See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/4920776

Measuring Sense of Place: Methodological Aspects

Article in Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie · December 2005

DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9663.2005.00479.x · Source: RePEc

CITATIONS READS

248 11,636

2 authors:

Shmuel Shamai Zinaida Ilatov

Tel-Hai Academic College and Shamir Reserach Institute University of Haifa
50 PUBLICATIONS 1,328 CITATIONS 26 PUBLICATIONS 379 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Shmuel Shamai on 17 February 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

MEASURING SENSE OF PLACE:
METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS
SHMUEL SHAMAI* & ZINAIDA ILATOV**
*Tel Hai Academic College, Upper Galilee, Israel, 12210 and Golan Research Institute, University of Haifa,
Kazrin, Israel, 12900
**Golan Research Institute, Kazrin, Israel, 12900. E-mails: [email protected];
[email protected]

Received: March 2004; revised September 2004

ABSTRACT
The main concern of this paper is to classify the different methods of measurement of sense of
place (which is a very vague concept). The existence and intensity of sense of place is also related
to social and cultural variables, such as ethnic and religious background. This paper reviews the
different methods of measuring sense of place and classifies them according to different criteria.
The study applies a bipolar (positive and negative level of attachment), unidimensional scale which
is composed of one component of scaling, using a ‘direct’ technique. The results point to
similarities and differences between Israeli-born and immigrant groups. Most of the respondents
in both groups had similar patterns of positive feelings towards the place where they live. The
differences were smaller than the similarities. The sense of place scale applied in this study has
the advantage of being a simple tool that is understandable to all types of respondents.

Key words: Sense of place, Israel, empirical measurements, immigrants, unidimensional scale

SENSE OF PLACE: BACKGROUND ‘Obviously, sense of place is one of the most

LITERATURE abstract and illusive concepts . . . understanding
what creates a true sense of place . . . is a com-
This study is concerned with methodological plex task’ (Barker 1979, p. 164). Sense of place
aspects of a concept that is sometimes dealt with ‘is not just a formal concept awaiting precise
loosely in different types of literature: a sense definition . . . [C]larification cannot be achieved
of place. The aims of the paper are to introduce by imposing precise but arbitrary definitions’
a new methodological tool for measuring a (Relph 1976, p. 4). Hence, it is not surprising
‘sense of place’, and to explore the concept that some authors declare that ‘it is quite useless
with regard to two different groups: native-born to try measuring it’ (Lewis 1979, p. 40). Discuss-
Israelis (‘Sabras’) and new immigrants from the ing the notion of regional identity, Paasi (2003,
countries of the former Soviet Union. p. 481) notes that ‘instead of assigning auto-
A sense of place is a very vague concept. It matically an explanatory role to this very popu-
has been dealt with using ‘non-positivistic’ views lar category, regional identity itself has to be
(mainly phenomenological), and in studies “explained” ’. The result of probing regional
which are based on positivistic (behavioural) identity empirically ‘is often narrow empirical
approaches (Shamai 1991; Lalli 1992). This analysis’ (Paasi 2003, p. 480).
study belongs to the latter. Those holding non- Although sense of place resists a simple defi-
positivistic views try to emphasise the difficulties nition, there are different ways of explaining
in dealing with the concept of sense of place. and probing the concept. ‘It is often easier to

Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie – 2005, Vol. 96, No. 5, pp. 467–476.
© 2005 by the Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG
Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden MA 02148, USA
468 SHMUEL SHAMAI & ZINAIDA ILATOV

