Cited by 265Spatial Cognition and NavigationUrban Design and Spatial AnalysisTransportation Planning and Optimization

Path selection and route preference in human navigation: A progress report

Golledge, Reginald G.·1995·Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/3-540-60392-1_14

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Golledge, R. G.
Affiliations
University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
Corresponding author
Golledge, Reginald G.
Venue
Lecture Notes in Computer Science
Published
1995
Pages
207-222
ISSN
  • 0302-9743 (ISSN-L)
  • 1611-3349
OpenAlex
W1873394894
Cited by
265
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 13
FWCI
7.21
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Lecture notes in computer science (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Urban Design and Spatial Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Transportation › Transportation Planning and Optimization
Keywords
path selection, route preference, cognitive mapping, cognitive distance, destination choice, trip chaining, shortest path

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