ARTICLE IN PRESS

0272-4944/$ - se

doi:10.1016/j.je

$This work

Swedish Resear

Spatial Plannin

and the three a

comments. Cor

Igor Knez, L

Technology an

Gavle, Sweden.�Tel.: +46 26

E-mail addr

Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218

www.elsevier.com/locate/yjevp

Attachment and identity as related to a place andits perceived climate$

Igor Knez�

Laboratory of Applied Psychology, Department of Technology and Built Environment, University of Gavle, SE-801 76 Gavle, Sweden

Available online 15 August 2005

Abstract

This study examined the relations between place, climate, place attachment and place identity using Breakwell’s four processes

model of place identity (e.g. Twigger-Ross, Bonaiuto, and Breakwell. (2003). Identity Theories and Environmental Psychology,

203–233) as a framework. Following this, an influence of high vs. low attachment and urban vs. country(open-air)-person attitude

on place (the City of Gothenburg, ‘‘Vallgraven’’, Sweden) related identity processes was examined. In line with Twigger-Ross and

Uzzell (1996) (Place and Identity Processes, 205–220) it was hypothesized that high attachment, together with a congruent place

identification, in this case urban-person attitude, would influence significantly more residents’ place-related identity processes than

low attachment and a place identification which was not congruent with where they were living, i.e. country(open-air)-person

attitude. In addition it was hypothesized, in line with Knez (2003a) (The 5th international conference on urban climate (ICUC-5),

September 2003, Lodz, Poland, Vol. 2, (2003a) pp. 69–72) that climate may be one of the meanings they attribute to the place.

Empirical evidence on links between place attachment and place identity on urban vs. country(open-air)-person attitude and place

identity were shown as well as a significant role of climate in subjects’ conceptions of a place, especially for those considered to be

highly attached to their residential area. This latter result presents a challenge to place theory, in general, not taking into account a

place’s climate (Knez (2003b). The 5th international conference on urban climate (ICUC-5), September 2003, Lodz, Poland 2

(2003b) 65–68)). Finally, structural equation modelling suggested a model of five place identity process as opposed to Breakwell’s

four processes model, and showed a significant link proceeding from residential time to place attachment to place identity. This

latter result indicates that prolonging one’s stay at a place intensifies one’s emotional bond to that place which in turn leads that a

place becomes more a part of one’s conceptual and extended selves (Neisser (1998). Philosophical Psychology, 1, 35–59), in this

context a part of the content of the five place-related identity processes of distinctiveness, referent continuity, congruent continuity,

self-esteem and self-efficacy.

r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Place attachment; Place identity; Place climate; Residential time

e front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

nvp.2005.03.003

was supported by a research grant from FORMAS, the

ch Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and

g. I would like to thank Anders Kjellberg, Terry Hartig

nonymous reviewers for their helpful and significant

respondence about this article should be addressed to

aboratory of Applied Psychology, Department of

d Built Environment, University of Gavle, SE-801 76

E-mail: igor.knez@hig.se.

64 81 11; fax: +46 26 64 81 81.

ess: igor.knez@hig.se.

1. Introduction

We know from our everyday experiences that we,across time, evolve bonds toward certain places, e.g.where we were born and brought up, where we live andwork. Thus, we make and gain emotional and cognitiveconceptions of physical environments that are related tous as individual agents and as members of social groups.This indicates that a place is an extensive concept (e.g.Canter, 1997). It has physical, geographical, architec-tural, historical, religious, social and psychological

ARTICLE IN PRESSI. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218208

connotations and it is, in addition, located at severallevels of a spatial scale; e.g. a neighbourhood aroundBroadway, a part of a town (Manhattan), a town (NewYork), a nation (USA), a continent (North America). Inthe words of Ryden (1993, pp. 37–38), a place is:‘‘ymuch more than a point in space y [it] takes in themeanings which people assign to that landscape throughthe processes of living in it’’.Three main constructs accounting for the psychology

of place are indicated in environmental psychology;namely, ‘‘place attachment’’, ‘‘place identity’’ and‘‘sense of place’’. There is however, at the moment, nogeneral agreement on the relationships between theseconstructs. For example, Altman and Low (1992)proposed ‘‘place attachment’’ as a generic theoreticalconcept in person–environment transactions. However,Jorgensen and Stedman (2001) suggested ‘‘sense ofplace’’ as a multidimensional construct, an attitude,comprising the attachment dimension. In parallel,Canter (1977, 1997) has over the last decades formulateda systematic proposal towards a ‘‘place theory’’ suggest-ing mechanisms operating for the psychology of place.Still others have related ‘‘identity theory’’ to people’sbonds to residential environments (Twigger-Ross &Uzzell, 1996; Bonaiuto, Carrus, Martorella, & Bonnes,2002) and favourite places (Korpela, 1989, 1992).The present paper concentrates on the links between

place attachment and place-related identity processes,and discusses the physical parameters outlined in placetheory in general by relating a place’s perceived climateto place attachment and place identity.

1.1. Place and attachment

Place attachment is a bond that we develop toward aplace that embodies an emotional content (see Giuliani,2003 for a recent review). It is as Riley (1992, p. 13)writes an: ‘‘y affective relationship between people andthe landscape that goes beyond cognition, preference, orjudgement’’. But according to Altman and Low (1992,p. 5) it: ‘‘yinvolves an interplay of affect and emotions,knowledge and beliefs, and behaviours and actions inreference to a place’’. Hidalgo and Hernandez (2001)pointed out that much previous place attachmentresearch has viewed places as referents for socialidentification, not taking into account the physicaldimensions of a place. Secondly, they argued that theterm is too ambiguous; earlier definitions: ‘‘y do notallow us to differentiate attachment from other closelyrelated concepts’’ (Hidalgo & Hernandez, 2001, p. 274).According to these authors, the main characteristic of‘‘place attachment’’ is the affective positive bondbetween a person and a place; more specifically, astrong tendency of that person to maintain closeness tosuch a place. More, Jorgensen and Stedman (2001)showed that the dimensions of identity (‘‘beliefs about

relationships between self and place’’) and dependence(‘‘the degree to which the place in relation to alternativeplaces is perceived to underpin behaviour’’) were lessrelated to the sense of place construct than was thedimension of attachment (‘‘emotional connections toplace’’).

1.2. Place and identity

Identity, generally speaking, defines an internal,subjective concept of oneself as an individual. It,according to Neisser (1988, p. 35), comprises five kindsof self-knowledge that are not experienced as separate,and that are based on several different forms ofinformation: ecological self (‘‘directly perceived withrespect to the immediate physical environment’’),interpersonal self (‘‘directly perceived and establishedby species-specific signals of emotional rapport andcommunication’’), extended self (‘‘based on memoryand anticipation’’), private self (‘‘appears when wediscover that our conscious experience are exclusivelyour own’’) and conceptual self (‘‘a self-concept thatdraws its meaning from a network of socially basedassumptions and theories about human nature ingeneral and ourselves in particular’’). Across the lifespana person’s identity can also be recognized as a productof primary relationships (‘‘emergence of self’’), child-hood (‘‘conservation and evolution of self’’) andadolescence (‘‘consolidation of self’’) (Honess & Yard-ley, 1987).Proshansky, Fabian, and Kaminoff (1983) extended

identity theory to the area of environmental psychologyand proposed that place identity is a ‘‘physical worldsocialisation of the self’’, meaning that: ‘‘y thedevelopment of self-identity is not restricted to makingdistinctions between oneself and significant others, butextends with no less importance to objects and things,and the very spaces and places in which they arefounded’’ (Proshansky et al., 1983, p. 57). Furthermore,Korpela (1989, 1992) has related place identity toenvironmental self-regulation, emphasizing the role ofa ‘‘favourite’’ place in, e.g. maintaining a coherence inone’s self.The research of Breakwell (1986, 1992, 1993),

Twigger-Ross and Uzzell (1996), Twigger-Ross etal.(2003), and Vignoles, Chryssochoou and Breakwell(2000) has suggested four processes related to placeidentity:

(1)

place-related distinctiveness (place identification, todistinguish myself from others; e.g. ‘‘I’m a Lon-doner, not a New-Yorker.’’)

(2)

(a) place-referent continuity (place as a coherentreference for my past; e.g. ‘‘I’m living in a townbecause it reminds me of the environment of mychildhood.’’)

ARTICLE IN PRESS

1C

gica

year

tem

vari

I. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218 209

(b) place-congruent continuity (place compatiblewith my current beliefs; e.g. ‘‘I’m living in atown because that type of milieu is congruentwith my present self, my opinions of how I wantto live.’’)

lima

l con

s or

pora

ation

(3)

place-related self-esteem (e.g. ‘‘Living in a townmakes me feel good and/or I’m proud to live in atown.’’)

(4)

place-related self-efficacy (e.g. ‘‘Everything I need inmy everyday life is in the town.’’).

Conceptually, the place-related identity processes arealso related to Neisser’s (1988) five kinds of self-knowledge; especially to the conceptual and extendedselves, applying to the notion of ‘‘what I am’’(conceptual self) and of ‘‘one’s life-narratives’’ (extendedself) that are continually enlarged and revised.

1.3. Place and climate

Concerning a theory of place, in general, severalauthors have sketched similar accounts (e.g. Relph,1976; Canter, 1977) proposing three key aspects ofplace; namely, physical (form and space), functional(activities) and psychological (emotion/cognition; mean-ings we attribute). Canter (1997) has further developedhis earlier model (Canter, 1977), now proposing four‘‘facets’’ of place, as he calls it: functional differentia-tion, place objectives, scale of interaction and aspects ofdesign. However, a significant insufficiency in thesetheoretical accounts, as was recently pointed out byKnez (2003b), is the neglect of one of the fundamentalaspects of place objectives, namely, its climate.1

This ecological variable, a physical parameter of aplace, plays an important role in everyday life. It has animpact on individual, social, economic (Parker, 1995) andcriminal behaviour (Rotton & Cohn, 2002) and onmeanings we attribute to places (Knez, 2003a). Why?Because climate is nested in places, it not only constitutesobjectively a place but also subjectively influences the waywe experience and remember a place (Knez, 2003b).For instance, the functional use of a place (Zacharias,

Stathopoulos, & Wu, 2001) and our perception of itsbeauty may vary as a function of its microclimaticconditions such as sunlight and wind. These and othermicroclimatic parameters such as temperature andhumidity may also influence our perception of comfort(Nikolopoulou, Baker, & Steemers, 2001; Thorsson,2003), combine in emotional sensations of places, affectour beliefs, attitudes and knowledge of a place, and

te refers to spatial or geographical variations in meteorolo-

ditions based on data that have been averaged over 30–40

more, compared to weather that describes momentary or

l variations; that is, monthly, daily or hourly average of the

s in meteorological conditions (Rotton & Cohn, 2002).

finally be a part of our self-knowledge; thus, related toour identity (Knez, 2003a). For example, some of ushave grown up in cities designed for winter (Manty &Pressman, 1988), however others have grown up intowns designed for summer. This experience has, in thewords of Hidalgo and Hernandez (2001), evolved atendency in these latter persons to maintain closeness tosuch a place; in other words, a positive bond, anattachment, to a ‘‘warm’’ place.

1.4. Present study

The general purpose of the present study was toinvestigate the relations between attachment and identityas related to a place and its perceived climate. This wasdone by using Breakwell’s four processes model of placeidentity as a framework (e.g. Breakwell, 1986, 1992, 1993;Twigger-Ross & Uzzell, 1996; Twigger-Ross et al., 2003;Vignoles et al., 2000). More precisely: (1) the influence ofhigh vs. low attachment and urban-person vs. country(o-pen-air)-person attitude on residents’ place (the City ofGothenburg, ‘‘Vallgraven’’, Sweden) related identity pro-cesses was investigated; (2) and if the perceived climate ofthis place was a part of the place-related identity processesof continuity; (3) as well as if climate as a part of the place-related identity processes of continuity was influenced bythe level (high vs. low) of place attachment.More, a measure of the urban-person vs. country(o-

pen-air)-person attitude was included because theparticipants were City citizens, meaning that an attitudeof this kind may have relevance for the place-relatedidentity process of distinctiveness; i.e. the residents’place identification. Given all this, four hypotheses wereoutlined and tested:

Hypothesis 1. Based on the Twigger-Ross and Uzzell(1996) results showing a role of high attachment inmaintenance of place-related identity processes and thatthe participants were City citizens, it was hypothesizedthat high attachment and urban-person attitude wouldaffect more residents’ place-related identity processesthan low attachment and country(open-air)-personattitude would do. In addition, a difference in place-related distinctiveness (place identification) was espe-cially expected between those considered to be urban vs.country(open-air)-persons.

Hypothesis 2. In line with the Knez (2003a, b) sugges-tions it was predicted that climate may be one of themeanings, parameters, we attribute to a place; hence, inthis context related to the place identity processes ofplace-referent continuity (a referent to past experiences/selves) and place-congruent continuity (a fit between aplace and a resident’s present values). In consequence, itwas also predicted that perceived climate as a part of theidentity processes of continuity may be more pro-nounced in high compared to low attached residents.

ARTICLE IN PRESSI. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218210

Hypothesis 3. By the method of structural equationmodelling the Breakwell’s model of place identity wastested. Following this model (see e.g. Twigger-Ross &Uzzell, 1996), four place-related identity processes werepredicted.

Hypothesis 4. By the method of structural equationmodelling (and by controlling for residential time thathas been indicated as an important factor in evolving aplace attachment (Hidalgo & Hernandez, 2001)), therelation between place attachment and place identitywas tested. In other words: Does causality proceed fromattachment to identity or vice versa? In line with someprevious research (see e.g. Giuliani, 2003; Twigger-Rosset al., 2003 for this discussion) a link from placeattachment to place identity was predicted.

2. Method

2.1. Sample

A total of 600 households located within the Cityof Gothenburg, ‘‘Vallgraven’’, Sweden (see Fig. 1)

Fig. 1. Gothenburg is the second largest city of Sweden situated on the West

with a typical European design, with ca. 3500 residents.

were sent a questionnaire about ‘‘places, climate andweather’’. They were randomly identified from aregister of population. The questionnaire was alsosent to 600 persons working in the City, a stratifiedsample, selected from a register of companies locatedwithin the City. The questionnaire comprised a numberof sections. Questions about demographic variables,general and specific questions about weather, climate,behaviours and attitudes related to Gothenburg, theCity as well as to five places located in this part oftown: a park, a large open square, a small courtyardsurrounded by low buildings, a walk and a viewpointplace by the sea/harbour, and an indoor shoppingcentre. Data related to place (City) attachment andplace (City) related identity will only be reported in thepresent study.

Response rate. After three contacts (two mail and onephone), the final response rate was 60.3% (724responses). Of these responses 47% (340) lived and53% worked (384) worked in the City. The questionsanalysed and reported in the present paper concernedonly those living in the City; i.e. individuals from therandom sample plus those from the stratified samplethat also were shown to live in the City.

Coast. The City (‘‘Vallgraven’’ ¼ moat, fosse) is a very dense city core

ARTICLE IN PRESSI. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218 211

2.2. Measures

Identity processes. Place-related identity processeswere measured with 10 self-report items/statements(two statements� five identity process). The questionwas: ‘‘What do you think about the part of the townwhere you live?’’ Subjects were asked to answer thisquestion by responding to the following statements, on a5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly agree) to 5(strongly disagree). These items/statements measuringthe five identity processes were derived after reviewingprevious research (Twigger-Ross & Uzzell, 1996):

(1)

place-related distinctiveness (statements—‘‘I feel asense of togetherness with others who live in thispart of the town.’’ and ‘‘I feel like a ‘‘city person’’.)

(2)

(a) place-referent continuity (statements—‘‘Thispart of the town reminds me of the environmentof my childhood.’’ and ‘‘The climate here is likethe climate in the environment of my child-hood.’’)

(b) place-congruent continuity (statements—‘‘Iwould rather prefer to live in a place like theone where I live now.’’ and ‘‘I want to live in aplace with the same climate as here.’’)

(3)

place-related self-esteem (statements—‘‘I feel goodwhen I am in this part of the town.’’ and ‘‘I amproud to live in this part of the town.’’)

(4)

place-related self-efficacy (‘‘I feel safe and secure inthis part of the town.’’ and ‘‘Everything I need in myeveryday life is here.’’).

2One of the assumptions the analysis of variance is based on is the

homogeneity of variance, which can be violated by unequal sample

sizes. Yet and as Howell (2002, p. 340) writes: ‘‘yif the largest

variance is no more than four times the smallest, the analysis of

variance is most likely to be valid.’’ Only in one of all the analyses of

variance performed below, and for the dependent variable place-

referent-continuity-statement 1, the difference between the smallest

(Low/Country(open-air)) and the largest (High/Country(open-air))

variance was more than four times (.5 vs. 2.7). It must be noted,

however, that no significant interaction related to this dependent

variable was obtained (see below). For all other dependent variables

and independent variable cell cross combinations the Howell (2002)

criterion was fulfilled.

Note that the role of climate (Hypothesis 2) ismeasured in relation to the two place-related processesof continuity (see 2a and 2b above).

Place attachment and urban vs. country(open-air)-

person attitude. Respondents’ attachment to the City(‘‘My bonds to this part of town are strong’’) wasmeasured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1(strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree). This item was aSwedish translation of one of the place attachment items(‘‘I feel very attached to this area’’) from an AttachmentScale used by Twigger-Ross and Uzzell (1996). Respon-dents’ urban vs. country(open-air)-person attitude:‘‘How much urban-person (take pleasure from thestreet-life, the shops, the amusements of the city) orcountry(open-air)-person (take pleasure from the sea,the woods, the nature) are you?’’ was also measured on a5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (mostly urban-person) to 5 (mostly country(open-air)-person).

2.3. Design

A nonequivalent comparison-group quasi-experimen-tal design (McGuigan, 1983) was used. Compared with a‘‘true experiment’’ (Liebert & Liebert, 1995), this means

that the inferences drawn about the causal relationshipsbetween independent and dependent variables areconsidered to be weaker.

Independent variables. Two levels of place attachment(High vs. Low) and two types of person (Urban vs.Country(open-air)-person). The residents lower than 3(1, 2) were considered to be ‘‘high attached’’ and thosehigher than 3 (4, 5) were considered to be ‘‘lowattached’’. Respondents lower than 3 (1, 2) wereconsidered to be ‘‘urban-person’’ and those higher than3 (4, 5) were considered to be ‘‘country(open-air)-person’’. This means that subjects scoring 3 werediscarded.

Dependent variables. Ten items/statements measuringthe five place-related identity processes (5 processes� 2statements).

3. Results

All data were subjected for MANOVAs (multivariateanalyses of variance2) because there were two dependentmeasures (statements) measuring each underlying iden-tity process, with the following between-subject inde-pendent variables: 2 Attachment (High vs. Low)� 2Type of Person (Urban vs. Country(open-air)). Inaddition, the SPSS ‘‘Type III sums of squares’’ modelwas used because it controls for unbalanced cellfrequencies. Number of subjects in each 2� 2 cell were:High/Urban ¼ 59; High/Country(open-air) ¼ 17; Low/Urban ¼ 57; Low/Country(open-air) ¼ 47. Total num-ber of subjects for each independent variable were:Attachment ¼ 180 (High ¼ 76+Low ¼ 104); Type ofPerson ¼ 180 (Urban ¼ 116+Country(open-air) ¼ 64).Finally, and as reported below, no significant interac-tions were obtained, only significant main effects.

3.1. Place-related distinctiveness

The overall main significant effects of Attachment,Wilk’s Lambda ¼ .79, F(2, 178) ¼ 23.55, p ¼ :000, andType of Person, Wilk’s Lambda ¼ .62, F(2,178) ¼ 52.65, p ¼ :000 were obtained. According tothe follow-up univariate F-tests, these effects were

ARTICLE IN PRESS

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0Statement 1 Statement 2

com

plet

ely

agre

e -

com

plet

ely

disa

gree

High Place Attachment

Low Place Attachment

Urban Person

Country Person

Fig. 2. Agreement with Statement 1 (‘‘I feel a sense of togetherness

with others who live in this part of the town.’’) and Statement 2 (‘‘I feel

like a ‘‘city person’’.’’) as a function of High vs. Low Place Attachment

and Urban vs. Country(open-air)-Person Attitude.

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0Statement 1 Statement 2

com

plet

ely

agre

e -

com

plet

ely

disa

gree

High Place Attachment

Low Place Attachment

Urban Person

Country Person

I. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218212

associated with both statements. For Attachment,statement 1, F(1, 178) ¼ 105.90, p ¼ :000, and statement2, F(1, 174) ¼ 5.33, p ¼ :022. For Type of Person,statement 1, F(1, 178) ¼ 9.31, p ¼ :003, and statement 2,F(1, 178) ¼ 44.93, p ¼ :000. As can be seen in Fig. 2, thisindicates that subjects that were highly attached to theirresidential area and those that were considered to beurban-persons felt significantly more sense of together-ness with others living in the City, and felt significantlymore like a ‘‘city-person’’ than persons with lowattachment and those considered to be country(open-air)-persons did.

1.0

Fig. 3. Agreement with Statement 1 (‘‘This part of the town reminds

me of the environment of my childhood.’’) and Statement 2 (‘‘The

climate here is like the climate in the environment of my childhood.’’)

as a function of High vs. Low Place Attachment and Urban vs.

Country(open-air)-Person Attitude.

3.2. Place-referent continuity

Only one overall effect was shown to be significant,that of a main effect of Attachment, Wilk’s

Lambda ¼ .83, F(2, 180) ¼ 17.60, p ¼ :000. This effectwas associated with statement 1, F(1, 180) ¼ 34.37,p ¼ :000, and statement 2, F(1, 180) ¼ 5.95, p ¼ :016.Thus, persons considered to be highly attached to theCity felt significantly more that the City and its climatereminded them of their childhood environment andits climate, than it did for low attached residents (seeFig. 3).

3.3. Place-congruent continuity

The overall main significant effects of Attachment,Wilk’s Lambda ¼ .82, F(2, 179) ¼ 18.70, p ¼ :000,and Type of Person, Wilk’s Lambda ¼ .89, F(2,179) ¼ 10.69, p ¼ :000 were obtained. For Attachment,these effects were associated with both statements; a

ARTICLE IN PRESSI. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218 213

significant association with statement 1, F(1,179) ¼ 36.46, p ¼ :000, and a strong tendency to asignificant association with statement 2, F(1,179) ¼ 3.08, p ¼ :081. For Type of Person, onlyassociation with statement 1 was shown to be signifi-cant, F(1, 179) ¼ 16.43, p ¼ :000. As can be seen in Fig.4, this indicates that subjects with high attachment andthose considered to be urban-persons preferred to live inthe City compared to their opponents. However, onlythose considered to be highly attached to the Citypreferred to live in a place with similar climate.

3.4. Place-related self-esteem

The overall main significant effects of Attachment,Wilk’s Lambda ¼ .75, F(2, 180) ¼ 28.93, p ¼ :000, and

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0Statement 1 Statement 2

com

plet

ely

agre

e -

com

plet

ely

disa

gree

High Place Attachment

Low Place Attachment

Urban Person

Country Person

Fig. 4. Agreement with Statement 1 (‘‘I would rather prefer to live in a

place like the one where I live now.’’) and Statement 2 (‘‘I want to live

in a place with the same climate as here.’’) as a function of High vs.

Low Place Attachment and Urban vs. Country(open-air)-Person

Attitude.

Type of Person, Wilk’s Lambda ¼ .93, F(2, 180) ¼ 6.82,p ¼ :001 were obtained. These effects were associatedwith both statements. For Attachment, statement 1, F(1,180) ¼ 29.31, p ¼ :000, and statement 2, F(1,180) ¼ 56.46, p ¼ :000. For Type of Person, statement1, F(1, 180) ¼ 13.17, p ¼ :000, and statement 2, F(1,180) ¼ 7.27, p ¼ :008. Consequently, persons highlyattached to the City and those considered to be urban-persons felt significantly better in, and were more proudto live in the City than low attached persons andcountry(open-air)-persons did (see Fig. 5).

3.5. Place-related self-efficacy

Similar results as above were shown; namely,two overall main effects of Attachment, Wilk’s

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0Statement 1 Statement 2

com

plet

ely

agre

e -

com

plet

ely

disa

gree

High Place Attachment

Low Place Attachment

Urban Person

Country Person

Fig. 5. Agreement with Statement 1 (‘‘I feel good when I am in this

part of the town.’’) and Statement 2 (‘‘I am proud to live in this part of

the town.’’) as a function of High vs. Low Place Attachment and

Urban vs. Country(open-air)-Person Attitude.

ARTICLE IN PRESSI. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218214

Lambda ¼ .82, F(2, 180) ¼ 18.73, p ¼ :000, and Type ofPerson, Wilk’s Lambda ¼ .93, F(2, 180) ¼ 6.21,p ¼ :002. For Attachment, these effects were associatedwith both statements; statement 1, F(1, 180) ¼ 28.53,p ¼ :000, and statement 2, F(1, 180) ¼ 14.58, p ¼ :000.For Type of Person, however, only association withstatement 2 was shown to be significant, F(1,180) ¼ 11.34, p ¼ :001. As can be seen in Fig. 6, thisindicates that high compared to low attached residentsfelt significantly more safe and secure, and carried outeasier their everyday life in the City. In addition,urban compared to country(open-air)-persons felt thattheir everyday life was significantly easier to carry out inthe City.

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0Statement 1 Statement 2

com

plet

ely

agre

e -

com

plet

ely

disa

gree

High Place Attachment

Low Place Attachment

Urban Person

Country Person

Fig. 6. Agreement with Statement 1 (‘‘I feel safe and secure in this part

of the town.’’) and Statement 2 (‘‘Everything I need in my everyday life

is here.’’) as a function of High vs. Low Place Attachment and Urban

vs. Country(open-air)-Person Attitude.

3.6. Causal modelling of place attachment and place

identity

Giving the results obtained we might conclude thatthere is a causal link from place attachment to place-related identity processes, meaning that persons con-sidered to be highly attached to their residential areapromote their place-related identity processes signifi-cantly more than those considered to be not attached tothat area. However and as pointed out in Section 2, theinferences to be drawn from a quasi-experimentcompared to a ‘‘true’’ experiment should be consideredweaker. This means that we still do not know if thecausal link between place attachment and place identityproceeds from attachment to identity or vice versa.To test this association the structural equation model-

ling was used (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1993). Two measuresof fit are reported: (1) w2 values (low values indicatebetter fits), degrees of freedom, number of cases andcorresponding p values; and (2) RMSEA values whichabove .10 indicate a poor fit, below .05 indicate a verygood fit (Steiger, 1994) and up to .08 a reasonable fit(Browne & Cudeck, 1993). The RMSEA model fit indexis not sample-size dependent and it takes into account amodel’s parsimony (McDonald & Marsh, 1990).