see its results in human behaviour than to with internal relations of power and inequality,
define it in precise terms’ (Lewis 1979, p. 28). and punctured by structured exclusions’ (p. 65).
According to Relph (1976, p. 4), the concept The feminist view points to the experience of
should be probed ‘by examining the links spaces according to differential gender lines,
between place and the phenomenological and exposes the mechanism of universal mas-
foundations of geography’. culinity domination (Rose 1993, 1999). Sense of
Philosophically-oriented discussions are im- place is constructed by underlying the structures
portant to the explanation of the concept of of power. Sense of place includes people together,
place. They are usually combined with descriptive and thus, excludes the ‘other’. ‘Those who
examples, but they try to probe the concept belong to a particular place are distinguished
itself. Relph (1976, p. 20) emphasises the from those who do not; and while the latter may
importance of the experience of living in a be excluded from that place, the former are
place in order to reveal the essence of place: ‘By expected to conform to its conventions’ (Rose
taking place as a multifaceted phenomenon of 1995, p. 100). The power relations are more
experience and examining the various proper- apparent in the era of globalisation when places
ties of place, such as location, landscape, and are situated between the global and the local.
personal involvement, some assessment can be Globalisation is increasing the inequalities between
made of the degree to which these are essential and among spaces and places (Massey 1995).
to our experience and sense of place’. Location Sense of place is a holistic concept (Eisenhauer
itself is not a sufficient condition to create a et al. 2000) and, according to their study, there
sense of place. In order to create a sense and are two main components: the first is the interac-
attachment to place, there is a need for long tions at a place among family or friends, family
and deep experience of a place, and preferably activities and traditions, and the memories as-
involvement in the place. Ritual, myths and sociated with the people of the place. The more
symbols help in strengthening the attachment current literature focuses on the importance of
to place (Relph 1976), and bind people to a the culture and power relations in shaping the
place (Tuan 1977). ‘Local symbols reflect and sense of place, and to the mutual but uneven
enhance sense of place’ (Peterson & Saarinen relations between the place and the people who
1986, p. 164). Sense of place is defined by Datel reside there. Culture mediates in a selective way
& Dingemans (1984, p. 135) as ‘the complex and operates as a screen which shapes the per-
bundle of meaning, symbols, and qualities that sonal and social interaction with the place. The
a person or group associates (consciously and ‘culture turn’ means acknowledging the power
unconsciously) with a particular locality or relations in a given place (Rose 1995).
region.’ Kaltenborn (1997) has found that a The second is based on sentiments about the
range of attributes, including the natural and natural uniqueness of an area (Rose 1995), the
cultural environment, family and social activi- scenery of the place, its climate or geological
ties, history and traditions are all important in value and its environmental setting and wildlife
the development of affective bonds with places. (Eisenhauer et al. 2000). Thus, sense of place is a
Entrikin (1997) emphasises the tension combination of both the physical (environmental)
between viewing the particular features of the and personal/social interaction in the place.
place or its universal features as ‘place becomes
like personality, unique and particular’ (p. 265). SOCIAL GROUPS AND SENSE OF PLACE
According to Entrikin (1997) the experience
of place ‘is filtered through the language of Sense of place is also a social phenomenon; ‘in
collective narratives and public discourses that essence, people confer meaning on the environ-
continually blend spatial scales and move between ment in ways that reflect their social and cultural
relatively centered and relative decentered experiences’ (Eisenhauer et al. 2000). Place is
perspectives’ (p. 266). The experience of a ‘understood contextually (and at times meta-
place is not neutral. Allen et al. (1998) state that phorically) in relation to ethnicity, class, gender,
a place (a region) is not merely a ‘bounded area sexuality, body, self, etc.’ (Paasi 2002a, p. 806).
on a map’, but rather, that we should think The differences of sense of place ‘are complex
about a place ‘in terms of social relations . . . and can be based on class, gender, “race” and

© 2005 by the Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG

MEASURING SENSE OF PLACE: METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS 469

