Search

This study compares adjacent and bivariate maps in communicating variance-based global sensitivity analysis (GSA) results for a geodiversity assessment spatial multi-criteria model and examines the influence of prior exposure to geodiversity and map reading skills on interpretation. It analyzes the quality of map interpretation, confidence levels, and map communication effectiveness. The findings indicate that there is no significant difference in the quality of map interpretation or confidence levels between the two map types. However, there are nuanced differences in interpretive patterns, suggesting the need for further investigation into factors affecting map interpretation. Adjacent maps are more effective in identifying factors linked to uncertainty in high geodiversity values, while bivariate maps excel in understanding spatial variability. Prior exposure to geodiversity and map reading skills do not significantly impact interpretation quality or confidence levels. Future research could explore other factors influencing map effectiveness and explore the cognitive processes underlying map interpretation. Understanding these processes could lead to more effective strategies for communicating the results of a GSA for spatial models through maps. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]