Outline Maps of Sheffield City Centre
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PERCEPTIONS OF IMPRECISE REGIONS IN RELATION TO GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION RETRIEVAL A study submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Information Management at THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD by LINDA MANSBRIDGE Abstract The Internet is an increasingly important source of information. Many Web searches are for geographical information or for other information within a geographical context. However, there is a disparity between the way in which geographical information is stored in information systems and the way in which most people think about geographical space. While in some cases this arises from problems with place names, much ‘everyday’ geography concerns imprecise or vague regions which have no single or officially-recognized boundary. The boundary of an imprecise region is, by definition, vague. The organization of geographical space into areas bounded, usually by lines, is a necessary component of having a sense of ‘place’. Research in the early days of GIS necessarily focused on the technology required for establishing effective systems for presenting geographical information. However, in more recent years, research has involved workers from a wide variety of disciplines looking at the ways in which humans perceive their geographical world. The field of psychology has been instrumental in investigations into how humans form cognitive maps, a mental representation of the world around them. Cognitive maps do not necessarily match the empirical reality of geography very closely; distortions in the perception of location and distance may arise from individual perceptions of a place. The aim of this study was to investigate how people perceive Sheffield City Centre, which is a ‘real’ place, known by that name, but having no single official boundary. This was done by means of a street survey. Participants were also asked about their perception of where the vague region of the Midlands is. The results show that while there is broad agreement of the location and extent of these imprecise areas, there are, too, some variations in people’s perceptions of them. In particular, this study sought to investigate the possibility that perception may be influenced by current location. Participants were asked at three main locations in central Sheffield about their perception of membership of the City Centre of a number of landmarks. Some differences were seen in the responses from the different locations; in addition, some differences were seen in responses from residents of Sheffield living in different parts of the city. Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr Paul Clough, for his help and encouragement during the course of my work on this study. Contents 1. Introduction............................................................................................................................................. 1 2. Literature Review.................................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Geographic Information Retrieval ..................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Imprecise regions and boundaries ..................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Spatial Cognition................................................................................................................................ 9 2.3.1 Primary learning ...................................................................................................................... 10 2.3.2 Secondary learning ................................................................................................................... 13 3. Background to the study....................................................................................................................... 14 4. Methodology .......................................................................................................................................... 15 4.1 Boundaries........................................................................................................................................ 15 4.1.1 Sheffield City Centre ................................................................................................................ 15 4.1.2 The Midlands............................................................................................................................ 19 4.2 Pilot study......................................................................................................................................... 22 4.3 Central Sheffield survey ................................................................................................................... 25 4.3.1 The sample surveyed ................................................................................................................ 25 4.3.2 The questionnaire...................................................................................................................... 26 4.3.3 Answer options ......................................................................................................................... 27 4.3.4 Location selected for the survey ............................................................................................... 27 5. Results .................................................................................................................................................... 28 5.1 Survey participants........................................................................................................................... 28 5.2 Analysis of results............................................................................................................................. 30 5.3 Sheffield City Centre......................................................................................................................... 30 5.3.1 Distribution of responses .......................................................................................................... 30 5.3.2 Home post codes of participants............................................................................................... 32 5.3.3 ‘Don’t know where it is’........................................................................................................... 33 5.3.4 Landmarks in the City Centre................................................................................................... 37 5.3.5 Landmarks not in the City Centre............................................................................................. 44 5.3.6 Landmarks on the boundary of the City Centre........................................................................ 47 5.3.7 Landmarks vs. location............................................................................................................. 50 5.3.8 Core of the City Centre............................................................................................................. 52 5.3.9 Outlines of the City Centre ....................................................................................................... 53 5.4 The Midlands.................................................................................................................................... 54 6. Discussion............................................................................................................................................... 58 Bibliography .............................................................................................................................................. 62 Appendix A: City Centre Boundaries .................................................................................................... 66 Appendix B: Questionnaire..................................................................................................................... 72 Appendix C: Post code areas.................................................................................................................... 76 Appendix D: Outline maps of Sheffield City Centre............................................................................. 77 Appendix E: Perceptions of the Midlands.............................................................................................. 82 1. Introduction Geographic information systems (GISs) are being used with increasing frequency in everyday life as well as by industry, government and other organizations, who use them for planning, marketing and the delivery of emergency services. Geographic information research was largely in the domain of geography, surveying and computer science but more recently, with the broadening of the application of GIS, has also involved a broader range of disciplines, such as the social and environmental sciences, philosophy and psychology. This shift in the emphasis of research in GIS from the technological issues necessary for the development of such systems more towards social aspects and user perspectives is welcomed by Schuurman (2003). Public participation GIS (PPGIS) uses the technology for the participation of groups otherwise unheard in decision making and the drawing up of policies. GIS has been exploited by non-governmental organizations and by smaller- scale neighbourhood groups. The importance of GIS in community affairs is described by Romasubramaian (1999). In a legal case of discrimination in Milwaukee, GIS was used by both