Map-based Mobile Services Design,Interacton and Usability Phần 9 potx

Fig. 13.9. The locations of the kiosk maps for task 4 shown here on the paged interface.

The complexity of the remaining route made it difficult for those using the textual interface

to relate back to the kiosk map.

13.7 Analysis and discussion

13.7.1 Designed elements

While we did observe a difference between the textual and paged interfaces in a

landmark placement question pertaining to the fourth task, we did not observe a

general trend across tasks, nor did we detect an interaction between mobile inter￾face (textual or paged) and interaction technique (pointing or non-pointing).

Therefore, we do not conclude that reflecting the kiosk map presentation on a mo￾bile route application provided any benefit for spatial awareness. For more com￾plex routes such as the one encountered in task four, graphical cues on the mobile

device may serve to better relate the route to the map presentation. None of the

participants specifically stated that they found the consistency between map views

(on the kiosk maps and on the device) to be beneficial. Instead, one participant

said they found it hard to relate the kiosk map with the map on the device, and

several participants mentioned that the kiosk map was unnecessary, went unused,

or wasn’t detailed enough to be useful. By contrast, one pair felt strongly that the

kiosk map was all that was needed, another pair also navigated using just the kiosk

map, and others commented that the kiosk map was clearly organized. Given such

a variety of perspectives it is hard to assess the impact from the user’s perspective

of integrating the kiosk map view and the phone map view.

There was a significant difference in spatial awareness test scores for route￾related questions between the pointing and non-pointing conditions, regardless of

the interface presentation used on the mobile phone (paged or textual). That is, in￾teracting directly with the kiosk maps seems to have promoted a better spatial

awareness of routes relative to the map. Because this was a naturalistic study, we

13 How Mobile Maps Cooperate with Existing Navigational Infrastructure 285

did not require participants to look at the kiosk maps in all conditions. In fact, five

participant pairs did not refer to the kiosk maps at all in the non-pointing condi￾tions, since they were not required to do so in order to retrieve route information.

As a result, we cannot conclude that interacting with the kiosk maps per se led to

an increase in spatial knowledge acquisition. This may be due simply to exposure

to the map itself. In the pointing conditions the actual time spent looking at the ki￾osk map was often quite short, and focused on finding the destination in large part.

However, three of the twelve participant pairs also spent time trying to visualize a

route to the destination using the kiosk map before pulling route information onto

the phone in these conditions. Comments regarding the pointing interface were

largely positive. In the non-pointing conditions, a kiosk map was visited in total

nine times across all pairs throughout the study, with five pairs never looking at a

kiosk map in these conditions. This suggests that providing route information di￾rectly on a phone can inhibit the use of kiosk maps, thereby potentially impacting

the ability to relate a route to these maps. It should be noted, however, that while

the direct interaction conditions did require participants to request routes using the

kiosk maps, it did not increase the tendency to refer to these maps beyond what

was necessary to retrieve route information. In the pointing conditions there were

only three recorded instances of participants viewing a kiosk map for reasons

other than requesting a route. When a task involved two or more phases, partici￾pants in the pointing conditions did not always retrieve route information for all

phases from the kiosk maps. When one part of a task was complete and partici￾pants realized they would need to query a map again to get the next destination,

several participants simply used the phone-based map, or surveyed the environ￾ment instead to help them find their destination, especially in Scotia Square where

the last kiosk map used was a considerable distance away. Others found a kiosk

map or remembered where one was, but rather than request a route simply memo￾rized the location of the next destination relative to their current position.

The most common complaint about the kiosk map interface was that once at a

destination they could not request a route from where they were standing. One

possible solution to this is to permit the selection of several stops along a route.

We have observed in prior studies that participants are quite adept at more com￾plex queries after a small amount of training (Reilly et al. 2005). We had designed

built routes on the mobile device to support this in the experiment, and in pilot

testing participants had no trouble selecting multiple destinations in sequence to

express a route with several stops after being shown how to do so. However we

did not demonstrate how to do this in the study, and no participants seemed to

consider that possibility when interacting with the kiosk maps.

13.7.2 Environmental elements

At least as important as the designed elements of our study to the navigation pat￾terns observed were environmental elements such as signage, landmarks, spatial

structure and dynamics. All of these contribute to the navigational infrastructure of

286 Derek REILLY, Bonnie MACKAY, Kori INKPEN

a space, and any application designed to support navigation should consider these

factors. We explicitly encouraged participants to make use of any cues in the envi￾ronment when completing the tasks.

Signage was especially important in the WTCC setting. As described previ￾ously, signage was abundant in the convention centre floor, but virtually non￾existent in the lobby areas of each level. Most pairs made some use of signage

during the tasks set here, however the amount and style of use varied widely. Two

groups relied on landmarks and signage exclusively for large portions of tasks in

the WTCC, first looking at a map (either a kiosk map or on the phone) then using

cues in the environment to navigate. Other groups relied on signage alone for

small portions of a route, but the most common strategy was to use signage and

other cues in the environment to reinforce or clarify information presented on the

phone. In a few cases, the phone information helped to clarify signage, as when a

sign was misinterpreted. At the other extreme, a couple of groups ignored signage

for at least one task, focusing instead on the phone information. In areas in the

WTCC where there was no signage, participants naturally switched their attention

to landmarks and the phone interface. Without signage, the phone interface be￾came more critical for navigation.

“phone interface particularly useful between floors e.g. --> how to get from meeting to

mariner room” – Participant #6

Most participants were quite resourceful, adapting their strategies based on the

environmental cues available. While the WTCC offered pervasive signage on the

conference floor, the Scotia Square mall gave only typical mall signage, showing

the way to washrooms, telephones, anchor stores and facilities attached to the mall

such as hotels and office buildings. The majority of participants shifted to identi￾fying landmarks referenced on the phone route display, while one pair simply

memorized the route from the kiosk map at the mall entrance. When the final task

brought participants into Barrington Place, a few participants shifted again to

make some use of the spare, understated signage in the building, which included a

store directory.

Landmarks were used by participants throughout the four tasks in this study.

When landmarks were referenced in the phone route description, participants gen￾erally tried to identify the landmark in the real world, unless they had already es￾tablished their location. For example, in the WTCC there is a set of escalators

linking the main conference levels. In their direct path, participants generally ac￾knowledged this landmark whether or not they were changing floors, while the ad￾jacent Show Office, to one side of their direct path, was only acknowledged by

three participants, even though all participants had a direct reference to this land￾mark in the route description. Landmarks also played an important role when lost,

and when participants were looking for a kiosk map to interact with. In the WTCC

the main lobby was used as a reference point when trying to determine orientation,

especially at the start of a task. In Scotia Square the fountain was a recognizable

point of reference when trying to locate a kiosk map or the information booth.

Even when participants had no indication that there was a map in the area, the cen￾tral, open space in which the fountain was located seemed an appropriate place to

start looking.

13 How Mobile Maps Cooperate with Existing Navigational Infrastructure 287