In his article “Cognitive Research in GIScience: Recent Achievements and Future Prospects”, Daniel Montello discusses some of the cognitive effects of the emergence of navigation systems as a “coordinated and goal-directed” form of travel (1828). In particular, Montello discusses how the designers of navigations systems seek to improve usability by providing “travelers with just the information they want and need, and not more,” and thusly, reducing the user’s intuitive sense of orientation in their environment (1829). In this topic, I see rich issues in several of the topics discussed in the course, as well as those I’ve encountered anecdotally.
One area that navigation systems and digital mapping platforms have spatial cognition implications is VGI. Personally, I am often startled to see how Google saves locations of places I’ve searched for in the past (e.g.: friend’s addresses, restaurants, cafés, etc.) and will show me these locations the next time I log in. Increasingly, Google is also becoming aggressive in its suggestions of similar venues, by either displaying the icons more prominently or suggesting them in auto-complete. For many people, Google Maps and other digital mapping interfaces are increasingly the only maps they consult, and increasingly, the ‘landmarks’ they are shown are personalized. My question, therefore, is what effect this will have on the on people’s experience of the city and, particularly, their tolerance of and exposure to third spaces that are not algorithmically calibrated for their personal preferences? If people begin navigating their city and consuming primarily based on their previously VGI-inferred preferences, will they ever have the opportunity to encounter people and places that will expand their awareness of people and communities outside theirs? My fear is that as geographic information becomes more fine-grained, comprehensive, and personalized, that people will be less likely to ‘stumble into’ places by chance, and that as the practice diminishes, it will be less acceptable to go to third spaces without fitting a particular target demographic.
Personally, I think that we should reconsider the way the VGI-derived information should be presented to end users. For instance, perhaps digital maps should first display a ‘base map’ which includes place names and neutral landmarks (e.g.: prominent buildings, parks, etc.), and then display the ‘personal’ layer only after the user makes a relevant search. This simple move could reduce the degree to which people use ‘personal’ landmarks which reduces their knowledge of other places in the area. Although this may slightly reduce usability, it could provide a less pre-determined and fragmented base for geographic cognition with the same community. I fear the emergent alternative could produce a form of soft ‘red-lining’ in user’s spatial cognition, where people’s geographic decisions about where to consume and where to go are reinforced by algorithmically determined paths, and thusly separating different social groups and cementing certain areas and businesses as economically prosperous or neglected based on their VGI footprint.
~CRAZY15