18th Conference of the International Association for People-Environment Studies (IAPS, Wien 7-10 July, 2004) SENSE OF SAFETY AND PERCEPTION OF LIFE ENVIRONMENT: THE PRE-ADOLESCENTS AND THEIR PARENTS PERCEPTION Key words: sense of safety, urban environment, well-being Laura Migliorini, University of Genoa, Department of Anthropological Sciences, Italy. Antonella Piermari, University of Genoa, Department of Anthropological Sciences, Italy. Anna Zunino, University of Genoa, Department of Anthropological Sciences, Italy.

IAPS SUMMARYSUMMARY  Introduction and literature review  Aims and method  Data and results  Discussion and conclusions

IAPS THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

IAPS SAFETY NEEDS

IAPS  Importance to study people well-being related to social- physical environment  Quality environment perception as summarizing variable to measure the impact of relationship between person and environment  Moser’s model of unsafety: affective, cognitive and behavioral components  Missing of accurate definition of sense of safety/unsafety  Missing of theoretical modeling to understand the relationship among the sense of safety/unsafety construct and other relevant variables included in this research field  Adolescent life-time is not very investigated LITERATURE REVIEW

IAPS RESEARCH AIM AND METHOD The present study explores the sense of safety and unsafety perceived in the life environment by pre-adolescents and their parents, and inquire adults subjective well-being and urban quality perception. 1° section: intervention carried out in the schools with pre-adolescents (11-14 years old). We’ve worked with 163 students, proposing them a group activity in order to inquire their relationships with urban environment, and to collect relevant data about their sense of safety. 2° section: collection of the same kind of data but coming from the pre- adolescents parents living in the same residential area. We asked parents to fill in a questionnaire about sense of safety, subjective well- being, urban quality perception.

IAPS PRE-ADOLESCENTS MEASURE  Demographic information  Questions about autonomy and sense of safety/unsafety in the residential area:  Complete sentences about sense of safety  Complete sentences about sense of unsafety  Tell about three safe place where you go around  List the features of those places  Which kind of people make you feel less safe?  Which kind of urban elements make you feel more safe?

IAPS  Demographic information  Questions about sense of safety/unsafety in the residential area (the same questions of adolescents for themselves and for their perception about their children)  Psychological Well-being Scale (Ryff and Keyes, 1995)  Perceived Quality of Residential Environment Scale (Bonaiuto, Aiello, Perugini, Bonnes, Ercolani, 1999) PARENTS MEASURE

IAPS SUBJECTS - PRE-ADOLESCENTS (n.163)

IAPS ° year 2° year 1° year Who do you go to school with? Can you go around the suburb alone? 100% %2.3% 80.7%19.3% YESNO 71.2%22.7%6.1% 50.0%40.0%10.0% 50.8%41.0%8.2 % alonefriendsrelatives/adults PRE-ADOLESCENTS AUTONOMY

IAPS SUBJECTS - PARENTS (n.126)

IAPS PRE-ADOLESCENTS SENSE OF SAFETY “I feel safe in my suburb if……”

IAPS PARENTS SENSE OF SAFETY - FOR THEMSELVES “I feel safe in my suburb if……”

IAPS PARENTS SENSE OF SAFETY - FOR THEIR CHILDREN “My son/daughter feels safe in his/her suburb if……”

IAPS PRE-ADOLESCENTS SENSE OF UNSAFETY “I feel unsafe in my suburb if……”

IAPS PARENTS SENSE OF UNSAFETY - FOR THEMSELVES “I feel unsafe in my suburb if……”

IAPS PARENTS SENSE OF UNSAFETY - FOR THEIR CHILDREN “My son/daughter feels unsafe in his/her suburb if……”

IAPS PRE-ADOLESCENTS FEATURES OF SAFE PLACES Which elements of three places you’ve indicated do you make feel safe in?

IAPS FEATURES OF SAFE PLACES - PARENTS FOR THEMSELVES Which elements of three places you’ve indicated do you make feel safe in?

IAPS FEATURES OF SAFE PLACES - PARENTS FOR THEIR CHILDREN Which elements of three places you’ve indicated do your son/daughter make feel safe in?

IAPS CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONS  Personal sense of safety: differences between pre- adolescents and parents (relations vs. structural elements)  Place safety: homogeneity of perception between pre- adolescents and parents (social relations)  Investigation on changes along life-span about sense of safety/unsafety  Analysis of very different kind of suburb in terms of structural features FUTURE RESEARCH

IAPS REFERENCESREFERENCES BONAIUTO M., AIELLO A.., PERUGINI M., BONNES M., ERCOLANI A.P. (1999), Multidimensional perception of residential environment quality and neighbourhood attachment in the urban environment, “Journal of Environmental Psychology”, 19, BONNES M., BONAIUTO M. (1996), Multiplace analysis of the urban environment. A comparison between a large and small Italian city, “Environment and Behaviour”, 28, 6, CANTER, D. (1977), The psychology of place, Architectural Press, London. MOSER, G. (1995), Gli stress urbani, LED, Milano. OSTROM C., LERNER R., FREEL M. (1995), Building the capacity of youth and families through University-Community collaboration: the Development-In-Context Evaluation (DICE) Model, “Journal of Adolescent Research”, 10, 4, PERKINS D., FLORIN P., RICH R., CHAVIS D. (1990), Participation and the social and physical environment of residential blocks: Crime and community context, “American Journal of Community Psychology”, 18, PERKINS D., MEEKS J., TAYLOR R. (1992), The physical environment of street blocks and resident perception of crime and disorder: Implications for theory and measurement, “Journal of Environmental Psychology”, 12, RYFF C., KEYES C. (1995), The structure of psychological well-being revisited, “Journal of Personality and Social Psychology”, 69, 4,

IAPS THEORY OF PLACE (CANTER) PLACES

IAPS DANGEROUS PEOPLE “Valuate from 1 to 7 the level of influence on your sense of unsafety”

IAPS POSITIVE STRUCTURAL FEATURES “Valuate from 1 to 7 the level of influence on your sense of safety”

IAPS PERCEIVED QUALITY OF RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT SCALE residential attacchment context features social relations features architectural / town- planning features D.SMP. Q. R. E personal growth autonomy environmental mastery self-acceptance.94.3positive relations purpose in life D.SMP. W-B PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING