Why do some blocks have more crime, or their residents have higher fear levels, than other blocks? In an effort to answer this question we proposed a model that incorporated physical defensible space features, local social ties, and territorial functioning. The model was tested using data from a multistage, stratified sample of 687 Baltimore households on 63 blocks. At each household, surveys were completed and on-site physical features were photographed and subsequently rated. Records of police activity on each block were also obtained. Our model explained significant portions of crimes of violence to persons (18%) and block fear (37%). It was also able to predict a significant amount (13%) of the variation in individual-level fear. At the block level: defensible space features dampened crime and fear but not as strongly as expected; and local social ties dampened crime and fear directly, and indirectly via an enhancement of territorial functioning. A model predicting individual fear levels, controlling for block context, was also supported. Our successful modeling of block dynamics suggests that these entities may profitably be treated as small-scale social units or groups. The pattern of findings has also confirmed suggestions made by others that physical factors alone cannot be relied on to preserve local order and feelings of security. Finally, the block-level linkages between local social ties and territorial attitudes clarify how territorial attitudes reflect, and may contribute to, the development of group-based norms regarding appropriate behaviors in on-block settings.

Clinical psychologists have long recognized that people can and do cathect, or get attached to, other persons. In everyday language we speak of persons who are "attached" or "involved" or "invested" in one another. More recently, social scientists have given attention to people's attachment to places. In~Data described here were collected under grant 78-

No abstract

No abstract

A pivotal assumption of work on defensible space theory and territorial signs is that people interpret the presence of defensible space features and territorial signs to mean that occupants have stronger territorial attitudes and behaviors. One purpose of this study was to test this assumption. A second purpose of the study was to examine the impact of perceived local threat on the efficacy of territorial displays. A sample of forty residents, split between those who perceived that they lived in high and low problem neighborhoods, were shown drawings of residential backyards. Results supported the following hypotheses: (1) that the presence of real barriers and plantings are interpreted as a deterrent to intrusion and an indication of stronger occupant territorial attitudes, and (2) that as local perceived threat increases, territorial displays are viewed as less effective deterrents to intrusion. The study also contributes to the fine-grain assessment of the links between physical elements in the environment and expected territorial functioning by showing that the effectiveness of territorial features depends not only on their inherent physical qualities and general symbolic meanings, but also on the social context in which they are perceived to exist.