Geografie 2014, 119, 67-90
https://doi.org/10.37040/geografie2014119010067
Selected Cognitive Issues of Positional Uncertainty in Geographical Data
References
1. , J. C. J. H., CLARKE, K. C., KEUPER, A. D. (2003): Testing popular visualization techniques for representing model uncertainty. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 30, č. 3, s. 249–261.
<https://doi.org/10.1559/152304003100011180>
2. , G. L., COWAN, C. R M., POWER, H. (2006): Acquiring information from simple weather maps: Influences of domain-specific knowledge and general visual–spatial abilities. Learning and Individual Differences, 16, č. 4, s. 337–349.
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2007.01.003>
3. , G., ANDRIENKO, N., KEIM,D., MACEACHREN, A. M., WROBEL, S. (2011): Challenging problems of geospatial visual analytics. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 22, s. 251–256.
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvlc.2011.04.001>
4. BEARD, K. M., BUTTENFIELD, B. P., CLAPHAM, S. B., (1991): Visualization of Spatial Data Quality: Scientific Report for the Specialist Meeting, NCGIA Technical Paper 91–26, National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (NCGIA), Castine, Maine.
5. BERTIN, J. (1973): Sémiologie graphique. 2. vydání, Paris, La Haye, 431 s.
6. , N., ACREDOLO, L. (1979): Developmental Changes in Map-Reading Skills. Child Development, 50, č. 3, s. 691–697.
<https://doi.org/10.2307/1128934>
7. BURROUGH, P. A., FRANK, A. U., eds. (1996): Geographic Objects with Indeterminate Boundaries. Bristol, PA. Taylor and Francis Inc., 345 s.
8. , B. P. (1993): Representing spatial data quality. Cartographica, 30, č. 2/3, s. 1–7.
<https://doi.org/10.3138/232H-6766-3723-5114>
9. , M. T. H., FELTOVICH, P. J., GLASER, R. (1981): Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, č. 2, s. 121–152.
<https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0502_2>
10. , H. F., BOLAND, J. E., NISBETT, R. E. (2005): Cultural variation in eye movements during scene perception. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, č. 35, s. 12629–12633.
<https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0506162102>
11. , R. (1999): Representation construction, externalised cognition and individual differences. Learning and Instruction, 9, č. 4, s. 343–363.
<https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(98)00051-6>
12. DIRECTIVE 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2007 establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE). http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2007:108:0001:0014:en:PDF.
13. , B. J. (1997): Dynamic display of spatial data reliability: does it benefit the map user? Computers and Geosciences, 23, č. 4, s. 409–422.
<https://doi.org/10.1016/S0098-3004(97)00011-3>
14. , S. I., LOBEN, A. (2009): Introduction: Cognitive Issues in Geographic InformationVisualization. Cartographica, 44, č. 3, s. 139–143.
<https://doi.org/10.3138/carto.44.3.139>
15. , R. L., STEWART, B., NORWOOD, M. (2002): A Comparison of Field-Dependence Cognitive Styles of Professionals in Purchasing and Consumer Service and Secondary Marketing Education Students, with Implications for Work force Development. Journal of Career and Technical Education, 18, č. 2, s. 66–78.
<https://doi.org/10.21061/jcte.v18i2.610>
16. , R. L. (1994): Gender differences in field-dependence and educational style. The Journal of Vocational Education Research, 19, č. 1, s. 1–21.
17. GARLANDINI, S., FABRIKANT, S. I. (2009): Evaluating the Effectiveness and Efficiency of Visual Variables for Geographic Information Visualization. In: Hornsby, K. S. et al. (eds.): COSIT 2009, LNCS 5756, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, s. 195–211.
18. , E., LASWAD, F., TOOLEY, S., JUSOFF, K. (2009): The Role of Presentation Format on Decision-makers’ Behaviour in Accounting. International Business Research, 2, č. 1, s. 183–195.
