Comparative analysis of paper and electronic maps perception by primary school students: a case study of Leningrad Region

DOI: 10.35595/2414-9179-2025-3-31-460-478

View or download the article (Rus)

About the Authors

Arsenii A. Siuziumov

Peter the Great Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography (the Kunstkamera) RAS,
3, Universitetskaya emb., St. Petersburg, 199034, Russia,
E-mail: a.a.siuziumov@gmail.com

Inessa E. Sidorina

Saint Petersburg State University,
33, 10th line of Vasil’evsky island, St. Petersburg, 199178, Russia,
E-mail: i.sidorina@spbu.ru

Elizaveta V. Menyailenko

Saint Petersburg State University,
33, 10th line of Vasil’evsky island, St. Petersburg, 199178, Russia,
E-mail: elizavetamenyajlenko@yandex.ru

Abstract

In Russia, there is currently a lack of research on the mechanisms of map reading and perception, as well as insufficient integration of user experience findings into the design and production of cartographic representations. The aim of this study is to conduct a comparative analysis of how primary school students perceive paper and digital maps of identical content, based on a unified series of maps of the Leningrad Region. The research employs a developed evaluation framework for assessing the perception of cartographic images. The experiment involved 30 students (aged 8–10). Participants were required to answer the same set of test questions. One group worked with printed thematic maps, while the other used interactive digital maps. Special attention was given to perception patterns when using different interactive tools. It is not possible to definitively conclude which approach — interactive or analog — is more effective in terms of information delivery and comprehension. The results indicate that modern schoolchildren exhibit high engagement and perform equally well with both paper and interactive digital maps. Based on the findings, it is recommended to incorporate cartographic materials more actively and at an earlier stage into primary school curricula, particularly in subjects such as Environmental Studies and Local History. Further research on cartographic perception should expand the sample size to include not only students but also parents and educators, while integrating eye-tracking technology and analysis of user interaction patterns. Particular emphasis should be placed on refining research methodologies and implementing the results into publishing and educational practices.

Keywords

cartography, researching perception of maps, electronic maps, maps for children, interactive maps

References

  1. Apostolopoulou E.P., Klonari A. Children’s Map Reading Abilities in Relation to Distance Perception, Travel Time and Landscape. European Journal of Geography, 2011. V. 2. No. 2. P. 35–47.
  2. Berlyant A.M. Image of Space: Map and Information. Moscow: Mysl’, 1986. 240 p. (in Russian).
  3. Berlyant A.M. Cartographic Literacy and Geographical Education: Challenges of Reorientation. Geografiya v Shkole (Geography at School), 1990. No. 2. P. 26–31 (in Russian).
  4. Bocharov M.K. Fundamentals of the Theory of Designing Cartographic Sign Systems. Moscow: Nedra, 1966. 134 p. (in Russian).
  5. Bugaevsky L.M., Zhukova O.Yu. On the Criteria Affecting the Conditions of Visual Perception of Cartographic Images. Izvestiya Vuzov. Geodesy and Aerophotosurveying, 1998. No. 1. P. 103–109 (in Russian).
  6. Emirova M.E. The Methodology of Formation of the Basics of Cartographic Literacy in Primary School Children. Geografiya v Shkole (Geography at School), 2021. No. 7. P. 32–39 (in Russian).
  7. Field K. Cartography. California, Redlands: Esri Press, 2018. 549 p.
  8. Gavronskaya Yu.Yu. “Interactivity” and “Interactive Teaching”. Vysshee Obrazovanie v Rossii (Higher Education in Russia), 2008. No. 7. P. 101–104 (in Russian).
  9. Gerber R.V. An International Study of Children’s Perception and Understanding of Type Used on Atlas Maps. The Cartographic Journal, 1982. V. 19. No. 2. P. 115–121. DOI: 10.1179/caj.1982.19.2.115.
  10. Ilyushina T.V. Study of Secondary School Students’ Perception of Cartographic Symbol Systems Using Thematic Maps as an Example. Izvestiya Vuzov. Geodesy and Aerophotosurveying, 1990. No. 5. P. 162–174 (in Russian).
  11. Korycka-Skorupa J., Gołębiowska I.M. Numbers on Thematic Maps: Helpful Simplicity or Too Raw to Be Useful for Map Reading? ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 2020. V. 9. No. 7. Art. 415. P. 1–24. DOI: 10.3390/ijgi9070415.
  12. Kovaleva O.V. Psychophysical and Physiological Aspects of the Perception of Graphical Information as Applied to the Image of a Relief on Maps. Izvestiya Vuzov. Geodesy and Aerophotosurveying, 2012. No. 3. P. 75–80 (in Russian).
  13. Litovskaya M.A., Litovskiy V.V. Images of Russia and Taiwan on the Map for Children “First Image of the World” (Dino’s Maps). Geographical Bulletin, 2023. No. 2. V. 65. P. 169–179 (in Russian). DOI: 10.17072/2079-7877-2023-2-169-179.
  14. Lutyi A.A. The Language of the Map: Essence, System, Functions. Moscow: GEOS, 2002. 326 p. (in Russian).
  15. Maklakov A.G. General Psychology. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2025. 583 p. (in Russian).
  16. Mazur E.N., Anikina A.S. The Problem of Using Techniques and Means of Teaching the Chronology of Primary Schoolchildren. SWorldJournal, 2022. No. 3 (13-03). P. 32–36 (in Russian). DOI: 10.30888/2663-5712.2022-13-0-02.
  17. Ooms K., De Maeyer P., Dupont L., Van Der Veken N., Van De Weghe N., Verplaetse S. Education in Cartography: What is the Status of Young People’s Map-Reading Skills? Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 2016. V. 43. No. 2. P. 134–153. DOI: 10.1080/15230406.2015.1021713.
  18. Pridantseva L.V. Tourism for Children: Basic Principles of Methodology for Creating Maps and Atlases. Izvestiya Vuzov. Geodesy and Aerophotosurveying, 1990. No. 2. P. 160–166 (in Russian).
  19. Robinson A. Map Design Studies. Pathways in Cartography Development. Moscow: Moscow University Press, 1975. P. 67–75 (in Russian).
  20. Roth R.E. Interactive Maps: What We Know and What We Need to Know. Journal of Spatial Information Science, 2013. V. 6. P. 59–115. DOI: 10.5311/JOSIS.2013.6.105.
  21. Salishchev K.A. Ideas and Theoretical Problems in Cartography of the 1980s. Results of Science and Technology, Cartography Series. Moscow: All-Union Institute for Scientific and Technical Information of Academy of Sciences of USSR, 1982a. V. 10. 155 p. (in Russian).
  22. Salishchev K.A. On the Language of Maps and Cartographic Science. Geodesy and Cartography, 1982b. No. 5. P. 42–47 (in Russian).
  23. Scoffham S. Maps and Atlases for Schools. The Routledge Handbook of Mapping and Cartography. Abingdon: Routledge, 2017. P. 388–398.
  24. Sidorina I.E., Pozdnyakova N.A., Panidi E.A., Andreeva T.A., Litvinova M.V. Integration of Traditional and Modern Methods in GIS-Based Mapping. InterCarto. InterGIS. Proceedings of the International Conference, 2019. V. 25. Part 1. P. 35–46 (in Russian). DOI: 10.35595/2414-9179-2019-1-25-35-46.
  25. Sidorina I.E., Siuziumov A.A., Menyailenko E.V. A Study of the Perception of Maps by Primary School Students to Expand the Possibilities of Using Modern Geo-Images in the Educational Process. Geografiya v Shkole (Geography at School), 2025. No. 3. P. 39–50 (in Russian). DOI: 10.47639/0016-7207-2025-3-39.
  26. Słomska-Przech K., Panecki T., Pokojski W. Heat Maps: Perfect Maps for Quick Reading? Comparing Usability of Heat Maps with Different Levels of Generalization. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 2021. V. 10. No. 8. Art. 562. P. 1–24. DOI: 10.3390/ijgi10080562.
  27. Smirnov L.E. Cartographic Information and Knowledge. Scientific-Technical Progress and Problems of Cartographic Theory. Moscow, 1987. P. 25–35 (in Russian).
  28. Syuzyumov A.A. The Classification of Geoimages in Mapping for Children and Adolescents. Geodesy, Cartography, Geoinformatics, and Cadasters. Proceedings of the All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference, 2024. P. 337–347 (in Russian). DOI: 10.52565/9785911553449.
  29. Titov G.S. Current Problems with Terminology of Web Cartography in Russia. Geodesy, Cartography, Geoinformatics, and Cadasters. Proceedings of the All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference, 2021. P. 317–323 (in Russian). DOI: 10.25960/7325-1191-8.
  30. Vasmut A.S. A Model of Information Transfer from the Map to its User. Izvestiya Vuzov. Geodesy and Aerophotosurveying, 1979. No. 5. P. 95–103 (in Russian).
  31. Wiegand P., Steil B. Communication in Children’s Picture Atlases. The Cartographic Journal, 1996. V. 33. No. 1. P. 17–25. DOI: 10.1179/000870496787074193.
  32. With Lesovichok Through the Native Land: Atlas of Leningrad Region for Elementary School. St. Petersburg: Herzen University Press, 2023. 36 p. (in Russian).
  33. Zinchuk N.N. Psychological Foundations of Visual Analysis of Geographic Maps and Interpretation of Aerospace Imagery. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 5, Geografiya (Moscow University Bulletin. Series 5. Geography), 2002. No. 2. P. 10–17 (in Russian).

For citation: Siuziumov A.A., Sidorina I.E., Menyailenko E.V. Comparative analysis of paper and electronic maps perception by primary school students: a case study of Leningrad Region. InterCarto. InterGIS. Moscow: MSU, Faculty of Geography, 2025. V. 31. Part 3. P. 460–478. DOI: 10.35595/2414-9179-2025-3-31-460-478 (in Russian)