Lesson 3: Spatial and Geospatial Thinking in System Design

Geospatial thinking is key to designing GIS functionality. Here, geospatial thinking is spatial thinking related to the earth. Spatial thinking includes processes that support exploration and understanding. An expert spatial thinker visualizes relations, imagines transformations from one scale to another, mentally rotates an object to look at its other sides, creates a new viewing angle or perspective, and remembers images in places and spaces. Spatial thinking also allows us to externalize these operations by creating representations such as a map.

Lesson Learning Objectives:

Review basic concept of spatial and geospatial thinking.

Questions?

If you have any questions now or at any point during this lesson, please feel free to post them to the Threaded Discussion Forum. (That forum can be accessed at any time by clicking on the Communicate tab, above, and then scrolling down to the Discussion Forum section.)

Now, let's begin Lesson 3...

Checklist

To finish this lesson, you must complete the activities listed below. You may find it useful to print this page out first so that you can follow along with the directions.

Steps to Completing Lesson 3

Step	Activity	Access/Directions
1	Read the lesson Overview and Checklist.	You are in the Lesson 3 online content now. The Overview page is previous to this page, and you are on the Checklist page right now.
2	Online content (Read) Spatial and Geospatial Thinking in System Design [1]	There are three different styles of reading that are referred to in the lessons: Scan: Do not deal with all of the content, but search through the material for a specific purpose or a specific word (or its synonym). Scanning is used for such purposes as finding the answer to a particular question. Skim: To skim, read a page by reading the headings and first sentences of each paragraph or section. Read:The purpose of this style is to understand the concepts and arguments that the text contains and it should be preceded by the Skim reading style.
3	View the Lesson Introduction.	You are in the Lesson 3 online content now. Click on the "Next Page" link to access the Lecture/Discussion.
4	Geospatial Think-Piece (Template) [2]	Using Word (or a word processing program compatible with Microsoft® Word) and the Geospatial Thinking Aid provided in this lesson, briefly describe (< 500 Words): the (1) behavioral, (2) physical, and(3) cognitive geospatial aspects of a "town and gown" problem such a noise code violation. Town and gown are two distinct communities of a university town; "town" being the non-academic population and "gown" metonymically being the university community. Name your file Lsn3_YourName.doc, Please turn-in your document the Lesson 3 Dropbox in ANGEL.
5	Read lesson Summary.	You are in the Lesson 3 online content now.

Spatial Thinking

Spatial thinking includes processes that support exploration and understanding. An expert spatial thinker visualizes relations, imagines transformations from one scale to another, mentally rotates an object to look at its other sides, creates a new viewing angle or perspective, and remembers images in places and spaces. Spatial thinking also allows us to externalize these operations by creating representations such as a map.

Spatial thinking begins with the ability to use space as a framework. An object can be specified relative to the observer, to the environment, to its own intrinsic structure, or to other objects in the environment. Each instance requires the adoption of specific spatial frames of reference or context. The process of interpretation begins with data which is generally context-free numbers, text, or symbols. Information is derived from data by implying some degree of selection, organization, and preparation for a purpose — in other words, the data is placed into a spatial context. For example, the elevation at a specific location is an example of data; however, the elevation only has meaning when placed in context of sea level. The spatial context is critical because it is the space the data is in that ultimately determines its interpretation. There are three spatial contexts within which we can make the data-to-information transition; these include behavioral spaces, physical spaces, and cognitive spaces. In all cases, space provides an interpretive context that gives meaning to the data.

Behavioral (life) space is the four-dimensional space-time where spatial thinking is a means of coming to grips with the spatial relations between self and objects in the physical environment. This is cognition in space and involves decisions about the world in which we live. It is exemplified by navigation and the actions that we perform in space.
Physical space is also built on the four-dimensional world of space-time, but focuses on a scientific understanding of the nature, structure and function of phenomena. This is cognition about space and involves thinking about the ways in which the "world" works. An example might be how an earthquake creates a tsunami.
Cognitive (Intellectual) space is in relationship to concepts and objects. The nature of the space is defined by the particular problem. This is cognition with space and involves thinking with or through the medium of space in the abstract. An example might be the territorial dispute between two ethnic groups.

