Where Am I Now? Modelling Disorientation in Pan-Scalar Maps

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

first of all, I would like to focus on lines 22-26 on page 1. I understand your approach and what you are trying to express. However, this might be misleading. It is not like you start zooming for a conference location, and immediately (sic!), the contextual reference is gone. Zooming is smooth, and it goes through level 11 then 10, etc. Therefore, you sound like being unfamiliar with Google Maps interaction, which I believe is not true.

The problem you are posing in the paragraph starting with line 33 is not that serious since Google Maps offer to pin the exact location (via the search bar in the top left corner of the screen) on the map canvas, and it might be your point of orientation. So muddling through cartographic disorientation is not a significant issue.

You are referring to the “Critical Zones in Desert Fog: Aids to Multiscale Navigation” but this was an issue in the late 90-ties. Google Maps started in the 2000-ties. Since that time thing has changed a lot. Nowadays, users have more interactive tools to find there selves (satellite photos, street view). Also, the popularity of web maps caused more intuitive usability (e.g., some mobile maps don’t even have interactive buttons).

All I’m trying to say, is that of course, map disorientation, as an experience exists. However, this way of introducing the issue doesn’t really post the actual problem that most users are facing. In my opinion, more appropriate would be to show that while the user is focused on a detailed search he might shift from the destination point and don’t know how to go back while using a pan, so it is necessary to zoom out and start the process again. Somehow this was touched on within the first story (S1). But from a potential reader perspective (e.g., GIS researcher), I might have a feeling that the disorientation issue is not serious since map providers offer rich interactive tools that enables you to find almost everything on a map.

I would add a lack of map exploration experience (or low spatial abilities) as a cause of failed reconciliations. I think that is the main reason because if you would give the same task to a person with low map experience, he would be more vulnerable (compared to the more experienced user) to the things you mentioned in section 4.3. So it would be appropriate to point out also user experience in this matter.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. I think there was a misunderstanding on the nature of the disorientation we are interested in, and we hope that our explanations will be clearer this time. Your comments are in Italic, and our answers in plain text.

first of all, I would like to focus on lines 22-26 on page 1. I understand
your approach and what you are trying to express. However, this might be
misleading. It is not like you start zooming for a conference location, and
immediately (sic!), the contextual reference is gone. Zooming is smooth, and
it goes through level 11 then 10, etc. Therefore, you sound like being
unfamiliar with Google Maps interaction, which I believe is not true.

In fact, it is not exactly how Google Map zooming interaction works. Very recently (after the story took place), Google introduced what I would call a “slow” zoom that only zooms for half a zoom level at each mouse wheel interaction, whatever the length wheel interaction. This interaction really improves the problem encountered in this disorientation story. But first, OpenLayers and Leaflet based applications still zoom proportionally to how much the mouse wheel changed. Then, even on Google Maps, when you use the finger pinch, the slow zoom is not triggered and you can jump from zoom level 12 to 17. So, Google clearly goes in the good direction to reduce disorientation, but this disorientation experience is still fairly common. Of course, I could have zoomed more slowly and smoothly to keep anchors after each zoom, but this is not what I did at the time, despite my expertise on multi-scale cartography. And my argument is that it is the way the map usually used. To make sure the reader does not think I am being dishonest with the story, I added more context around the story in the introduction.

The problem you are posing in the paragraph starting with line 33 is not
that serious since Google Maps offer to pin the exact location (via the
search bar in the top left corner of the screen) on the map canvas, and it
might be your point of orientation. So muddling through cartographic
disorientation is not a significant issue.

I am sorry, but I really do not see how the “pin location” button applies to that part of the text. Using the pan-scalar map when you are on-site is only a subset of the uses of such maps, and even in these cases, the pin location only gives one salient landmark, but it is not sufficient for a proper reconciliation process.

You are referring to the “Critical Zones in Desert Fog: Aids to Multiscale
Navigation” but this was an issue in the late 90-ties. Google Maps started
in the 2000-ties. Since that time thing has changed a lot. Nowadays, users
have more interactive tools to find there selves (satellite photos, street
view). Also, the popularity of web maps caused more intuitive usability
(e.g., some mobile maps don’t even have interactive buttons).

Yes, the reference is from the late 90s, but it is from the HCI research, so not focused at all on cartography. The PAD++ interface principles, for instance, are not so different from the ones used in web maps 15-20 years later. It is specifically because cartography is now interactive that new challenges arise.

All I’m trying to say, is that of course, map disorientation, as an
experience exists. However, this way of introducing the issue doesn’t really
post the actual problem that most users are facing. In my opinion, more
appropriate would be to show that while the user is focused on a detailed
search he might shift from the destination point and don’t know how to go
back while using a pan, so it is necessary to zoom out and start the process
again. Somehow this was touched on within the first story (S1). But from a
potential reader perspective (e.g., GIS researcher), I might have a feeling
that the disorientation issue is not serious since map providers offer rich
interactive tools that enables you to find almost everything on a map.

In fact, we are precisely interested in the disorientation caused by the interactivity, and the possibility to smoothly explore many different cartographic representations. One can argue that this disorientation problem is not serious. But until now, I never met anyone stating that they never feel disorientation during the use of pan-scalar maps, and I discuss my research with many different people to collect feedbacks. It is clear for us that the consequences of pan-scalar disorientation are much less challenging than the consequences of being lost during a travel, with the ubiquitous use of pan-scalar maps that we live, gaining efficiency in their use would help a lot in our opinion. We tried to add a bit of this discussion in the introduction to better explain the motivation of this research.

I would add a lack of map exploration experience (or low spatial abilities)
as a cause of failed reconciliations. I think that is the main reason
because if you would give the same task to a person with low map experience,
he would be more vulnerable (compared to the more experienced user) to the
things you mentioned in section 4.3. So it would be appropriate to point out
also user experience in this matter.

This is an interesting remark, because it really seems that there is some expertise in the way people explore pan-scalar maps. Some make the exploration more efficiently than others. We added this as a separate cause for failed reconciliations in the paper.

Reviewer 2 Report

An interesting examination of the phenomenon of disorientation due to the nature of pan-scalar maps. While the authors mention traditional concepts of gestalt, anchors and attentional visualisation, they do not refer back to the value of peripheral vision in orientation, which we no longer have when we are 'lost-in-zoom' ... might this be worth a quick mention ?

Minor typographic corrections as below:

Abstract: Try to reduce the repetition of ‘disorientation’ e.g. remove from lines 2,7

2: the ones -> those

4 Sarting -> Starting

15: what are ‘slippy’ maps ?

35: replace second Cartographic disorientation with ‘This’

63: remove 'it'

70: remove ‘the fact of’

256: like -> such as

402: we can the … -> we can use the … ?

416: more based -> based  more

Author Response

Thank you for your review. Your comments are put in Italic below and our answers in plain text.

An interesting examination of the phenomenon of disorientation due to the
nature of pan-scalar maps. While the authors mention traditional concepts of
gestalt, anchors and attentional visualisation, they do not refer back to
the value of peripheral vision in orientation, which we no longer have when
we are 'lost-in-zoom' ... might this be worth a quick mention ?

This is a very interesting comment. We do agree that peripheral vision certainly plays a role in the reconciliation process, maybe for instance to recognize landmarks around the area of visual focus. So, maybe peripheral vision enables simultaneous landmarks recognitions. We did not include this in the model because we were unsure of how it is used, but it is clearly worth further studies. We included a short paragraph on peripheral vision in the discussion, with additional references addressing peripheral vision and visual search.

Minor typographic corrections as below:

Abstract: Try to reduce the repetition of ‘disorientation’ e.g. remove from
lines 2,7 

2: the ones -> those

4 Sarting -> Starting

15: what are ‘slippy’ maps ?

35: replace second Cartographic disorientation with ‘This’

63: remove 'it'
70: remove ‘the fact of’256: like -> such as
402: we can the … -> we can use the … ?
416: more based -> based  more

We made the corrections for all these remarks.

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper discusses that when searching for a map, users will lose their way when the layer level and map position change when zooming and panning. Explore the reconciliation between current map view and the mental map when users are lost. Before it is in good shape to be published, I think it should be consolidated and reinforced/improved further in the future.

First，What is the main question addressed by the research?

Second，the literature review does not draw out key issues.

What’s more, how to display and quantify a mental map.

Finally，in conceptual model of Pan-scalar Map Disorientation, what is the definitions of working memory, short-term memory, and long-term memory.

Author Response

Thank you for your review.