You are on page 1of 12

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218
www.elsevier.com/locate/yjevp

Attachment and identity as related to a place and
its perceived climate$
Igor Knez
Laboratory of Applied Psychology, Department of Technology and Built Environment, University of Ga¨vle, SE-801 76 Ga¨vle, 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

1. Introduction
$

This work was supported by a research grant from FORMAS, the
Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and
Spatial Planning. I would like to thank Anders Kjellberg, Terry Hartig
and the three anonymous reviewers for their helpful and significant
comments. Correspondence about this article should be addressed to
Igor Knez, Laboratory of Applied Psychology, Department of
Technology and Built Environment, University of Ga¨vle, SE-801 76
Ga¨vle, Sweden. E-mail: igor.knez@hig.se. 
Tel.: +46 26 64 81 11; fax: +46 26 64 81 81.
E-mail address: igor.knez@hig.se.
0272-4944/$ - see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.03.003

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 and
work. Thus, we make and gain emotional and cognitive
conceptions of physical environments that are related to
us 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, architectural, historical, religious, social and psychological

1992. Place and identity Identity. a continent (North America). 13) writes an: ‘‘y affective relationship between people and the landscape that goes beyond cognition. 1993). 2002) and favourite places (Korpela. The research of Breakwell (1986. ‘‘place attachment’’. a neighbourhood around Broadway. earlier definitions: ‘‘y do not allow us to differentiate attachment from other closely related concepts’’ (Hidalgo & Hernandez. a strong tendency of that person to maintain closeness to such a place. 1. 1996. 1983. childhood (‘‘conservation and evolution of self’’) and adolescence (‘‘consolidation of self’’) (Honess & Yardley. Furthermore.g. The present paper concentrates on the links between place attachment and place-related identity processes. private self (‘‘appears when we discover that our conscious experience are exclusively our own’’) and conceptual self (‘‘a self-concept that draws its meaning from a network of socially based assumptions and theories about human nature in general and ourselves in particular’’). 2001. & Bonnes. 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 alternative places is perceived to underpin behaviour’’) were less related to the sense of place construct than was the dimension of attachment (‘‘emotional connections to place’’). Bonaiuto. p. In parallel. namely. meaning that: ‘‘y the development of self-identity is not restricted to making distinctions between oneself and significant others. p. It is as Riley (1992. more specifically. 1989. Secondly. generally speaking. and discusses the physical parameters outlined in place theory in general by relating a place’s perceived climate to place attachment and place identity. the main characteristic of ‘‘place attachment’’ is the affective positive bond between a person and a place. According to these authors. Twigger-Ross and Uzzell (1996). and Vignoles. More. Carrus.g. Across the lifespan a person’s identity can also be recognized as a product of primary relationships (‘‘emergence of self’’). Twigger-Ross et al. but extends with no less importance to objects and things. and Kaminoff (1983) extended identity theory to the area of environmental psychology and proposed that place identity is a ‘‘physical world socialisation of the self’’. p. comprises five kinds of self-knowledge that are not experienced as separate.. and the very spaces and places in which they are founded’’ (Proshansky et al. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218 connotations and it is. p.g.(2003).1. Canter (1977. in addition. knowledge and beliefs. a town (New York).2. 1. 57). and that are based on several different forms of information: ecological self (‘‘directly perceived with respect to the immediate physical environment’’). not taking into account the physical dimensions of a place. emphasizing the role of a ‘‘favourite’’ place in. Fabian. Three main constructs accounting for the psychology of place are indicated in environmental psychology. Korpela (1989. a place is: ‘‘ymuch more than a point in space y [it] takes in the meanings which people assign to that landscape through the processes of living in it’’. Chryssochoou and Breakwell (2000) has suggested four processes related to place identity: (1) place-related distinctiveness (place identification. a nation (USA). a part of a town (Manhattan). Place and attachment Place attachment is a bond that we develop toward a place that embodies an emotional content (see Giuliani. ‘‘I’m living in a town because it reminds me of the environment of my childhood. e.ARTICLE IN PRESS 208 I. according to Neisser (1988. 5) it: ‘‘yinvolves an interplay of affect and emotions. no general agreement on the relationships between these constructs. to distinguish myself from others. not a New-Yorker. In the words of Ryden (1993. interpersonal self (‘‘directly perceived and established by species-specific signals of emotional rapport and communication’’). defines an internal. 1992) has related place identity to environmental self-regulation.’’) (2) (a) place-referent continuity (place as a coherent reference for my past. But according to Altman and Low (1992. However. e. ‘‘I’m a Londoner. located at several levels of a spatial scale. Altman and Low (1992) proposed ‘‘place attachment’’ as a generic theoretical concept in person–environment transactions. pp. maintaining a coherence in one’s self. 274). It. For example. Martorella. they argued that the term is too ambiguous. ‘‘place identity’’ and ‘‘sense of place’’. an attitude. preference. Proshansky.g. 1997) has over the last decades formulated a systematic proposal towards a ‘‘place theory’’ suggesting mechanisms operating for the psychology of place. at the moment. or judgement’’. 1992). Jorgensen and Stedman (2001) suggested ‘‘sense of place’’ as a multidimensional construct. extended self (‘‘based on memory and anticipation’’). 1987). 37–38). e. e.’’) . p. 35). 2003 for a recent review). subjective concept of oneself as an individual. comprising the attachment dimension. Hidalgo and Hernandez (2001) pointed out that much previous place attachment research has viewed places as referents for social identification. Still others have related ‘‘identity theory’’ to people’s bonds to residential environments (Twigger-Ross & Uzzell. There is however. and behaviours and actions in reference to a place’’.

ARTICLE IN PRESS I. 2003). we attribute to a place. a measure of the urban-person vs. It has an impact on individual. it not only constitutes objectively a place but also subjectively influences the way we experience and remember a place (Knez. e. its climate. & Steemers. ‘‘Vallgraven’’. The general purpose of the present study was to investigate the relations between attachment and identity as related to a place and its perceived climate. especially to the conceptual and extended selves. Place and climate Concerning a theory of place. Present study Conceptually. hence. Based on the Twigger-Ross and Uzzell (1996) results showing a role of high attachment in maintenance of place-related identity processes and that the participants were City citizens.’’) (3) place-related self-esteem (e. meaning that an attitude of this kind may have relevance for the place-related identity process of distinctiveness. 1996. 1976. 2000). as was recently pointed out by Knez (2003b). 1977). country(open-air)-person attitude on residents’ place (the City of Gothenburg. This experience has. as he calls it: functional differentiation. 1977) proposing three key aspects of place. Stathopoulos. Thorsson. low attachment and urban-person vs. in the words of Hidalgo and Hernandez (2001). 2002) and on meanings we attribute to places (Knez. Hypothesis 2. related to our identity (Knez.’’) (4) place-related self-efficacy (e. however others have grown up in towns designed for summer.4. In addition. meanings we attribute).’’). More. it was also predicted that perceived climate as a part of the identity processes of continuity may be more pronounced in high compared to low attached residents. country(open-air)-person attitude was included because the participants were City citizens. 1. combine in emotional sensations of places. a significant insufficiency in these theoretical accounts. an attachment. compared to weather that describes momentary or temporal variations. b) suggestions it was predicted that climate may be one of the meanings.g.. low) of place attachment. (2) and if the perceived climate of this place was a part of the place-related identity processes of continuity. For instance. namely.g. a difference in placerelated distinctiveness (place identification) was especially expected between those considered to be urban vs. thus.1 This ecological variable. a positive bond. place objectives. the place-related identity processes are also related to Neisser’s (1988) five kinds of selfknowledge. 1986. 1. scale of interaction and aspects of design. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218 (b) place-congruent continuity (place compatible with my current beliefs. ‘‘Everything I need in my everyday life is in the town. monthly. Canter (1997) has further developed his earlier model (Canter. However. In line with the Knez (2003a. In consequence. my opinions of how I want to live. Vignoles et al. More precisely: (1) the influence of high vs. social. These and other microclimatic parameters such as temperature and humidity may also influence our perception of comfort (Nikolopoulou. This was done by using Breakwell’s four processes model of place identity as a framework (e. 1992. 2003a). 1995) and criminal behaviour (Rotton & Cohn. 1993.3. four hypotheses were outlined and tested: Hypothesis 1.g. 2001. country(open-air)-persons. it was hypothesized that high attachment and urban-person attitude would affect more residents’ place-related identity processes than low attachment and country(open-air)-person attitude would do. (3) as well as if climate as a part of the placerelated identity processes of continuity was influenced by the level (high vs. Baker. . ‘‘I’m living in a town because that type of milieu is congruent with my present self. 2003b). a physical parameter of a place. plays an important role in everyday life. Canter. For example. now proposing four ‘‘facets’’ of place. Breakwell. Relph. applying to the notion of ‘‘what I am’’ (conceptual self) and of ‘‘one’s life-narratives’’ (extended self) that are continually enlarged and revised. 1988). evolved a tendency in these latter persons to maintain closeness to such a place. in general. ‘‘Living in a town makes me feel good and/or I’m proud to live in a town. Why? Because climate is nested in places. affect our beliefs. the residents’ place identification. to a ‘‘warm’’ place. and 1 Climate refers to spatial or geographical variations in meteorological conditions based on data that have been averaged over 30–40 years or more. is the neglect of one of the fundamental aspects of place objectives. several authors have sketched similar accounts (e. in this context related to the place identity processes of place-referent continuity (a referent to past experiences/ selves) and place-congruent continuity (a fit between a place and a resident’s present values). daily or hourly average of the variations in meteorological conditions (Rotton & Cohn.g. Twigger-Ross & Uzzell. Twigger-Ross et al. Sweden) related identity processes was investigated. some of us have grown up in cities designed for winter (Ma¨nty & Pressman. attitudes and knowledge of a place. economic (Parker. Given all this.. in other words. 2003a). 2001) and our perception of its beauty may vary as a function of its microclimatic conditions such as sunlight and wind. namely.e. that is. 2002). 209 finally be a part of our self-knowledge. physical (form and space). & Wu. the functional use of a place (Zacharias. i. 2003. parameters. functional (activities) and psychological (emotion/cognition.g.

Giuliani. the relation between place attachment and place identity was tested. 1) were sent a questionnaire about ‘‘places. the final response rate was 60. with ca. . The questions analysed and reported in the present paper concerned only those living in the City. climate. Sweden (see Fig. 1996).3% (724 responses). selected from a register of companies located within the City. fosse) is a very dense city core with a typical European design.g. The City (‘‘Vallgraven’’ ¼ moat. 2. Hypothesis 4. climate and weather’’. 2001)).1. the City as well as to five places located in this part of town: a park.g. Twigger-Ross & Uzzell. a walk and a viewpoint place by the sea/harbour. By the method of structural equation modelling the Breakwell’s model of place identity was tested. Twigger-Ross et al..ARTICLE IN PRESS 210 I. a stratified sample. Data related to place (City) attachment and place (City) related identity will only be reported in the present study.e. After three contacts (two mail and one phone). Gothenburg is the second largest city of Sweden situated on the West Coast. 2003. a large open square. four place-related identity processes were predicted. Response rate. general and specific questions about weather. They were randomly identified from a register of population. Questions about demographic variables. 1. behaviours and attitudes related to Gothenburg. Of these responses 47% (340) lived and 53% worked (384) worked in the City. The questionnaire comprised a number of sections. individuals from the random sample plus those from the stratified sample that also were shown to live in the City. 2003 for this discussion) a link from place attachment to place identity was predicted. Following this model (see e. The questionnaire was also sent to 600 persons working in the City. and an indoor shopping centre. i. Fig. Sample A total of 600 households located within the City of Gothenburg. Method 2. a small courtyard surrounded by low buildings. 3500 residents. In other words: Does causality proceed from attachment to identity or vice versa? In line with some previous research (see e. ‘‘Vallgraven’’. By the method of structural equation modelling (and by controlling for residential time that has been indicated as an important factor in evolving a place attachment (Hidalgo & Hernandez. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218 Hypothesis 3.

62.7).5 vs.’’ and ‘‘Everything I need in my everyday life is here.’’ and ‘‘I am proud to live in this part of the town. The question was: ‘‘What do you think about the part of the town where you live?’’ Subjects were asked to answer this question by responding to the following statements. Finally. 178) ¼ 23. The residents lower than 3 (1. Compared with a ‘‘true experiment’’ (Liebert & Liebert. Ten items/statements measuring the five place-related identity processes (5 processes  2 statements). Country(open-air)-person).79. this means 211 that the inferences drawn about the causal relationships between independent and dependent variables are considered to be weaker.’’) (b) place-congruent continuity (statements—‘‘I would rather prefer to live in a place like the one where I live now. 178) ¼ 52. These items/statements measuring the five identity processes were derived after reviewing previous research (Twigger-Ross & Uzzell. which can be violated by unequal sample sizes. p. and for the dependent variable placereferent-continuity-statement 1.’’ and ‘‘The climate here is like the climate in the environment of my childhood. that no significant interaction related to this dependent variable was obtained (see below). 5) were considered to be ‘‘low attached’’. 1995). Place-related distinctiveness The overall main significant effects of Attachment.’’ and ‘‘I feel like a ‘‘city person’’.) (2) (a) place-referent continuity (statements—‘‘This part of the town reminds me of the environment of my childhood. country(open-air)person attitude.’’) (4) place-related self-efficacy (‘‘I feel safe and secure in this part of the town.’’). Number of subjects in each 2  2 cell were: High/Urban ¼ 59. For all other dependent variables and independent variable cell cross combinations the Howell (2002) criterion was fulfilled. with the following between-subject independent variables: 2 Attachment (High vs. the SPSS ‘‘Type III sums of squares’’ model was used because it controls for unbalanced cell frequencies. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218 2. 2) were considered to be ‘‘high attached’’ and those higher than 3 (4. the amusements of the city) or country(open-air)-person (take pleasure from the sea. It must be noted. 1996): (1) place-related distinctiveness (statements—‘‘I feel a sense of togetherness with others who live in this part of the town. the analysis of variance is most likely to be valid. 1983) was used. Independent variables. F(2. p ¼ :000 were obtained. the difference between the smallest (Low/Country(open-air)) and the largest (High/Country(open-air)) variance was more than four times (. these effects were 2 One of the assumptions the analysis of variance is based on is the homogeneity of variance. This item was a Swedish translation of one of the place attachment items (‘‘I feel very attached to this area’’) from an Attachment Scale used by Twigger-Ross and Uzzell (1996). Respondents’ attachment to the City (‘‘My bonds to this part of town are strong’’) was measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree).55.65. Design A nonequivalent comparison-group quasi-experimental design (McGuigan.ARTICLE IN PRESS I. 5) were considered to be ‘‘country(open-air)person’’.2. Results All data were subjected for MANOVAs (multivariate analyses of variance2) because there were two dependent measures (statements) measuring each underlying identity process.’’ and ‘‘I want to live in a place with the same climate as here. on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree). Measures Identity processes. 3. 340) writes: ‘‘yif the largest variance is no more than four times the smallest. the nature) are you?’’ was also measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (mostly urbanperson) to 5 (mostly country(open-air)-person). Type of Person ¼ 180 (Urban ¼ 116+Country(open-air) ¼ 64). Low/ Urban ¼ 57. High/Country(open-air) ¼ 17.3.’’ Only in one of all the analyses of variance performed below.1. Place attachment and urban vs. Low)  2 Type of Person (Urban vs. Respondents lower than 3 (1. 2. the shops. and as reported below. only significant main effects. F(2. Place-related identity processes were measured with 10 self-report items/statements (two statements  five identity process). Note that the role of climate (Hypothesis 2) is measured in relation to the two place-related processes of continuity (see 2a and 2b above). Wilk’s Lambda ¼ . and Type of Person. Wilk’s Lambda ¼ . Low) and two types of person (Urban vs. This means that subjects scoring 3 were discarded. Dependent variables. 2) were considered to be ‘‘urban-person’’ and those higher than 3 (4.’’) (3) place-related self-esteem (statements—‘‘I feel good when I am in this part of the town. country(open-air)-person attitude: ‘‘How much urban-person (take pleasure from the street-life. Total number of subjects for each independent variable were: Attachment ¼ 180 (High ¼ 76+Low ¼ 104). Respondents’ urban vs. the woods. 2. no significant interactions were obtained. Low/Country(open-air) ¼ 47. . In addition. Two levels of place attachment (High vs. 3. however. According to the follow-up univariate F-tests. Yet and as Howell (2002. p ¼ :000. Country(open-air)).

associated with both statements.95. 3).3. F(1. Thus. and statement 2.31.’’) and Statement 2 (‘‘I feel like a ‘‘city person’’. p ¼ :000.0 3. Country(open-air)-Person Attitude. F(1. 179) ¼ 18. and statement 2. these effects were associated with both statements.’’) as a function of High vs.89. this indicates that subjects that were highly attached to their residential area and those that were considered to be urban-persons felt significantly more sense of togetherness with others living in the City.’’) and Statement 2 (‘‘The climate here is like the climate in the environment of my childhood. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218 212 Statement 1 Statement 2 5. p ¼ :000. Low Place Attachment and Urban vs.0 High Place Attachment Low Place Attachment Urban Person Country Person Lambda ¼ . Wilk’s Lambda ¼ . 2.0 1. that of a main effect of Attachment.60. For Attachment.completely disagree 4. As can be seen in Fig. p ¼ :022. completely agree . statement 1. p ¼ :016.ARTICLE IN PRESS I.completely disagree 4.’’) as a function of High vs.0 2. 180) ¼ 17. Place-referent continuity Only one overall effect was shown to be significant. . 179) ¼ 10. 180) ¼ 5. 3. 2. p ¼ :000 were obtained. Wilk’s Fig.2. For Type of Person.0 3. 180) ¼ 34. and Type of Person. Wilk’s Lambda ¼ .93. F(2.69.0 Fig. statement 1.90.70.0 3. F(1. Agreement with Statement 1 (‘‘I feel a sense of togetherness with others who live in this part of the town. persons considered to be highly attached to the City felt significantly more that the City and its climate reminded them of their childhood environment and its climate. Agreement with Statement 1 (‘‘This part of the town reminds me of the environment of my childhood. 178) ¼ 44. This effect was associated with statement 1. 174) ¼ 5. p ¼ :003. Low Place Attachment and Urban vs. completely agree . and statement 2.37. F(1. F(2.0 1. Place-congruent continuity The overall main significant effects of Attachment.33. and felt significantly more like a ‘‘city-person’’ than persons with low attachment and those considered to be country(openair)-persons did. than it did for low attached residents (see Fig. Country(open-air)-Person Attitude. 178) ¼ 9. F(1. 178) ¼ 105.0 Statement 1 Statement 2 5. p ¼ :000.82. F(1. F(2. p ¼ :000. p ¼ :000. a 3.0 High Place Attachment Low Place Attachment Urban Person Country Person 2.83. For Attachment.

p ¼ :000. p ¼ :081. namely. p ¼ :000.75.82.0 3. F(1. p ¼ :000. Low Place Attachment and Urban vs. Agreement with Statement 1 (‘‘I would rather prefer to live in a place like the one where I live now.completely disagree 4. F(1. p ¼ :008. For Attachment. F(1. 180) ¼ 28.17. only those considered to be highly attached to the City preferred to live in a place with similar climate. 180) ¼ 7.0 2.’’) as a function of High vs.’’) and Statement 2 (‘‘I want to live in a place with the same climate as here. Fig. and statement 2.’’) and Statement 2 (‘‘I am proud to live in this part of the town. Place-related self-esteem 3. Wilk’s Lambda ¼ . However. 3. Country(open-air)-Person Attitude.ARTICLE IN PRESS I. only association with statement 1 was shown to be significant. and Similar results as above were shown.’’) as a function of High vs. Agreement with Statement 1 (‘‘I feel good when I am in this part of the town.46.0 2.0 High Place Attachment High Place Attachment Low Place Attachment Low Place Attachment Urban Person Urban Person Country Person Country Person 4. persons highly attached to the City and those considered to be urbanpersons felt significantly better in. statement 1. 180) ¼ 29. For Type of Person. 179) ¼ 36. and were more proud to live in the City than low attached persons and country(open-air)-persons did (see Fig. 5.27. p ¼ :001 were obtained. 179) ¼ 16. and a strong tendency to a significant association with statement 2. Wilk’s Lambda ¼ . As can be seen in Fig. F(1. Place-related self-efficacy The overall main significant effects of Attachment.93.0 Fig. Type of Person. F(2. p ¼ :000. p ¼ :000. 180) ¼ 6.0 1.93. and statement 2. Consequently. F(1. statement 1.08. 179) ¼ 3. F(1. Low Place Attachment and Urban vs.completely disagree completely agree . 4.0 completely agree . Country(open-air)-Person Attitude.43. F(1.5. 4. p ¼ :000. These effects were associated with both statements.0 3. two overall main effects of Attachment. Wilk’s Statement 1 Statement 2 Statement 1 5.0 1. For Type of Person. .4. 180) ¼ 13.31. this indicates that subjects with high attachment and those considered to be urban-persons preferred to live in the City compared to their opponents. 180) ¼ 56. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218 213 significant association with statement 1. F(2. 5).46.0 Statement 2 5.

To test this association the structural equation modelling was used (Jo¨reskog & So¨rbom.’’) and Statement 2 (‘‘Everything I need in my everyday life is here. only association with statement 2 was shown to be significant. 1990). congruent continuity. number of cases and corresponding p values. Model Commentary w2 df p RMSEA SM1 SM2 SM3 SM4 One-identity process Three-identity processes Four-identity processes Five-identity processes 178.’’) as a function of High vs.58. In addition.93. urban compared to country(open-air)-persons felt that their everyday life was significantly easier to carry out in the City. F(2. 180) ¼ 14. Structural model of place identity. F(2.05 indicate a very good fit (Steiger. these effects were associated with both statements.0 one (SM1. 1993). however. and statement 2. Two measures of fit are reported: (1) w2 values (low values indicate better fits). referent continuity. degrees of freedom. Causal modelling of place attachment and place identity Giving the results obtained we might conclude that there is a causal link from place attachment to placerelated identity processes. 180) ¼ 28. continuity (referent and congruent). Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218 214 Lambda ¼ .08 . four (SM3) place-related identity processes.08 a reasonable fit (Browne & Cudeck.53. 1994) and up to . Country(open-air)-Person Attitude. However and as pointed out in Section 2.10 .75 151.00 . As can be seen in Fig. three (processes of distinctiveness.38 35 32 29 25 o. Agreement with Statement 1 (‘‘I feel safe and secure in this part of the town. self-esteem and self-efficacy) or five (processes of distinctiveness. 180) ¼ 6. The RMSEA model fit index is not sample-size dependent and it takes into account a model’s parsimony (McDonald & Marsh. The following conceptually relevant models of place-related identity were tested. three (SM2) place-related identity processes. the inferences to be drawn from a quasi-experiment compared to a ‘‘true’’ experiment should be considered weaker. F(1.completely disagree 4. For Type of Person. with ten manifest (observed) variables (ten items.00 o. 180) ¼ 18. p ¼ :001.60 146.0 2. comprising statements grouped around processes of distinctiveness.ARTICLE IN PRESS I.73. Table 1 Structural modelling (SM) statistics for four place related identity models 1. selfesteem and self-efficacy. For Attachment. Low Place Attachment and Urban vs.00 o. statement 1.10 .21. This means that we still do not know if the causal link between place attachment and place identity proceeds from attachment to identity or vice versa. continuity and self-evaluation). p ¼ :000.0 Fig. self-esteem and self-efficacy) latent (underlying) variables (see Table 1): 3.0 High Place Attachment Low Place Attachment Urban Person Country Person completely agree . p ¼ :002. Structural Model 1) general place-related identity process.34. F(1.10 . Statement 1 Statement 2 5. four (processes of distinctiveness. p ¼ :000.00 o.05 100. 6. 6. meaning that persons considered to be highly attached to their residential area promote their place-related identity processes significantly more than those considered to be not attached to that area.82. and carried out easier their everyday life in the City.6.0 3. Wilk’s Lambda ¼ . continuity (referent and congruent) and selfevaluation (self-esteem and self-efficacy). 180) ¼ 11. this indicates that high compared to low attached residents felt significantly more safe and secure. comprising all ten statements. p ¼ :000. and (2) RMSEA values which above . continuity. and Type of Person. statements) grouping around one (general identity process). below . comprising statements grouped around processes of distinctiveness. 1993). F(1.10 indicate a poor fit.