Learning to think spatially is to consider objects in terms of their context. This is to say, the object's location in behavioral space, physical space, or cognitive space, to question why objects are located where they are, and to visualize relationships between and among these objects. The key skills of spatial thinking include the ability to:

Understand the context. The significance of context was discussed above, but it is important to say that if the data upon which the decision is based are placed into the wrong spatial context, for example, physical space rather than cognitive space, it is likely the analysis will be flawed.
Recognize spatial schemes (patterns and shapes). The successful spatial thinker needs to retain an image of the simple figure in mind, and look for it by suppressing objects irrelevant to a task at hand. This ability allows a geospatial analyst to identify patterns of significance in a map, such as an airfield.
Recall previously observed objects. The ability to recall an array of objects that was previously seen is called object location memory.
Integrate observation-based learning. Synthesizing separately made observations into an integrated whole. The expert analyst moves through the data, gathering information from separately observed objects and views, and integrates this information into a coherent mental image of the area.
Mental rotating an object and envisioning scenes from different viewpoints. The ability to imagine and coordinate views from different perspectives has been identified by Piaget and Inhelder (1967) as one of the major instances of projective spatial concepts. Mental-rotation ability or perspective-taking ability could be relevant to those analysis tasks that involve envisioning what an object, such as a building, would look like if seen from another position.

Golledge’s First-Order Primitives constitute a broad list of cognitive schemes for geospatial analysis (R. G. Golledge "Do People Understand Spatial Concepts: The case of First-Order Primitives", Theories and Models of Spatio-Temporal Reasoning in Geographic Space. Pisa: Springer-Verlag, 1992). The schemas are:

Location. This includes a descriptor with identity, magnitude, location and time. An additional cognitive component might be familiarity. Occurrences are often called environmental cues, nodes, landmarks, or reference points.
Spatial distributions. Distributions have a pattern, a density, and an internal measure of spatial variance, heterogeneity or dispersion; occurrences in distributions also have characteristics such as proximity, similarity, order, and dominance.
Regions. Areas of space in which either single or multiple features occur with specified frequency (uniform regions) or over which a single feature dominates.
Hierarchies. Multiple levels or nested levels of phenomena including features.
Networks. Linked features having characteristics, connectivity, centrality, diameter, and density. Networks may also include physical links such as transportation systems, or nonvisual systems.
Spatial associations. Associations include spatial autocorrelation, distance decay, and contiguities. Examples of these associations include interaction frequencies or geographic and areal associations. For example, the coincidence of features within specific areas (i.e., squirrels are normally near trees) is a spatial association.
Surfaces. There are generalizations of discrete phenomena, including densities of occurrence, flows over space and through time (as in the spatial diffusion of information or phenomena).

Geospatial Reasoning

Reasoning

The three well known reasoning processes trace the development of analytic beliefs along different paths. Inductive reasoning reveals “that something is probably true," deductive reasoning demonstrates “that something is necessarily true.” It is generally accepted that both are limited: inductive reasoning leads to multiple, equally likely solutions, and deductive reasoning is subject to error. Therefore, a third aid to judgment, abductive reasoning, showing “that something is plausibly true,” is used to offset the limitations of the others. While analysts who employ all three guides to sound judgment stand to be the most persuasive, fallacious reasoning or mischaracterization of rules, cases, or results in any of the three can affect reasoning using the others.

Inductive reasoning, moving from the specific case to the general rule, suggests many possible outcomes, or the range of what might happen in the future. However, inductive reasoning lacks a means to distinguish among outcomes. An analyst has no way of knowing whether a solution is correct.
Deductive reasoning, on the other hand, moves from the general to the specific. Deductive reasoning becomes essential for predictions. Based on past perceptions, certain facts indicate specific outcomes. If, for example, troops are deployed to the border, communications are increased, and leadership is in defensive bunkers, then war is imminent. However, if leadership remains in the public eye, then these preparations indicate that an exercise is imminent.
Abductive reasoning reveals plausible outcomes. Abductive reasoning is the process of generating the best explanation for a set of observations. When actions defy accurate interpretation through existing paradigms, abductive reasoning generates novel means of explanation. In the case of predictions, an abductive process presents an “assessment of probabilities.” Although abduction provides no guarantee that the analyst has chosen the correct hypothesis, the probative force of the accompanying argument indicates that the most likely hypothesis is known and that actionable intelligence is being developed.

Geospatial Reasoning

It is not too far of a stretch to say that people who are drawn to the discipline of geography have minds accustomed to assembling information into three-dimensional mental schemas. We construct schemas in our mind, rotate them, and view them from many angles. Furthermore, the experienced geospatial professional imagines spatial schemas influenced in the fourth dimension, time. We mentally replay time series of the schema. So easy is the geospatial professional’s ability to assemble multidimensional models that the expert does it with incomplete data. We mentally fill in gaps, making an intuitive leap toward a working schema with barely enough data to perceive even the most rudimentary spatial patterns. This is a sophisticated form of geospatial reasoning. Expertise increases with experience because as we come across additional schemas, our mind continuously expands to accommodate them. This might be called spatial awareness. Being a visual-spatial learner, instead of feeling daunted by the abundance and complexity of data, we find pleasure in recognizing the patterns. Are we crazy? No, this is what is called a visual-spatial mind. Some also call these people right brain thinkers.

The concept of right brain and left brain thinking developed from the research of psychobiologist Roger W. Sperry. Sperry discovered that the human brain has two different ways of thinking. The right brain is visual and processes information in an intuitive and simultaneous way, looking first at the whole picture then the details. The left brain is verbal and processes information in an analytical and sequential way, looking first at the pieces then putting them together to get the whole. Some individuals are more whole-brained and equally adept at both modes.

The qualities of the Visual-Spatial person are well documented but not well known (Visual-Spatial Resource [3]). Visual-spatial thinkers are individuals who think in pictures rather than in words. They have a different brain organization than sequential thinkers. They are whole-part thinkers who think in terms of the big picture first before they examine the details. They are non-sequential, which means that they do not think and learn in the step-by-step manner. They arrive at correct solutions without taking steps. They may have difficulty with easy tasks, but show a unique ability with difficult, complex tasks. They are systems thinkers who can orchestrate large amounts of information from different domains, but they often miss the details.

Sarah Andrews [4] likens some contrasting thought processes to a cog railway. Data must be in a set sequence in order to process it through a workflow. In order to answer a given question, the thinker needs information fed to him in order. He will apply a standardized method towards arriving at a pragmatic answer, check his results, and move on to the next question. In order to move comfortably through this routine, he requires that a rigid set of rules be in place. This is compared with the geospatial analyst who grabs information in whatever order, and instead of crunching down a straight-line, formulaic route toward an answer, makes an intuitive, mental leap toward the simultaneous perception of a group of possible answers. The answers may overlap, but none are perfect. In response to this ambiguity, the geospatial analyst develops a risk assessment, chooses the best working answer from this group, and proceeds to improve the estimate by gathering further data. Unlike, the engineer, whose formulaic approach requires that the unquestioned authority of the formula exist in order to proceed, the geospatial intelligence professional questions all authority, be it in the form of a human or acquired data.

Geospatial Thinking Aid

Geospatial thinking is the essence of designing GIS functionality. Geospatial thinking is spatial thinking related to the earth. The following geospatial thinking process is simply offered as a structure to make sure that key concepts are not overlooked. Nothing here is likely new to the skilled geospatial thinker, but it is purely a reminder of the actions that can help the designer think about geospatial problems.

Action 1: Identify the entity or event the system is being designed to address or manipulate. This entity can be natural and human phenomena relative to the problem.

Action 2: Think about the entity or event in the space contexts. The definition of the spatial presence of an entity is the prerequisite for spatial thinking. The spatial context is critical because it is the space the entity is in that ultimately determines its interpretation. There are three spatial contexts within which we can make the data-to-information transition. These are:

behavioral space
physical space
cognitive space

In all cases, space provides an interpretive context that gives meaning.

Action 3: Place the phenomena in the context of the earth. When making sense about the space (Gershmehl and Gershmehl, 2006) the spatial thinker first asks the fundamental spatial questions:

Where is this place?
What is at this place?
How is this place linked to other places?

Action 4: Examine the qualities of the objects or events. The spatial thinking then proceeds to examine the places by asking the following questions:

How are places similar or different?
What effect(s) does a feature have on nearby areas?
What nearby places are similar to each other and can be grouped together?
Where does this place fit in a hierarchy of nested areas?
Is the change between places abrupt, gradual, or irregular?
What distant places have similar situations and therefore may have similar conditions?
Are there clusters, strings, rings, waves, other non-random arrangements of features?
Do features tend to occur together (have similar spatial patterns)?

Return to Action 2 if you have not explored all of the space contexts. Note the qualities for each space.

Action 5: Recalling the results of Action 4, examine the space-time relationship between the objects and/or event. Last, the comparisons are placed into the context of space and time. Spatial thinking goes beyond a simple identification of locations. It involves comparing locations, considering the influence of nearby features, grouping regions and hierarchies, and identifying distant places that have similar conditions. It is also the consideration of change, movement and diffusion through time and place. This is spatiotemporal thinking which asks the questions:

How do spatial features change through time?
How do conditions change at a place over time?
What is the change in position of something over time?
What is the change in extent of something over time?
Where are places that do not seem to follow an observed “rule”?

Note the time-space relationships.

Summary and Final Tasks

The geospatial professional is a “knowledge worker” or “symbol analyst” (a term used by the U.S. Department of Labor) who carries out multi-step operations, manipulates abstract and complex symbols and ideas, acquires new information efficiently, and remains flexible enough to recognize change. Successful knowledge work requires intensive study, practice, and commitment. Professionalism in the area calls for a broad experience and understanding of the basic concepts of the profession. The individual who is only interested in technology, important as it is, is therefore not fully professional. Nor is the technical expert ipso facto a professional.