ArticlePloS one2025
User preferences in multi-objective routes: The role of gradient visualization and personality measures.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traditional pedestrian navigation systems typically prioritize the shortest or fastest routes. However, modern urban environments require multi-objective navigation that incorporates factors such as route gradient, familiarity, and individual preferences. This study investigates how presenting gradient information-either in numeric or graphical formats-affects pedestrian route choices, and how individual psychological traits, particularly the Big Five and Sensation Seeking dimensions, influence these decisions. We conducted an online survey with 91 valid participants (from an initial pool of 315), each randomly assigned to one of three groups: Control (no gradient shown), Numeric (textual gradient), or Graphical (altitude charts). Participants selected their preferred route from six route pairs, each differing in slope and distance. These pairs were generated using a multi-objective planning algorithm that optimizes both attributes. Our findings reveal three key insights. First, numeric gradient presentation led to a modest shift away from shortest-route selections (mean: 3.89 versus 4.29 in the control group), particularly for longer cases. Second, graphical gradient representations did not significantly improve decision-making over numeric formats. Third, participants with higher Sensation Seeking scores showed a significantly stronger preference for longer but gentler routes (p < 0.01). These results highlight the role of individual tendencies in route selection, suggesting that personalized navigation systems could be improved by incorporating user-specific psychological profiles.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.