Rural Psychology 1983
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4613-3512-2_7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Environmental Perception and Cognition in Rural Contexts

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

1983
1983
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Selecting and describing site attributes. The attributes selected for research were generated from previous studies in spatial cognition, scenic quality, natural hazards, and the social and managerial features of backcountry recreation areas Driver & Knopf, 1977;Feimer, 1983;Haas, Driver & Brown, 1980;Roggenbuck & Dawson, 1979). The original list of 33 attributes was pilot tested among 37 university undergraduates.…”
Section: Variablesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Selecting and describing site attributes. The attributes selected for research were generated from previous studies in spatial cognition, scenic quality, natural hazards, and the social and managerial features of backcountry recreation areas Driver & Knopf, 1977;Feimer, 1983;Haas, Driver & Brown, 1980;Roggenbuck & Dawson, 1979). The original list of 33 attributes was pilot tested among 37 university undergraduates.…”
Section: Variablesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Urban-rural differences in perception might also play a role, particularly in viticulture; as mentioned, this is a second or retirement career for many growers in the Hill Country VA, having worked previously in professions not tied to agriculture. Rural residents whose livelihoods have historically depended on agriculture have a stronger sensitivity to the threat of natural hazards than those who have less experience with the hazards, such as those who have lived most of their professional lives in an urban area (Feimer 1983, citing Burton et al 1978Burton and Kates 1964;Kates 1967Kates , 1976and Saarinen 1976).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…These environments are understood by affective and aesthetic reactions [50], up to where "The rural environment is an object for aesthetic consumptions..." [68]. Rural residents in relation to, and dispute with, their psychophysical environment are characterized by perception and knowledge processes, by reference to their places and resources [69], as well as by activities characterizing the farming profession [70]. Other studies highlight the complexity of people's relationships with the environment through attitudes towards it [67,69,71], through various levels of awareness, commitment, behavior and pro-environment action [72][73][74].…”
Section: On Environment Onlymentioning
confidence: 99%