Effects of Territorial Marking on Residents of Two Multifamily Housing Developments - A Partial Test of Newman's Theory of Defensible Space (A Methodological Review) (From Link Between Crime and the Built Environment, Volume 2, P C296-C305, 1980, by Tetsuro Motoyama et al - See NCJ-79544)

• NCJ Number: 79568
• Author(s): T Motoyama; H Rubenstein; P Hartjens
• Date Published: 1980
• Length: 10 pages
• Corporate Author: American Institutes for Research
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Available on microfiche from NCJRS as NCJ-79544.

Annotation

This review assesses Richard Chenoweth's investigation of the effects of physical design changes on resident attitudes and behavior in two public housing developments.

Abstract

The study area consisted of three row-house type public housing developments. Two of the developments underwent design changes to produce a clear delineation of private, semiprivate, semipublic, and public spaces within them. A random sample of residents at each of the three sites (total sample of 209) was administered a questionnaire before construction and 1 year later (2 months after a major portion of the construction was completed). The questionnaire sought to measure (1) proprietary attitudes toward defined areas, (2) territorial behavior, (3) social fabric, and (4) perceptions of crime. The study had a quasi-experimental design with a treatment and control group. The study concludes that physical design changes to create 'defensible space' did not facilitate resident territorial behavior, resident proprietary attitudes, or a strong social fabric among residents. This finding produced the conclusion that 'defensible space' characteristics may not reduce the incidence of crime through intermediate effects on residents. The study's conclusions are generally supported by the data. Although the period of time after construction completion (2 months) may be too short for resident behaviors to be affected significantly by physical design changes, the study dismisses this consideration. This expectation of some immediate effect from the design changes is questionable, since nowhere in the literature is there research on the time frame required for physical design changes to affect behavior and attitudes. Crime data would have provided an important added dimension to the study, even though this was primarily a study of the effects of physical design changes on the residents. (Author summary modified)