尋路地圖視角和地標形式的使用性研究

Effects of Map View and Landmark Presentation Styles on Usability of Wayfinding Maps

10.6381/JD.200603.0085

游萬來(Man-Lai You)；陳俊文(Chun-Wen Chen)；李佩衿(Pei-Jin Lee)

尋路地圖 ； 視角 ； 地標 ； 空間能力 ； 使用性 ； Wayfinding map ； View ； Landmark ； Spatial ability ； Usability

設計學報

11卷1期（2006 / 03 / 01）

85 - 99

繁體中文

尋路是人們活動於生活空間中經常面臨的問題。尋路問題的決策需要有空間資訊的協助，而地圖則是提供空間資訊的有用工具。尋路地圖則是以尋路爲主要功能的地圖類型。設計尋路地圖時，除了資訊內容的正確性之外，在決定地圖表現形式時，也應考慮如何讓使用者能正確和舒適地使用地圖。由於使用者間的個別差異，特別是空間能力方面，使得地圖表現形式因素，可能導致地圖的使用性有所差異。本研究在地圖表現形式的諸因素中，選擇以“地圖視角”和“地標形式”作爲主要研究變項，並假設符合使用者視覺印象的地圖視角和地標形式，其所需的認知負荷較低，因而會有較佳的使用性。主要研究內容爲：以地圖視角和地標形式的形式變化，繪製同一園區範圍的4種尋路地圖，透過使用性工程方法，以模擬實驗進行尋路任務，量測地標定位和路徑學習的使用性效標，並調查使用者主觀滿意度，以分析地圖視角和地標形式和地圖使用性的關係。實驗的主要發現有：(1)透視視角配以具象地標的尋路地圖，使用績效較佳，主觀滿意度也較高；(2)透視視角的尋路地圖，在使用績效與滿意度都優於俯視地面的尋路地圖；(3)各種尋路地圖的主觀滿意度依序爲：具象地標透視地圖最高，其次爲立面地標俯視地圖、幾何地標透視地圖，平面地標俯視地圖最低。本研究結果符合假設，使用者解讀符合視覺印象的地圖視角和地標表現方式較爲容易，主觀上也較能接受。本研究的結果可作爲區里型空間尋路地圖設計的參考。

People often need to find ways. This problem can be more easily resolved with the help of certain spatial information, such as that conveniently provided in maps. Wayfinding maps serve mainly to help users find ways. Apart from the accuracy of information contained, the design of the maps should ensure easy and comfortable use. Owing to individual variation in spatial ability, the presentation styles of map would cause difference in usability among users. This study examined the effect on views and landmark presentation styles on map usability. It is hypothesized that maps with views and landmark presentation styles that match the user's visual perception would require less cognitive effort, and are thus of higher usability. Four maps of a public park were made with variations in views and landmark presentation styles and subjects were asked to locate specified positions and memorize the route. Data for measuring usability including correction, time, and subjective user satisfaction were collected. The results show that maps with the perspective view and figurative landmarks were of higher usability and offered greater subjective satisfaction than maps with panoramic view. Maps ranked in order of subjective user satisfaction are as follows: perspective map with figurative landmarks, survey map with facade landmarks, perspective map with geometric landmarks, and survey map with plan landmarks. Evidence supporting our hypothesis is found in that users find it easier to use and accept maps with views and landmarks presentation styles that match their visual perception. The findings of this study can serve as useful reference for designing wayfinding map for neighborhood areas.

1. Agrawala, M.(2001).Department of Computer Science, Stanford University.
2. Chen, C. W.,You, M.,Chiou, S. C.(2003).Psycho-pleasurability of maps for wayfinding.Proceedings of the 6th Asian Design Conference: Integration of Knowledge, Kansei, and Industrial Power (CD ROM),Japan:
3. Colle, H. A.,Reid, G. B.(1998).The room effect: Metric spatial knowledge of local and separated regions.Presence,7(2),116-128.
4. Devlin, A. S.,Bernstein, J.(1997).Interactive way-finding: Map style and effectiveness.Journal of Environmental Psychology,17,99-110.
5. Down, R. (eds.),Stea, D. (eds.)(1973).Image and the Environment: Cognitive Mapping and Spatial Behavior.Chicago:
6. Goldstein, E. B.(1996).Sensation and Perception.CA:Brooks/Cole, Pacific Grove.
7. Golledge, R. G. (ed.)(1999).Wayfinding Behavior: Cognitive Mapping and Other Spatial Processes.Baltimore, MD:Johns Hopkins University Press.
8. Holmes, N.(1991).Pictorial Maps.New York, NY:Watson-Guptill.
9. Levine, M.(1982).You-are-here maps: Psychological considerations.Environment and Behavior,14,221-237.
10. Lynch, K.(1960).The Image of the City.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
11. Mark, D. M.,Medyckyj-Scott, D. (eds.),Hearnshaw, H. M. (eds.)(1993).Human Factors in Geographical Information Systems.London, UK:Belhaven Press.
12. McGee, M. G.(1979).Human spatial abilities: Psychometric studies and environment, genetic, hormonal, and neurological influences.Psychological Bulletin,86(5),889-918.
13. Montello, D. R.,Lovelace, K. L.,Golledge, R. G.,Self, C. M.(1999).Sex-related differences and similarities in geographic and environmental, spatial abilitie.Annals of the Association of American Geographers,89(3),515-534.
14. Nielsen, J.(1993).Usability Engineering.Cambridge, MA:Academy Press Professional.
15. O'neill, M. J.,Zwaga, H. J. G.(eds.),Boersema, T.(eds.),Hoonhout, H. C. M.(eds.)(1999).Visual Information for Everyday Use.London, UK:Taylor & Francis.
16. Passini, R.(1984).Wayfinding in Architecture.New York, NY:Van Nostrand Reinhold.
17. Robinson, A. H.,Morrison, J. L.,Muehrcke, P. C.,Kimerling, A. J.,Guptill, S. C.(1995).Elements of Cartography.New York, NY:John Wiley & Sons.
18. Siegel, A. W.,White, S. H.,H. Reese (ed.)(1975).Advances in Child Development and Behavior.New York, NY:Academic Press.
19. Solso, R. L.(1998).Cognitive Psychology.MA:Allyn and Bacon, Needham Heights.
20. Thorndyke, P. W.,Hayes-Roth, B.(1982).Difference in spatial knowledge acquired from maps and navigation.Cognitive Psychology,14,560-589.
21. Wochinger, K.,Boehm-Davis, D.(1995).Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, McLean, Virginia, Technical Report no. FHWA-RD-95166Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, McLean, Virginia, Technical Report no. FHWA-RD-95166,未出版
22. 康鳳梅、戴文雄、鍾瑞國(2004)。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告,未出版
23. 康鳳梅、鍾瑞國、劉俊祥、李金泉(2002)。高職機械製圖科學生空間能力差異之研究。師大學報，47(1)，55-69。
24. 張春蘭(1992)。地圖設計法則之探討。中國地理學會會刊，20，29-39。
25. 許勝雄、彭游、吳水丕(1991)。人因工程學。台北市:揚智文化。
26. 曾宥源(2001)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立雲林科技大學空間設計系。

1. 陳夢兮,陳建雄(2022)。虛擬環境中俯瞰地圖尺寸與透明度的介面使用性研究。設計學報，27(2)，25-40。
2. (2024)。說服式地圖之空間型矛盾手法表現。商業設計學報，27，17-37。