<https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v2n1p183>
19. , J (1988): Field dependence research: A historical analysis of a psychological construct. Signs, 13, č. 2, s. 311–330.
<https://doi.org/10.1086/494408>
20. , S., HUNTER, G. J. (2007): Testing the effects of positional uncertainty on spatial decision-making. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 21, č. 6, s. 645–665.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/13658810601073273>
21. , S., TALHOFER, V., HOFMANN, A. (2010): “Mathematical Model Used in Decision-Making Process with Respect to the Reliability of Geo Database.” Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, s. 1652–1657.
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.381>
22. HUNTER, G. J., QUI, J., GOODCHILD, M. F. (1999): Application of a New Model of Vector Data Uncertainty. In K. Lowell and A. Jaton, editors, Spatial Accuracy Assessment: Land Information Uncertainty in Natural Resources. Chelsea, Michigan: Ann ArborPress, s. 203–208.
23. INSPIRE (2009): D2.8.I.6 INSPIRE Data Specification on Cadastral Parcels – Guidelines. http://inspire.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/Data_Specifications/INSPIRE_DataSpecification_CP_v3.0.pdf.
24. JOHNSON, C. R., MOORHEAD, R., MUNZNER, T., PFISTER, H., RHEINGANS, P., YOO, T. S. (2006): „NIH-NSF Visualization Research Challenges Report,” Note: http://tab.computer.org/vgtc/vrc/index.html, IEEE Press.
25. , D. N., SCHKADE, D. A. (1993): Information displays and decision processes. Psychological Science, 4, č. 4, s. 221–227.
<https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1993.tb00265.x>
26. KONEČNÝ, M. (2011): Cartography: Challenges and Potentials in Virtual Geographic Environments Era. Annals of GIS, Honkong: Taylor &Francis, 17, č. 3, s. 135–146.
27. , P., (2011): Možnosti testování kartografické vizualizace polohové nejistoty. Kartografické listy, 19, č. 9, s. 88–96.
28. KUBÍČEK, P., (2012): Vybrané aspekty vizualizace nejistoty geografických dat. Habilitační práce. Masarykova univerzita, Brno, 170 s.
29. KUNZ, M. (2011): Interactive visualizations of natural hazards data and associated uncertainties. PhD Thesis, ETH Curych, 103 s.
30. , R. E., BUNCH,R. L. (2005): Individual Differences in Map Reading Spatial Abilities Using Perceptual and Memory Processes. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 32, s. 33–46.
<https://doi.org/10.1559/1523040053270774>
31. , A. M., KRAAK, M. J. (2001): Research challenges in geovisualisation. Cartography and Geographic information Science, 28, č. 1, s. 3–12.
<https://doi.org/10.1559/152304001782173970>
32. , A., ROBINSON, A., HOPPER, S., GARDNER, S., MURRAY, R., GAHEGAN, M., HETZLER, E. (2005): Visualising geospatial information uncertainty. What we know and chat we need to know. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 32, č. 3, s. 139–160.
<https://doi.org/10.1559/1523040054738936>
33. MOELLERING, H., ed. (1988): The Proposed Standard for Digital Cartographic Data. The AmericanCartographer 15, č. 1.
34. , M. (2006): Cartography: uncertainty, interventions,and dynamic display. Progress in Human Geography, 30, č. 3, s. 373–381.
<https://doi.org/10.1191/0309132506ph612pr>
35. , D. R. (2009): Cognitive Research in GIScience: Recent Achievements and Future Prospects. Geography Compass, 3/5, s. 1824–1840.
<https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-8198.2009.00273.x>
36. PANG, A. (2001): Visualizing uncertainty in geo-spatial data. In. Proceedings of the Workshop on the Intersections between Geospatial Information and Information Technology. Washington, D. C., National Academies Committee of the Computer Science and Telecommunications Board, s. 1–14.
