Role of Landmark Size and Location in Way-finding and Spatial Cognition in Virtual Environments

Abstract

The current study explored the impact of global landmarks, landmarks that are visible from a distance, and local landmarks, ones that are only visible from a short distance. Participants searched for targets in a virtual cityscape including either global or local landmarks. Way-finding performance was measured in addition to spatial memory using sketch maps. The findings indicate precedence of global landmarks during way-finding; however the impact of local landmarks increased with experience. Map sketches indicated that the impact of global and local landmarks was dependent on their location within and around the virtual environment. Theoretically, the findings help distinguish between the visibility and location aspects of global and local landmarks. Practically, the findings can inform the design of virtual environments with consideration to user tasks and requirements.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Arthur

Passini

(1992) Wayfinding: People, Signs, and Architecture. McGraw-Hill Ryerson, Toronto.

Billinghurst

Weghorst

(1995). The use of sketch maps to measure cognitive maps of virtual environments. Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium (VRAIS1995).

Carpman

J. R.

Grant

M. A.

(2001). Design That Cares: Planning Health Facilities for Patients and Visitors, Second Edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Darken

R. P.

Sibert

J. L.

(1993). A toolset for navigation in Virtual Environments. Proc. of UIST 1993, 157–165.

Elvins

T. T.

(1997). Virtually lost in virtual worlds: Wayfinding without a cognitive map. Computer Graphics, 15–17.

Jacobs

L. F.

(2003). The evolution of the cognitive map. Brain Behavior and Evolution, 62(2), pp. 128–139.

Lovelace

K. L.

Hegarty

Montello

D. R.

(1999). Elements of good route directions in familiar and unfamiliar environments. Spatial Information Theory, vol. 1661, 65–82.

Lynch

(1960). The Image of a City. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Navon

(1981). The forest revisited: More on global precedence. Psychological Research, 43, 1–32.

10.

Parush

Berman

(2004). Navigation and orientation in 3D user interfaces: The impact of navigation aids and landmarks. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, Vol. 61 No 3, 375–395.

11.

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 & Virtual Environments, 7(2), 179–192.

12.

Rumpradit

Donnell

M. L.

(1999). Navigational cues on interface design to produce better information seeking on the World Wide Web'. Proc. 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

13.

Satalich

G. A.

(1995). Navigation and Wayfinding in Virtual Reality: Finding the Proper Tools and Cues to Enhance Navigational Awareness. University of Washington.

14.

Siegel

A. W.

White

S. H.

(1975). The development of spatial representation of large-scale environments. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, Ed. Reese

H. W.

, 9–55.

15.

Steck

S.D.

Mallot

H.A.

(2000). The role of global and local landmarks in virtual environment navigation. Presence, 9 (1), 69–83.

16.

Thorndyke

P. W.

Goldin

S. E.

(1983). Spatial learning and reasoning skill. Spatial Orientation: Theory, Research, and Application, Ed. Pick

H. L.

Acredolo

L. P.

, pp 195–217.

17.

Thorndyke

P. W.

Hayes-Roth

(1982). Differences in spatial knowledge acquired from maps and navigation. Cognitive Psychology, 280, 560–589.

18.

Zimring

(1990). The Cost of Confusion: Non-monetary and monetary cost of the Emory University hospital wayfinding system. Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Technology.

19.

Vinson

N. G.

(1999). Design guidelines for landmarks to support navigation in virtual environments. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Pittsburgh, PA, 278–285.