Hi,
One obvious reference would be Ruth Conroy Dalton’s “The Secret is to Follow Your Nose”:
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0013916502238867
Measuring cognitive load or cognitive effort over prolonged tasks (that in fact consist of multiple subtasks) is a difficult problem, to my knowledge without an established solution. Any empirical evidence to support the “cognitively simplest journey” claim will therefore be either partial or indirect.
For a start, there are many facets of “cognitive simplicity”: there is the ease to memorise the route, the average / cumulative / maximal effort coming from making successful turning decisions, there’s a potential difference between known and unknown routes, about planning and executing the trips, etc. At least one study showed that people minimise their cognitive effort by modifying cognitive strategies depending on the task at hand and the perceptual information available (Hoelscher et al. "Would you follow your own route description? Cognitive strategies in urban route planning”). This one would indeed suggest that following least angular deviation strategy is preferred - but only in some situations and rather during the actual navigation than during planning it.
Best wishes
Jakub
---
Dr Jakub Krukar
Postdoctoral Researcher / Lecturer
Spatial Intelligence Lab
Institute for Geoinformatics, Muenster, Germany
---
http://krukar.staff.ifgi.de
> On 24. Jul 2018, at 08:45, Penn, Alan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> A couple points on this question, but sorry no answer. I’d be interested in responses too.
>
> Minimum angle deviation paths are also distance minimising so the question of what people are optimising must remain open. Topological simplest paths (fewest axial lines) might be thought of as reducing decisions and so reducing cognitive load in some way, if only in terms of the need to remember a route.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 24 Jul 2018, at 07:00, Subik Shrestha <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Hi there,
>>
>> You might find the following paper or the references in the paper to be helpful in this regard (although the paper is not about the human brain's way of navigating):
>>
>> http://spacesyntax.tudelft.nl/media/Long%20papers%20I/hillieriida.pdf
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Subik
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 8:56 PM SUBSCRIBE SPACESYNTAX Anonymous <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Hi Space syntax community,
>>
>> Thank you for being actively involved in academic discussion on space syntax. I do have one question on which hope you could please help. I’d be thankful to have your answer on this question supported by academic evidence. The question is:
>>
>> - As says in space syntax, over time people tend to have “least angular deviations” when traverse between destinations. This is because they wanna unintentionally “minimaise their brain navigation processing”. And, this is again because “least angular deviation” can produce “cognitively simplest journeys”. Now my question is do we have academic evidence (either lab-based or in a free condition) that a pattern with least angular deviation is cognitively easier for brain navigation? (I understand Kevin Lynch’s work may be cited on this; but I’m after more robust new evidence).
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> ########################################################################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the SPACESYNTAX list, click the following link:
>> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=SPACESYNTAX&A=1
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the SPACESYNTAX list, click the following link:
>> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=SPACESYNTAX&A=1
>>
>
> To unsubscribe from the SPACESYNTAX list, click the following link:
> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=SPACESYNTAX&A=1
>
########################################################################
To unsubscribe from the SPACESYNTAX list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=SPACESYNTAX&A=1
|