Map generalization is a traditional cartographical issue which should be particularly considered in today’sinformation age. The aim of this study is to find some characteristics about head/tail breaks which worksas generalization method compared with the well known Topfer’s method. A questionnaire survey wasconducted to let 30 users choose either of the series maps of both methods and the reason(s) for thatchoice. Also to test their understanding of the series maps histograms were added for them to match.Afterwards the sample results were analyzed using both univariate and bivariate analysis approaches. Itshows that the head/tail breaks method was selected by 58%, compared with 38.7% of Topfer’s method,because of its simplicity. By checking the correctness of histogram question it also shows that those whowell understood answers choose the head/tail breaks rather than the Topfer’s method. However in somecases, where the amount of geographical features is relatively small, Topfer’s method is more selectedbecause of its informative characteristic and similar structure to the original map. It was also found that inthe comparison the head/tail breaks is more advantageous in line feature type generalization than in arealfeature type. This is probably because Topfer’s method changes its minority selection rule to half selectionin line feature type, whereas the head/tail breaks keeps the scaling property. Any difference between thetwo tested scales, Finland level and Helsinki level, is not found in this comparison study. However, futurework should explore more regarding this and other issues.