Three characteristics of hardcopy maps, scale, interrelatedness of symbols, and standardized symbology, are reviewed. Their implications for future map-related research and design are discussed. Research on types of coding used in visual displays is discussed in terms of its applicability to hardcopy maps. Specific suggestions for hardcopy map design are based on the literature comparing different kinds of map products.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsK. R.DipF. A.Cartographic design standards—A preliminary investigation. London: Royal College of Arts, Final Technical Report, 1967.
2.
BarmackJ. E.SinaikoH. W.Human factors problems in computer generated displays. Washington, D.C.: Institute for Defense Analysis, Research and Engineering Support Division, Study S-234, 1966.
3.
BerryH. A.Topographic data output study. Detroit: Aeronutronic Division of Ford Motor Company, Third quarterly Progress Report, 1960.
4.
BerryH.A.Topographic data output study. Detroit: Aeronutronic Division of Ford Motor Co., Final Progress Report, 1961.
5.
CarelW. L.HershbergerM. L.HermanJ. A.McGrathJ. J.Design criteria for airborne map displays Volume I: Methodology and research results. Culver City, Calif.: Hughes Aircraft Co., Final Technical Report C2151-003, 1974.(a).
6.
CarelW. L.HershbergerM. L.HermanJ. A.McGrathJ. J.Design criteria for airborne map displays Volume II: Design criteria. Culver City, Calif.: Hughes Aircraft Co., Final Technical Report C2151-003, 1974(b).
7.
ChristR. E.Review and analysis of color coding research for visual displays. Human Factors, 1975, 17, 542–570.
8.
DeLuciaA.The effect of shaded relief on map information accessibility. Cartographic Journal, 1972, 19, 14–18.
9.
EdmondsE. M.WrightR. H.The effects of map scale on position location. Washington, D.C.: Human Resources Research Office, George Washington University Technical Report 65-9, 1965.
10.
FlanneryJ. J.The relative effectiveness of some common graduated point symbols in the presentation of quantitative data. Canadian Cartographer, 1971, 10, 96–109.
11.
FloydA. M.Generalization problems in derived mapping. Canadian Cartography, 1962, 1, 407.
12.
GrabeauW. E.AddorE. E.Retention of detail in map generalization. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Miscellaneous Paper No. 4-687, 1964.
13.
HayesT. J.A new map for Vietnam—The pictomap. Military Engineer, 1966, 384, 255–256.
14.
HillA. R.Cartographic performance: An evaluation of orthophoto-maps. London: Royal College of Art, Final Technical Report, 1974.
15.
HonigfeldA. R.Radar symbology: A literature review. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Army. Human Engineering Laboratories. Technical Memorandum 14-64, 1964.
16.
HugginsW. H.EntwisleD. R.Iconic communication and annotated bibliography. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 1974.
17.
HuizarN. R.Evaluation of the 1:50,000 scale experimental air movement data and military standard maps. Fort Hood: Headquarters MASSTER, MASSTER Evaluation Number 4012, 1972.
18.
JenksG. F.CaspallF. C.Vertical exaggeration in three-dimensional mapping. Manhattan, Kansas: University of Kansas, Technical Report 2, 1967.
19.
KuehlerA. W.Potential natural vegetation of the coterminous United States. Washington, D.C.: American Geographical Society. Special Publication Number 36, 1964.
20.
LaymonR. S.Study of two image interpreter map displays: Chip versus hard copy. Santa Monica: Systems Development Corp., Technical Research Note 169, 1966.
21.
LyonsH. G.Relief in cartography. Geographical Journal, 1914, 233-248, 395–407.
22.
MacNeilR. F.Colors and legibility: Caution and warning data plates. Human Engineering Laboratory, Technical Note 3-75, 1965.
23.
MAPRO, Test of new and improved map products USAC-DEC Experimental 72-15. Fort Ord: Combat Developments Experimentation Command, Final Report, Phase I. July, 1973.
24.
McCormickE. J.Human factors engineering. (3rd ed) New York: McGraw-Hill, 1970.
25.
McGrathJ. J.BordenG. J.Geographic orientation in aircraft pilots: An analytical study of visual checkpoints. Goleta: Human Factors Research, Inc., Technical Report 751-9, 1969.
26.
McGrathJ. J.OsterhoffW. E.BordenG. J.Geographic orientation in aircraft pilots: Experimental studies of two cartographic variables. Goleta: Human Factors Research, Inc., Technical Report 751-3, 1964.
27.
MeisterD.SullivanD.Guide to human engineering design. Bunker-Ramo Corporation, No. 196-080, 1969.
28.
MontaganoG. A.Generalization of hydrographic features. Canadian Cartographer, 1962, 1, 8–11.
29.
OsterhoffW. E.EarlW. K.McGrathJ. J.Geographic orientation in aircraft pilots: Achromatic display of color coded charts. Goleta, Calif.: Human Factors Research, Inc., Technical Report 751-8, November. 1966.
30.
RobinsonA. H.The look of maps: An examination of cartographic design. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1952.
31.
ShontzW. D.TrummG. A.WilliamsL. G.A study of visual search using eye movement recordings: Color coding for information location. Minneapolis: Honeywell, Final Technical Report 12009-FRI, 1968.
32.
ShowmanD. J.Studies of display symbol legibility, Part X. The relative legibility of Leroy and Lincoln/MITRE alphanumeric symbols. Boston: MITRE Corp.MTR-204, 1966.
33.
ShurtleffD.Design problems in visual displays, Part I. Classical factors in the legibility of numeral, and capital letters. Boston: MITRE Corp., MTR-20, 1966.
34.
SkopJ.Investigation of user requirements pertinent to relief portrayal. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Army Map Service, Corps of Engineers. Final Report, 1958.
35.
Van CottH. P.KinkadeR. G.Human engineering guide to equipment design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972.
36.
WheatonG. R.ZavalaA.VanCottH. P.Enhanced photomap evaluation study. Washington, D.C.: American Institutes for Research, Technical Report AIR-F-15-4. 67-TR, 1967.
37.
YanoskyT. R.Design and color in cartography. In McGrathJ. J. (Ed.) A JANAIR symposium. Goleta: Human Factors Research, Inc., 1967.