many other aspects of identity’ (Rose 1995, SENSE OF PLACE SCALE

p. 116).
Perception is related to the cultural and Some discussions have suggested a ranking
ethnic background of the subjects, as ‘individuals procedure for sense of place. Feelings towards
and groups whose environmental interactions places are varied. At one extreme, there is
differ will form different assessments of the ‘alienation’, ‘homelessness’, and ‘not belong-
places they experience’ (Canter 1977, p. 163). ing’ (Relph 1976, p. 51). At the other extreme,
Social ties are related to a geographical unit. there is ‘belonging to a place and . . . deep and
‘In many cases a sociospatial consciousness has complete identity with a place’ (Relph 1976,
developed amongst the local population, a con- p. 55). Each different way of sensing the place
sciousness which includes a social as well as a can be seen as a different level on an ordinal
geographical belonging’ (Lidskog 1996, p. 41). scale; that is, starting with the lowest level of
Chang (2000), primarily using Relph’s notion sense of place and ‘climbing’ six more steps to
of ‘insideness’ and ‘outsideness’ and other con- reach the most intense and deepest way of
cepts, identified different groups of people with sensing a place.
differing degrees of attachment to Singapore’s Some positivist studies concerning sense of
Little India. Other types of social divisions have place have also referred to a ranking procedure.
been related to racial differences, as Sigelman The Kilbrandon Report (quoted in Gold 1980,
& Henig (2001), for example, find significant pp. 131–133), for example, distinguished between
difference between African-Americans and whites two degrees of regional awareness, yes (regional
in terms of their perceptions of the special awareness exists) and no (it does not exist),
advantages of the central city and the suburbs while Piveteau (1969) distinguished between
of Washington DC. Sense of place contributes three levels (no, yes-low and yes-high). A four-
to shaping personal and collective identity level scale of sense of place was used by Shamai
(Altman & Low 1992). & Kellerman (1985). The levels used were: (1) not
The results of a study that was conducted in having sense of place, (2) knowledge of the place,
Banks Peninsula, New Zealand (a rural, farm- (3) belonging to a place, and (4) attachment
based setting) point to the significance of resi- to a place. Shamai (1991) has developed this
dential status and social belonging regarding scale and distinguishes among seven levels in
the development of a sense of place. Both Maori an ordinal scale: (0) not having any sense of
and those of European descent respondents with place, (1) knowledge of being located in a place,
long-term residence expressed a more rooted (2) belonging to a place, (3) attachment to a
sense of place for Peninsula environs (Hay 1998). place, (4) identifying with the goals of the place,
In a study in Hong Kong (La Grange & Ming (5) involvement in a place, (6) sacrifice for a
2001), home-owners manifested a somewhat place.
higher level of positive attitude towards their Most measurements ignore negative feelings
community and a ‘sense of Hong Kongness’ toward a place. Although that possibility is rare,
than home renters. In an Israeli study (Shamai it cannot be ruled out; ‘sense of place is a positive
& Kellerman 1985), differences regarding (phenomenon) usually, but it can include nega-
regional awareness were probed: age and years tive feelings’ (Arnon 2001). McAndrew (1998)
of residence in the region and in the settlement, refers to the concept of ‘rootedness’, which is
and ethnic origin (Israeli born vs immigrants; similar to the concept of sense of place, and
origin in Europe or North America vs Asia or constructs it by using a bi-polar structure,
Africa) were not found to be related to the level including positive and negative components. As
of sense of place. However, the rural population previously cited, Rose (1995) argues that the
had a higher level of sense of place towards their ‘dominant’ sense of place defines the social
region than urban respondents. Interestingly, boundaries of ‘us’, and excludes the ‘others’.
according to Paasi (2002b), ‘[i]t is obvious that The possible resistance of the ‘others’ may lead
the narratives of regional (and other spatial) to negative sense of place, too.
identities are increasingly being contested in a Negative feelings may be more important,
world characterized by voluntary and forced particularly when dealing with immigrants. In
migration’ (p. 146). the specific case probed, a substantial number

© 2005 by the Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG

470 SHMUEL SHAMAI & ZINAIDA ILATOV

of Russians who have immigrated to Israel are composed of five dimensions of urban-related
non-Jews, and others have immigrated against identity: external evaluation, continuity with
their will because their families wanted to. In personal past, general attachment, perception
interviews (that were not taken in the place of familiarity and commitment (Lalli 1992).
examined in this study), some of the immi- The uni-component scale avoids the question of
grants said that their town was ‘a dead town’, ‘a selecting the attributes that presumably compose
town without a future’. ‘We do not have a past, the sense of place. Due to the confusion in the
we do not have a present and there is no future literature, this bypasses the different views, by
[here] . . . [If] we get a bundle of money, we will choosing only one general question, and thus,
go to Canada’ (Horowitz et al. 2003). one component only. Examples can be found
The positivistic scales for measuring sense of in the aforementioned Kilbrandon Report,
place can be classified by four attributes: ‘polarity’, which distinguished between two degrees of
number of dimensions, number of components, regional awareness, yes and no, while Piveteau
and ‘directness’ (direct or indirect technique (1969) distinguished between three levels: no,
applied) of the questions. yes-low and yes-high.

Polarity – The ‘poles’ are the highest positive Dimensions – When the questions are clustered
score of sense of place and the ‘lowest’ negative into a scale, in some cases the main scale has
score. Bi-polar studies (of which the current been divided into sub-scales, but often this does
study is an example) apply negative and positive not happen. A unidimensional scale usually
attitudes towards the sense of place); unipolar combines several questions to construct a single
studies include only positive attitudes towards scale, based on logic (Piveteau 1969; Shamai &
the sense of place (as in most studies); and Kellerman 1985; Shamai 1991) and/or statistical
‘semi-polar’ studies range from not having analyses (mainly using reliability measures,
sense of place to the positive pole (Piveteau factor analyses and correlations). A multidimen-
1969; Shamai & Kellerman 1985; Shamai 1991). sional scale is based on sub-scales of different
but related attributes of sense of place. For
‘Directness’ – A methodological distinction has example, McAndrew (1998) tests two empirical
been made by the ‘directness’ of the questions. sub-scales: positive and negative. Each sub-scale
Are the questions phrased by using direct or is composed of different questions. Williams
indirect techniques? (Shamai & Kellerman et al. (1992) used two sub-scales (place identity
1985). A direct technique assumes that the place and place dependence). Jorgensen & Stedman
examined exists in the respondent’s mind, (2001) developed a more sophisticated empirical
while indirect questions, although they do not tool which consisted of three different sub-
assume this, are complicated and are open to scales: place identity, place attachment and place
different interpretations. dependence.
The idea underlying the multidimensional
Components – The empirical scale can be scale is to break down the sense of place into
composed of one (direct) question/component its parts in order to widen the spectrum of the
or several components (multi-component). A empirical study of the sense of place concept,
multi-component scale is based on several ques- and to achieve better understanding. The main
tions which eventually compose one scale. Most problem with this method is the selection of
studies use a multi-component approach. For dimensions: Are they the ‘right’ ones? Do they
example, ‘an index was designed to measure not limit the conceptual scope of sense?
identification with Canada in terms of commit- The difference between multi-component and
ment to permanent residence, feeling a sense multidimension is as follows: a multi-component
of belonging, of being at home and of becoming, scale is based on several questions, which result
or wanting to become a naturalised Canadian in one scale only. A multidimensional scale is
citizen’ (Goldlust & Richmond 1977, p. 134). also based on several questions, but results in
Other studies, as well, use this approach, for more than one (sub) scale.
example Shamai & Kellerman (1985), Shamai In the current study, we decided to use a sim-
(1991) or the ‘Urban Identity Scale’, which is ple scale that would try to capture the sense of

