Figure 1
Two solutions when designing bivariate maps: extrinsic (left) and intrinsic (right)
Source: own elaboration
Figure 2
Examples of maps tested in the study
Source: own elaboration
Figure 3
The sets of maps and task solved by each participant (a participant was randomly assigned to a set)
Source: own elaboration
Figure 4
The study procedure
Source: own elaboration
Table 1
Examples of questions asked in the study
| Task type | Number of variables in the task | Question | Operation type | Question type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1v | 1 | Indicate the area visited by the least number of individual tourists. | extracting a single value | open |
| What hotel room price per night is possible in the area marked with symbol ‘X’? PLN 42.8/PLN 75.6/PLN 137.9/PLN 332.2 | closed | |||
| In which areas among those marked with letters are the trail lengths the shortest? A/B/C/D | closed | |||
| T2v | 2 | What is the income from tourism in the area visited by the highest number of tourists? PLN 7.5K–10K per person/PLN 10.1K–15K per person/PLN 15.1K–25K per person/PLN 25.1K–47.5K per person | localising an area according to values of two variables | closed |
| Indicate the area with the lowest hotel room price per night and, at the same time, the lowest number of restaurants. | open | |||
| Among areas with 11–20 tourists per 10 km of bike routes, indicate the one with the shortest length of bike trails. | open | |||
| T4v | 4 | In which group of areas marked with letters are the values of all variables the lowest? A/B/C/D | finding areas representing extreme values of all four variables | closed |
| Indicate the area with extreme (min or max) values of at least three variables. | open | |||
| Are there areas with the highest values for all four indices? yes/no | closed |
[i] Source: own elaboration
Figure 5
Answer accuracy of participants when using different multivariate map types
Source: own elaboration
Table 2
Accuracy of different task types using the three tested maps
| Task type | Map type | Accuracy rate % | Cochran's Q | p | post hoc groups | Bonferroni post hoc | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T4v | M4v M2v M1v | 73.33 73.33 100.00 | 4.000 | 0.135 | - | - | - |
T2v | M4v M2v M1v | 60.00 60.00 93.33 | 4.545 | 0.103 | - | - | - |
T1v | M4v M2v M1v | 73.33 93.33 100.00 | 6.500 | 0.039 * | M4v – M2v M2v – M1v M1v – M4v | −1.837 −0.612 −2.449 | 0.199 1.000 0.043 * |
[i] Source: own elaboration
Figure 6
Answer time of participants when using different multivariate map types
Source: own elaboration
Figure 7
Rating of task difficulty after using the three tested maps
Source: own elaboration
Table 3
Answer time while solving different task types using the three tested maps
| Task type | Map type | M (sec.) | SD | Friedman's Fr | p | post hoc groups | Bonferroni post hoc | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T4v | M4v M2v M1v | 49.44 43.99 39.58 | 20.003 13.300 21.145 | 3.733 | 0.155 | - | - | - |
| T2v | M4v M2v M1v | 66,71 57.27 59.86 | 25.925 24.782 32.335 | 3.733 | 0.155 | - | - | - |
| T1v | M4v M2v M1v | 35.89 44.48 27.32 | 12.147 37.582 15.248 | 2.133 | 0.344 | - | - | - |
[i] Source: own elaboration
Table 4
Rating of task difficulty after using the three tested maps
| Task type | Map type | M | SD | Friedman's Fr | p | post hoc groups | Bonferroni post hoc | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T4v | M4v M2v M1v | 2.80 1.87 2.00 | 0.262 0.215 0.239 | 8,619 | 0.013 * | M4v – M2v M2v – M1v M1v – M4v | 2.373 −0.639 1.734 | 0.053 1.000 0.249 |
| T2v | M4v M2v M1v | 2.80 2.80 2.33 | 0.327 0.312 0.232 | 2.476 | 0.290 | - | - | - |
| T1v | M4v M2v M1v | 2.20 2.00 1.40 | 0.200 0.258 0.131 | 11.886 | 0.003 ** | M4v – M2v M2v – M1v M1v – M4v | 0.730 1.826 2.556 | 1.000 0.204 0.032 * |
[i] Source: own elaboration
Figure 8
Heatmaps showing visual attention distribution when solving different task types (in rows) using the three tested map types (in columns)
Source: own elaboration
Figure 9
Fixation duration on maps with legends while using the three tested maps
Source: own elaboration
Table 5
Fixation duration on maps with legends while solving different task types using the three tested maps
| Task type | Map type | M (sec.) | SD | Friedman's Fr | P | post hoc groups | Bonferroni post hoc | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T4v | M4v M2v M1v | 27.41 20.17 14.66 | 12.036 10.762 7.973 | 8.533 | 0.014 * | M4v – M2v M2v – M1v M1v – M4v | 1.461 1.461 2.921 | 0.432 0.432 0.010 ** |
| T2v | M4v M2v M1v | 31.86 32.97 21.10 | 14.368 18.868 15.902 | 3.333 | 0.189 | - | - | - |
| T1v | M4v M2v M1v | 16.21 21.04 10.71 | 5.552 16.389 5.249 | 12.133 | 0.002 ** | M4v – M2v M2v – M1v M1v – M4v | -0.183 3.104 2.921 | 1.000 0.006 ** 0.010 ** |
[i] Source: own elaboration
Figure 10
Fixation duration on map AOI while using the three tested maps
Source: own elaboration
Figure 11
Fixation duration on legend AOI while using the three tested maps
Source: own elaboration
Table 6
Fixation duration on map AOI while using the three tested maps
| Task type | Map type | M (sec.) | SD | Friedman's Fr | P | post hoc groups | Bonferroni post hoc | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T4v | M4v M2v M1v | 15.25 14.66 12.57 | 7.269 8.488 7.564 | 0.933 | 0.627 | - | - | - |
| T2v | M4v M2v M1v | 10.25 23.81 10.69 | 5.159 16.415 7.043 | 6.933 | 0.031 * | M4v – M2v M2v – M1v M1v – M4v | −2.556 1.826 −0.730 | 0.032 * 0.204 1.000 |
| T1v | M4v M2v M1v | 7.64 10.52 5.38 | 4.738 7.918 3.309 | 6.933 | 0.031 * | M4v – M2v M2v – M1v M1v – M4v | −1.826 2.556 0.730 | 0.204 0.032 * 1.000 |
[i] Source: own elaboration
Table 7
Fixation duration on legend AOI while using the three tested maps
| Task type | Map type | M (sec.) | SD | Friedman's Fr | p | post hoc groups | Bonferroni post hoc | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T4v | M4v M2v M1v | 12.16 5.51 2.10 | 8.750 3.844 1.453 | 24.400 | <0.001 *** | M4v – M2v M2v – M1v M1v – M4v | 2.191 2.739 4.930 | 0.085 0.019 * 0.000 *** |
| T2v | M4v M2v M1v | 21.61 9.16 10.40 | 12.237 4.566 10.878 | 14.533 | <0.001 *** | M4v – M2v M2v – M1v M1v – M4v | 3.469 −0.365 3.104 | 0.002 ** 1.000 0.006 ** |
| T1v | M4v M2v M1v | 8.56 10.52 5.33 | 5.669 12.600 3.933 | 0.533 | 0.766 | - | - | - |
[i] Source: own elaboration
Figure 12
The share of fixation durations on map itself and on map legend
Source: own elaboration