Cited by 168Spatial Cognition and NavigationTactile and Sensory InteractionsUrban Transport and Accessibility

Comparing methods for introducing blind and visually impaired people to unfamiliar urban environments

Espinosa, M.Angeles, Ungar, Simon, Ochaı́ta, Esperanza, Blades, Mark, Spencer, Christopher·1998·Journal of Environmental Psychology

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/jevp.1998.0097

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Espinosa, M. A., Ungar, S., Ochaı́ta, E., Blades, M., & Spencer, C.
Affiliations
University of Sheffield (GB)
Venue
Journal of Environmental Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-09
Volume
18
Issue
3
Pages
277-287
ISSN
0272-4944 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2169119783
Cited by
168
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 10
FWCI
2.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Environmental Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • CogPrints (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Transportation › Urban Transport and Accessibility
Keywords
blind people, visually impaired people, tactile maps, spatial learning, route learning, urban environment, spatial knowledge, verbal description, direct experience, wayfinding

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review