Residential Attachment: Sources of Residential and Community Satisfaction

Abstract

The residential environment is a particularly important setting for human behavior by virtue of its significance for roles, relationships, and the sense of place in the world. Based on interviews with 2,622 respondents from 42 municipalities in 10 SMSAs across the country, this study tried to clarify some of the dimensions of residential experience that affect residential and community satisfaction. The frequent finding of a strong relationship between social class or majority/minority status and residential satisfaction is examined under controlled conditions. This relationship appears to be mainly a function of the large inequities in housing and neighborhood associated with social inequalities. It is these variations in residential quality that are the direct, primary influences on residential satisfaction. Closer analyses of the specific sources of residential and community satisfaction reveal the prominence of objective features of the residential environment in accounting for such satisfaction. Local social interaction plays a relatively minor part in explaining residential attachment; and its effects are limited to that modest proportion of the population for whom such neighborhood and community relationships are highly valued.

Greenspace and Place Attachment: Do Greener Suburbs Lead to Greater Residential Place Attachment?

“…For example, some studies indicate that belonging to an ethno-racial minority or having a different language background is associated with lower place attachment (Austin and Baba, 1990;Bailey, Kearns, and Livingston, 2012;Theodori, 2004). Poverty, renting and residential mobility are also linked to reduced place attachment (Austin and Baba, 1990;Bonaiuto et al, 1999;Brown, Perkins and Brown, 2003;Comstock et al, 2010;Fried, 1982;Mesch and Manor, 1998;Parkes, Atkinson and Kearns, 2002;Ringel and Finkelstein, 1991). Lastly, local social ties mediate the relationship between these socio-demographic characteristics and place attachment (Kasarda and Janowitz, 1974;Lewicka, 2010).…”

“…Increasing evidence suggests that people who report higher levels of place attachment to their geographic communities have greater access to social capital (Fried, 1982;Kasarda and Janowitz, 1974;Mesch and Manor, 1998) and positive mental health outcomes (Ross, Reynolds and Greis, 2000 ). Further, communities with higher levels of place attachment have greater levels of civic engagement (Comstock et al, 2010;Sampson, 1988), are more effective at collective lobbying and crime control (Manzo and Perkins, 2006;Vorkin and Riese, 2001), and are more environmentally responsible (Scannell and Gifford, 2010a;Vorkin and Riese, 2001).…”

“…Studies show that perceptions of community greenspace are linked to higher levels of place attachment (Arnberger and Eder, 2012;Bonaiuto et al, 1999;Fried, 1982;Hur, Nasar and Chun, 2010;Kaplan and Kim, 2004;Kearney, 2006). Yet, to date few studies have examined the relationships between objective greenspace and place attachment across different types of urban communities.…”

The Intergenerational Transmission of Context

“…A general mechanism leading to continuity in the neighborhood environment is the set of ties, both social and psychological, that connect individuals to places (Altman and Low 1992;Elder, King, and Conger 1996;Fried 1982;Gerson, Stueve, and Fischer 1977;Milligan 1998). Individuals' social and familial ties are often centered around specific places, which may lead to continuity in the types of residential environments that individuals occupy that is not consistent with their economic circumstances.…”

Pengaruh Aspek Arsitektur dan Perencanaan Kota Terhadap Terbentuknya Ikatan Batin Dengan Suatu Tempat (Place Attachment)

“…Place attachment itu sendiri merupakan isu penting yang telah menarik beberapa peneliti (seperti Fried, 1982;Giuliani, 1991;Altman & Low, 1992;Giuliani & Feldman, 1993;Feldman, 1996;Twigger-Ross & Uzzell, 1996;Bonaiuto et al, 1999;Bonaiuto et al, 2004;Bonnes et al, 1997;Bonnes et al, 2004) untuk dapat memahami cara masyarakat menetapkan ikatan afektif atau rasa cinta terhadap tempat-tempat tertentu dalam lingkungan hunian mereka, yang dapat menjadi bagian dari identitas suatu tempat (Ernawati, 2005;Proshansky et al, 1983;Low & Altman, 1992).…”