Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Communities, Neighborhoods, and Health

Part of the book series: Social Disparities in Health and Health Care ((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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Axelrod, M. 1956. “Urban Structure and Social Participation.” American Sociological Review 21 (1):13–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, W. and M.D. Boat. 1957. “Urban Neighborhoods and Informal Social Relations.” American Journal of Sociology 62:391–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bronfrebrenner, U. 1979. The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, S. 2007. “Commentary: Investigating Neighbourhood Effects on Health – Avoiding the ‘Local Trap.’” International Journal of Epidemiology 36 (920):355–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foley, D.L. 1950. “The Use of Local Facilities in a Metropolis.” American Journal of Sociology 56 (3):238–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frumkin, H. 2006. “The Measure of Place.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 31 (6):530–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Galster, G. 2001. “On the Nature of Neighborhood.” Urban Studies 38 (12):2111–2124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gieryn, T.F. 2000. “A Space for Place in Sociology.” Annual Review of Sociology 26:463–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golledge, R.G. and R.J. Stimson. 1997. Spatial Behavior: A Geographical Perspective. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, P. and R. White. 1974. Mental Maps. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Grannis, R.1998. “The Importance of Trivial Streets: Residential Streets and Residential Segregation.” American Journal of Sociology 103:1530–1564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grannis, R. 2008. From the Ground Up: Translating Geography into Community Through Neighbor Networks. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greer, S. 1956. “Urbanism Reconsidered: A Comparative Study of Local Areas in a Metropolis.” American Sociological Review 21:19–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greer, S. 1962. The Emerging City; Myth and Reality. New York, NY: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hochschild AR. 1997. The Time Bind: When Work Becomes Home and Home Becomes Work. New York, NY: Metropolitan/Holt.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J. 1961. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York, NY: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J.A., Gerson, K. 2004. The Time Divide: Work, Family and Gender Inequality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwan, M.-P. 1999. “Gender and Individual Access to Urban Opportunities: A Study Using Space-Time Measures.” The Professional Geographer 51:210–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwan, M.-P. 2000. “Interactive Geovisualization of Activity Travel Patterns Using 3-D GIS.” Transportation Research Part C 8:185–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwan, M.-P. 2002. “Time, Information Technologies, and the Geographies of Everyday Life.” Urban Geography 23 (5):471–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, J., J. Urry, and K. Axhausen. 2006. Mobilities, Networks, Geographies Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, T.R. 1968. “Urban Neighborhood as a Socio-Spatial Schema.” Human Relations 21:241–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, B.A. and K. Campbell. 1997. “Common Ground? Urban Neighborhoods as Survey Respondents See Them.” Social Science Quarterly 78:922–936.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, K. 1960. The Image of the City. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, S.A. 2008. “The Salience of Neighborhood: Some Lessons from Sociology.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 34 (3):257–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClenahan, B. 1929. The Changing Urban Neighborhood. Los Angeles, CA: University of Southern California.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClenahan, B. 1946. “The Communality: The Urban Substitute for the Traditional Community.” Sociology and Social Research 30:264–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Michelson, W.H. 1976. Man and His Urban Environment. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. 2001. “Multi-level Modeling Might Not Be the Answer.” Environment and Planning A 33:1357–1360.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Presser HB. 2003. Working in a 24/7 Economy: Challenges for American Families. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Suttles, G. 1972. The Social Construction of Communities. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuan, Y. 1974. Topophilia: A Study of Environmental Perception, Attitudes, and Values. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuan, Y. 1977. Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Census Bureau. 1997. United States Census 2000: Participant Statistical Areas Program Guidelines. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Wellman, B. 1979. “The Community Question: The Intimate Networks of East Yonkers.” American Journal of Sociology 84 (5):1201–1231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wellman, B. 1999. Networks in the Global Village: Life in Contemporary Communities. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellman, B. and B. Leighton. 1979. “Networks, Neighborhoods and Communities.” Urban Affairs Quarterly 14:363–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Wong, D.W.S. 2004. “Comparing Traditional and Spatial Segregation Measures: A Spatial Scale Perspective.” Urban Geography 25:66–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

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.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, Population Research Institute, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA

    Stephen A. Matthews

Authors
  1. Stephen A. Matthews
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen A. Matthews .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Sociology, Duke University, Durham, 27708-0097, North Carolina, USA

    Linda M. Burton

  2. Dept. Anthropology, Penn State University, Carpenter Bldg. 409, University Park, 16802, Pennsylvania, USA

    Stephen A. Matthews

  3. , Department of Sociology, University of Washington, 211 Savery Hall, Seattle, 98195-3340, USA

    ManChui Leung

  4. Dept. Sociology, University of Washington, Raitt Hall 206A, Seattle, 98195-4322, Washington, USA

    Susan P. Kemp

  5. Dept. Sociology, University of Washington, Raitt Hall 206A, Seattle, 98195-4322, Washington, USA

    David T. Takeuchi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Matthews, S.A. (2011). Spatial Polygamy and the Heterogeneity of Place: Studying People and Place via Egocentric Methods. In: Burton, L., Matthews, S., Leung, M., Kemp, S., Takeuchi, D. (eds) Communities, Neighborhoods, and Health. Social Disparities in Health and Health Care, vol 1. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7482-2_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation