Urbanization and Community Attachment in Rural Areas

Theodori, Gene L.; Luloff, A. E.

doi:10.1080/089419200403839

Cited by 95 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Some environments furnish a wider range of community organizations or social institutions (e.g., civic or religious organizations, sporting clubs; Feldman et al, 2012;Kasarda & Janowitz, 1974) that become links binding individuals to their current residence. To illustrate, urban residents participate in leisure and social activities more than rural dwellers (Sampson, 1988;Theodori & Luloff, 2000). The family's community participation further expands employees' off-the-job links via their family's own networks of friends and acquaintances.…”

Section: Proposition 4bmentioning

confidence: 99%

Job embeddedness: A multifoci theoretical extension.

Kiazad¹,

Holtom²,

Hom³

et al. 2015

Journal of Applied Psychology

214

293

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integrating the expanding job embeddedness (JE) literature, in this article we advance a multifoci model of JE that is theoretically grounded in conservation of resources (COR) theory. From COR theory, we posit that employees' motivation to acquire and protect resources explains why they become embedded and how they behave once embedded. Our COR-based JE model highlights contextual antecedents that clarify how employees become embedded within different foci. Its multifoci theoretical lens also illustrates how different forms of work-focused embeddedness differentially affect work outcomes and how they interact with nonwork foci to influence those outcomes. Along with directions for further research, we further discuss theoretical and practical implications of our integrative formulation.

show abstract

Section: Proposition 4bmentioning

confidence: 99%

Job embeddedness: A multifoci theoretical extension.

Kiazad¹,

Holtom²,

Hom³

et al. 2015

Journal of Applied Psychology

214

293

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The author refers to the same findings by other authors, such as John D. Kasarda and Morris Janowitz (1974), Robert J. Sampson (1988), and Gene L. Theodori and A. E. Luloff (2000). With regard to the differences in attachment between rural and urban areas, Theodori and Luloff relied on late-nineteenth-and early-twentieth-century findings by social theorists, who showed growing concern due to increased urbanization, modernization and industrialization, and the impact of these processes on social solidarity and people's integration in communities.…”

Section: Type Of Settlementmentioning

confidence: 68%

“…In their writings, these theorists highlighted that rural communities stimulated a higher level of solidarity and integration than urban environments, which is why people in these communities were more attached to the places they lived in (see Tönnies, 1887;Simmel, 1903;Wirth, 1938). According to Theodori and Luloff (2000), as part of his ideal conception of the social transformation from a community (Germ. Gemeinschaft) into a society (Germ.…”

Section: Type Of Settlementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From Simmel's perspective, this indifference, which is reflected in the reserved personality of individuals in the urban environment, can also be manifested in the loss of attachment to the community and living environment. Despite this and other traditional views on urbanization, Theodori and Luloff (2000) argue that it is primarily Wirth's theory that defines the effects of the urban environment on individuals and their connectivity (see Wirth, 1938;Fischer, 1972;Christenson, 1979). According to Wirth (1938), the size, density and heterogeneity of the urban population are the characteristics that lead to weaker family ties, the replacement of primary contacts with secondary ones, a smaller emphasis on the social importance of the local community and, in this sense, a deterioration and loss of attachment with the community and hence a lower level of attachment to the individual's living environment compared to the countryside (Wirth, 1938;Fischer, 1972;Christenson, 1979).…”

Section: Type Of Settlementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The relationship of the elderly toward their home and living environment

Kerbler¹,

Sendi²,

Hrast³

2017

Urbani izziv

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationship of the elderly toward their home and living environment Housing is a basic human good and right. It plays a versatile role, allowing people to fulfil a number of needs, and it is not limited only to one's immediate living space, but also includes an individual's wider living environment. People's relationship toward housing and their living environment changes over the course of their lives. Especially in old age, housing becomes more important. Research shows that the elderly want to remain in their home environments as long as possible because they are closely attached to them. In order to determine whether these findings also apply to Slovenia, this article analyses how attached the elderly in Slovenia are to their homes and wider living environment and how satisfied they are with living there. The elderly's views were obtained with a survey, and a statistical analysis was carried out using SPSS software, based on the calculation of various statistical correlation tests. The analysis confirmed the assumption that the Slovenian elderly are also very attached to their homes or home environments and are satisfied with living there. In addition, the analysis showed some differences among the elderly in this regard depending on their age, where they live and how long they have been living in their current homes.

show abstract

“…Lewicka (2005) Tönnies, 1887;Simmel, 1903;Wirth, 1938). Kot navajata Theodori in Luloff (2000), je na primer Ferdinand Tönnies (1887) v svojem idealnem pojmovanju družbene preobrazbe iz družbe (nem. Gemeinschaft) v skupnost (nem.…”

Section: Tip Naseljaunclassified