The Position of Sound in Audiovisual Maps: An Experimental Study of Performance in Spatial Memory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Digital maps are known as reliable media for communicating spatial information. People use maps to make themselves familiar with new environments and to form cognitive representations of spatial configurations and additional semantic information that are coupled with locational information. Since the mid-1990s, cartographers have explored auditory media as cartographic elements to transfer spatial information. Among the established sound variants used in multimedia cartography, speech recordings are a popular auditory tool to enrich the visual dominance of maps. The impact of auditory elements on human spatial memory has hardly been investigated so far in cartography and spatial cognition. A recent study showed that spoken object names bound to visual location markers affect performance in memory of object locations. Map users tend to make significantly smaller spatial distortion errors in the recall of object locations if these locations are coupled with auditory semantic information (place names). The present study extends this approach by examining possible effects on sound position as cues for spatial memory performance. A monaural condition, where an auditory name is presented in a spatial location corresponding to the object location, is compared with a binaural condition (of no directional cue). The results show that a monaural communication additionally improves spatial memory performance. Interestingly, the semantic information bound to an object location appears to be the driving factor in improving this effect.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".