Comp. by: LElumalai Stage : Revises1 ChapterID: 9781405132879_4_C Date:31/3/09
Time:21:45:52 Filepath://ppdys1108/BlackwellCup/00_Blackwell/00_3B2/Gregory-
9781405132879/appln/3B2/revises/9781405132879_4_C.3d
scholar Manuel Francisco de Barros e Sousa,
Viscount of Santare ́m, who used it to describe
map study in the same way thathistoriography
referstothehistoryofhistoricalwriting(Wolter,
1975). Although Santare ́m referred only to
early maps, the word evolved to include con-
temporarymaps andmapping aswell asancient
artefacts (Harley, 1987, p. 12).
As a synonym for mapmaking, cartography
is often construed to include the collection of
geographical information through systematic
surveys, formal or otherwise, of the physical
landscape or its human occupants. In an insti-
tutional context, cartography might refer
narrowly to the production of artwork for
printed maps (also called ‘map finishing’) or
more broadly to the overall mission of a com-
mercial firm such as Rand McNally or a gov-
ernment agency such as the Ordnance Survey.
Although individuals working as freelance
mapmakers or non-faculty staff members of
an academic geography department are still
content to call their work cartography and
themselves cartographers, the term’s other
institutional connotations declined markedly
in the final years of the twentieth century,
when new technologies (seedigital cartog-
raphy; geographic information systems;
remote sensing) and new business models
undermined the paper map’s traditional role
in storing and distributing geographical infor-
mation, and organizations at different levels
replaced ‘cartography’ as a descriptor with
more fashionable labels based on ‘geospatial’
or ‘geographical information’.
As a scientific endeavour focused on the
increasing efficiency in mapmaking, improving
the reliability of map communication, or
enhancing the understanding of cognitive
processes involved in decoding and using
maps, cartography remains an active if some-
what retrenched sub-discipline ofgeography.
Moreover, its boundary with geographic
information scienceis blurred insofar as
many (perhaps most) academics trained as
cartographers not only understand the power
and limitations of geospatial technology but
know how to use GI software. Similarly, many
(but probably not most) academics trained as
GI scientists not only appreciate the map as
an interface and display device but also recog-
nize the inadequacy of current GI software
as a design tool. Labelling became especially
important in the 1990s, as older faculty
retooled and academic departments converted
course titles and job descriptions from cartog-
raphy to GIS. The American Cartographer
becameCartography and Geographic InformationSystemsin 1990, only to reposition itself as
Cartography and Geographic Information Science
nine years later. Despite this blatant but
apparently successful attempt to retain market
share through re-branding, the journal
remains committed to improving the practice
and understanding of map communication,
albeit with a clear emphasis on electronic and
digital cartography.
Map-design research has theoretical, tech-
nical and more ostensibly scientific–empirical
themes, with the latter often relying on subject-
testing to improve pedagogical approaches
to map reading, enhance understanding of
how the human eye-brain system processes
map information (MacEachren, 1995), and
evaluate the effectiveness of competing solu-
tions to design problems (Montello, 2002). In
the latter three empirical realms, academic
cartographers constitute a numerical and philo-
sophical majority only in design-related carto-
graphic research, which also includes work on
dynamic and interactive maps, multi-sensory
cartographic interfaces (see visualization),
and tactile maps for persons with impaired
vision (Perkins, 2002). Not surprisingly, educa-
tional psychologists and cognitive psychologists
dominate explorations of map-reading and cog-
nitive mapping, respectively.
Arthur Robinson’sThe look of maps(1952)
was the seminal work in empirical map-design
research, a topic taken up in various guises by
Robinson’s graduate students and their intel-
lectual offspring. Robinson held that effective
map design required an appreciation of the
design’s impact on map viewers, whose ability
to decode cartographic symbols was under-
standably impaired if they could not read
labels or detect crucial differences in line
thickness, greytones or colour. Aligned philo-
sophically with the logical positivism of
the quantitative revolution, map-design
researchers uncritically adopted psychophys-
ics, aparadigmin experimental psychology
that treats the magnitude of a response as a
power function of the magnitude of the acti-
vating stimulus (Montello, 2002, pp. 288–9).
A succession of empirical studies attempted to
‘rescale’ graduated circles, line weights and
greytones to the perceptual prowess of a hypo-
thetical average map reader, an attractive con-
cept undermined by variations in cognitive
style, training and prior knowledge as well as
by the unavoidable distractions of nearby sym-
bols inthe ‘map environment’. Although less
ambitious studies of ‘just noticeable differ-
ences’ among lines, greytones and colours
provided reliable guidance for mapmakers,Gregory / The Dictionary of Human Geography 9781405132879_4_C Final Proof page 67 31.3.2009 9:45pmCARTOGRAPHY