Structural model of place identity. The followingconceptually relevant models of place-related identitywere tested, with ten manifest (observed) variables (tenitems, statements) grouping around one (general identityprocess), three (processes of distinctiveness, continuityand self-evaluation), four (processes of distinctiveness,continuity, self-esteem and self-efficacy) or five (pro-cesses of distinctiveness, referent continuity, congruentcontinuity, self-esteem and self-efficacy) latent (under-lying) variables (see Table 1):

one (SM1; Structural Model 1) general place-relatedidentity process; comprising all ten statements;three (SM2) place-related identity processes; compris-ing statements grouped around processes of distinc-tiveness, continuity (referent and congruent) and self-evaluation (self-esteem and self-efficacy);four (SM3) place-related identity processes; compris-ing statements grouped around processes of distinc-tiveness, continuity (referent and congruent), self-esteem and self-efficacy;

Table 1

Structural modelling (SM) statistics for four place related identity

models

Model Commentary w2 df p RMSEA

SM1 One-identity process 178.75 35 o.00 .10

SM2 Three-identity processes 151.60 32 o.00 .10

SM3 Four-identity processes 146.05 29 o.00 .10

SM4 Five-identity processes 100.38 25 o.00 .08

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Statement 1

Statement 2

Place-Related

Distinctiveness

Statement 1

Statement 2

Place-Referent

Continuity

Statement 1

Statement 2

Place-Congruent

Continuity

Statement 1

Statement 2

Place-Related

Self-Esteem

Statement 1

Statement 2

Place-Related

Self-Efficacy

0.69

0.54

0.56

0.60

0.97

0.36

0.78

0.77

0.39

0.54

Fig. 7. A model of place-related identity, showing the grouping of ten

manifest (observed) variables (statements) around five latent (under-

lying) variables of place-related distinctiveness, place-referent con-

tinuity, place-congruent continuity, place-related self-esteem and

place-related self-efficacy. The paths represent significant, po:00,standardised estimates; i.e. regression coefficients (see Joreskog, 1999).

I. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218 215

five (SM4) place-related identity processes; compris-ing statements grouped around processes of distinc-tiveness, referent continuity, congruent continuity,self-esteem and self-efficacy.

Note that there is no two-place-related identityprocesses version, because it is not theoretically valid.In other words, it is not conceptually relevant to assumethat the three processes of distinctiveness, continuityand self-evaluation can be reduced to two processes;only to one (a general identity process; SM1).As can be seen in Table 1, it was the structural model

of five place-related identity processes (see also Fig. 7)that best described the observed data and that showed amost reasonable fit, w2 (25, N ¼ 402) ¼ 100.38, po:00,RMSEA ¼ .08.

Structural model of place attachment and place

identity. Previous research has indicated a causal linkfrom place attachment to place identity (e.g. Giuliani,2003; Twigger-Ross et al., 2003 for this discussion). Thishypothesis and the opposite one were tested in thissection.As shown above a model of five place-related identity

processes showed a most reasonable fit. However, thismodel cannot at first been used in this section because itshould automatically lead to a multiple regressionanalyses when modelling from identity (five variables)to attachment (one variable) but not vice versa. Thus, totest the direction of the attachment—identity link, astatistically valid one-general-place-identity, a G-factor,model was computed by eliminating those items (state-ments) that showed weak loadings to this model. A G-factor model with seven items (out of ten) showed anestimated reliability of .82 and a fit of w2 (14,N ¼ 402) ¼ 56.16, po.00, RMSEA ¼ .089. This modelwas used in subsequent structural modelling, testing thelinks between type of person attitude and placeattachment and/or place identity. In addition, severalother (observed) variables were controlled for instructural modelling such as residential-time.According to these tests the only manifest (observed)

variable that did not weaken the structural model, i.e.the place attachment and place identity links, and thuscould be added, was the residential-time variable. Amodel of residential time - place attachment - placeidentity showed a fit of w2 (27, N ¼ 384) ¼ 98.39,po.00, RMSEA ¼ .08 compared to the model ofresidential time - place identity - place attachment,w2 (27, N ¼ 384) ¼ 128.60, po.00, RMSEA ¼ .10.The next step was to change the G-factor model with

the model of five place-identity processes, because placeattachment was indicated to precede place identity; thus,to test the link from residential time to place attachmentto the five place identity processes. This model showed amost reasonable fit of w2 (40, N ¼ 384) ¼ 151.75,po.00, RMSEA ¼ .08. As can be seen in Fig. 8, the

strongest relations (highest regression coefficients) wereindicated between place attachment and identity pro-cesses of distinctiveness, self-esteem and self-efficacy.Generally speaking, this model suggests that prolong-

ing one’s stay at a place amplifies one’s emotional bondto that place which in turn leads that a place becomesmore a part of one’s place-related identity.

4. Discussion

In general, the results were shown to be consistentwith the hypotheses set out for this study; e.g. with the

ARTICLE IN PRESS

ResidentialTime

Place Attachment

Place-Related

Distinctiveness

Place-Referent

Continuity

Place-Congruent

Continuity

Place-Related

Self-Esteem

Place-Related

Self-Efficacy

0.69

0.45

0.400.36

0.52

0.58

Fig. 8. A causal model of residential time, place attachment and place identity, showing a causal link proceeding from time to attachment to identity.

The paths represent significant, po:00, standardised estimates; i.e. regression coefficients (see Joreskog, 1999).

I. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218216

Twigger-Ross and Uzzell (1996) findings suggesting thatthe identity processes may be related to a location. Intheir words: ‘‘ywe suggest that all identifications havelocation implications, place is part of the content of anidentification.’’ (Twigger-Ross & Uzzell, 1996, p. 218).A significant relation between the City and the residents’all place-related identity processes yielded; however,only for those highly attached to that area. Moreprecisely and in line with Hypothesis 1, it was shownthat persons highly attached to the City compared tothose that were not:

(1)

Felt more sense of togetherness with others living inthe City and felt more like a ‘‘city-person’’ (place-related distinctiveness; see Fig. 2).

(2)

Both the City and its climate reminded them of theenvironment of their childhood (place-referent con-tinuity; see Fig. 3). They preferred to live in a placelike the City as well as in a place with similar climate(place-congruent continuity; see Fig. 4).

(3)

They felt better in, and were more proud to live in,the City (place-related self-esteem; see Fig. 5).

(4)

They felt more safe and secure, and they carried outeasier their everyday life in the City (place-relatedself-efficacy; see Fig. 6).

The second hypothesis outlined in this study was thatclimate may be a part of the residents’ place identifica-tion; i.e. associated with the place-related identityprocesses of continuity and that this connection maybe more pronounced in the high than in low attachedresidents. As predicted, the perceived climate of the Cityreminded the highly attached residents of the climate inthe environment of their childhood. They also preferredto live in a place with the same climate as in the City.This indicates that the place’s perceived climate is a partof those persons’ present beliefs (place-congruent con-

tinuity) and their autobiographical memory (place-

referent continuity), as was suggested by Knez (2003a).The results also showed, according to Hypothesis 1,

that the place-related identity processes of place-related

distinctiveness (see Fig. 2), place-congruent continuity

(see Fig. 4), place-related self-esteem and place-related

self-efficacy (see Figs. 5 and 6) were significantly more

ARTICLE IN PRESSI. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218 217

pronounced in urban compared to country(open-air)-persons. This was especially expected for the place-related distinctiveness, a process by which personsdistinguish themselves from others; but was also shownin identity processes indicating that the City for urbancompared to country(open-air)-persons is: (1) morepreferred type of environment (place-congruent con-tinuity); (2) it gives them more positive feelings aboutthemselves (place-related self-esteem); (3) and it morefacilitates their everyday life (place-related self-efficacy).Consequently and in general, empirical evidence on

links between place attachment and place identity onurban vs. country(open-air)-person attitude and placeidentity were shown as well as a significant role ofclimate in subjects’ conceptions of a place, especially forthose considered to be highly attached to theirresidential area. This is consistent with the researchrelating identity theory to people’s bonds to a residentialarea (e.g. Bonaiuto et al., 2002; Twigger-Ross & Uzzell,1996) and questions, in general, theory of place (e.g.Canter, 1997) not taking into account a place’s climate.The place theory does, indeed, involve physical attri-butes (e.g. Canter, 1977); however, these attributes areoften defined in relation to an architectural view of aplace comprising physical components such as size,colour, shape, form and texture. Thus, ignoring one ofthe fundamental objectives, physical parameters, of aplace, its climate; which is an embedded part of a place(Knez, 2003b) and which has an impact on individual,social, economic (Parker, 1995) and criminal behaviour(Rotton & Cohn, 2002) and on meanings we attribute toplaces (Knez, 2003a).In contrast to Hypothesis 3, the structural equation

modelling suggested a model of five place-relatedidentity processes (see Table 1 and Fig. 7). Thischallenges Breakwell’s model, as outlined in, e.g.Twigger-Ross & Uzzell (1996), considering the twocontinuity processes as one.Furthermore, a significant causal link proceeding

from citizens’ residential time to their place attachmentand to their five place-related identity processes wasindicated (see Fig. 8). The relation between placeattachment and residential time is in line with Hidalgoand Hernandez (2001), considering attachment as anaffective positive bond between a person and itsresidential environment that result in a strong tendencyof that person to maintain closeness to such a place. Thecausal link from place attachment to place identityreplicates the MANOVA results reported in the firstpart of the Results section and is consonant withHypothesis 4, that in line with some earlier researchsuggested that place attachment may precede placeidentity development (see e.g. Giuliani, 2003; Twigger-Ross et al., 2003 for this discussion).Thus, the structural equation modelling of the data

obtained indicates that prolonging one’s stay at a place

intensifies one’s emotional bond to that place (placeattachment) which in turn leads that a place, to a higherdegree, becomes a part of one’s conceptual and extendedselves (Neisser, 1988), in this context a part of thecontent of the five place-related identity processes ofdistinctiveness, referent continuity, congruent continu-ity, self-esteem and self-efficacy.In conclusion, place-related attachment and identity

are phenomena that evolve over time and are guided byinterwoven and interrelated psychological and socio-logical elements in a most complex way. Given this, thepresent study could certainly be criticized by, e.g. notusing more items/scales measuring the latent constructsof place-related attachment and identity and for notdelivering qualitative data on the longitudinal progressof these phenomena. Still and generally speaking, theresults obtained are consonant with the more explora-tive and qualitative data on place-related attachmentand identity (e.g. Gustafson 2001; Twigger-Ross &Uzzell, 1996). Secondly, they address climate as animportant perceived component of a place (Knez,2003a, b) and, thirdly, they indicate tentatively a linkbetween residential time and place-related attachmentand identity (e.g. Giuliani, 2003; Hidalgo & Hernandez,2001; Twigger-Ross et al., 2003).

References

Altman, I., & Low, S. (1992). Place attachment. New York: Plenum

press.

