Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Relationships Between Population Density and the Perceived Quality of Neighbourhood

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Two overseas survey-based scales measuring perceived quality of neighbourhood were adapted and replicated in a New Zealand context. An Italian study (Bonaiuto, Fornara, and Bonnes. (2003). Landscape and Urban Planning, 65, 41–52) measuring Perceived Residential Environmental Quality (PREQ) and an American study (Carp and Carp. (1982). Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2, 295–312) using the Perceived Environmental Quality Indices (PEQI) were applied to a sample of Auckland residents, separated into low, medium, and high population density areas. The surveys measured attitudes towards subjects such as noise, neighbours, accessibility, green areas, welfare services, recreational services, safety, maintenance, environmental health, transport services, and characteristics of an ideal neighbourhood, and were completed by 369 respondents. Primary analyses examined differences in perception across the three density groups. The factor structures of both scales were replicated with the Auckland sample, and differences across densities were found for subscales of the PREQ. The results are discussed in relation to the cross-cultural similarities of perceived environmental quality, and the concept that environmental satisfaction is based on balancing aspects of the residential environment is proposed.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amato, P. R. (1980). City size, sidewalk density, and friendliness towards strangers. The Journal of Social Psychology, 111, 151–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amérigo, M. (2002). A psychological approach to the study of residential satisfaction. In J. I. Aragones, G. Francescato, & T. Gärling (Eds.), Residential environments: Choice, satisfaction, and behaviour (pp. 81–99). Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amérigo, M., & Aragones, J. I. (1997). A theoretical and methodological approach to the study of residential satisfaction. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17, 47–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bardo, J. W. (1984). Sociospatial predictors of community satisfaction. The Journal of Social Psychology, 122, 189–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, K. (2000). Urban amenity indicators: The liveability of our urban environments. Environmental performance indicators technical paper No. 63, from Ministry for the Environment website: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/rma/live-work-play-jun02/resources/pdf/63.pdf. Retrieved December 11, 2007.

  • Bonaiuto, M., Aiello, A., Perugini, M., Bonnes, M., & Ercolani, A. P. (1999). Multi-dimensional perceptions of residential environment quality and neighbourhood attachment in the urban environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19, 331–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonaiuto, M., Fornara, F., & Bonnes, M. (2003). Indexes of perceived residential environment quality and neighbourhood attachment in urban environments: A confirmation study on the city of Rome. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65, 41–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonaiuto, M., Fornara, F., & Bonnes, M. (2006). Perceived residential environment quality in middle- and low-extension Italian cities. European Review of Applied Psychology, 56, 23–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carp, F. M., & Carp, A. (1982). Perceived environmental quality of neighborhoods: Development of assessment scales and their relation to age and gender. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2, 295–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, Y-K. (1999). Density, crowding, and factors intervening in their relationship: Evidence from a hyper-dense metropolis. Social Indicators Research, 48, 103–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, Y., Park, G.-S., Echevarria-Cruz, S. (2005). Perceived neighbourhood characteristics and the health of adult Koreans. Social Science & Medicine, 60, 1285–1297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chwalow, A. J. (1995). Cross-cultural validation of existing quality of life scales. Patient Education and Counselling, 26, 313–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cramer, V., Torgersen, S., & Kringlen, E. (2004). Quality of life in a city: The effect of population density. Social Indicators Research, 69(1), 103–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunstan, F., Weaver, N., Araya, R., Bell, T., Lannon, S., Lewis, G., et al. (2005). An observation tool to assist with the assessment of urban residential environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25, 293–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzsimmons, J. (2005). Getting there., from Green Party Web site: http://www.greens.org.nz/searchdocs/other9045.html. Retrieved December 11, 2007.

  • Francescato, G. (2002). Residential satisfaction research: The case for and against. In J. I. Aragones, G. Francescato, & T. Gärling (Eds.), Residential environments: Choice, satisfaction, and behaviour (pp. 81–99). Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, H. (1978). Mental health and the environment. British Journal of Psychiatry, 132, 113–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fried, M. (1982). Residential attachment: Sources of residential and community satisfaction. Journal of Social Issues, 38(3), 107–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gärling, T., & Friman, M. (2002), A psychological conceptualization of residential choice and satisfaction In J. I. Aragones, G. Francescato, & T. Gärling (Eds.), Residential environments: Choice, satisfaction, and behaviour (pp. 81–99). Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handal, P. J., Barling, P. W., & Morrissy, E. (1981). Development of perceived and preferred measures of physical and social characteristics of the residential environment and their relationship to satisfaction. Journal of Community Psychology, 9, 118–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenaro, C., Verdugo, M. A., Caballo, C., Balboni, G., Lachapelle, Y., Otrebski, W., & Schalock, R. L. (2005). Cross-cultural study of person centred quality of life domains and indicators: A replication. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49(10), 734–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mercer (2006a). World-wide quality of living survey. http://www.mercerhr.com/summary.jhtml?idContent=1173105. Retrieved 11 December 2007.

  • Mercer (2006b). Highlights from the 2006 world-wide quality of living survey. http://www.mercerhr.com/qualityofliving. Retrieved 16 November 2006.

  • Ministry of Social Development (2003). The social report, from Ministry of Social Development. http://socialreport.msd.govt.nz/2003/introduction/introduction.shtml. Retrieved 11 December 2007.

  • Murphy, N., Confavreux, C., Haas, J., Konig, N., Roullet, E., Sailer, M., Swash, M., & Young, C. (1998). Quality of life in multiple sclerosis in France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 65, 460–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagat, D., & Paulus, P. B. (1997). Residential crowding experience scale – assessment and validation. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 7, 303–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Power, M., Bullinger, M., Harper, A., & The WHOQOL Group (1999). The World Health Organization WHOQOL-100: Tests of the universality of quality of life in 15 different cultural groups worldwide. Health Psychology, 18(5), 495–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Priebe, S., Warner, R., Hubschmid, T., & Eckle, I. (1998). Employment, attitudes towards work, and quality of life among people with schizophrenia in three countries. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 24(3), 469–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, L. B., Hubley, A. M., Palepu, A., & Zumbo, B. D. (2006). Does weighting capture what’s important? Revisiting subjective importance weighting with a quality of life measure. Social Indicators Research, 75, 141–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirgy, M. J., & Cornwell, T. (2001). Further validation of the Sirgy et al.’s measure of community quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 56, 125–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Statistics New Zealand (2002). Monitoring progress towards a sustainable New Zealand, from Statistics New Zealand Web site http://www.stats.govt.nz/NR/rdonlyres/BD1610D1–77E2–4025-A43D-9190BC131AD9/0/MonitoringSusDevelopment.pdf. Retrieved December 11, 2007.

  • The University of Auckland (2005). Auckland universities help tackle city’s transport problems, from University of Auckland Web site http://www.auckland.ac.nz/uoa/about/news/articles/2005/09/universities_transport.cfm. Retrieved December 11, 2007.

  • The WHOQOL Group (1997). Measuring quality of life, from World Health Organisation Web site http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/1997/WHO_MSA_MNH_PSF_97.4.pdf. Retrieved December 11, 2007.

  • The WHOQOL Group (1998a). Development of the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment. Psychological Medicine, 28, 551–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The WHOQOL Group (1998b). The World Health Organization quality of life assessment (WHOQOL): Development and general psychometric properties. Social Science and Medicine, 46(12), 1569–1585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, J., Cleland, B. S., & Walton, D. (2004). Working paper: Review of current measures of New Zealand settlement liveability. Opus International Consultants Central Laboratories Report 520951.01.

  • Warner, R., de Girolamo, G., Belelli, G., Bologna, C, Fioritti, A., & Rosini, G. (1998). The quality of life of people with schizophrenia in Boulder, Colorado, and Bologna, Italy. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 24(4), 559–568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, T. G. (1985). Urbanism, misanthropy and subcultural processes. Social Science Journal, 22(3), 89–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, J., Wang, M., Xiang, Y., & Hu, X. (2005). Quality of life for people with intellectual disabilities in China: a cross-culture perspective study. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49 (10), 745–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Vince Dravitzki, B. Cleland and Sicily Sunseri for their help on this project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Opus Central Laboratories, P.O. Box 30 845, Lower Hutt, Wellington, New Zealand

    D. Walton, S. J. Murray & J. A. Thomas

  2. University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

    D. Walton

  3. Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand

    D. Walton

Authors
  1. D. Walton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. J. Murray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. A. Thomas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. Walton.

Additional information

This research was conducted for the Foundation for Research, Science, and Technology under contract OPSX401.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Walton, D., Murray, S.J. & Thomas, J.A. Relationships Between Population Density and the Perceived Quality of Neighbourhood . Soc Indic Res 89, 405–420 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-008-9240-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-008-9240-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation