Personal and Ubiquitous Computing

, Volume 16, Issue 8, pp 1001–1011 | Cite as

Analysis of verbal route descriptions and landmarks for hiking

  • L. Tiina SarjakoskiEmail author
  • Pyry Kettunen
  • Hanna-Marika Flink
  • Mari Laakso
  • Mikko Rönneberg
  • Tapani Sarjakoski
Original Article


Along with the increasing number of mobile applications for pedestrian use a need arises for more intuitive wayfinding instructions, also for broader use such as hiking. To get a deeper understanding about what kinds of terms and concepts people use when moving in a natural environment and how they describe their surroundings, an empirical thinking aloud study was carried out in a national park during both winter and summer conditions. This study aims at providing additional knowledge on human verbal descriptions of routes and landmarks. The propositions of descriptions are classified into categories and analysed. The results of this study will be utilised for an implementation of a terrain navigator to support such leisure activities as hiking during different times of a year. The results of the analysis of verbal descriptions regarding hiking are discussed and compared with previous studies, and finally conclusions are given.


Route description Landmark Spatial Concept Hiking Navigation Mobile Season 



This survey is a part of two research projects. The European Commission supported HaptiMap project (FPT-ICT-224675) is coordinated by the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Group of Lund University’s Department of Design Sciences ( The UbiMap project is funded by the Academy of Finland, under the Motive research programme and is carried out in cooperation with the FGI, Department of Geoinformatics and Cartography, and the University of Helsinki, Department of Cognitive Science.


  1. 1.
    Barkowsky T (2001) Mental processing of geographic knowledge. In: Montello DR (ed) COSIT 2001, LNCS, vol 2205. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 372–386Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boren MT, Ramey J (2000) Thinking aloud: reconciling theory and practice. IEEE Trans Prof Commun 43(3):261–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brosset D, Claramunt C, Saux E (2008) Wayfinding in natural and urban environments: a comparative study. Cartographica 43(1):21–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burrough P, Frank A (eds) (1995) Geographic objects with indetermined boundaries. Taylor & Francis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Daniel M-P, Denis M (2004) The production of route directions: investigating conditions that favour conciseness in spatial discourse. Appl Cogn Psychol 18(1):57–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Denis M (1997) The description of routes: a cognitive approach to the production of spatial discourse. Cah Psychol Cogn 16(4):409–458Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Golledge R (1999) Human wayfinding and cognitive maps. In: Golledge R (ed) Wayfinding behaviour. John Hopkings University Press, Baltimore, pp 5–46Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Elias B, Hampe M, Sester M (2005) Adaptive visualisation of landmarks using an MRDB. In: Meng L, Zipf A, Reichenbacher T (eds) Map-based mobile services, theories, methods and implementations. Springer, Berlin, pp 75–869Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elias B, Paelke V, Chaouali M (2009) Evaluation of user variables in topographic feature recall for the informed selection of personalized landmarks. In: Gartner G, Rehrl K (eds) Location based services and telecartography II. From sensor fusion to context models. Lecture notes in geoinformation and cartography. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 122–136Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ishikawa T, Montello DR (2006) Spatial knowledge acquisition from direct experience in the environment: individual differences in the development of metric knowledge and the integration of separately learned places. Cogn Psychol 52:93–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jacobson RD (1998) Cognitive mapping without sight: four preliminary studies of spatial learning. J Environ Psychol 18:289–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Klippel A (2003) Wayfinding choremes. In: Kuhn W, Worboys M, Timpf S (eds) COSIT 2003, LNCS, vol 2825. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 301–314Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kovanen J, Sarjakoski T, Sarjakoski LT (2010) A client-server architecture for audio supported mobile route guiding for hiking. In: Proceedings of UPINLBS 2010, ubiquitous positioning, indoor navigation and location-based service, 14–15 October 2010, Helsinki (Kirkkonummi) Finland, CD-ROM. Online:
  14. 14.
    Magnusson C, Brewster S, Sarjakoski T, Roselier S, Sarjakoski LT, Tollmar K (2009) Exploring future challenges for haptic, audio and visual interfaces for mobile maps and location based services. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2009—LocWeb Workshop. Boston, MA, USAGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Presson CC, Montello DR (1988) Points of reference in spatial cognition: stalking the elusive landmark. Br J Dev Psychol 6:378–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Raubal M, Winter S (2002) Enriching wayfinding instructions with local landmarks. In: Egenhofer M, Mark D (eds) Proceedings of geographic information science—second international conference, GIScience 2002, Boulder, CO, USA, 25–28 Sept 2002, LNCS, vol 2478. Springer, Berlin, pp 243–259. doi: 10.1007/3-540-45799-2
  17. 17.
    Rehrl K, Leitinger S, Gartner G, Ortag F (2009) An analysis of direction and motion concepts in verbal descriptions of route choices. In: Hornsby KS, Claramunt C, Denis M, Ligozat G (eds) COSIT 2009, LNCS, vol 5756. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 471–488Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sarjakoski LT, Sarjakoski T (2008) User interfaces and adaptive maps. In: Shekhar S, Xiong H (eds) Encyclopedia of GIS. Springer, Berlin, pp 1205–1212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Snowdon C, Kray C (2009) Exploring the use of landmarks for mobile navigation support in natural environments. In: Oppermann R, Eisenhauer M, Jarke M, Wulf V (eds) The 11th international conference on human-computer interaction with mobile devices and services, Mobile HCI 2009, Bonn, Germany, 15–18 Sept 2009. ACM, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Thorndyke PW, Hayes-Roth B (1982) Differences in spatial knowledge acquired from maps and navigation. Cogn Psychol 14:560–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tversky B (1993) Cognitive maps, cognitive collages, and spatial mental models. In: Frank AU, Campari I (eds) COSIT’93, LNCS, vol 716. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 14–24Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tversky B (2003) Structures of mental spaces: how people think about space. Environ Behav 35(1):66–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. Tiina Sarjakoski
    • 1
    Email author
  • Pyry Kettunen
    • 1
  • Hanna-Marika Flink
    • 1
  • Mari Laakso
    • 1
  • Mikko Rönneberg
    • 1
  • Tapani Sarjakoski
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Geoinformatics and CartographyFinnish Geodetic InstituteMasalaFinland

Personalised recommendations