. Google Scholar
  9. Matt Duckham, Stephan Winter, and Michelle Robinson. Including landmarks in routing instructions. Journal of Location Based Services, 4(1):28-52, 2010. Google Scholar
  10. Paolo Fogliaroni, Dominik Bucher, Nikola Jankovic, and Ioannis Giannopoulos. Intersections of Our World. In Stephan Winter, Amy Griffin, and Monika Sester, editors, 10th International Conference on Geographic Information Science (GIScience 2018), pages 3:1-3:15, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2018. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik. Google Scholar
  11. Ioannis Giannopoulos, David Jonietz, Martin Raubal, Georgios Sarlas, and Lisa Stähli. Timing of pedestrian navigation instructions. In Eliseo Clementini, Maureen Donnelly, May Yuan, Christian Kray, Paolo Fogliaroni, and Andrea Ballatore, editors, 13th International Conference on Spatial Information Theory, COSIT 2017, September 4-8, 2017, L'Aquila, Italy, volume 86 of LIPIcs, pages 16:1-16:13. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.COSIT.2017.16.
  12. Ioannis Giannopoulos, Peter Kiefer, and Martin Raubal. GazeNav: Gaze-Based Pedestrian Navigation. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices & Services, MobileHCI '15, pages 337-346. ACM, 2015. Google Scholar
  13. Charalampos Gkonos, Ioannis Giannopoulos, and Martin Raubal. Maps, vibration or gaze? Comparison of novel navigation assistance in indoor and outdoor environments. Journal of Location Based Services, 11(1):29-49, 2017. Google Scholar
  14. Jana Götze and Johan Boye. "turn left" versus "walk towards the café": When relative directions work better than landmarks. In Fernando Bação, Maribel Yasmina Santos, and Marco Painho, editors, AGILE 2015 - Geographic Information Science as an Enabler of Smarter Cities and Communities, Lisboa, Portugal, 9-12 June 2015, Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography, pages 253-267. Springer, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16787-9_15.
  15. Jiawei Han, Micheline Kamber, and Jian Pei. 2 - getting to know your data. In Jiawei Han, Micheline Kamber, and Jian Pei, editors, Data Mining (Third Edition), The Morgan Kaufmann Series in Data Management Systems, pages 39-82. Morgan Kaufmann, Boston, third edition edition, 2012. Google Scholar
  16. Gengen He, Toru Ishikawa, and Makoto Takemiya. Collaborative navigation in an unfamiliar environment with people having different spatial aptitudes. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 15(4):285-307, 2015. Google Scholar
  17. Toru Ishikawa and Uiko Nakamura. Landmark selection in the environment: Relationships with object characteristics and sense of direction. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 12(1):1-22, 2012. Google Scholar
  18. Markus Kattenbeck. How subdimensions of salience influence each other. comparing models based on empirical data. In Eliseo Clementini, Maureen Donnelly, May Yuan, Christian Kray, Paolo Fogliaroni, and Andrea Ballatore, editors, 13th International Conference on Spatial Information Theory, COSIT 2017, September 4-8, 2017, L'Aquila, Italy, volume 86 of LIPIcs, pages 10:1-10:13. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.COSIT.2017.10.
  19. Markus Kattenbeck, Eva Nuhn, and Sabine Timpf. Is salience robust? A heterogeneity analysis of survey ratings. In 10th International Conference on Geographic Information Science, GIScience 2018, August 28-31, 2018, Melbourne, Australia, volume 114 of LIPIcs, pages 7:1-7:16. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.GISCIENCE.2018.7.
  20. Peter Kedron, Amy E. Frazier, Andrew B. Trgovac, Trisalyn Nelson, and A. Stewart Fotheringham. Reproducibility and replicability in geographical analysis. Geographical Analysis, NA(NA):NA, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/gean.12221.
  21. Peter Kiefer, Ioannis Giannopoulos, and Martin Raubal. Where am I? Investigating map matching during self-localization with mobile eye tracking in an urban environment. Transactions in GIS, 18(5):660-686, 2014. Google Scholar
  22. Vasiliki Kondyli, Carl P. L. Schultz, and Mehul Bhatt. Evidence-based parametric design: Computationally generated spatial morphologies satisfying behavioural-based design constraints. In Eliseo Clementini, Maureen Donnelly, May Yuan, Christian Kray, Paolo Fogliaroni, and Andrea Ballatore, editors, 13th International Conference on Spatial Information Theory, COSIT 2017, September 4-8, 2017, L'Aquila, Italy, volume 86 of LIPIcs, pages 11:1-11:14. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.COSIT.2017.11.
  23. Markus Konkol, Christian Kray, and Morin Ostkamp. Follow the signs - countering disengagement from the real world during city exploration. In Arnold K. Bregt, Tapani Sarjakoski, Ron van Lammeren, and Frans Rip, editors, Societal Geo-innovation - Selected Papers of the 20th AGILE Conference on Geographic Information Science, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 9-12 May 2017, Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography, pages 93-109, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56759-4_6.
  24. Markus Konkol, Christian Kray, and Max Pfeiffer. Computational reproducibility in geoscientific papers: Insights from a series of studies with geoscientists and a reproduction study. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 33(2):408-429, 2019. Google Scholar
  25. Hengshan Li and Nicholas A. Giudice. Assessment of between-floor structural and topological properties on cognitive map development in multilevel built environments. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 18(3):138-172, 2018. Google Scholar
  26. Hua Liao, Weihua Dong, Haosheng Huang, Georg Gartner, and Huiping Liu. Inferring user tasks in pedestrian navigation from eye movement data in real-world environments. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 33(4):739-763, 2019. Google Scholar
  27. Lynn S. Liben, Lauren J. Myers, and Adam E. Christensen. Identifying locations and directions on field and representational mapping tasks: Predictors of success. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 10(2-3):105-134, 2010. Google Scholar
  28. K L Lovelace, M Hegarty, and D R Montello. Elements of good route directions in familiar and unfamiliar environments. In Freksa, C. and Mark, D. M., editor, Spatial Information Theory: Cognitive and Computational Foundations of Geographic Information Science, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 65-82, 1999. Google Scholar
  29. William A. Mackaness, Phil J. Bartie, and Candela Sanchez-Rodilla Espeso. Understanding information requirements in "text only" pedestrian wayfinding systems. In Geographic Information Science - 8th International Conference, GIScience 2014, Vienna, Austria, September 24-26, 2014. Proceedings, volume 8728 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 235-252. Springer, 2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11593-1_16.
  30. N. Magdy, M. A. Sakr, T. Mostafa, and K. El-Bahnasy. Review on trajectory similarity measures. In 2015 IEEE Seventh International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Information Systems (ICICIS), pages 613-619, December 2015. Google Scholar
  31. Stefan Münzer and Christoph Stahl. Learning routes from visualizations for indoor wayfinding: Presentation modes and individual differences. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 11(4):281-312, 2011. Google Scholar
  32. Daniel Nüst, Carlos Granell, Barbara Hofer, Markus Konkol, Frank O. Ostermann, Rusne Sileryte, and Valentina Cerutti. Reproducible research and GIScience: an evaluation using AGILE conference papers. PeerJ, 6:e5072, 2018. Google Scholar
  33. Christina Ohm, Manuel Müller, and Bernd Ludwig. Evaluating indoor pedestrian navigation interfaces using mobile eye tracking. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 17(1-2):89-120, 2017. Google Scholar
  34. Open Science Collaboration. Reproducibility Project: Psychology, 2015. Google Scholar
  35. Frank O. Ostermann and Carlos Granell. Advancing science with vgi: Reproducibility and replicability of recent studies using vgi. Transactions in GIS, 21(2):224-237, 2017. Google Scholar
  36. Marianna Pagkratidou, Alexia Galati, and Marios Avraamides. Do environmental characteristics predict spatial memory about unfamiliar environments? Spatial Cognition & Computation, 20(1):1-32, 2020. Google Scholar
  37. Martin Perebner, Haosheng Huang, and Georg Gartner. Applying user-centred design for smartwatch-based pedestrian navigation system. Journal of Location Based Services, 13(3):213-237, 2019. Google Scholar
  38. Karl Rehrl, Elisabeth Häusler, and Sven Leitinger. Comparing the effectiveness of gps-enhanced voice guidance for pedestrians with metric- and landmark-based instruction sets. In Geographic Information Science, 6th International Conference, GIScience 2010, Zurich, Switzerland, September 14-17, 2010. Proceedings, volume 6292 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 189-203. Springer, 2010. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15300-6_14.