Bonaiuto, M., Carrus, G., Martorella, H., & Bonnes, M. (2002). Local

identity processes and environmental attitudes in land use changes:

The case of natural protected area. Journal of Economic

Psychology, 23, 631–653.

Breakwell, G. M. (1986). Coping with threatened identity. London:

Methuen.

Breakwell, G. M. (1992). Processes of self-evaluation: Efficacy and

estrangement. In G. M. Breakwell (Ed.), Social psychology of

identity and self-concept. Surrey: Surrey University Press.

Breakwell, G. M. (1993). Integrating paradigms: Methodological

implications. In G. M. Breakwell, & D. Canter (Eds.), Empirical

approaches to social representations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing

model fit. In K. A. Bollen, & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural

equation models. London: Sage.

Canter, D. (1977). The psychology of place. London: The Architectural

Press Ltd.

Canter, D. (1997). The facets of place. In G. T. Moore, & R. W.

Marams (Eds.), Advances in environment, behavior, and design

(pp. 109–147). Plenum press: New York.

Giuliani, M. V. (2003). Theory of attachment and place attachment. In

M. Bonnes, T. Lee, & M. Bonaiuto (Eds.), Psychological theories

for environmental issues (pp. 137–170). Aldershot: Ashgate publish-

ing limited.

Gustafson, P. (2001). Meanings of place: Everyday experience and

theoretical conceptualisations. Journal of Environmental Psychol-

ogy, 21, 5–16.

Hidalgo, M. C., & Hernandez, B. (2001). Place attachment:

Conceptual and empirical questions. Journal of Environmental

Psychology, 21, 273–281.

ARTICLE IN PRESSI. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218218

Honess, T., & Yardley, K. (Eds.). (1987). Self and identity: Perspectives

across the lifespan. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Howell, D. C. (2002). Statistical methods for psychology (5th edition).

Duxbury, CA: Thomson Learning.

Joreskog, K. G. (1999). How large can a standardized coefficient be? In

the help-file of the LISREL program.

Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation

modeling with the Simplis command language. Hillsdale, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publisher.

Jorgensen, B. S., & Stedman, R. C. (2001). Sense of a place as an

attitude: Lakeshore owners attitudes toward their properties.

Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 233–248.

Knez, I. (2003a). Memories for climate and places. The 5th

international conference on urban climate (ICUC-5), September

2003, Lodz, Poland, Vol. 2, pp. 69–72.

Knez, I. (2003b). Climate: A nested structure in places. The 5th

international conference on urban climate (ICUC-5), September

2003, Lodz, Poland, Vol. 2, pp. 65–68.

Korpela, K. M. (1989). Place-identity as a product of environmental

self-regulation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 3, 241–256.

Korpela, K. M. (1992). Adolescents’ favourite places and environ-

mental self-regulation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 3,

249–258.

Liebert, R. M., & Liebert, L. L. (1995). Science and behavior: An

introduction to methods of psychological research. New York:

Prentice-Hall.

McDonald, R. P., & Marsh, H. W. (1990). Choosing a multivariate

model: Noncentrality and goodness of fit. Psychological Bulletin,

107, 247–255.

McGuigan, F. J. (1983). Experimental psychology: Methods of

research. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Manty, J., & Pressman, N. (Eds.). (1988). Cities designed for winter.

Helsinki: Building Book Ltd.

Neisser, U. (1988). Five kinds of self-knowledge. Philosophical

Psychology, 1, 35–59.

Nikolopoulou, M., Baker, N., & Steemers, K. (2001). Thermal comfort

in outdoor urban spaces: Understanding the human parameter.

Solar Energy, 70, 227–235.

Parker, P. M. (1995). Climatic effects on individual, social and economic

behavior. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Proshansky, H. M., Fabian, A. K., & Kaminoff, R. (1983). Place

identity: Physical world socialization of the self. Journal of

Environmental Psychology, 3, 57–83.

Relph, E. (1976). Place and placelessness. London: Pion.

Rotton, J., & Cohn, E. (2002). Climate, weather and crime. In R. B.

Bechtel, & A. Churchman (Eds.), Handbook of environmental

psychology (pp. 481–498). New York: Wiley.

Riley, R. B. (1992). Attachment to the ordinary landscape. In I.

Altman, & S. Low (Eds.), Place attachment (pp. 13–35). New York:

Plenum Press.

Ryden, K. C. (1993). Mapping the invisible landscape: Folklore, writing,

and the sense of place. Ithaca: University of Iowa Press.

Steiger, J. H. (1994). Statistica: Structural equation modeling. Tulsa,

OK: StatSoft, Inc.

Thorsson, S. (2003). Climate, air quality and thermal comfort in the

urban environment. A Doctoral Dissertation, Department of

Physical Geography, Earth Sciences Centre, Goteborgs University.

Twigger-Ross, C. L., Bonaiuto, M., & Breakwell, G. (2003). Identity

theories and environmental psychology. In M. Bonnes, T. Lee, &

M. Bonaiuto (Eds.), Psychological theories for environmental issues

(pp. 203–233). Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

Twigger-Ross, C. L., & Uzzell, D. L. (1996). Place and identity

processes. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16, 205–220.

Vignoles, V. L., Chryssochoou, X., & Breakwell, G. M. (2000). The

distinctiveness principle: Identity, Meaning, and the Bounds of

Cultural Relativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4,

337–354.

Zacharias, J., Stathopoulos, T., & Wu, H. (2001). Microclimate and

downtown open space activity. Environment and Behavior, 33,

296–315.