Advertisement

Spatial Polygamy and the Heterogeneity of Place: Studying People and Place via Egocentric Methods

  • Stephen A. MatthewsEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Social Disparities in Health and Health Care book series (SDHHC, volume 1)

Abstract

Since the early twentieth century, several academic disciplines have invested considerable energies in the study of people and their use of, and their connection to, place. One of the weakest areas of current practice in social science and health research is the conceptualization of place. For the most part, studies of the relationship between people and place, and specifically health and well-being outcomes, are based on several conventional, naive, and tenuous assumptions regarding place and human spatial behavior. In this chapter, I introduce the concept of spatial polygamy – briefly that we belong to multiple nested and nonnested places – and use this to critique the measure of place based on residential units such as the census tracts. It is important to note that the critique of the naïve assumption of bounded, static, and isolated units such as census tracts in studies of place is not new. To illustrate this, I will review some literature from sociology and geography and some from almost a century ago. The empirical sections of the paper introduce two different types of research that seek to explore and better understand relationships between people and place. Using data gathered in ethnographic studies, I will show the complexity of lived lives and how the use of multiple place(s) varies in juggling different individual and family responsibilities among low-income and minority families. An approach based on secondary data from the US Census demonstrates a different way in which research on places can be more explicit about issues of scale and the spatial relationships between places. These two very different examples will be followed by a brief discussion of the research potential afforded by developments in new tracking technologies, innovative data collection methods, and methodological tools. The time is ripe for updating our conceptual models of place and to take advantage of emerging technologies, methods, and data. A renewed focus on theoretical and conceptual development will help to push research on place and health forward.

Keywords

Global Position System Census Tract Metropolitan Statistical Area Census Block Group Place Attachment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The work presented in this chapter draws on ideas that have emerged from many years of thinking about people and places and from several projects that draw on geospatial data on both individuals and neighborhoods. Several people pushed and prodded me to pursue this track and/or have collaborated with me; these include, but are not limited to, Sandy Azar, Alan Benjamin, Nyesha Black, Yosef Bodovski, Linda Burton, Steven Cummins, Mark Daniel, Jim Detwiler, Glenn Firebaugh, John Iceland, Donald Janelle, Susan Kemp, Barrett Lee, Susan McHale, Brian McManus, Anne Vernez Moudon, Claudia Nau, David O’Sullivan, Sean Reardon, Luis Sanchez, Carla Shoff, Debra Skinner, David Takeuchi, and Tse-Chuan Yang. Brian McManus, Yosef Bodovski, and Carla Shoff (all of the Geographic Information Analysis Core, Population Research Institute at Penn State) helped prepare the figures. Any errors or ­misrepresentations that remain are mine. The term “spatial polygamy” I attribute to John Odland (the late Professor of Geography at Indiana University) made during an invited seminar to the Department of Geography at UCLA in the early 1990s. John died in 2009.

