The term “schematic map” is often used as a synonym for transit maps. Most of these maps are still similar to their iconic origin, Beck’s (1947) map on London’s subway network. However, cartographers [2, p. 34] and computer scientists [3, p. 124] claim the following. Schematization is not only useful in transit maps (applied to lines); it can also be useful in thematic maps (applied to polygons). The geometry in schematic maps adheres to strict constraints. It can thus reduce visual clutter and ultimately the map reader’s cognitive load. Lower cognitive load, in turn, makes typical map interactions easier [4].
Nevertheless, the literature lacks usability studies on schematization in thematic maps, specifically on their perception. The following question is still open: does schematization make certain map interactions more effective and efficient? These interactions include, e.g., orienting, counting, comparing and estimating [4], [5]. The goal of this research is to plan, conduct and contextualize a user study about this perception. Similar studies for transit maps were conducted by Roberts et al. with a focus on subjective vs. objective usability. You can transfer this focus to schematized thematic maps.
Related research tasks can include:
• literature review on map studies and/or schematization
• preparation of map samples for the study
• implementation of the study
• analysis of the study results
Literature/references:
H. C. Beck, “London Transport Railways : More Central Line Stations Now Open. London Transport. H.C Beck. Waterlow & Sons, LTD., London & Dunstable. ”Waterlow & Sons, 1947.
M. S. Monmonier, How to Lie with Maps, 5. [print.]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.
W. Meulemans, “Similarity Measures and Algorithms for Cartographic Schematization,” Eindhoven, 2014.
R. E. Roth, “Cartographic Interaction Primitives: Framework and Synthesis,” The Cartographic Journal, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 376–395, Nov. 2012, doi: 10.1179/1743277412Y.0000000019.
J. L. Morrison, “Towards a Functional Definition of the Science of Cartography with Emphasis on Map Reading,” The American Cartographer, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 97–110, Jan. 1978, doi: 10.1559/152304078784022845.
M. J. Roberts, E. J. Newton, F. D. Lagattolla, S. Hughes, and M. C. Hasler, “Objective versus Subjective Measures of Paris Metro Map Usability: Investigating Traditional Octolinear versus All-Curves Schematics,” INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMANCOMPUTER STUDIES, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 363–386, Mar. 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2012.09.004.
M. J. Roberts, H. Gray, and J. Lesnik, “Preference versus Performance: Investigating the Dissociation between Objective Measures and Subjective Ratings of Usability for Schematic Metro Maps and Intuitive Theories of Design,” INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN-COMPUTER STUDIES, vol. 98, pp. 109–128, Feb. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.06.003.
M. J. Roberts, “What's Your Theory of Effective Schematic Map Design?,” in Schematic Mapping Workshop 2014, Essex, 2014, p. 9.