place-referent continuity.60 Statement 2 Statement 1 0. congruent continuity. model was computed by eliminating those items (statements) that showed weak loadings to this model. this model suggests that prolonging one’s stay at a place amplifies one’s emotional bond to that place which in turn leads that a place becomes more a part of one’s place-related identity. RMSEA ¼ . referent continuity.ARTICLE IN PRESS I. regression coefficients (see Jo¨reskog. w2 (25. RMSEA ¼ . Discussion In general. po.16.39 Place-Related Self-Efficacy Statement 2 0. N ¼ 384) ¼ 151. i. 2003. This model was used in subsequent structural modelling. 4. po. As can be seen in Fig. A model of place-related identity. According to these tests the only manifest (observed) variable that did not weaken the structural model.10.60. place-related self-esteem and place-related self-efficacy. this model cannot at first been used in this section because it should automatically lead to a multiple regression analyses when modelling from identity (five variables) to attachment (one variable) but not vice versa. because place attachment was indicated to precede place identity. In other words.00. A Gfactor model with seven items (out of ten) showed an estimated reliability of . Previous research has indicated a causal link from place attachment to place identity (e. Giuliani. 8.place identity showed a fit of w2 (27. the results were shown to be consistent with the hypotheses set out for this study.00.00. A model of residential time . continuity and self-evaluation can be reduced to two processes.82 and a fit of w2 (14. In addition. The next step was to change the G-factor model with the model of five place-identity processes.54 Fig. The paths represent significant. Note that there is no two-place-related identity processes version. 7.38.089. only to one (a general identity process. Thus.. i. Structural model of place attachment and place identity.77 0. e.97 Place-Congruent Continuity 0. the place attachment and place identity links. po. As can be seen in Table 1. As shown above a model of five place-related identity processes showed a most reasonable fit. with the . po.place identity . was the residential-time variable.39.36 Statement 2 Statement 1 0.08.g. showing the grouping of ten manifest (observed) variables (statements) around five latent (underlying) variables of place-related distinctiveness. comprising statements grouped around processes of distinctiveness. Generally speaking. to test the direction of the attachment—identity link. This hypothesis and the opposite one were tested in this section. N ¼ 384) ¼ 128.08. strongest relations (highest regression coefficients) were indicated between place attachment and identity processes of distinctiveness. a G-factor. However. self-esteem and self-efficacy. 1999). RMSEA ¼ .place attachment. it was the structural model of five place-related identity processes (see also Fig.00. N ¼ 402) ¼ 56. N ¼ 402) ¼ 100. N ¼ 384) ¼ 98. a statistically valid one-general-place-identity. it is not conceptually relevant to assume that the three processes of distinctiveness. w2 (27. thus. because it is not theoretically valid.56 Place-Referent Continuity 0.08 compared to the model of residential time . po:00. 2003 for this discussion). the Statement 1 215 0. place-congruent continuity. SM1).78 Place-Related Self-Esteem Statement 2 Statement 1 0. standardised estimates. 7) that best described the observed data and that showed a most reasonable fit. and thus could be added.54 0. This model showed a most reasonable fit of w2 (40. self-esteem and self-efficacy.69 Place-Related Distinctiveness Statement 2 Statement 1 0. several other (observed) variables were controlled for in structural modelling such as residential-time. to test the link from residential time to place attachment to the five place identity processes.g. testing the links between type of person attitude and place attachment and/or place identity. RMSEA ¼ . Twigger-Ross et al.place attachment . po:00.e.75. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218 five (SM4) place-related identity processes. RMSEA ¼ .e.

(3) They felt better in. see Fig. see Fig. see Fig. (2) Both the City and its climate reminded them of the environment of their childhood (place-referent continuity.58 Place-Related Self-Efficacy Fig. see Fig. 5). 4). (4) They felt more safe and secure. Twigger-Ross and Uzzell (1996) findings suggesting that the identity processes may be related to a location. showing a causal link proceeding from time to attachment to identity. 4). that the place-related identity processes of place-related distinctiveness (see Fig. it was shown that persons highly attached to the City compared to those that were not: (1) Felt more sense of togetherness with others living in the City and felt more like a ‘‘city-person’’ (placerelated distinctiveness. 218). 1996. The paths represent significant. 6). p. place is part of the content of an identification. i. More precisely and in line with Hypothesis 1. and were more proud to live in. The second hypothesis outlined in this study was that climate may be a part of the residents’ place identification. the City (place-related self-esteem. see Fig. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218 216 Place-Related Distinctiveness 0. place attachment and place identity.45 Residential Time 0. A causal model of residential time.e. associated with the place-related identity processes of continuity and that this connection may be more pronounced in the high than in low attached residents. only for those highly attached to that area.ARTICLE IN PRESS I. the perceived climate of the City reminded the highly attached residents of the climate in the environment of their childhood. 2). po:00. In their words: ‘‘ywe suggest that all identifications have location implications. place-congruent continuity (see Fig.52 Place-Related Self-Esteem 0. i. A significant relation between the City and the residents’ all place-related identity processes yielded. As predicted. 8.’’ (Twigger-Ross & Uzzell. regression coefficients (see Jo¨reskog. 3).36 Place Attachment 0. and they carried out easier their everyday life in the City (place-related self-efficacy. place-related self-esteem and place-related self-efficacy (see Figs. They preferred to live in a place like the City as well as in a place with similar climate (place-congruent continuity. standardised estimates. as was suggested by Knez (2003a). according to Hypothesis 1. 5 and 6) were significantly more . 2).e. however. The results also showed. 1999). They also preferred to live in a place with the same climate as in the City.69 Place-Referent 0. This indicates that the place’s perceived climate is a part of those persons’ present beliefs (place-congruent continuity) and their autobiographical memory (placereferent continuity).40 Continuity Place-Congruent Continuity 0.

1997) not taking into account a place’s climate. Martorella.g. G. Still and generally speaking.. M. Advances in environment. 2003). but was also shown in identity processes indicating that the City for urban compared to country(open-air)-persons is: (1) more preferred type of environment (place-congruent continuity). theory of place (e. ignoring one of the fundamental objectives. Twigger-Ross & Uzzell (1996). as outlined in. 1996) and questions. I.). that in line with some earlier research suggested that place attachment may precede place identity development (see e. Canter. Breakwell. (3) and it more facilitates their everyday life (place-related self-efficacy). 2003. social. Secondly. T. V. London: The Architectural Press Ltd. S. M. in this context a part of the content of the five place-related identity processes of distinctiveness. Alternative ways of assessing model fit.). (2002). G. Journal of Economic Psychology. Twigger-Ross & Uzzell. Bonaiuto (Eds. In conclusion. In G. indeed. This is consistent with the research relating identity theory to people’s bonds to a residential area (e.g. especially for those considered to be highly attached to their residential area. shape. referent continuity. (2) it gives them more positive feelings about themselves (place-related self-esteem). Marams (Eds. Bollen. H. e. & R. (2001). Twigger-Ross & Uzzell. of a place. M. 2001. 8). London: Sage. Meanings of place: Everyday experience and theoretical conceptualisations.g. The causal link from place attachment to place identity replicates the MANOVA results reported in the first part of the Results section and is consonant with Hypothesis 4. empirical evidence on links between place attachment and place identity on urban vs. Bonaiuto et al. Testing structural equation models. Processes of self-evaluation: Efficacy and estrangement.). Breakwell. becomes a part of one’s conceptual and extended selves (Neisser.g. B. & M. e. M. Integrating paradigms: Methodological implications. Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218 pronounced in urban compared to country(open-air)persons. (2001). In K. they indicate tentatively a link between residential time and place-related attachment and identity (e. M.). (1993). The relation between place attachment and residential time is in line with Hidalgo and Hernandez (2001). Thus.g. Psychological theories for environmental issues (pp. The psychology of place. London: Methuen. 7). D. economic (Parker. W. & Cudeck. Browne. Giuliani. Gustafson. (1977). Carrus. T. Social psychology of identity and self-concept. W. Plenum press: New York. Giuliani. Aldershot: Ashgate publishing limited.g. Canter. Breakwell (Ed. C. Thus. Given this. 2003a). The place theory does. Place attachment: Conceptual and empirical questions. Twigger-Ross et al. (1992). however. Theory of attachment and place attachment. (1997).). Hidalgo & Hernandez. the present study could certainly be criticized by. 2002) and on meanings we attribute to places (Knez. Consequently and in general. This challenges Breakwell’s model. 2003b) and which has an impact on individual. M. 23. a significant causal link proceeding from citizens’ residential time to their place attachment and to their five place-related identity processes was indicated (see Fig. Canter. in general. In contrast to Hypothesis 3. . D... (1992). (1993). Gustafson 2001. & Low. M. congruent continuity. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 1995) and criminal behaviour (Rotton & Cohn. the structural equation modelling suggested a model of five place-related identity processes (see Table 1 and Fig. This was especially expected for the placerelated distinctiveness. country(open-air)-person attitude and place identity were shown as well as a significant role of climate in subjects’ conceptions of a place. Surrey: Surrey University Press. involve physical attributes (e. & Bonnes. 137–170). In G. 1977). which is an embedded part of a place (Knez. 1996). not using more items/scales measuring the latent constructs of place-related attachment and identity and for not delivering qualitative data on the longitudinal progress of these phenomena. place-related attachment and identity are phenomena that evolve over time and are guided by interwoven and interrelated psychological and sociological elements in a most complex way. Empirical approaches to social representations.. and design (pp. colour. P.. thirdly. to a higher degree. 2003a. 1988).. Canter. (2003). In G. its climate. Hidalgo. S. they address climate as an important perceived component of a place (Knez. behavior. Place attachment. 21. Bonaiuto. Local identity processes and environmental attitudes in land use changes: The case of natural protected area. Breakwell. Moore. 2002. the results obtained are consonant with the more explorative and qualitative data on place-related attachment and identity (e. considering attachment as an affective positive bond between a person and its residential environment that result in a strong tendency of that person to maintain closeness to such a place. form and texture. M. Breakwell. the structural equation modelling of the data obtained indicates that prolonging one’s stay at a place 217 intensifies one’s emotional bond to that place (place attachment) which in turn leads that a place. b) and. 5–16. self-esteem and self-efficacy.. Giuliani. G.. Canter (Eds. New York: Plenum press. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 2003 for this discussion). Bonnes. In M. Journal of Environmental Psychology.g. 631–653. A. Furthermore. The facets of place. & D. & J. a process by which persons distinguish themselves from others. considering the two continuity processes as one. Long (Eds. Lee. 109–147). M. Coping with threatened identity.. (1986). R. M. 273–281. 21.ARTICLE IN PRESS I. these attributes are often defined in relation to an architectural view of a place comprising physical components such as size. TwiggerRoss et al. References Altman. & Hernandez. 2003. physical parameters.g. G.

13–35). Thermal comfort in outdoor urban spaces: Understanding the human parameter. Riley. (1999). L. G. & M. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 249–258. Korpela. 3. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publisher. W. Vignoles. Altman. Westport. Jorgensen. L... September 2003.). Place and identity processes. Poland. Parker. 3.. J.ARTICLE IN PRESS 218 I. J. & Uzzell. K. Solar Energy. C. Neisser. Twigger-Ross. & Yardley. Personality and Social Psychology Review. S. X.. Ryden. Korpela. K. Chryssochoou. Fabian. (2001). Vol. C. & Stedman. 481–498). 4. & S. Low (Eds. J. H. & So¨rbom. V. Zacharias. weather and crime. Journal of Environmental Psychology. Climate. H. Attachment to the ordinary landscape. The distinctiveness principle: Identity. Place identity: Physical world socialization of the self. (Eds. Stathopoulos. Journal of Environmental Psychology. (1994). (1992). OK: StatSoft. Knez. M. (2001). Department of Physical Geography. R.. Mapping the invisible landscape: Folklore. September 2003. K. Ithaca: University of Iowa Press. social and economic behavior. K. 33. 337–354. Psychological Bulletin. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited. (1987). Climatic effects on individual. Journal of Environmental Psychology. Handbook of environmental psychology (pp. and the sense of place. How large can a standardized coefficient be? In the help-file of the LISREL program. L. T. S. (1993). Liebert. . McDonald. 3.. K.. CA: Thomson Learning. Lodz. T. B. Hillsdale. H. Knez. Inc. Jo¨reskog. 227–235. Statistical methods for psychology (5th edition). (1992). Knez / Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (2005) 207–218 Honess.). Ma¨nty. and the Bounds of Cultural Relativity. C. M. & Steemers. P.). (1996). Lodz. Identity theories and environmental psychology. R. Microclimate and downtown open space activity. Thorsson. Self and identity: Perspectives across the lifespan. K. In M. 296–315. 57–83. Bechtel. N. G. Bonnes. Vol. D. P. Climate. Sense of a place as an attitude: Lakeshore owners attitudes toward their properties. 205–220. J. 16. G. pp. (1988). The 5th international conference on urban climate (ICUC-5). M. Place-identity as a product of environmental self-regulation.. Poland. E. & A. D. H. (2000). Journal of Environmental Psychology.. Place and placelessness. R. (1990). & Liebert. In I. Jo¨reskog.. M. B. Bonaiuto (Eds. Go¨teborgs University. (1988). 203–233). K. Baker. 107. Duxbury. LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the Simplis command language. I. Five kinds of self-knowledge. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Environment and Behavior. 2. CT: Greenwood Press. Earth Sciences Centre. Lee. air quality and thermal comfort in the urban environment. Adolescents’ favourite places and environmental self-regulation. Howell. B. New York: Wiley. J. (2001). 35–59. Choosing a multivariate model: Noncentrality and goodness of fit. (1989). A. Nikolopoulou. & Breakwell. U. 233–248. M. L. pp.). London: Pion. R. Inc. & Breakwell. Relph.. K. A Doctoral Dissertation. R. M. Philosophical Psychology. 247–255.. Helsinki: Building Book Ltd. Experimental psychology: Methods of research. Statistica: Structural equation modeling. M. (2003b). I. & Cohn. C.. Science and behavior: An introduction to methods of psychological research. F. 241–256. (1983). In R. 65–68. 70. McGuigan. (1976). writing.. Bonaiuto. (2003). & Wu. (2002). T. 1. & Kaminoff.). N.. New York: Prentice-Hall.. Twigger-Ross. (1995). The 5th international conference on urban climate (ICUC-5). & Pressman. Steiger. (Eds. D. C. Place attachment (pp. Cities designed for winter. L. (1983). 69–72. (1995). E. Climate: A nested structure in places. Memories for climate and places. New York: Plenum Press. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. (2003). Proshansky. (1993). Tulsa. L. 21. (2002). Churchman (Eds. Meaning.. G. M. (2003a). & Marsh. Psychological theories for environmental issues (pp. Rotton. 2..