2

Journal of Environmental Psychology (1996) 16, 205–220 0272-4944/96/030205+16$18.00/0 1996 Academic Press Ltd

ENVIRONMENTALPSYCHOLOGYJour

nalof

PLACE AND IDENTITY PROCESSES

CLARE L. TWIGGER-ROSS AND DAVID L. UZZELL

Department of Psychology, University of Surrey, Guildford, GU2 5XH, U.K.

Abstract

This paper examines the role of place and identity processes using Breakwell’s model as a framework. Thismodel suggests that there are four principles of identity which guide action: continuity, self-esteem, self-effi-cacy and distinctiveness. These principles are examined here in relation to attachment to a residentialenvironment. It focuses on residents living in an area of the London Docklands, chosen because of the social,environmental and economic change in that area. It was hypothesized that attached respondents woulddiscuss their relationship with the local environment in ways which supported or developed the identityprinciples whereas nonattached residents would not consider the local environment in this way. Twenty in-depth semi-structured interviews were carried out on a sample of residents from Rotherhithe in the LondonDocklands. The interviews were transcribed and content analysed. Results showed that there were differ-ences between the attached and nonattached respondents in their discussion of their local environment. Inaddition, there were differences within the nonattached group such that some residents were not attachedand neutral with regards to their residential environment, whereas others were not attached but had a nega-tive evaluation of their residential environment. These results are discussed within the identity process modelframework. 1996 Academic Press Limited

Introduction psychological literature to define a range ofrelationships between the physical environmentand identity. In this paper we wish to address theDespite the many studies using the concepts of and

place identity (e.g. Lalli, 1992; Proshansky et al., question of whether existing identity theories canbe used to explain this relationship adequately.1983) place attachment (see for overview: Giuliani,

1991; Altman & Low, 1992) within environmental Following a critical analysis of current work onplace and identity using Breakwell’s framework,psychology, few have provided a clear and theoreti-

cally driven account of the relationship between this paper presents data collected from a series ofinterviews carried out in order to investigate theplace and identity. One particular criticism levelled

specifically at Proshanky et al.’s (1983) model of degree to which emotional attachment to a residen-tial environment functions to develop and maintainplace identity is that there is no account of what

processes guide action in relation to identity identity processes. The usefulness of the identityprocess model in explaining the relationship(Korpela, 1989), and therefore no explanation of

how or why places become salient for the self-con- between place and identity is discussed togetherwith the significance of this study for the identitycept. Within the social psychology of the self-con-

cept there are theories about social identity, yet process model.there is little theorizing about the role of place inidentity. In this paper we discuss a study that used Place and IdentityBreakwell’s identity process model (1986, 1992,1993) as a theoretical framework for organizing the Overall, there are two ways in which place has beenresearch within environmental psychology, and sub- related to identity. The first is what we will callsequently empirically examined the relationships place identifications. This refers to a person’sbetween place and identity. There has been a con- expressed identification with a place, e.g. a personfusing array of terms used within environmental from London may refer to themselves as a

205

206 C. L. Twigger-Ross and D. L. Uzzell

Londoner. In this sense place can be considered to self-esteem as the only principle of identity. Insteadwe prefer to use Breakwell’s identity process modelbe a social category and will be subject to the same

rules as a social identification within social identity which proposes four principles of identity: self-esteem, self-efficacy, distinctiveness and continuity.theory. Hogg and Abrams (1988) suggest that social

identity comprises different social identifications,any one of which will be come salient depending on

Identity process theorythe context. For Hogg and Abrams (1988), a socialidentification is defined as: ‘identity contingent self-

Breakwell’s (1986, 1992, 1993) model of identity hasdescriptions deriving from membership in socialits roots in the writings of James (1890) and Meadcategories (nationality, sex, race, occupation, sports(1934). Breakwell (1986) proposes that identityteams . . .)’ p. 25. Place identification would expressshould be conceptualized in terms of a biologicalmembership of a group of people who are defined byorganism moving through time which developslocation. If this position is taken then place identifi-through the accommodation, assimilation andcation is a type of social identification. However, inevaluation of the social world. The selection of infor-taking this position then it could be said that themation to be accommodated, assimilated and evalu-concept of place is subsumed into social identity andated is governed by three principles: distinc-subsequently ignored. We would argue that thetiveness, continuity and self-esteem:social identity approach can only account for part of

the relationship between self and environment. Three prime principles are evident: the two pro-cesses work to produce uniqueness or distinc-The second way in which place has been relatedtiveness for a person, continuity across time andto identity is through the term place identity, a con-situation and a feeling of personal worth or socialstruct promoted by Proshansky et al. (1983, 1987) value. (Breakwell, 1986, p.24).

which calls for a more radical re-evaluation of theMore recently a fourth principle has been added:construct of identity. He proposes that place ident-

self-efficacy (Breakwell, 1992). This is a person’sity is another aspect of identity comparable to socialperception of his/her ability to be effective in achiev-identity that describes the person’s socializationing his/her goals. Of importance to this research iswith the physical world. Since he takes a Meadianthe fact that social theory suggests that self-esteemapproach to the self there is an assumption that theis the only motivation for action with respect toprocesses operating between place and identity areidentity (Abrams, 1992), whereas Breakwell (1986)the same as between groups and identity.gives equal status to continuity, distinctiveness andRochberg-Halton (1981) gives a good account ofself-efficacy and does not regard this as an exhaus-how objects and places can become part of the gen-tive list (Breakwell, 1993). What is striking abouteralized other and thereby incorporated into thethese principles is the similarities they have withself-concept. However, it is never made clear by Pro-Korpela’s (1989) work carried out on place andshansky what the relationship is between these twoidentity. He acknowledges that the use of the physi-aspects of identity. Whilst it may be possible to dis-cal environment as a strategy for the maintenancecuss the relationship between the physical environ-of self has been accepted in the psychological litera-ment and identity without reference to a group, toture (Fried, 1963), but he also criticizes Proshanky’shave two forms of identity would focus discussion onconceptualization:whether or not identity was more ‘social’ or more

‘place’. This would not seem to be useful in explana- Proshansky et al.’s (1978, 1983, 1989) opinion,tory terms. In addition it contradicts environmental experiences are somehow agglutinated and the

result is the self of which place identity is a part,psychologists’ transactional perspective on placesub-identity in its own right. (Korpela, 1989, p.(Sageart & Winkel, 1990). We agree with241).Proshansky that there has been a neglect of the

physical environment by self-theorists. We would, Korpela’s (1989), following Epstein (1983), pro-vides some principles which could guide action. Thehowever, suggest that rather than there being a

separate part of identity concerned with place, all three principles he defines are: the need to maxim-ize the pleasure/pain balance, the need to maintainaspects of identity will, to a greater or lesser extent,

have place-related implications. In this paper we a coherent conceptual system and to the need tomaintain a favourable level of self-esteem. The fol-explore the extent to which an attachment with a

place can function to support and develop aspects of lowing section takes Breakwell’s four identity prin-ciples and reviews the literature within thisidentity. In order to do this, however, we feel that

social identity theory is limited by the dominance of framework.

207Place and Identity Processes

Distinctiveness Continuity

Breakwell (1986) suggests that a desire to preserveThe first principle of identity is the desire to main-tain personal distinctiveness or uniqueness. continuity of the self-concept is a second motivator

of action. It is defined as continuity over time andResearch into settlement identity (Feldman, 1990)and community identity (Hummon, 1990) has situation between past and present self-concepts.

Two distinct types of self–environment relationshipfocused on the perceived distinctiveness associatedwith being a ‘city’, ‘town’ or ‘country’ person. This which focus on the maintenance and development of

the continuity of self are discussed in the literature:research suggests that distinctiveness summarizesa lifestyle and establishes that person as having a place-referent continuity and place-congruent conti-

nuity. Whilst these self–environment relationshipsspecific type of relationship with his/her homeenvironment, which is clearly distinct from any are not mutually exclusive it is suggested that they

are related to distinct patterns of residence.other type of relationship.In Hummon’s (1986) study, urban enthusiasts Place-referent continuity is discussed by

Czikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton (1981),were adamant not only that they were ‘city’ peoplebut were convinced of the benefits associated with Graumann (1983), Korpela (1989), Giuliani (1991)

and Lalli (1992), who show that places act as refer-living in the urban environment. These benefitswere compared with the negative aspects of living ents to past selves and actions and that for some

people, maintenance of a link with that place pro-in suburbia or the country. Not only did theseaspects distinguish themselves as ‘city’ people, but vides a sense of continuity to their identity. This is

expressed concisely by Korpela:their lifestyles were positively contrasted with thelives of those living in different settlement types.

The continuity of self-experience is also maintainedThe distinctiveness felt by a ‘city’ person had a by fixing aids for memory in the environment. Thehighly positive valence attached to it. place itself or the objects in the place can remind

This ‘city’ identity represents a distinctive life- one of one’s past and offers a concrete backgroundagainst which one is able to compare oneself at diff-style usually coupled with a strong positive affecterent times . . . . This creates coherence and conti-with regard to that lifestyle. Some people therefore,nuity in one’s self-conceptions (Korpela, 1989, p.do seem to use a place related self-referent in order 251)

to present themselves as distinct from others.In addition to settlement identifications, Lalli In using the term place-referent continuity the

physical environment is conceptualized as a refer-(1992) discusses specific place identifications:ence for past action and experience. Research sug-

the bond to a particular part of town also contrib- gests this exists at both the individual and grouputes to one’s differentiation from residents in other level. Devine (1994) examines the role of historicaltown areas (Lalli, 1992, p. 25).

sites in Ireland in the maintenance of nationalidentity suggesting that historic places play a roleA resident’s association with a specific town or

area of town people enables them to differentiate in preserving the continuity of a group identity. Atthe individual level, Rowles (1983) showed thatthemselves from people from other parts of town. In

one of the early studies of cognitive maps and neigh- elderly members of an Appalachian community didnot want to move as the environment remindedbourhood image, Eyles found that aspirations to

have an address in a fashionable part of London them of past, more active selves. Lalli (1988) foundthat the extent to which a town provides a personresulted in the bending of the perceived neighbour-

hood ‘boundaries’ so that the respondent’s address with continuity with his/her personal past wasrelated to a general identification measure.would be seen in Highgate Village (Eyles, 1968),

creating an identification to which specific attri- Hormuth (1990) discusses the role of relocationand self-concept change suggesting that choosing tobutes were ascribed, e.g. ‘Highgate Village residents

are smart, therefore if my address is Highgate move can represent self-concept change with the oldplace becoming a symbol of the old self and the newVillage, I too am smart’.

In summary, there is some compelling evidence place representing an opportunity to develop newidentities. In both these examples place is con-that people use place identifications in order to dis-

tinguish themselves from others. In this sense place sidered to be an active part of the construction of aperson’s identity, representing continuity andfunctions in a similar way to a social category and

therefore place identifications can be thought of as change. Evidence that having control, or not, overthe maintenance of continuity of place is importantcomparable to social identifications.


for psychological well-being comes most dramati- of oneself has been regarded as a central motive bymany writing about the self (e.g. James, 1890;cally from Fried (1963) and Speller (1988) who have

shown that unwanted and personally uncontrol- Gecas, 1982), specifically within social identitytheory (Tajfel, 1978; Hogg and Abrams, 1988;lable change in the physical environment, resulting

in the loss of the principle of continuity, may cause Abrams, 1992). With regard to the environment,Korpela (1989) shows how favourite environmentsa grief or loss reaction. Such grieving can be long-

term as demonstrated in the study by Nanistova can support self-esteem. Children described thesense of positive self-esteem they gained from being(1994a, b) in which it was found that inhabitants of

a village who had been forcibly moved in order that in their own rooms during times of distress.Through living in an historic town a person can feelthe valley could be flooded for a reservoir were still

distressed 40 years later. This work shows how the a sense of pride by association (Lalli, 1992; Uzzell,1995). This differs from simply positively evaluatingprinciple of continuity can be useful in explaining

psychological issues surrounding forced relocation. a place, in that it suggests that person gains a boostto his/her self-esteem from the qualities of the place,The second conceptualization of the way in which

the environment is used to maintain continuity of i.e. ‘I like Docklands’ (evaluation) vs ‘Living inDocklands makes me feel good about myself’ (self-the self-concept is place-congruent continuity. It

differs from place-referent continuity in terms of esteem). It may be possible to evaluate a place posi-tively but this may not impact upon one’s self-specificity. Place-referent continuity refers to the

maintenance of continuity via specific places that esteem, though the two may be related.have emotional significance for a person, whereasplace-congruent continuity refers to the mainten-

Self-efficacyance of continuity via characteristics of placeswhich are generic and transferable from one place

This is defined as an individual’s belief in theirto another. For example, a person may seek a placecapabilities to meet situational demands. It is usedfelt to be congruent with his/her settlement identifi-as a measure of personal agency. Self-efficacy the-cation (Feldman, 1990), in order to preserve conti-ory was developed within the framework of socialnuity of self as a specific type of person. That is,learning theory (Bandura, 1977), and is regarded aspeople will look for places in which to live that seemhigh when the individual believes s/he can performto represent their values. Graumann highlightsan act or complete a task. It follows that an individ-this:ual would wish to maintain a reasonable level ofFor it is actually values which people esteem highlyself-efficacy. This is increasingly regarded asand which they feel to be personified or objectifiedimportant for psychological well-being (Leibkind,in their objects of identification.’ (Graumann, 1983,

p. 314). 1992). With respect to the environment, we wouldsuggest that feelings of self-efficacy are maintainedIn addition to choosing environments that areif the environment facilitates or at least does notcongruent with self, the physical environment canhinder a person’s everyday lifestyle. In the environ-be modified in order to represent present selvesmental literature. Winkel (1981) discusses the con-(Duncan, 1973) and to present a new self. Thecept of manageable environments:absences of place-congruent continuity can lead to

general dissatisfaction and possibly a desire to A manageable environment is one in which the resi-leave an area to find another place to live which is dents of an area able to organise information fromcongruent with self (Feldman, 1990). their immediate socio-physical environment in such

a way that they can develop a predicative systemOverall, there is evidence that place is inextri-that allows them to judge whether a setting sup-cably linked with the development and maintenanceports their goals and purposes.of continuity of self. Furthermore, the self can be

threatened by unwanted disruptions to emotionally Living in a manageable environment means thata person feels self-efficacious with respect to theirsalient places.daily functioning in that environment. That is, theybelieve that they are able to carry out their chosenSelf-esteemactivities in that environment. We suggest thatwhen an environment is perceived as unmanage-Self-esteem refers to a positive evaluation of oneself

or the group with which one identifies; it is con- able it constitutes a threat to self-efficacy.In conclusion, using these four concepts originat-cerned with a person’s feeling of worth or social

value. The desire to maintain a positive conception ing in social psychology but modified and developed


within an environmental context, it is suggested to the functional aspects of the environment, suchas closeness to work and the evaluation of facilitiesthat:

1a. Respondents who are attached will express such as shops and schools.place identifications; they will distinguish them-selves from others by these identifications.

1b. Those people who are not attached to the Theory into practicelocal area will express no place identifications oridentifications not congruent with the local area. The research context

2a. The local environment will be discussed bypeople who are attached in ways which maintain The research presented here was carried out in the

Surrey Docks, part of the redeveloped Londonboth place-referent and place-congruent continuityor promote conscious discontinuity of both types of Docks, England which is now referred to as London

Docklands. The London Docks used to be one of thecontinuity.2b. Those people who are not attached to the area largest areas of docklands in the world. The

reduction in world shipping and the decline ofwill have no sense of continuity with the localenvironment but may or may not have continuity Britain as a maritime power led to the closing of

most of the docks. Some of the Dockland sites werewith another place.3. Respondents who are attached to the local area redeveloped in the 1980s in what was to become the

largest urban redevelopment project in the world.will express positive self-esteem from that attach-ment. Those respondents who are not attached to Canary Wharf (see Fig. 1) became a symbol of the

economic boom of the late 1980s when new officesthe local area will express negative or neutral self-esteem associated with their relationship with the and an influx of young, single, high earners con-

trasted with the remaining indigenous workingarea.4. The local environment will be discussed in class population and vestiges of pre-1970s industry.

The former derelict sites on the south bank of theways which show how manageable a person feelstheir local environment to be and that this will refer River Thames did not experience the scale of com-

1

2

3

4 5

6

7

1 St. Katherine's Dock2 London Docks3 Limehouse Basin4 Surrey Commercial Docks5 West Indian and Millwall

Docks6 East India Docks7 Royal Docks

Tower Bridge Surrey

Docks

Canary Wharf

Deptford Creek

River Lea

River Thames

Royal Victoria Docks Royal Albert Docks

King George V Docks

London's Docklands: The Upstream Docks

1 0 1 2 miles

01 1 2 kms

N

FIGURE 1. Map of the London Docklands.


mercial development found, for example, at Canary e.g. ‘In the questionnaire you said that you wereattached to the area. I wonder if you could tell me inWharf. Nevertheless, in Rotherhithe the old docks

were filled in, and new houses were built. These what ways you are attached to the area.’Section two focused on the issue of relocation.were marketed as desirable residences for the influx

of an essentially middle-class population. Respondents’ perceptions of the impact of relocationon their lives in particular and in general were dis-Surrey Docks was chosen for the research because

it had experienced such massive social, economic cussed, together with the significance or not ofbecoming a homeowner. Respondents who had notand environmental change attracting a large

amount of controversy (e.g. Newman & Mayo, 1983; relocated within the previous 10 years were askedto discuss the pros and cons of remaining in theMorris, 1992) which meant that there was an exist-

ing discourse about whose place it was and who same area for that length of time, e.g. ‘What do youfeel are the advantages for you in having lived herebelonged there (Morris, 1992). This was important

for the research since place attachment is usually for a long time?’Section three comprised questions on the impactexperienced at a largely unconscious level (Relph,

1976) so one approach to its study is to focus on of the redevelopment of the Surrey Docks area ontheir lives with specific reference to the positive andareas of place disruption (Brown and Perkins,

1992). The redevelopment also meant that there negative consequences of the redevelopment forthem, their social networks and the community as awere a range of inhabitants with a varying degrees

of attachment to the same area and therefore con- whole e.g. ‘What impact has the new developmenthad on your life?’ (asked if they had lived in the areatrasts could be made between attached and nonat-

tached residents. This paper does not look directly prior to redevelopment).The fourth section focused on an elaboration ofat the ‘impact’ of the new development, rather the

processes of identity within that area. the personal meaning of their settlement, place andlocal identifications. They were also asked if therewere certain situations in which they would use aSample. The sample consisted of 20 people chosen

from respondents to a questionnaire which focused specific identification, e.g. ‘Are there situationswhen you would specifically use that label toon place attachment (Twigger, 1992, 1994, 1995).

These people were chosen because they fulfilled the describe yourself?’In section five respondents were asked wherecriteria of ‘attached’ or ‘not attached’. The criterion

of attached/not attached was decided by the respon- they came from (it was known that they were not allnative to the area and came from many differentdents’ score on an Attachment Scale.1 A score corre-

sponding to the mean or below was chosen as the places from Southwark to overseas) and what per-ception they thought others had of Surrey Docks,cut-off criterion, those respondents higher than the

mean were considered to be ‘attached’ and those e.g. ‘What sort of image do you think other peoplewho do not live in this area have of it?’below ‘not attached’. Ten respondents at each end of

the scale were selected, with either very low or very Section six focused on the respondents’ expressedpride in the area and the positive and negativehigh scores so that any differences would be

emphasized. aspects of living in the area, e.g. ‘Would you say abit more about what makes you feel proud/not feelTwenty respondents were contacted and 19 were

subsequently interviewed in their homes. The inter- proud about living here?’views were semi-structured and lasted between 40and 60 min. Semi-structured interviews were used Analysisbecause there were specific questions which haddeveloped from two previous studies (a interview The transcripts of the interviews were analysed

using the theoretical framework presented above.and a questionnaire survey) that the interviewerconsidered to be important to this stage of the data This might be classified as a ‘thematic analysis’

method, which aims to provide ‘a coherent way ofcollection. Semi-structured questions allowed forthe respondent to discuss his/her answers within a organizing or reading some interview material in

relation to specific research questions’ (Banister etdefined framework.2

al., 1994, p. 57). Henwood and Pidgeon (1994) elo-quently describe the different epistemologicalInterview schedule. The interview schedule con-

sisted of six sections. The first section contained assumptions and contradictions present within thenow wide range of qualitative research approachesquestions on the extent and nature of the respon-

dent’s attachment/nonattachment to the local area available. This research sits within an empiricist


framework that takes a ‘broadly inductivist view people they lived in the area. In order for a responseto confirm the role of self-esteem, the respondentthat initial representations of social relationships

can be discovered from detailed qualitative observa- had to refer to how living in the area gave them apositive feeling about themselves thus dis-tions.’ (Henwood & Pidgeon, p. 229). In order to

establish whether or not expressing emotional tinguishing it from being only a positive evaluationof the area.attachment to the local area could be regarded as

supporting identity principles, criteria were estab-lished to denote the four identity principles. The Self-efficacy. Self-efficacy was noted when thetranscripts were read several times for evidence respondent referred to the ease (or not) with whichsupporting or refuting the coding framework s/he could carry out his/her daily life in that area.detailed below. In addition, the aim of the thematic The content of answers classified as concerned withanalysis was to draw out the salient dimensions of manageability was expected to be focused on facili-the relationship with the local area for identity ties and functional aspects of the local environment.development and maintenance.

Distinctiveness. Hummon (1990) suggests that dis- Resultstinctiveness is confirmed when the respondent usesan identification to distinguish him/herself from Characteristics of the sampleothers. In addition, Hummon (1990) showed that a‘city’ enthusiast would describe him/herself with Of the 20 respondents contacted only 19 were avail-reference to other identifications, e.g. a ‘country’ able for interview during the time period (10person. In order for a response to be classified as attached residents and nine nonattached). Twelvereferring to distinctiveness, two criteria were used: were female and seven were male. Ages ranged(i) confirmation by the respondent of the identifi- from 26 to 67 years with a mean of 42·3. Fivecations expressed in the questionnaire, showing respondents had been born in the local areathat s/he did use those categories in order to dis- (Rotherhithe). Two respondents had lived in theirtinguish him/herself from others. (ii) The compara- current house for less than a year, four had livedtive use of identifications, e.g. defining him/herself there for between 1 and 3 years, seven for between 4as distinct from another type of person in the course and 7 years, two for 8–10 years and four for 11+of the interview. years.

Continuity. Evidence of continuity was expected to Distinctivenesscentre around the respondent’s residential history,his/her attachment to the area and relocation per- From the Tables 1 to 3 it is possible to see that thereceptions. Continuity, as noted above, can be divided are differences between the attached and nonat-into place-referent continuity and place-congruent tached residents in their pattern of identification.continuity. This is most marked at the local level and the place

Place-referent continuity would be confirmed if level, that is more attached than nonattached havethe respondent showed how the environment func- place and local identifications.tioned as a referent with which to relate past activi-ties and selves to the present. For example attach- Settlement identification. Of the attached respon-ment expressed as talking about the landscape as it dents six of them had congruent settlement identifi-was when s/he was younger. cations, i.e. city, and they described the valuedPlace-congruent continuity would be confirmed if attributes of their settlement identifications in com-the respondent’s discussion of his/her attachment parative terms as suggested by Hummon (1986).centred around the integration or fit between theperson and the environment. For example, feelingattached to the local area because the physical TABLE 1environment was their preferred type (e.g. city). Settlement identifications for attached and nonattached

respondentsSelf-esteem. Self-esteem was examined using the City Other Nonestatement relating to pride in the area, taken from

Attached 6 4 0the questionnaire. Respondents had alreadyNonattached 3 4 2expressed the extent to which they felt proud to tell


TABLE 2Place identifications for attached and nonattached respondents

Londoner Rotherhithe Downtowner Other None

Attached 5 3 1 1Nonattached 3 3 3

TABLE 3 having had no childhood settlement identificationNumbers of residents who considered themselves local/not and enjoying the best of the country and the city.

local

Local Not local Place identification. The comparative techniquewas also used by attached respondents when talk-Attached 10 0

Nonattached 1 8 ing about place identifications. The people who saidthat they were Rotherhithe people made a distinc-tion between Rotherhithe and the other areas ofSouthwark, emphasizing the different types of

I just like the hustle and bustle of London, I like people in those areas.to go to the country and stay but I like to get back toLondon, more to do . . . RN you only had to go past the Red Lion and they

were Deptford people. BHwe bought a cottage in Norfolk, I can go for a

week or a fortnight but no longer, it’s too quiet. BH but you start going to Peckham, you are goingI think it would be too quiet [the country], I like it into uncharted territory, into a different world,

like this with things going on. DH because once you get past the Old Kent Road andyou have got Peckham. JLFor the rest of the attached respondents who had

How could you say you came from Catford, poxyother settlement identifications (i.e. country) thereCatford? JLwere three who had an idealized identification with

the country and one who considered himself to be a I think Rotherhithe and Bermondsey people arethe same type of people, but you wouldn’t associatetown person. For the former group, the idealizedyourself with Peckham and that’s on the same sortidentification although incongruent with their pre-of border. JCsent surroundings did not appear to present any

A North Londoner is more quiet, I mean when Iconflict for them, rather it expressed a feeling offirst came over here, I mean they used to swear andescapism for them. The respondents who said heI thought, what have I let myself in for. DHwas a town person, considered the area of

Only one of the attached interviewees did not classRotherhithe to have a small town atmosphere andherself as a Londoner or a Rotherhithe person. Sheso it was congruent with his identification.said she was ‘a southerner’ but felt that her identityThe nonattached respondents with noncongruentwas defined more by her class and lifestyle:settlement identifications (i.e. country) also used a

comparative technique to evaluate their current I identify myself by class and lifestyle, sort of lef-tie, middle-class thinking person . . . Guardianenvironment:reader. MS

I find it difficult to tolerate the dirt, the noise, theOf those people who were not attached to the localbusyness, the cars or the people, I like getting out

. . . a lot of quiet. JG area, three of them had identifications with otherplaces: namely, Ireland, Scotland and Birmingham.the view is within three to four hundred yards. I

It can be said that, for these two people, they werehave no wide outlook here and you know, when youliving in places not congruent with their identifi-get out into the countryside and suddenly you can

see for miles and miles and miles. It’s that element cations. These people were planning to leave inof broadening out that I like. MR order to find places which would be more compatible

with a very different type of place identification.These two people were not living in place whichthey perceived to be congruent with their settle- The Irish woman was planning to move to

Eastbourne which she felt had similar qualities toment identification. They were planning to leave inorder to find places which would be more compatible the town in Ireland in which she grew up. For her, it

was not important that she should go back towith their settlement identification. Finally, therewere two people who were not attached and had no Ireland. In fact she said that she had been back to

her home town and found it too quiet. More import-settlement identification and they explained this by


ant for her was to find a place that possessed the Personal distinctiveness. All the above identifi-cations are considered as social categories. Distinc-qualities she valued in her home town.

Two of the interviewees who were not attached to tiveness related to identification will relate to somedegree to the person’s relationship with the otherthe local area did have place identifications. Both of

them said that they were Londoners. For one, it was people who defined themselves as ‘city’, therefore itis related to a group identification. In addition tothe city of London with which she specifically ident-

ified and for her it was enough to be anywhere in this group distinctiveness, there were expressions ofpersonal distinctiveness relating to the length ofLondon.time spent in the area. Two people who had lived inI’ve just literally in the last two or three weeksthe area prior to the redevelopment expressed alooked at flats and I’ve gone straight over to Tooting

and put a deposit on a flat over there and I know feeling of uniqueness because they had stayed innothing about Tooting . . . but I like to live in the area and watched it change from a slum to aLondon. JP desirable residential area:For the other person his identification as a

I can remember what a crap place I was in. JLLondoner did not mean that he felt he had to stay inthat area or London necessarily. It was more a I’ve enjoyed seeing it change, the change, when I

was young this was a dirty place, with all docks andstatement of who he was rather than an expressionthe wharves, and that noisy and all that but nowof his relationship with the local environment.it’s quiet . . . someone who moved away for fiveThe rest of the nonattached interviewees did not years would come back and they wouldn’t recognize

have any identification with either place or it, completely different. RNsettlement.

In addition three people who moved in early on inthe development also expressed a feeling ofLocal identification. With respect to a local identi-uniqueness:fication 11 of the respondents said that they were

and it was quite good because here we were one oflocal people (all the attached people and onethe first to move in and that gives you a bit of annonattached). When they discussed the reasons whyedge, cos you can say to them, tell them what’sand the significance of it for them, their responses what. EC

centred on the importance of recognizing people andWell it has been very interesting seeing if change,being recognized themselves, i.e. being dis-

I think a lot of the new people haven’t got the com-tinguished from others.munity spirit that we had in the first place . . . with

I think when you get involved in area things one or two exceptions I am one of the older resi-going on, you tend to, people think of you as a dents. HBknown face, out. EC

It’s been nice being one of the first people, seeingknowing people and knowing where you are . . . it grow up around us. DHyou’re talking to somebody and they say, Oh I usedto know her mum and whatever. MO Distinctiveness was achieved by inhabitants at both

a spatial and temporal scale. First, attached resi-because we know people, we recognize people,dents expressed distinctiveness on three levels ofand in the shops they are very good at getting

things for you, they are very good you know. SS environmental scale: settlement, place and locale.Second, distinctiveness could be achieved by differ-Amongst those people who did not feel local to theentiating oneself from others on a temporal scale:area there was a desire to feel local; it was some-e.g. before and after the redevelopment. In terms ofthing that they felt they would like to achieve inthe questions posed at the end of the introduction,another place. This was also true of the nonattachedboth attached and nonattached respondentsrespondents without any settlement or place identi-expressed settlement identifications, but were dif-fications. They felt that they did not have any placeferentiated by the congruency of those settlementor settlement identification because they had livedidentifications with the locale. The attached respon-in many different places.dents were more likely to have a settlement identity

Not local to anywhere, I think if you’ve movedthat is congruent with the locale. Unexpected wasand married away from home and then moved afterthe concept of idealized settlement identifications.that, and then teamed up with someone, the roots,

there is not time for roots to go anywhere . . . GG For those people with an idealized settlementidentification place and local identification seemedI’d only feel that I came from somewhere if I’dto be more salient than settlement identifications.lived there a hell of a long time or had kids here or

something. PW As predicted there were those nonattached respon-


common attitude which is one that I don’t person-dents who did not express any identification withally share . . . there have been no, up until recentlyany level of place.there have been no recreational facilities . . . there’snothing. JS

ContinuityThere was only one person who said she was

attached to the area but had a ‘country’ settlementContinuity, it will be recalled, can be sub-dividedidentity. She felt at home in the area and the small-into place-congruent continuity and place-referentness and quiet of the peninsula appealed to thecontinuity.‘country’ in her. The main aspect of the country thatshe missed was the scenery, especially the green-Place-congruent continuity is the ‘fit’ between theness and the mountains.environment and the residents’ desires and values.

This was expressed in two ways. For the 10 respon-Place-referent continuity. For those who weredents who were attached there was a tendency toattached some of them had place-referent conti-compare their local environment with a specificallynuity. Evidence was manifest in the desire not tovalued place that they had once lived in, mentioningmove away from the area. Two women, for example,both physical and social features of thatwould not leave the area because their husbandsenvironment.had died there. For them, the local environmentTwo other people considered the local area inacted as a marker or storehouse for emotionally sig-terms of general qualities that they valued. Of thosenificant past events and actions:respondents who were not attached but had identifi-

cations with other places there was a desire to find I don’t think I would find it easy to move away . . .because of my memories, of having spent the timeplaces to complement those identifications. Thishere with my husband . . . because we had all ourwas illustrated by two people describing their feel-married life here, our whole relationship in andings of not fitting in with the environment, specifi- around this area. MS

cally the social environment. One woman had comeThe reason I wouldn’t move from here is becauseto a mixed tenancy block of flats in the area, with

my husband died over here and he is in Camberwellthe intention of getting involved in the area, but has cemetery and er I wouldn’t leave him over here, cosbeen unable to do so. She found that she did not get he’s over here, I wouldn’t leave him over here . . .on with the local people and found the facilities to DHbe poor. For the six people who had lived in the area all

I have a lot of difficulties relating to the locals, you their lives, they discussed the place with referencehave to fit in with them, rather than the other way to past events in their lives:round and that becomes a bit difficult when you

I was born across the other side of the main road,have, you know there is an awful lot of racist feelinglived there till I got married, about 20 years, then Iin Rotherhithe and there are all sorts of tests beingmoved down the road . . . stayed there till thesecarried out if you get invited into a house of some-were built. RNone, genuinely a lot of racist talk . . . JG

Another woman found similar conflicts between I’ve lived here all my life, well this area, wellRotherhithe feels like home, and I went to schoolher values and those expressed by the local popu-round here. JClation. She had moved to the area as an investment.

As a result of her experience she said that she and then lived at the Old Kent Road and movedwould be very careful about choosing the next place down here when I was five, so my primary school

was up the road, St. Joseph’s is no longer there, sec-she moves to.ondary school was St. Michael’s but that was only

the local people, I find are very insular and cliquey, one bus ride away. JLthey are not what I would call friendly by anystretch of the imagination and they seem to share a we used to sit and watch the cargo being

TABLE 4Continuity expressed by attached and nonattached respondents (note it was possible for a respondent to express all of

these constructs)

Place referent Place congruent Place incongruent Discontinuity None

Attached 6 9 1 3 0Nonattached 0 4 3 1 2


unloaded and sit and the odd occasional crate would ’cos you can’t do what you wanted to do . . . let’s goand change everything. BHfall over, we’d be over there like a shot, potatoes

that’s next week’s potatoes and we’ll have the aftersThese represent people who consciously changedbecause there’s oranges coming. JL

their environments in response to life events inOne interviewee said how he would be devastated order to start anew.

if they closed the ‘pie and mash’ shop up the road, Overall, there was evidence for the expression ofeven though he had not been there for a long time. place-referent and place-congruent continuity inHe identified himself as a Bermondsey boy and for residents’ relationships with the local environment.him this shop represented the part of Bermondsey It was particularly noteworthy that the symbolicwith which he identified. role of the local environment was highly salient for

One of the people who was not attached to the many inhabitants. This was exemplified in thearea did express a lack of place-referent continuity: tendency of inhabitants to equate the physical relo-

I was born overseas, so I don’t feel attachment to cation with a psychological relocation. Bothanywhere, because I was born in Libya, so I don’t attached and nonattached residents expressed theknow, maybe if you could say you were born in that significance of their residential environment tohospital you could say you were more attached. PW

their self-concepts.For those two residents who were not attached

and had no identifications, continuity of place didSelf-esteemnot seem to be important to them:

I don’t feel a particular need to be rooted to a place,Overall, the attached residents expressed manyI’m more of a snail, I carry my shell around withdifferent ways in which their relationship with theme. GGlocal area impacted positively on their self-esteem,Finally, there was evidence that where peoplewhereas the nonattached respondents expressed ahad changed their residence this represented a newnarrower and more negative range of impacts.beginning and a break from the past. Two people

Two people, when explaining why they felt proudhad moved to their own place after divorce:of the area, talked about the changed in the area. It

Oh I was thrilled with it, starting from scratch . . . made them feel good to see the area which they hadJP known for years become a desirable place to live.

that was a wonderful feeling, somewhere stable to down here before it was a slum, it really was,live after all those years of instability . . . I lovedalthough you wouldn’t admit it . . . it was bad, sincemoving here, having my own home, I could do whatthis has been done everything’s new and it’s allI wanted with it. HBbeen tidied up, it’s nice. RN

One person was intending to move with his newIt’s mine, I own part of it, I’ve helped somewherepartner. Unfortunately she died before they moved:

along the line, I’ve shared the crap. JLthe house belonged to Clare and her family and I

Several people discussed the status attached toteamed up with Clare. We didn’t mind living thereon our own in her family house but we needed a living in Docklands. There were mixed feelings as tofresh start and she died unfortunately . . . GG whether they would associated themselves with it

since there is a difficulty with people thinking Dock-One respondent described how he and his wifelands is only north of the river. One personhad moved away from another area because theyexpressed how she did use the name to give hercould no longer be councillors due to his new job insome kudos with her workmates:which he had to be politically neutral.

working in Kensington obviously they look downbecause I hold a politically restricted job in localtheir noses a bit and to be able to say in the earlygovernment now, I couldn’t stand and we decided todays, “Oh well I’m moving to Docklands” was throw-move . . . let’s go somewhere else . . . rather thaning it back at them . . . HBstay attached to the area you’ve been involved in for

15 to 20 years, otherwise you are going to get pangs, Further, one respondent expressed how moving toher new home enhanced her self-esteem at the per-sonal level:

TABLE 5getting the keys to this place was a great feeling, ISelf-esteemhad actually achieved something. HB

Attached NonattachedThere was some evidence for the physical qualit-

Self esteem 10 1 ies of the place providing positive self esteem. One


woman felt her spirits lift when she went for a walk convenience for everything, getting to work, schools,leisure centre, library, shops, I mean everything wein the area:do or got to in an average week is within walking

When I get lonely in the flat I can just go out and be distance. ECwalking around and I feel better. JP

it’s easy to move around London, it’s ideal fromVisitors’ perceptions of the area were also most points of view and it’s handy for work. BH

expressed in terms of self-esteem: Both attached and nonattached respondents gaveI think generally people who come to visit me and examples of situations that threatened the manage-haven’t been before are surprised . . . pleasantly so ability of their daily lives, such as crime, services,at the green. MS

pollution and the social environment. These wereIt’s nice, if you want to invite people, it’s a nice the areas which people discussed in answer to the

place to bring your friends. BH questions about the costs and benefits of living inthe area. In addition these topics were mentioned asThe people who were not attached fell into two

distinct groups, those who liked living in the area areas which could cause the breakdown of manage-ability with a result that they may have to leave thebut were moving on, and those for whom it was not

a pleasant experience to be living there. For the area.First, in respect of crime and safety, two peopleformer group the local area was not expressed as

central to their identities. The latter group had been burgled. For one nonattached personcrime was becoming an increasing problem for her:expressed their feelings of dissatisfaction and a

strong desire to leave the area. One woman I don’t like the idea that you have to lock your carsexpressed how she used the negative aspects of the at night, you have to make sure you are secure from

burglars and the sheer business of living and get-place in a way that boosted her self-esteem:ting to work takes so much time, that you have

I think I take a terrible satisfaction in telling them about an hour to yourself, it’s exhausting. JGhow awful it is, because most of the people I work

One other person felt that it was not possible towith are living in quiet little garden suburbs, theextent of the depravity is people leaving the go away and leave her house because she felt sureoccasional bottle . . . it’s my way of coping. JG she would get burgled. She felt there had been a rise

in crime and it was one of the reasons she wouldThese results suggest that for the attachedlike to leave the area.respondents living in an area which is congruent

Everyone mentioned the poor public transportwith their values and desires enhances their self-system. There was also general agreement thatesteem. From the comment made by the respondentthere were few entertainment facilities in the area.who was not attached and positively disliked theHowever, the lack of secondary schools in the areaplace, it was important for her to salvage some posi-was a problem for one man who felt attached, andtive feelings in terms of the self-presentation of herhe argued it may be a reason to leave the area evenresidential location. The two respondents who werethough he was reluctant to do because he had livednot attached and felt negatively about the localthere most of his life.area, positively identified with other places which

Pollution too was an issue. One person mentionedhad the effect of highlighting their discontent aboutthe air pollution through dust:their present residence.

There is an incredibly high rate of asthma in thisarea and on the other side of the river . . . and mySelf-efficacyeldest one has got asthma and my wife has devel-oped it. BHThere were a variety of aspects of environmental

manageability such as the existence of crime, thestandard of public services, pollution levels or racial TABLE 6

Issues of environmental manageabilitymix that were important to both attached and unat-tached respondents. It was therefore appropriate to Attached Not attachedlist the numbers in each group who mentioned

Good public services 5 2which aspect (see Table 6). For some people these Bad public services 2 2were tolerable but for others they created tensions Air pollution 1 0

Noise pollution 0 1even to the extent that they had contemplated leav-Safe environment 2 2ing the area.Unsafe environment 0 3The attached people made more reference of theRacial tension 2 0manageability of the environment:


For him this might mean that he would leave the and development of identity processes. There wasevidence that holding specific settlement identifi-area.

Noise pollution was experienced by one of the cations was used to gain positive distinctivenessover people identifying with other settlements. Thisrespondents:was exemplified by the ‘city’ people negatively label-but the neighbourhood is being spoiled in my viewling the qualities of the country, e.g. the peace andby the large number of young people living here

with loud music machines, our neighbours next quiet, which are valued by ‘country’ people. As sug-door drive us mad . . . get drunk and play loud gested by Hummon (1986), the settlement identifi-music at 4 o’clock in the morning. GG cation represented a framework through which per-He was leaving the area for a home in France. ceptions of other settlements and their qualitiesFinally, the social environment or more specifi- were evaluated.

cally changes in the ethnic composition of the neigh- A similar mechanism was apparent at the placebourhood. Many of the respondents commented on identification level. People who identified withthe increased number of Black people who have Rotherhithe, positively distinguished themselvesbeen moved into this area by the local authority. It from residents of the surrounding areas, such aswas felt that this would be a major issue in the next Peckham. At the level of defining oneself as local orfew years: not, there was a bias towards wanting to be labelled

it will be [a big issue] towards the end of this and as local and wanting to belong. Again nonlocalsnext year, I mean you go down there in the morn- were defined as different, nonparticipants andings, I’m not prejudiced but, you drive down there short-term residents. Previous work has not exam-in the mornings and that’s all you see at the bus

ined the different levels of identification.stop, they’ve got to live somewhere I suppose. RNIt was also found that not all levels of place

you never got any blacks around here because identification were salient for all the respondents.there weren’t no houses, now there are housesFor those people who had lived in the area all ofChrist knows what is going to happen in two yearstheir lives, place and locale were salient but nottime, powder keg . . . they are getting the blacks

with chips on their shoulders. JL settlement. If, as Feldman (1990) suggests, identifi-cations are used to categorize and order theThe people who were not attached to the areaenvironment, then it is reasonable to assume thatexpressed both positive and negative opinions aboutthe categories must have a salience for the individ-the manageability of the area:ual at the appropriate scale of settlement. In ordereasy access straight in and being able to wanderto achieve distinctiveness whilst living in one neigh-around . . . the shops are brilliant. JPbourhood for a length of time, it is more salient tonow that they have a set of shops out here it’s acompare yourself with the surrounding neighbour-very very convenient spot, short walk to the tube,hoods than with a different settlement. This raisesshort walk to the shops, short walk to the park. GGthe issue of environmental scale in relation to thewe’ve got a limited shopping facility at Surreysalience of specific identifications. As a general rule,Quays and everything else has failed. JGthe further away a person is from his/her home, theBoth groups discussed the local area in positivemore general an identification will be used. Forand negative terms. Manageability did not, on itsexample, if a person is in a foreign country s/he isown, clearly differentiate the two groups but itlikely to use his/her nationality as her/his identifi-seemed to have the potential to be the ‘last straw’cation, whereas someone from London may callfor nonattached people with no continuity andthemselves a Londoner when they are in the Northincongruent settlement and place identifications.of England. Distinctiveness then is achieved withinThe main difference between the attached and non-the constraints of the appropriate environmentalattached was the ability to leave the area in the facescale.of a threat to their feeling of manageability. Not

There was evidence for the establishment and usesurprisingly, for the attached respondents this wasof place in the maintenance of continuity of self anda more difficult decision to make than for the nonat-the use of place to create, symbolize and establishtached respondents.new selves. There was also evidence for place-refer-ent continuity: the landscape is used as a memorialto the person’s past. For the two widows, remainingDiscussionin the area was a link with their dead husbands.For one, the area held the memory of their mar-Overall, the results provide evidence for the use of

the residential environment in the maintenance riage. In this way it could be said that the place


acted as a focus for memories that they wished to place attachment. For the former group having anattachment elsewhere had a negative effect on theirpreserve (Rowles, 1983; Korpela, 1989). For others,

the ability to point out where s/he had grown up identity processes mainly resulting in a desire toleave the area. For the latter group, either placeacted as a symbol of continuity with the past and

the future: the existence of a familiar building con- attachment was not salient for them at this stage oftheir lives or they had never felt any need for afirmed his/her existence as a young person.

As well as the conscious preservation of conti- place attachment (Giuliani, 1991).It was suggested in the introduction that thisnuity amongst the respondents there was evidence

of conscious discontinuity (Hormuth, 1990). In these study may help to clarify the role of place in identityand to illuminate aspects of the identity processcases a new environment was chosen to mark a new

stage in life. One woman’s new house, for example, model. The framework of distinctiveness, conti-nuity, self-efficacy and self-esteem has clarified therepresented her new life as a single woman after

divorce. It stood for something she had achieved meanings and role emotionally salient places havefor a person’s identity. This work has provided somewithout her husband’s assistance. This supports the

proposition that place is used in the active construc- evidence for the salience of place identifications to agroup of residents and suggests that these identifi-tion of identity (Hormuth, 1990) as opposed to its

function as backdrop to experience. cations function in similar ways to other identifi-cations. In terms of social identity theory it suggestsThere was some evidence for place congruent con-

tinuity in the people who expressed dissatisfaction that place identifications are a legitimate additionto the existing range of identifications. Further, thiswith the area. For them the image of the environ-

ment was not congruent with their image of them- work provides some evidence for the relationshipbetween place and identity which has implicationsselves. They did not feel able to belong to an area

where the people and the facilities did not represent for social psychological theories of identity. Specifi-cally, it suggests that identity processes have atheir values and aspirations (Feldman, 1990). For

these people it was necessary for them to live in a dynamic relationship with the residential environ-ment. The development and maintenance of theseplace which they felt to be congruent with their

values. processes occurs in transactions with the environ-ment. In acknowledging this, the environmentPlace was also used to maintain positive self-

esteem. This is closely associated with distinc- becomes a salient part of identity as opposed to themerely setting a context in which identity can betiveness. There was evidence of positive self-esteem

through association with a ‘prestigious’ place (Lalli, established and developed. However, identity pro-cess theory needs to be able to account for those1992). One women described how she used her

association with the Docklands to present herself in residents who did not express an identification orattachment to any place or settlement. On the othera positive fashion. In addition, the association with

London was regarded as a positive one, linking a hand it can be suggested that there may be lifes-tages when attachment to place and identityperson to activity, and the ‘heart’ of the country. In

this sense, self-esteem was maintained through the become more salient, and that some of the respon-dents fall into that category. However, as Giulianisymbolic qualities of the place.

There was some evidence for the actual physical (1991) argues, there are people for whom theseidentifications do not seem to be salient. Onequalities of the place providing positive self-esteem.

In addition, inhabitants’ self-esteem was enhanced suggestion is that in respect of location, thesepeople identify themselves more strongly with beingby the positive feedback given to them by visitors to

the area about their residential location. travellers or nomads. Their identity is still definedin terms of location, in the sense of moving asIn this study manageability was operationalized

at a basic level, ostensibly denoting the extent to opposed to remaining in places. Taking this further,we suggest that all identifications have locationwhich the environment facilitated everyday life.

Clearly for some people, given their values and implications, place is part of the content of anidentification. This is an important contribution toaspirations, the environment was not manageable.

These people found the level of crime, noise and the current theories of identity which tend to presentidentity as disembodied from the physicallack of services unacceptable, and leaving was their

preferred option. environment.Breakwell’s (1986) identity process theory wasFinally, those people who were not attached

seemed to fall into two main groups: those who were designed to examine threats to identity. In thisresearch there was an implied disruption of identityattached to other places and those who expressed no


Epstein, S. (1983). The unconscious, the preconscious,´because of the disruption of the place. This linkand the self-concept. In J. Suls & A. G. Greenwald,needs to be examined more systematically in orderEds., Psychological Perspectives on the Self, Vol. 2.to gain a closer understanding of the relationship Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

between identity and change in the physical Eyles, J. (1968). The Inhabitants’ Images of Highgateenvironment. Under what conditions of change to Village. London: LSE Geography Discussion Papers,

no. 15.the physical environment do people perceive aFeldman, R. M. (1990). Settlement identity: psychologicalthreat to identity. This research has focused on the

bonds with home places in a mobile society. Environ-residential environment. Further work could exam- ment and Behavior, 22, 183–229.ine the salience of other important environment and Fried, M. (1963). Grieving for a lost home. In L. Duhl,identity settings, such as the workplace. Ed., The Urban Condition. New York: Basic Books.

Gecas, V. (1982). The self concept. Annual Review of Soci-ology, 8, 1–33.

Gerson, K., Stueve, C. A. & Fischer, C. (1977). Attach-Notes ment to place. In C. Fischer et al., Eds, Networks andPlaces—Social Relations in the Urban Setting. New

(1) As part of an earlier study (see Twigger, 1994 for York: Free Press.details) the interviewees had completed a postal question- Giuliani, M. V. (1991). Towards an analysis of mentalnaire concerning their experience of living in the local representations of attachment to the home. Journal ofarea. This questionnaire included a Place Attachment Architecture and Planning Research. Summer,scale of 20 items (α=0·86). 13–146.(2) The interviewer was female, white and 26 years old. Graumann, C. (1983). On multiple identities. Inter-

national Social Science Journal, 35, 309–321.Henwood, K. & Pidgeon, N. (1994). Beyond the qualitat-

ive paradigm: a framework for introducing diversityReferences within qualitative psychology. Journal of Communityand Applied Social Psychology, 4, 225–238.

Abrams, D. (1992). Processes of social identification. In G. Hogg, M. A. & Abrams, D. (1988). Social Identifications.M. Breakwell, Ed., Social Psychology of Identity and London: Routledge.the Self-concept. Surrey: Surrey University Press.Hormuth, S. (1990). The Ecology of Self: Relocation andAltman, I. & Low, S. Eds, (1992). Place Attachment. New

Self-concept Change. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-York: Plenum Press.sity Press.Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. New York:

Hummon, D. (1990). Commonplaces: Community IdeologyPrentice Hall.and Identity in American Culture. New York: StateBanister, P., Burman, E., Parker, I., Taylor, M. & Tindall,University of New York Press.C. (1994). Qualitative Methods in Psychology: A

Hummon, D. (1986). City mouse, country mouse: the per-Research Guide. Buckingham: Open University Press.sistence of community identity. Qualitative Sociology,Breakwell, G. M. (1986). Coping with Threatened Ident-9, 3–25.ity. London: Methuen.

James, W. (1890). The Principles of Psychology. NewBreakwell, G. M. (1992). Processes of self-evaluation: effi-York: Holt.cacy and estrangement. In G. M. Breakwell, Ed.,

Krupat, E. (1983). A place for place identity. Identity ofSocial Psychology of Identity and the Self-concept.Environmental Psychology, 3, 343–344.Surrey: Surrey University Press.

Korpela, K. M. (1989). Place identity as a product ofBreakwell, G. M. (1993). Integrating paradigms: metho-environmental self regulation. Journal of Environ-dological implications. In G. M. Breakwell & D. V.mental Psychology, 9, 241–256.Canter, Eds., Empirical Approaches to Social Rep-

Lalli, M. (1988). Urban related identity. In D. Canter, etresentations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.al., Eds., Environmental Social Psychology. London:Brown, B. B. & Perkins, D. D. (1992). Disruptions in placeKluwer Academic Publishers.attachment. In I. Altman & S. Low, Eds., Place

Lalli, M. (1992). Urban related identity: theory, measure-Attachment. New York: Plenum Press.ment and empirical findings. Journal of Environmen-Cuba, L. & Hummon, D. M. (1993). A place to call home:tal Psychology, 12, 285–303.identification with dwelling, community and region.

Leibkind, K. (1992). Ethnic identity—challenging theSociological Quarterly, 11, 111–131.boundaries of social psychology. In G. M. Breakwell,Czikszentmihalyi, M. & Rochberg-Halton, E. (1981). TheEd., Social Psychology of Identity and the Self Con-Meaning of Things: Domestic Symbols of the Self.cept. Surrey: Surrey University Press.Cambridge: University Press.

Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, Self and Society. Chicago:Duncan, J. S. (1973). Landscape taste as a symbol ofUniversity of Chicago Press.group identity: a Westchester county village. Geo-

Morris, N. (1992). Docklands hits a stumbling block.graphical Review, 63, 334–355.Architect’s Journal, April 8, 11.Devine, P. (1994). A time and a place for the Irish?—an

explanatory analysis of significance of Irish historical Nanistova, E. (1994a). Psychosocialne aspekty nutenejrelokacie: orientacna sonda do zivotnych retrospektıv.places for maintaining Irish National Identity.

Unpublished MSc. thesis, Department of Psychology, Acta Environmentalica (Universitatis Comenianae),3, 48–54.University of Surrey.


Nanistova, E. (1994b). Strata domova ako dosledok civili- Speller, G. (1988). Landscape place and the psychosocialimpact of the channel tunnel project. Unpublishedzacneho zasahu: pokus o kvalitativnu analyzu zivot-

nych, in Zbornik Psycologicke a biologicke dosledky M.Sc thesis, Department of Psychology, University ofSurrey.radikalnych civilizacnych zmien v Europe Katedra A.

Dubceka UK, Bratislava, 349–358. Tajfel, H. Ed. Differentiation between Social Groups.Newman, I. & Mayo, M. (1983). Docklands. International London: Academic Press.

Journal of Urban and Regeneration Research, 5, Twigger, C. (1992). Psychological attachment to place:529–545. London Docklands—a case study. Paper presented at

Proshansky, H. M. (1978). The city and self-identity. the Annual British Psychological Society Conference,Environment and Behavior, 10, 147–169. Scarborough, U.K, April 5–8.

Proshansky, H. M. & Fabian, A. (1987). The development Twigger, C. (1994). Psychological attachment to place andof place identity in the child. In C. S. Weinstein & T. identity: London Docklands—a case study. Unpub-G. David, Eds., Spaces for Children. New York: lished Ph.D. thesis, Department of Psychology,Plenum Press. University of Surrey.

Proshansky, H. M., Fabian, A. K. & Kaminoff, R. (1983). Twigger, C. (1995). Developing a model of attachment toPlace identity: physical world socialisation of the self. place. Paper presented at European Congress of Psy-Journal of Environmental Psychology, 3, 57–83. chology Athens, Greece, July 1–5.

Relph, E. (1976). Place and Placelessness. London: Pion. Uzzell, D. L. & Sorensen, M-L. S. (1993). ConstructingRochberg-Halton, E. (1984). Object relations, role models and Deconstructing National Identities: The Role ofand cultivation of the self. Environment and Behav- the Past in the Present, Conference on Changingiour, 16, 335–368. European Identities: Social Psychological Analyses ofRowles, G. D. (1983). Place and personal identity in old Social Change, Farnham Castle, 7–9 May 1993.age: observations from Appalachia. Journal ofUzzell, D. L. (1995). Conferring a sense of place identity:Environmental Psychology, 3, 299–313.

the role of museums. The International Journal ofSageart, S. & Winkel, G. (1990). Environmental psy-Heritage Studies, 1, 4.chology. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 441–477.

Winkel, G. (1981). The perception of neighbourhoodSarbin, T. R. (1983). Place identity as a component of self:change. In J. Harvey, Ed., Cognition and Socialan addendum. Journal of Environmental Psychology,Behaviour and the Environment. New York: Erlbaum.3, 337–342.

2

Documents

Transcript of 2