No abstract

It is suggested that for each of the role-related identities of an individual, there are physical dimensions and characteristics that help to define and are subsumed by that identity. In addition, there is a general place-identity for each individual which reflects his or her unique socialization in the physical world. This paper argues that it is important to conceptualize place-identity as a specific component (subidentity) of each individual's self-identity. Place-identity is defined as those dimensions of self that define the individual's personal identity in relation to the physical environment by means of a complex pattern of conscious and unconscious ideas, feelings, values, goals, preferences, skills, and behavioral tendencies relevant to a specific environment.

For the social sciences, particularly those concerned with man's relations to other men, the physical environment has been conceived as a given, rather than as a source of parameters for understanding human behavior. Urban settings, for example, are distinguished from suburban or rural settings, or the "ghetto" from the more affluent areas of a community, but more for their contrasting properties as social systems or complex social contexts than for the differences between them as organized physical settings. The scientific literature abounds in descriptions of ghettos as a prelude to examining them as sociocultural systems generating given sets of values and relevant behaviors. But systematic studies of the behavioral consequences of ghettos as physical settings are rare indeed.Even at a more circumscribed level of analysis-a neighborhood, an apartment, or a business office-the physical setting is no less taken for granted. It is assumed to set the stage for and perhaps define the actors' roles with respect to particular human relationships and activities; but for any given setting there are countless variations in design and substance that are generally ignored in the attempts to establish the factors that facilitate or hinder the prescribed behaviors.It is reasonable to ask why [the] physical setting has been neglected in the theory and research of social scientists. In our judgment, it is rooted in more Harold M. Proshansky received his PhD in social psychology from New York University in 1952. He is currently a Professor of Environmental Psychology and Social Psychology in the Graduate Division of the City University of New York, where he also serves as Dean of the division. His major research during the last 10 to 12 years has been in the field of environmental psychology, with particular interest in privacy and territoriality in hospital, school, and other urban settings.William H. Ittelson received his PhD in 1950 from Princeton University. He is currently a Professor of Environmental Psychology and Codirector of the doctoral program in environmental psychology of the Graduate Division of the City University of New York.

No abstract

No abstract

The appropriate bedroom size in a psychiatric ward poses a question that constantly plagues designers, administrators, and physicians. Historically, solutions have ranged through almost all possible combinations. In the past, the major conflicting pressures in arriving at a solution have been costswhich dictated large, multiple-occupancy rooms-and therapeutic considerations-which argued in favor of single or small rooms. Recent developments in design and construction techniques, however, have tended to diminish cost differences, while at the same time new therapeutic approaches have pointed to possible advantages of larger rooms. [A preliminary report on studies of bedroom size, Ittelson, Proshansky, & Rivlin, 1970, has already been published.] SETTINGThe study reported here was conducted in the psychiatric wards of three large metropolitan hospitals which will be referred to as "private," "city," and "state." Two are devoted to providing general medical and surgical services for their patients, and each has a relatively small psychiatric service: in the William H. Ittelson received his PhD in 1950 from Princeton University. He is currently a Professor of Environmental Psychology and Codirector of the doctoral program in environmental psychology of the Graduate Division of the City University of New York.Harold M. Proshansky received his PhD in social psychology from New York University in 1952. He is currently a Professor of Environmental Psychology and Social Psychology in the Graduate Division of the City University of New York, where he also serves as Dean of the division. His major research during the last 10 to 12 years has been in the field of environmental psychology, with particular interest in privacy and territoriality in hospital, school, and other urban settings.

No abstract

HERE is an abundance of information at hand regarding social attitudes, their intensities,, their interrelations, and their dependence upon background factors (i; 2). On the other hand, there is a dearth of information as to their relation to character structure, e.g., their reciprocal relation with perceptual and with motor habits. In particular, there is very little clear information as to the relation between verbally expressed attitudes on social issues and the underlying dynamics of individual personality. Since the projective methods have been developed chiefly for the purpose of defining unconscious dynamics as rekted to immediate attitude and conduct, it may appear reasonable to develop a projective procedure for this express purpose. To do so would necessitate the utilization, on the one hand, of a reliable and valid indicator of attitude of the type familiar to us through attitude scales and, on the other hand, t& press into service a projective technique suitable for those subjects whose attitudes are in question. This would be a continuation of our earlier study demonstrating the influence of affective experience upon perception (6); individual affective organization would be expected to influence both perceived and verbally experienced attitudes.Accordingly, we made use of an attitude scale devised by T. M. Newcomb (5) to investigate attitudes towards organized labor, and of a method derived from the Murray Thematic Apperception Test (3; 4). Our hypothesis was that extreme groups, i.e., those inclining towards strongly pro-labor or anti-labor attitudes, would reveal their social orientation through their manner of report Upon pictures of social conflict situations. Since the Murray cards were not primarily designed for the study of controversial social issues as such, we culled through magazines and newspapers to make up our own list of standard pictures. A group of subjects sorted the pictures into various categories, those being selected which in the judgment of three judges were ambiguous with respect to outcome as far as labor was concerned, i.e., indicating neither victory nor defeat for the labor cause. A few other pictures having nothing to do with labor were added to disguise our purpose.The subjects of our study were male college students selected from two institutions, the one group known to be markedly pro-labor, the other markedly antilabor in general orientation. There were 17 subjects from College A, anti-labor, and 18 from College B, pro-labor. The age range was 20-23. We secured from each individual in each group a response to the items of the Newcomb scale. The scale brought out sharply the attitude trends of which we were already aware, but served also to indicate individual differences. The two groups are significantly distinct by the conventional criteria.At a later date the pictures were presented one at a time by means of slides before each of the groups. Upon the completion of each five-second exposure, the subjects were instructed to write two and a half minutes. The instructi...