Ratings by 239 men and women on a Route Selection Rating Scale were factor analyzed. Four orthogonal factors involved in selecting automobile routes were obtained: Safety, Interest, Purpose, and Hindrances. Scores on the scales were the means of the ratings of items having −.27 or higher loadings on each factor. A profile analysis showed that the means for men and women were not different over the collapsed scales; however, post hoc tests showed that both men and women rated Purpose and Hindrances as more important than Safety and Interest in selecting a route. And women rated Safety higher than did men.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AppleyardO. (1970) Styles and methods of structuring a city. Environment and Behavior, 2, 100–117.
2.
AppleyardD. (1976) Planning a pluralistic city. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.
3.
CattellR. B. (1966) Handbook of multivariate experimental psychology. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
4.
CohenR. (Ed.) (1985) The development of spatial cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5.
DownsR. M., & SteaD. (1973) Cognitive maps and spatial behavior: process and products. In DownsR. M. & SteaD. (Eds.), Image and environment: cognitive mapping and spatial behavior. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
6.
DownsR. M., & SteaD. (1977) Maps in minds: reflections on cognitive mapping. New York: Harper & Row.
7.
EvansG. W. (1980) Environmental cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 259–287.
8.
EvansG. W., & PezdekK. (1980) Cognitive mapping: knowledge of real-world distance and location information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 13–24.
9.
GaleN.GolledgeR. G.PellegrinoJ. W., & DohertyS. (1990) The acquisition and integration of route knowledge in an unfamiliar neighborhood. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 10, 3–25.
10.
GärlingT.BöökA., & LindbergE. (1986) Spatial orientation and wayfinding in the designed environment: a conceptual analysis and some suggestions for postoccupancy evaluation. Journal of Architectural Planning Research, 3, 55–64.
11.
GoodchildB. (1974) Class differences in environmental perception. Urban Studies, 11, 59–79.
12.
KaplanS., & KaplanR. (1982) Cognition and the environment: functioning in an uncertain world. New York: Praeger.
13.
KaranP. P.BladenW. A., & SinghG. (1980) Slum dwellers' and squatters' images of the city. Environment and Behavior, 12, 81–100.
O'NeillM. J. (1991) Evaluation of a conceptual model of architectural legibility. Environment and Behavior, 23, 259–284.
16.
OrleansP. (1973) Differential cognition of urban residents: effects of social scale on mapping. In DownsR. M. & SteaD. (Eds.), Image and environment: cognitive mapping and spatial behavior. Chicago, IL: Aldine. Pp. 57–94.
17.
PassiniR. (1984) Spatial representations, a wayfinding perspective. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 4, 153–164.
18.
PearsonJ. L., & IalongoN. S. (1986) The relationship between spatial ability and environmental knowledge. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 6, 299–304.
19.
PedersenD. M. (1993) Dimensions of romantic attitudes. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 77, 623–633.
20.
PedersenD. M. (1994) Identification of levels of self-identity. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 78, 1155–1167.
21.
RovineM., & WeismanG. D. (1989) Sketch-map variables as predictors of way-finding performance. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 9, 217–232.
22.
RussellJ. A., & WardL. M. (1982) Environmental psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 651–688.
23.
SPSS, Inc. (1988) SPSS user's guide. (3rd ed.) Chicago, IL SPSS, Inc.
24.
ThorndykeR. W., & Hays-RothB. (1982) Differences in spatial knowledge acquired from maps and navigation. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 560–589
25.
ThorndykeP. W., & StaszC. (1980) Individual differences in procedures for knowledge acquisition from maps. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 137–175.
26.
VanettiE. J., & AllenG. L. (1988) Communicating environmental knowledge: the impact of verbal and spatial abilities on the production and comprehension of route directions. Environment and Behavior, 20, 667–682.