  39. Karl Rehrl, Elisabeth Häusler, Sven Leitinger, and Daniel Bell. Pedestrian navigation with augmented reality, voice and digital map: final results from an in situ field study assessing performance and user experience. Journal of Location Based Services, 8(2):75-96, 2014. Google Scholar
  40. Karl Rehrl, Sven Leitinger, Georg Gartner, and Felix Ortag. An analysis of direction and motion concepts in verbal descriptions of route choices. In Kathleen Stewart Hornsby, Christophe Claramunt, Michel Denis, and Gérard Ligozat, editors, Spatial Information Theory, 9th International Conference, COSIT 2009, Aber Wrac'h, France, September 21-25, 2009, Proceedings, volume 5756 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 471-488. Springer, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03832-7_29.
  41. Adam Rousell and Alexander Zipf. Towards a landmark-based pedestrian navigation service using osm data. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 6(3):64, 2017. Google Scholar
  42. Wiebke Schick, Marc Halfmann, Gregor Hardiess, Friedrich Hamm, and Hanspeter A. Mallot. Language cues in the formation of hierarchical representations of space. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 19(3):252-281, 2019. Google Scholar
  43. Helmut Schrom-Feiertag, Volker Settgast, and Stefan Seer. Evaluation of indoor guidance systems using eye tracking in an immersive virtual environment. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 17(1-2):163-183, 2017. Google Scholar
  44. S. Schwarzkopf, S. J. Büchner, C. Hölscher, and L. Konieczny. Perspective tracking in the real world: Gaze angle analysis in a collaborative wayfinding task. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 17(1-2):143-162, 2017. Google Scholar
  45. Angela Schwering, Jakub Krukar, Rui Li, Vanessa Joy Anacta, and Stefan Fuest. Wayfinding through orientation. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 17(4):273-303, 2017. Google Scholar
  46. Makoto Takemiya and Toru Ishikawa. I can tell by the way you use your walk: Real-time classification of wayfinding performance. In Max J. Egenhofer, Nicholas A. Giudice, Reinhard Moratz, and Michael F. Worboys, editors, Spatial Information Theory - 10th International Conference, COSIT 2011, Belfast, ME, USA, September 12-16, 2011. Proceedings, volume 6899 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 90-109. Springer, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23196-4_6.
  47. Makoto Takemiya and Toru Ishikawa. Strategy-based dynamic real-time route prediction. In Thora Tenbrink, John G. Stell, Antony Galton, and Zena Wood, editors, Spatial Information Theory - 11th International Conference, COSIT 2013, Scarborough, UK, September 2-6, 2013. Proceedings, volume 8116 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 149-168. Springer, 2013. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01790-7_9.
  48. Lin Wang, Weimin Mou, and Xianghong Sun. Development of landmark knowledge at decision points. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 14(1):1-17, 2014. Google Scholar
  49. Flora Wenczel, Lisa Hepperle, and Rul von Stülpnagel. Gaze behavior during incidental and intentional navigation in an outdoor environment. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 17(1-2):121-142, 2017. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail