M1 - Map Critique
Map Critique of Well-Designed and
Poorly-Designed Maps
https://i.redd.it/whea49oipy331.jpg
General
What is the purpose (substantive objective) of the map?
The purpose of this map is to showcase the busiest airports in the continent of Europe by the number of passengers on board.
What is the “look and feel” (affective objective) of the map?
The map is a bit cluttered, but other than that it feels educational and modern.
Who is the intended audience for the map (include expected educational level)?
The intended audience for this map is anyone who is interested in the continent of Europe, potentially those who reside there or those who plan on visiting the continent. It could also be aimed at those who take interest in airports and travel. These individuals could be a range of educational levels, but most with at least a high school diploma.
Cartographic Design
Is there appropriate visual emphasis on important themes?
Yes, the cartographer did an excellent job of doing this by making the busier airports a darker color and larger in size.
Is the symbology for qualitative and quantitative data effectively applied?
Undoubtedly. I feel that the symbology was very useful in evoking a certain emotion as well as displaying the raw statistics.
Do the colors and symbols support the substantive and affective objectives?
The colors were useful in both the substantive and affective objectives by drawing the reader's attention to those that are darker in color being busier. I think the color scheme was executed perfectly.
Are the symbols and labels legible?
Yes, however the smaller airports’ font was a bit too small to read when zoomed out.
Are the symbols intuitive and easy to decipher or do they have good explanation?
There are no symbols in the graphic to analyze.
Is there appropriate use of graphics, images, text blocks, or other supporting information?
There is not, but I think the use of auxiliary information would be helpful in further educating the viewer on the business of the airports shown.
Map Elements & Page layout
Does the page look balanced—are the map and map elements aligned to the page and to each other?
Overall, yes. I do think there is much more information on the left (west) side of the map compared to the right, but this doesn’t necessarily mean the alignment was off, as the whole continent was shown.
Do all the map elements support the substantive and affective objectives?
Yes, they are all relevant and useful in both objectives.
Are the map elements placed logically on the page?
Yes, I appreciated how the cartographer placed the title and legend in very empty spots on the map.
Does the map have appropriate borders?
None that are present in this image, the map takes up the entire graphic.
Scale
Is the scale (map extent) appropriate to the map?
Yes, I think the scale is ideal as it shows the whole continent.
Is the scale bar appropriately designed, positioned and sized?
There is no scale bar present, however I am not sure the inclusion of one would be useful for this map.
Are the scale units logical?
No scale units are present.
Legend
Have all the necessary symbols and details been included in the legend as they appear on the map (size, color, etc)?
The color was effectively showcased both in the legend as it was on the map, however the size was not and this might be difficult to demonstrate in a legend.
Is there a logical structure related to the function of the legend?
The legend is ordered in an ascending order and thus is easier to read and understand.
Are the legend labels logical?
Yes they are. Although I think the cartographer should have simply noted (in 10,000,000s) instead of writing out the full number for each legend to make the map more concise.
Titles and Subtitles
Are the titles and/or subtitles present and suitably descriptive (area mapped, subject, date, etc)?
Yes, the title clearly describes what the map is for and includes the year the data is presenting.
Are the titles and/or subtitles suitably positioned and sized?
Yes. I think the placement of the title is ideal, but it could likely be sized a bit larger.
Synopsis: This map was an excellent example of including many map elements in an effective manner. The purpose of the map is clear, the map itself is concise and easy to understand, and the layout was effective. Upon completing the evaluation, there were a few elements that I would adjust or add, such as including symbols and a scale bar, but overall the cartographer who made the map did a great job.
The map showcases the element of visual contract perfectly, as the airports with more passengers are clearly darker and larger than those with less passengers. The map also demonstrated figure-ground organization superbly, as the airports are very distinct from the plain, gray map background. The components that appeal to my aesthetic are the use of colors to demonstrate data, the simplicity and conciseness of the map, and the limited map background to not distract the viewer from the overall intent of the map.
Poorly-Designed Map:
http://livingqlikview.com/the-9-worst-data-visualizations-ever-created/
General
What is the purpose (substantive objective) of the map?
To showcase the racial makeup of the United States over the listed time frame.
What is the “look and feel” (affective objective) of the map?
The affective objective of the map is lacking as the map is unorganized and wrongly created. It is likely to evoke a sense of relief with a diversifying nation over time, but it doesn’t showcase this properly.
Who is the intended audience for the map (include expected educational level)?
Someone who is interested in the racial makeup of the United States or is interested in maps. The educational level of the viewer would likely be 16+.
Cartographic Design
Is there appropriate visual emphasis on important themes?
No, the visual emphasis is not appropriate and does not demonstrate the theme properly. It looks as though the cartographer was trying to incorporate a line graph in a map, which does not make sense.
Is the symbology for qualitative and quantitative data effectively applied?
No, the symbology used was not effectively applied and leads to further confusion from the viewer.
Do the colors and symbols support the substantive and affective objectives?
No, the colors are not relevant and no symbols are present.
Are the symbols and labels legible?
They are legible and easy to read when zoomed out, yes.
Are the symbols intuitive and easy to decipher or do they have good explanation?
There are no symbols to assess.
Is there appropriate use of graphics, images, text blocks, or other supporting information?
No, no helpful additional information of any sort was present in this map.
Map Elements & Page layout
Does the page look balanced—are the map and map elements aligned to the page and to each other?
The map is well balanced and does a great job at reducing empty space.
Do all the map elements support the substantive and affective objectives?
No, the map elements are incorrect and misleading.
Are the map elements placed logically on the page?
The map elements are placed logically and it is easy to view this map top-to-bottom.
Does the map have appropriate borders?
No borders are present in the map.
Scale
Is the scale (map extent) appropriate to the map?
The map extent is appropriate and shows the entire country.
Is the scale bar appropriately designed, positioned and sized?
There is no scale bar present to assess.
Are the scale units logical?
There is no scale bar present to assess.
Legend
Have all the necessary symbols and details been included in the legend as they appear on the map (size, color, etc)?
Yes, the colors are shown in both the legend and map.
Is there a logical structure related to the function of the legend?
No, the legend is unstructured and its function is limited because the map is confusing and misleading.
Are the legend labels logical?
Yes, however I feel ‘other’ should be presented last, as it would be the least common category.
Titles and Subtitles
Are the titles and/or subtitles present and suitably descriptive (area mapped, subject, date, etc)?
Yes, however one should not use names like “America” for the “United States of America” because “America” could technically be composed of all the countries in South and North America. The time period was accurate, however.
Are the titles and/or subtitles suitably positioned and sized?
Yes, the sizing and position of the title and subtitle are aesthetically pleasing and logical.
Synopsis: This map is a great example of what not to do when creating a map. It has no symbols or helpful auxiliary information which makes it difficult to understand the overall purpose. The usage of a bar graph-like set up inside of a map is not purposeful or effective. In fact, this information does not have much of any spatial importance, as it is referring to the entire country. I will admit the layout of the map is superb and makes it streamlined and easy to view, however the map itself and information that is present on it make little to no logical sense. The map did effectively apply the legibility principle, as all of the elements are easy to read. The map also was effective in balance, as there are not many areas of white space and the elements are well-spread throughout the image. To enhance this map, I would not attempt to showcase this type of data on a map, unless it is region specific. Showing chronological data on a map is difficult and certainly not effectively applied in this map. Second, I would include a scale bar for an understanding of the scale the map is at. I would also focus on one year that the map is focused on and find a way to make the data spatial rather than being percentages of the entire country.