37. , A., WITTENBRINK, T., LODHA, K. (1997): Approaches to uncertainty visualization. Visual Computer, 13, s. 370–390.
<https://doi.org/10.1007/s003710050111>
38. , S., BRYCHTOVÁ, A., VOŽENÍLEK, V. (2012): Eye-tracking a jeho využití při hodnocení map. Geografický časopis, Geografický ústav SAV, s. 71–87.
39. , J. (1993): Jazyková koncepcia mapy, jej vývoj a súčasný stav. Kartografické listy, s. 27–36.
40. PRAVDA, J. (2003): Mapový jazyk. UK v Bratislavě, PrF UK, Bratislava, 88 s.
41. ROBINSON, A., (2011): Challenges and opportunities for web-based evaluation of the use of spatial technologies. Proceeding of ICA conference, Paris, 6 s.
42. , T. (2013): Geografická informace v době směrnice INSPIRE: nalezení, získání a využití dat pro geografický výzkum. Geografie, 118, č. 1, s. 77–93.
43. SHI, W. 2010. Principles of modelling uncertainties in spatial data and spatial analyses. BocaRaton, London, New York, Taylor and Francis, 412 s.
44. SLOCUM, T., MCMASTER, R., KESSELER, F., HOWARD, H. (2005): Thematic Cartography and GeographicVisualization. New Jersey PrenticeHall, 576 s.
45. SOUČEK, P., BARTOŠ, J. (2011): Nový grafický klient v Nahlížení do katastru nemovitostí. In: Růžička, J., Pešková, K. (eds.): Proceedings – Symposium GIS Ostrava 2011, Ostrava, 5 s.
46. , K., FRIEDMANNOVÁ, L., KUBÍČEK P., KONEČNÝM. (2010): Selected issues of cartographic communication optimization for emergency centers. International Journal of Digital Earth, 3, č. 4, s. 316–339.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2010.484511>
47. ŠAŠINKA, Č., MORONG, K. (2012): Původní výzkumný nástroj pro oblast kartografie a psychologie – Multivariantní Testovací program (MuTeP). In: Halama, P., Hanák, R., Masaryk, R.: Sociálne procesy a osobnosť: Zborník príspevkov z 15. ročník medzinárodnej konferencie. Bratislava: Ústav experimentálnej psychologie, s. 188–194.
48. ŠAŠINKA, Č., STACHOŇ, Z., ŠTĚRBA, Z., BŘEZINOVÁ, Š. (2011): Evaluace kartografických děl objektivními metodami v perspektivě osobnostních charakteristik uživatele. In: Konečný, M. (ed.): dynamická geovizualizace v krizovém managementu, MUNI Press, Brno, s. 288–317.
49. , J., HETZLER, B., MACEACHREN, A., GAHEGAN, M., PAVEL, M. (2005): Typology for visualizing uncertainty. In: Visualization and Data Analysis, 5669, s. 146–157.
50. , A. M. (1996): Spatial cadastral boundary concepts and uncertainty in parcelbased information system. International Archives of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensig, XXXI, part B3, s. 890–893.
51. , D., VOYER, S., BRYDEN, M. P. (1995): Magnitude of sex differences in spatial abilities: A meta-analysis and consideration of critical variables. Psychological Bulletin, 117, č. 2, s. 250–270.
<https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.2.250>
52. , H. A. (1950): Individual differences in ease of perception of embedded figures. Journal of Personality, 19, s. 1–15.
<https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1950.tb01084.x>
53. , X., JIANG, B. (2005): Visualization of qualitative locations in geographic information systems. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 32, č. 4, s. 219–229.
<https://doi.org/10.1559/152304005775194683>
54. , J. (1997): The nature of external representations in problem solving. Cognitive Science, 21, č. 2, s. 179–217.
<https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2102_3>
55. ZHANG, J., GOODCHILD, M. (2002): Uncertainty in Geographical Information. London, Taylor and Francis, 266 s.