References

  1. Axelrod, M. 1956. “Urban Structure and Social Participation.” American Sociological Review 21 (1):13–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell, W. and M.D. Boat. 1957. “Urban Neighborhoods and Informal Social Relations.” American Journal of Sociology 62:391–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernard, P., R. Charafeddine, K.L. Frohlich, M. Daniel, Y. Kestens, and L. Potvin. 2007. “Health Inequalities and Place: A Theoretical Conception of Neighborhood.” Social Science and Medicine 65 (9):1839–1852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bronfrebrenner, U. 1979. The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Chaix, B., J. Merlo, and P. Chauvin. 2005a. “Comparison of a Spatial Approach With the Multilevel Approach for Investigating Place Effects on Health: The Example of Healthcare Utilization in France.” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 59:517–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chaix, B., J. Merlo, S.V. Subramanian, J. Lynch, and P. Chauvin. 2005b. “Comparison of a Spatial Perspective with a Multilevel Analytical Approach in Neighborhood Studies: The Case of Mental and Behavioral Disorders Due to Psychoactive Substance Use in Malmö, Sweden, 2001.” American Journal of Epidemiology 162 (2):171–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chaix, B., J. Merlo, D. Evans, C. Leal, and S. Havard. 2009. “Neighborhoods in Eco-Epidemiologic Research: Delimiting Personal Exposure Areas: A Response to Riva, Gauvin, Apparicio and Brodeur.” Social Science & Medicine 69 (9):1306–1310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Coulton CJ, Korbin J, Chan T, Su M. 2001. Mapping residents’ perceptions of neighborhood boundaries: a methodological note. American Journal of Community Psychology 29:371–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cummins, S. 2007. “Commentary: Investigating Neighbourhood Effects on Health – Avoiding the ‘Local Trap.’” International Journal of Epidemiology 36 (920):355–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cummins, S., S. Curtis, A.V. Diez-Roux, and S. Macintrye. 2007. “Understanding and Representing ‘Place’ in Health Research: A Relational Approach.” Social Science & Medicine 65 (9):1825–1838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Diez-Roux, A.V. 2003. “The Examination of Neighborhood Effects on Health: Conceptual and Methodological Issues Related to the Presence of Multiple Levels of Organization.” pp. 45–64 in Neighborhoods and Health, edited by Kawachi I. and L.F. Berkman. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Elgethun, K., M.G. Yost, C.T.E. Fitzpatrick, T.L. Nyerges, and R.A. Fenske. 2007. “Comparison of Global Positioning System (GPS) Tracking and Parent-Report Diaries to Characterize Children’s Time-Location Patterns.” Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology 17:196–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ellen, I.G., T. Mijanovich, and K.-N. Dillman. 2001. “Neighborhood Effects on Health: Exploring the Links and Assessing the Evidence.” Journal of Urban Affairs 23 (3–4):391–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Entwistle, B., K. Faust, R.R. Rindfuss, and T. Kenada. 2007. “Networks and Contexts: Variation in the Structure of Social Ties.” American Journal of Sociology 112 (5):1495–1533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Faust, K., B. Entwisle, R.R. Rindfuss, S.J. Walsh, and Y. Sawangdee. 1999. “Spatial Arrangement of Social and Economic Networks Among Villages in Nang Rong District, Thailand.” Social Networks 21:311–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Foley, D.L. 1950. “The Use of Local Facilities in a Metropolis.” American Journal of Sociology 56 (3):238–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fotheringham, A.S. and D.W.S. Wong. 1991. “The Modifiable Areal Unit Problem in Multivariate Statistical Analysis.” Environment and Planning A 23:1025–1044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Frumkin, H. 2006. “The Measure of Place.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 31 (6):530–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Furstenberg, F.F. Jr., T.D. Cook, J. Eccles, G.H. Jr. Elder, and A. Sameroff. 1999. Managing to Make It: Urban Families and Adolescent Success. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. Galster, G. 2001. “On the Nature of Neighborhood.” Urban Studies 38 (12):2111–2124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gieryn, T.F. 2000. “A Space for Place in Sociology.” Annual Review of Sociology 26:463–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Golledge, R.G. and R.J. Stimson. 1997. Spatial Behavior: A Geographical Perspective. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  23. Gould, P. and R. White. 1974. Mental Maps. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Grannis, R.1998. “The Importance of Trivial Streets: Residential Streets and Residential Segregation.” American Journal of Sociology 103:1530–1564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Grannis, R. 2008. From the Ground Up: Translating Geography into Community Through Neighbor Networks. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Greer, S. 1956. “Urbanism Reconsidered: A Comparative Study of Local Areas in a Metropolis.” American Sociological Review 21:19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Greer, S. 1962. The Emerging City; Myth and Reality. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  28. Hochschild AR. 1997. The Time Bind: When Work Becomes Home and Home Becomes Work. New York, NY: Metropolitan/Holt.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Inagami, S., D.A. Cohen, and B.K. Finch. 2007. Non-Residential Neighborhood Exposures Suppress Neighborhood Effects on Self-Rated Health. Social Science & Medicine 65 (8):1779–1791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jacobs, J. 1961. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York, NY: Random House.Google Scholar
  31. Jacobs, J.A., Gerson, K. 2004. The Time Divide: Work, Family and Gender Inequality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kwan, M.-P. 1999. “Gender and Individual Access to Urban Opportunities: A Study Using Space-Time Measures.” The Professional Geographer 51:210–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kwan, M.-P. 2000. “Interactive Geovisualization of Activity Travel Patterns Using 3-D GIS.” Transportation Research Part C 8:185–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kwan, M.-P. 2002. “Time, Information Technologies, and the Geographies of Everyday Life.” Urban Geography 23 (5):471–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kwan, M.-P. and G. Ding. 2008. “Geo-Narrative: Extending Geographic Information Systems for Narrative Analysis in Qualitative and Mixed-Method Research.” The Professional Geographer 60 (4):443–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Larsen, J., J. Urry, and K. Axhausen. 2006. Mobilities, Networks, Geographies Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  37. Lee, T.R. 1968. “Urban Neighborhood as a Socio-Spatial Schema.” Human Relations 21:241–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lee, B.A. and K. Campbell. 1997. “Common Ground? Urban Neighborhoods as Survey Respondents See Them.” Social Science Quarterly 78:922–936.Google Scholar
  39. Lee, B.A., S.F. Reardon, G. Firebaugh, C.R. Farrell, S.A. Matthews, and D. O’Sullivan. 2008. “Beyond the Census Tract: Patterns and Determinants of Racial Segregation at Multiple Geographic Scales.” American Sociological Review 73:766–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lynch, K. 1960. The Image of the City. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  41. Macintyre, S., A. Ellaway, and S. Cummins. 2002. “Place Effects on Health: How Can We Conceptualise, Operationalise and Measure Them?” Social Science & Medicine 55 (1):125–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Matthews, S.A. 2008. “The Salience of Neighborhood: Some Lessons from Sociology.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 34 (3):257–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Matthews, S.A. Unpublished Manuscript. “The Salience of Neighborhood: Some Observations and Lessons from Geo-Ethnography.” Department of Sociology, Penn State. Manuscript available from the author.Google Scholar
  44. Matthews, S.A., J. Detwiler, and L.M. Burton. 2005. “Geoethnography: Coupling Geographic Information Analysis Techniques with Ethnographic Methods in Urban Research.” Cartographica 40 (4):75–90.Google Scholar
  45. Matthews, S.A., A.V. Moudon, and M. Daniel. 2009. “Using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for Enhancing Research Relevant to Policy on Diet, Physical Activity, and Weight.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 36 (4S):171–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. McCarty, C., J.L. Molina, C. Aguilar, and L. Rota. 2007. “A Comparison of Social Network Mapping and Personal Network Visualization.” Field Methods 19 (2):145–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. McClenahan, B. 1929. The Changing Urban Neighborhood. Los Angeles, CA: University of Southern California.Google Scholar
  48. McClenahan, B. 1946. “The Communality: The Urban Substitute for the Traditional Community.” Sociology and Social Research 30:264–274.Google Scholar
  49. McKenzie, R.D. 1923. The Neighborhood: A Study of Local Life in the City of Columbus, Ohio. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  50. Michelson, W.H. 1976. Man and His Urban Environment. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  51. Mitchell, R. 2001. “Multi-level Modeling Might Not Be the Answer.” Environment and Planning A 33:1357–1360.Google Scholar
  52. Nusser, S.M., S.S. Intille, and R. Maitra. 2006. “Emerging Technologies and Next-Generation Intensive Longitudinal Data Collection.” pp. 254–277 in Models for Intensive Longitudinal Data, edited by Walls T.A. and J.L. Schafer. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  53. O’Campo, P. 2003. “Invited Commentary: Advancing Theory and Methods for Multilevel Models of Residential Neighborhoods and Health.” American Journal of Epidemiology 157:9–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pickett, K.E. and M. Pearl. 2001. “Multilevel Analysis of Neighborhood Socioeconomic Context and Health Outcomes: A Critical Review.” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 55 (2):111–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pratchett, T. 1995. “I Needed a Map.” in The Discworld Mapp: Being the Onlie True and Mostly Accurate Mappe of the Fantastyk and Magical Dyscworlde, edited by Pratchett T. and S. Briggs. London, UK: Corgi Books.Google Scholar
  56. Presser HB. 2003. Working in a 24/7 Economy: Challenges for American Families. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Reardon, S.F., S.A. Matthews, D. O’Sullivan, B.A. Lee, G. Firebaugh, C.R. Farrell, and K. Bischoff. 2008. “The Geographic Scale of Metropolitan Racial Segregation.” Demography 45 (3):489–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Rodriguez, D.A., A.L. Brown, and P.J. Troped. 2005. “Portable Global Positioning Units to Complement Accelerometry-Based Physical Activity Monitors.” Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 37 (11):S572–S581.Google Scholar
  59. Roosa, M.W., S. Jones, J.-Y. Tein, and W. Cree. 2003. “Prevention Science and Neighborhood Influences on Low-Income Children’s Development: Theoretical and Methodological Issues.” American Journal of Community Psychology 31 (1/2):55–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Roy, K., C. Tubbs, and L.M. Burton. 2004. “Don’t Have No Time: Daily Rhythms and the Organization of Time for Low-Income Families.” Family Relations 53:168–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sampson, R.J., J.D. Morenoff, and T. Gannon-Rowley. 2002. “Assessing Neighborhood Effects: Social Processes and New Directions in Research.” Annual Review of Sociology 28:443–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sastry, N., A. Pebley, and M. Zonta. 2002. “Neighborhood Definitions and the Spatial Dimension of Daily Life in Los Angeles.” CCPR Working Paper 033-04. Los Angeles, CA: California Center for Population Research, UCLA.Google Scholar
  63. Skinner, D., S.A. Matthews, and L.M. Burton. 2005. “Combining Ethnography and GIS Technology to Examine Constructions of Developmental Opportunities in Contexts of Poverty and Disability.” pp. 223–239 in Discovering Successful Pathways in Children’s Development: Mixed Methods in the Study of Childhood and Family Life, edited by Weisner, T. Chicago, IL: MacArthur Foundation, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  64. Smith, J., W.H. Form, and G.P. Stone. 1954. “Local Intimacy in a Middle-Sized City.” American Journal of Sociology 60 (3):276–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Subramanian, S.V., K. Jones, and C. Duncan. 2003. “Multilevel Methods for Public Health Research.” pp. 65–111 in Neighborhoods and Health, edited by Kawachi I. and L.F. Berkman. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Suttles, G. 1972. The Social Construction of Communities. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  67. Taylor, S.E., R.L. Repetti, and T. Seeman. 1997. “Health Psychology: What Is an Unhealthy Environment and How Does It Get Under the Skin?” Annual Review of Psychology 48:411–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Tuan, Y. 1974. Topophilia: A Study of Environmental Perception, Attitudes, and Values. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  69. Tuan, Y. 1977. Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  70. U.S. Census Bureau. 1997. United States Census 2000: Participant Statistical Areas Program Guidelines. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.Google Scholar
  71. Webber, M.M. 1963. “Order in Diversity, Community Without Propinquity.” Pp. 23–54 in Cities and Space: The Future Use of Urban Land, edited by Wingo, L. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Wellman, B. 1979. “The Community Question: The Intimate Networks of East Yonkers.” American Journal of Sociology 84 (5):1201–1231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Wellman, B. 1999. Networks in the Global Village: Life in Contemporary Communities. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  74. Wellman, B. and B. Leighton. 1979. “Networks, Neighborhoods and Communities.” Urban Affairs Quarterly 14:363–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wiehe, S.E., A.E. Carroll, G.C. Lui, K.L. Haberkorn, S.C. Hoch, J.S. Wilson, and J.D. Fortenberry. 2008. “Using GPS-Enabled Cell Phones to Track the Travel Patterns of Adolescents.” International Journal of Health Geographics 7:22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Winston P., R.J. Angel, L.M. Burton, P.L. Chase-Lansdale, A.J. Cherlin, R.A. Moffitt, and W.J. Wilson. 1999. Welfare, Children and Families Three City Study: Overview and Design Report. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University, Welfare, Children and Families Project.Google Scholar
  77. Wong, D.W.S. 2004. “Comparing Traditional and Spatial Segregation Measures: A Spatial Scale Perspective.” Urban Geography 25:66–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Sociology, Population Research InstituteThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations