Learning and remembering from thematic maps of familiar regions

  • Kent A. Rittschof
  • Raymond W. Kulhavy


To examine how four methods of symbolizing data affect learning from thematic maps of familiar regions, two experiments were conducted. In Experiment 1, 86 college students viewed one of three types of thematic map or a control table, then read a map-related text. Recall of regions with their associated theme information was greater for those who studied a map than for those who studied a table. In Experiment 2, 83 college students viewed one of two types of thematic map for either 1 or 3 min, followed by a map-related text. Shaded-region, or choropleth maps were associated with greater recall of theme information, but longer exposure time was not. In both experiments, map-related text information was recalled more than map-unrelated text information. Choropleth maps and proportional symbol maps were associated with higher reported use of metacognitive strategies. Instructional and theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.


College Student Exposure Time Educational Technology Text Information Longe Exposure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bahr, L.S. & Johnston, B. (Eds.). (1992).Collier's Encyclopedia. New York: Macmillan Educational Company.Google Scholar
  2. Bertin, J. (1983).Semiology of graphics: Diagrams, networks, maps. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press (Translated by William J Berg).Google Scholar
  3. Bugelski, B.R. (1962). Presentation time, total time, and mediation in paired-associate learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63 (4), 409–412.Google Scholar
  4. Dent, B.D. (1996).Cartography: Thematic map design. Dubuque, IA: William C. Brown Publishers.Google Scholar
  5. Farah, M.J., Hammond, K.M., Levine, D.N., & Calvanio, R. (1988). Visual and spatial mental imagery: Dissociable systems of representation.Cognitive Psychology, 20, 439–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gagné, R.M. (1985).The conditions of learning and a theory of instruction. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  7. Kulhavy, R.W. & Stock, W.A. (1996). How cognitive maps are learned and remembered.Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 86 (1), 123–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kulhavy, R.W., Stock, W.A., & Kealy, W.A. (1994). How geographic maps increase recall of instructional text.Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(4), 47–62.Google Scholar
  9. Kulhavy, R.W., Stock, W.A., Verdi, M.P., Rittschof, K.A., & Savenye, W. (1993). Why maps improve memory for text: The influence of structural information on working memory operations.European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 5 (4), 375–392.Google Scholar
  10. Larkin, J.H., & Simon, H.A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth a thousand words.Cognitive Science, 11, 65–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Levine, D.N., Warach, J., & Farah, M.J. (1985). Two visual systems in mental imagery: Dissociation of “what” and “where” in imagery disorders due to bilateral posterior cerebral lesions.Neurology, 35, 1010–1018.Google Scholar
  12. MacEachren, A.M. (1994).Some truth with maps: A primer on symbolization & design. Washington, DC: Association of American Geographers.Google Scholar
  13. Miller, G.A. (1956). The magical number seven plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.Google Scholar
  14. Mosenthal, P.B. & Kirsch, I.S. (1990). Understanding thematic maps.Journal of Reading, 34, 136–140.Google Scholar
  15. Paivio, A. (1986).Mental representations: A dual coding approach. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Paivio, A., Clark, J.M., Digdon, N., & Bons, T. (1989). Referential processing: Reciprocity and correlates of naming and imaging.Memory & Cognition, 17, 163–174.Google Scholar
  17. Rittschof, K.A., Griffin, M.M., & Custer, W.L. (in press). Learner differences affecting schemata for thematic maps.International Journal of Instructional Media.Google Scholar
  18. Rittschof, K.A., Kulhavy, R.W., Stock, W.A., & Hatcher, J. (1993). Thematic maps and text: An analysis of “what happened there?”Cartographica, 30(2), 87–93.Google Scholar
  19. Rittschof, K.A., Stock, W.A., Kulhavy, R.W., Verdi, M.P., & Doran, J. (1994). Thematic maps improve memory for facts and inferences: A test of the stimulus order hypothesis.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 129–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rittschof, K.A., Stock, W.A., Kulhavy, R.W., Verdi, M.P., & Johnson, J.T. (1996). Learning from cartograms: The effects of region familiarity.Journal of Geography, 95 (2), 50–58.Google Scholar
  21. Schwartz, N.H. & Kulhavy, R.W. (1981). Map features and the recall of discourse.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 6, 151–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tippett, L.T. (1992). The generation of visual images: A review of neuropsychological research and theory.Psychological Bulletin, 112, 415–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Trifonoff, K.M. (1995). Going beyond location: Thematic maps in the early elementary grades.Journal of Geography, 94(4), 368–374.Google Scholar
  24. Tufte, E. R. (1983).The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, Connecticut: Graphics Press.Google Scholar
  25. Tyner, J. (1992).Introduction to thematic cartography. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  26. Ungerleider, L.G. & Mishkin, M. (1982). Two cortical visual systems. In D.J. Ingle, M.S. Goodale, & R.J.W. Mansfield (Eds.),Analysis of visual behavior (pp. 549–586). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  27. Winn, W. (1991). Learning from maps and diagrams.Educational Psychology Review, 3, 211–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Young, J.E. (1994). Learning from thematic maps: Children's cognitive processing and the integration of mapped information.Dissertation Abstracts International, 56, 02A. (University Microfilms No. AAI9517415).Google Scholar
  29. Zimmerman, B., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1988). Construct validation of a strategy model of student self-regulated learning.Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 284–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© the Association for Educational Communications and Technology 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kent A. Rittschof
    • 1
  • Raymond W. Kulhavy
    • 2
  1. 1.the College of EducationGeorgia Southern UniversityUSA
  2. 2.the College of EducationArizona State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations