Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Maps as geomedial action spaces: considering the shift from logocentric to egocentric engagements

  • Published:
GeoJournal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper considers some significant questions in geography and cognate fields about the roles of maps in the information age. Most maps are now digital products, offering immersive environments for user involvement. The increasingly networked digital distribution of geographic information in consumer-orientated cartographic representations leads to substantial changes how people individually and collaboratively experience and produce space and place. This article focuses on the ongoing metamorphosis arising through geobrowsing, the media-based flexible production of geographic knowledge through interactive maps. Drawing on work in media studies influenced by the so-called spatial turn—the rediscovering of geography-related questions in the social sciences and humanities, after modernism’s claimed prioritization of time and history (Soja in Postmodern Geographies. The reassertion of space in critical social theory, London, 1989; Jameson in Postmodernism, or, the cultural logic of late capitalism, Duke University Press, Durham, 1991)—this paper develops a theoretical framework built on the dynamic networked geomedial action spaces concept to understand the changing roles of information age maps as imagined materialist spaces for the experience and production of space—ultimately a medial turn. Following this concept, maps change from offering static and non-interactive frames of geographic reference for the production of space and place and as geomedia support a veritable infinity of interactive and map-based activities. Geobrowsing facilitates some new modes of geographic interactions that move from logocentric engagements with static maps to egocentric dynamic interactions with code-based elements of geomedial action spaces. Google Earth and similar geomedia facilitate maps that become intrinsic to a growing number of social action spaces and alter the experience and production of space and place.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.nkeconwatch.com/.

References

  • Aarseth, E. (1997). Cybertext: Perspectives on ergodic literature. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abend, P. (2013). Geobrowsing: Google Earth und Co.—Nutzungspraktiken einer digitalen Erde. Transcript, Bielefeld.

  • Abend, P., Thielmann, T., Ewerth, R., Seiler, D., Mühling, M., Döring, J., et al. (2012). Geobrowsing behavior in Google Earth. In T. Jekel, A. Car, J. Strobl, & G. Griesebner (Eds.), GI_Forum 2012: Geovisualization, society and learning (pp. 2–13). Berlin: Wichmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aitken, S. C., & Crane, J. (2009). Affektive Geovisualisierung. In J. Döring & T. Thielmann (Eds.), Mediengeographie (pp. 481–488). Bielefeld: Transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akrich, M. (1992). The description of technical objects. In W. E. Bijker & J. Law (Eds.), Shaping technology/building society. Studies in sociotechnical change (pp. 205–224). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azocar Fernandez, P. I., & Buchroithner, M. F. (2014). Paradigms in cartography. A epistemological review of the 20th and 21st centuries. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Banks, J. (2013). Co-creating videogames. London, NY: Bloomsbury Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Begall, S., Červený, J., Neef, J., Vojtčch, O., & Burda, H. (2008). Magnetic alignment in grazing and resting cattle and deer. PNAS, 105(36), 13451–13455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, W. (1969). The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction. In H. Arendt (Ed.), Illuminations (pp. 217–251). New York, NY: Schocken Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolter, J. D., & Grusin, R. (2000). Remediation. Understanding new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, E., & Cairns, P. (2004). A grounded investigation of immersion in games. In CHI 2004 (pp. 1297–1300).

  • Burda, H., Begall, S., Červený, J., Neef, J., & Nemec, P. (2009). Extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields disrupt magnetic alignment of ruminants. PNAS, 106(14), 5708–5713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calleja, G. (2011). In-game. from immersion to incorporation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caquard, S. (2011). Cartography I: Mapping narrative cartography. Progress in Human Geography, 37(1), 135–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caquard, S. (2014). Cartography II: Collective cartographies in the social media era. Progress in Human Geography, 38(1), 141–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, W. E. (2010a). Exploring space: Lessons from applying interactive integrated media for visualising geography. The Globe, 64(1), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, W. E. (2010b). Addressing the value of art in cartographic communication. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 65(3), 294–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, W. E., & Hunter, G. J. (2001). Towards a methodology for the evaluation of multimedia geographical information products. GeoInformatica, 5(3), 291–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dodge, M., Perkins, C., & Kitchin, R. (2009). Mapping modes, methods and moments: a manifesto for map studies. In M. Dodge, R. Kitchin, & C. Perkins (Eds.), Rethinking maps (pp. 220–243). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Döring, J., & Thielmann, T. (2008). Spatial turn. Das Raumparadigma in den Kultur- und Sozialwissenschaften. Bielefeld: Transcript.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Döring, J., & Thielmann, T. (2009). Mediengeographie. Theorie–Analyse–Diskussion. Bielefeld: Transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farman, J. (2011). Mobile interface theory. Routledge, NY: Embodied space and locative media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felgenhauer, T., & Quade, D. (2012). Society and geomedia. Some reflections from a social theory perspective. In T. Jekel, A. Car, J. Strobl, & G. Griesebner (Eds.), GI_Forum 2012: Geovisualization, society and learning (pp. 74–82). Berlin: Wichmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gartner, G. (2009). Web mapping 2.0. In M. Dodge, R. Kitchin, & Ch. R. Perkins (Eds.), Rethinking maps (pp. 68–82). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. J. (1950). The perception of the visual world. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodchild, M. F. (2007). Citizens as sensors. The world of volunteered geography. GeoJournal, 69(4), 211–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodchild, M. F. (2008). What does Google Earth mean for the social sciences? In M. Dodge, M. McDerby, & M. Turner (Eds.), Geographic visualization: Concepts, tools and applications (pp. 11–23). Chichester/Hoboken: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Harley, J. B. (1988). Silences and secrecy: The Hidden Agenda of cartography in early modern Europe. Imago Mundi, 40(1), 55–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harley, J. B. (1989). Deconstructing the map. Cartographica, 26(2), 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey F, 2012 Are there fundamental principles in Geographic Information Science? USA: Tobler Lecture Event 2012 of the Association of American Geographers Geographic Information Systems and Science Specialty Group, CreateSpace, Independent Publishing Platform.

  • Jameson, F. (1991). Postmodernism, or, the cultural logic of late capitalism. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture. Where old and new media collide. New York, NY: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kehlmann, D. (2005). Fingerreisen. Du–Zeitschrift für Kultur, 11(12), 20–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingsbury, P., & Jones, J. P., III (2009). Walter Benjamin’s Dionysian adventures on Google Earth. Geoforum, 40(4), 502–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klatzky, R. L. (1998). Allocentric and egocentric spatial representations: Definitions, distinctions, and interconnections. In C. Freksa, C. Habel, & K. F. Wender (Eds.), An interdisciplinary approach to representing and processing spatial knowledge (pp. 1–17). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1999). Pandora’s hope. Essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social. An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lombard, M., & Ditton, T. (1997). At the heart of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 3(2). doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.1997.tb00072.x.

  • Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems. Stanford, CA: Standford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manovich, L. (2001). The language of new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manovich, L. (2013). Software takes command. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massey, D. (2005). For space. London; Thousand Oaks; New Delhi: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • McHaffie, P. (1995). Manufacturing metaphors: Public cartography, the Market, and Democracy. In J. Pickles (Ed.), Ground truth. The social implications of geographic information systems (pp. 113–129). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media. The extension of man. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montello, D. R. (2002). Cognitive map-design research in the twentieth century, theoretical and empirical approaches. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 29(3), 283–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, J. L. (1997). Topographic mapping for the twenty first century. In D. Rhind (Ed.), Framework for the world (pp. 14–27). Cambridge, MA: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • November, V., Camacho-Hübner, E., & Latour, B. (2010). Entering a risky territory: Space in the age of digital navigation. Environment and Planning D, 28(4), 581–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, T. (2005). What Is Web 2.0. 30 September, http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html.

  • Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble. What the Internet is hiding from you. New York, NY: Penguin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, C. (2006). Cultures of everyday map collecting. Sheetlines, 76, 29–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, C. (2008). Cultures of map use. The Cartographic Journal, 45(2), 150–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peuquet, D., & Kraak, M.-J. (2002). Geobrowsing: Creative thinking and knowledge discovery using geographic visualization. Information Visualization, 1(1), 80–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickles, J. (Ed.). (1995). Ground truth: The social implications of geographical information systems. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickles, J. (2004). A history of spaces: Cartographic reason, mapping and the geo-coded world. London: Routledge Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, M., & Prosch, H. (1975). Meaning. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rammert, W. (1993). Technik aus soziologischer Perspektive Bd.1 Forschungsstand, Theorieansätze, Fallbeispiele (VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Opladen).

  • Rammert, W., Böhm, W., & Olscha, C. (1991). Vom Umgang mit Computern im Alltag. Fallstudien zur Kultivierung einer neuen Technik (VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Opladen).

  • Scharl, A., & Tochtermann, K. (2007). The geospatial web. London: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Slater, M., & Wilbur, S. (1997). A framework for immersive virtual environments (FIVE): Speculations on the role of presence in virtual environments. Presence, 6(6), 603–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soja, E. W. (1989). Postmodern geographies. The reassertion of space in critical social theory (London/New York).

  • Soja, E. W. (1996). Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and other real-and-imagined places. Malden: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, L. A. (1999). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human–machine communication. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, J. (2008). Material agency, skills, and history: distributed cognition and the archaeology of memory. In L. Malafouris & C. Knappett (Eds.), Material agency: Towards a non-anthropocentric approach (pp. 37–55). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Thielmann, T. (2010). Locative media and mediated localities. Aether: The Journal of Media Geography, 5, 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thielmann, T., Van der Velden, L., Fischer, F., & Vogler, R. (2012). Dwelling in the web: Towards a Googlization of space. HIIG discussion paper no. 3, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2151949.

  • Thrift, N. (2008). Non-representational theory. Space, politics, affect. London, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treisman, A., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12(1), 97–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turnbull, D. (2007). Maps narratives and trails: Performativity, hodology and distributed knowledges in complex adaptive systems—an approach to emergent mapping. Geographical Research, 45(2), 140–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, A. J. (2006a). Introduction to neogeography. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Short cuts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, P. (2006b). Affordance as context. Interacting with Computers, 17(6), 787–800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandenberg, S. G., & Kuse, A. R. (1978). Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization, perceptual and motor skills. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47(2), 599–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verhoeff, N. (2012). Mobile screens. The visual regime of navigation. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Warf, B., & Arias, S. (2009). The spatial turn. Interdisciplinary perspectives. London, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilken, R., & Goggin, G. (2012). Mobile technology and place. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winter, G., Schröter, J., & Barck, J. (2009). Das Raumbild. Eine Einleitung. In G. Winter, J. Schröter, & J. Barck (Eds.), Das Raumbild (pp. 7–18). Paderborn: Wilhelm Fink.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wirth, W., & Hofer, M. (2008). Präsenzerleben, Eine medienpsychologische Modellierung. Montage/av, 17(2), 159–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D., & Fels, J. (1992). The power of maps. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zook, M., & Graham, M. (2007). The creative reconstruction of the internet: Google and the privatization of cyberspace and DigiPlace. Geoforum, 38(6), 1322–1343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Media Culture und Theatre, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany

    Pablo Abend

  2. Leibniz-Institute for Regional Geography and University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany

    Francis Harvey

Authors
  1. Pablo Abend
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francis Harvey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pablo Abend.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Dr. Pablo Abend declares that he has no conflict of interest. Prof. Dr. Francis Harvey declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical standards

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008 (5).

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Abend, P., Harvey, F. Maps as geomedial action spaces: considering the shift from logocentric to egocentric engagements. GeoJournal 82, 171–183 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-015-9673-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-015-9673-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation