Abstract
To determine why North Americans tend to locate European cities south of North American cities at similar latitudes (Tversky, 1981), we had observers provide bearing estimates between cities in the U.S. and Europe. Earlier research using latitude estimates of these cities has indicated that each continent has several subjective regions (Friedman & Brown, 2000a). Participants judged cities from two subjectively northern regions (Milwaukee-Munich), two subjectively southern regions (Memphis-Lisbon), and the two “crossed” regions (Albuquerque-Geneva; Minneapolis-Rome). Estimates were biased only when cities from the subjectively northern regions of North America were paired with cities from the subjectively southern region of Europe. In contrast to the view that biases are derived from distorted or aligned map-like representations, the data provide evidence that the subjective representation of global geography is principally categorical. Biases in numerical location estimates of individual cities and in bearing estimates between city pairs are derived from plausible reasoning processes operating on the same categorical representations.
Article PDF
References
Brown, N. R., &Friedman, A. (1999). Assessing and improving geographical beliefs: A cognitive approach.Research in Geographic Education,1, 1–13.
Brown, N. R., &Siegler, R. S. (1993). Metrics and mappings: A framework for understanding real-world quantitative estimation.Psychological Review,100, 511–534.
Friedman, A., &Brown, N. R. (2000a). Reasoning about geography.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,129, 193–219.
Friedman, A., &Brown, N. R. (2000b). Updating geographical knowledge: Principles of coherence and inertia.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,26, 900–914.
Glicksohn, J. (1994). Rotation, orientation, and cognitive mapping.American Journal of Psychology,107, 39–51.
Hirtle, S. C., &Jonides, J. (1985). Evidence of hierarchies in cognitive maps.Memory & Cognition,13, 208–217.
Holyoak, K. J., &Mah, W. A. (1982). Cognitive reference points in judgments of symbolic magnitude.Cognitive Psychology,14, 328–352.
Huttenlocher, J., Hedges, L. V., &Duncan, S. (1991). Categories and particulars: Prototype effects in estimating spatial location.Psychological Review,98, 352–376.
Huttenlocher, J., Hedges, L. V., &Vevea, J. L. (2000). Why do categories affect stimulus judgment?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,129, 220–241.
Kerkman, D. D., Brown, N. R., & Wilson, R. (2000, April).Spatial and numerical estimates of geographical locations in Canada, the U.S., and Mexico. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Southwestern Society for Research in Human Development, Eureka Springs, AR.
Maki, R. H. (1981). Categorization and distance effects with spatial linear orders.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,7, 15–32.
McNamara, T. P. (1986). Mental representations of spatial relations.Cognitive Psychology,18, 87–121.
McNamara, T. P., &Diwadkar, V. A. (1997). Symmetry and asymmetry of human spatial memory.Cognitive Psychology,34, 160–190.
McNamara, T. P., Hardy, J. K., &Hirtle, S. C. (1989). Subjective hierarchies in spatial memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,15, 211–227.
Newcombe, N., Huttenlocher, J., Sandberg, E., Lie, E., &Johnson, S. (1999). What do misestimations and asymmetries in spatial judgment indicate about spatial representation?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,25, 986–996.
Stevens, A., &Coupe, P. (1978). Distortions in judged spatial relations.Cognitive Psychology,10, 422–437.
Tversky, B. (1981). Distortions in memory for maps.Cognitive Psychology,13, 407–433.
Tversky, B. (1997). Spatial constructions. In N. L. Stein, P. A. Ornstein, B. Tversky, & C. Brainerd (Eds.),Memory for everyday and emotional events (pp. 181–208). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Tversky, B. (2000). Levels and structure of spatial knowledge. In R. Kitchin & S. M. Freundschuh (Eds.),Cognitive mapping: Past, present, and future (pp. 24–43). London: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by grants from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada to each of the first and second authors.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Friedman, A., Brown, N.R. & Mcgaffey, A.P. A basis for bias in geographical judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 9, 151–159 (2002). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196272
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196272