© 2005 by the Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG

MEASURING SENSE OF PLACE: METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS 471

place in a direct and straightforward way. Thus, Israel with similar ethnic composition. The first
a direct technique was selected. Due to the possi- phase was carried out by face-to-face interviews.
bility of negative feelings towards a place in It included 116 Sabras and 137 immigrants
general and, in this case in particular, a bipolar from the former Soviet Union. The second
approach was applied. We prefer a unidimen- phase included 200 immigrants interviewed
sional scale which is composed of one compo- only by phone (Shamai & Ilatov 2002). After
nent of scaling, rather than more complicated these two phases, we were positive that the
structures which may pre-impose the researchers’ respondents had interpreted the question
conceptions on the subjects. (Thus, a scale was correctly.
constructed between (−5) to (+5): (−5) = very The data from Kiryat Shemona is presented
negative connection/attachment; 0 = no con- in this study only after other comparable (pilot)
nection/attachment; (+5) = very positive con- studies have been done (at a different location)
nection/attachment). among Sabras and previous Soviet Union immi-
grants, and which resulted in similar results.
RESEARCH SETTING Thus, the unique status of Kiryat Shemona did
not create a different situation.
The study was conducted in Kiryat Shemona, A sample of 299 adults from Kiryat Shemona
which is located in the northeast ‘corner’ of were interviewed by phone. The sample was
Israel, near the Lebanese border. There are composed of 199 Sabras (93 males and 106
21,000 inhabitants, including 4,300 immigrants females) and 100 immigrants (50 males and
from countries of the former Soviet Union 50 females). Three questions regarding different
(20% of the town population). The interviews levels of places were asked:
took place during 2001, a year after the Israeli
1. What is your level of attachment towards
withdrawal from Lebanon. The town had suf-
your settlement?
fered from shelling for more than two decades
2. What is your level of attachment towards
up to 2000. The immigrants who arrived mainly
your region?
during the early 1990s had suffered from the
3. What is your level of attachment towards
shelling, as well. In spite of living under warlike
your country (Israel)?
conditions the population increased. This was
partly due to intensive government support in (The scale ranges from (−5) to (+5): (−5) = very
many ways: by direct help to governmental negative connection/attachment; 0 = no con-
agencies (such as schools, the municipality), or nection/attachment; (+5) = very positive con-
by developing public sector workplaces, by sub- nection/attachment).
sidising private sector workplaces, and by direct
benefits to the population (such as, reducing RESULTS
income tax). These benefits encourage the popu-
lation to stay in Kiryat Shemona. The results (means and standard deviation) to
The questionnaire was tested in a pilot study the above three questions regarding sense of
in two phases in another town in the North of place, are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Sabras and immigrants attachment to places – means and standard deviations – Kiryat Shemona.

Attachment to place

Town Region State

Means S.D. Means S.D. Means S.D.

Sabras (n = 199) 3.92 1.69 4.14 1.34 3.80 2.48

Immigrants (n = 100) 4.02 1.78 3.98 1.84 3.75 2.16
T-test score Probability n.s n.s n.s

© 2005 by the Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG

472 SHMUEL SHAMAI & ZINAIDA ILATOV

Both groups manifested similar results, of Table 2. Sabras and immigrants in Kiryat Shemona –
positive means with small gaps, which were not attachment to places – frequencies.
significant according to the T-test. The standard
deviations were also similar. Attachment to Kiryat Shemona (settlement)
The frequencies of the answers were divided
Sabras Immigrants
according to three levels of attitudes: negative
(scores from −2 to −5), neutral (−1, 0 and +1 n % n %
scores), and positive (+2 to +5). The scores of
the two groups are presented in Table 2. Negative (−5 to −2) 3 1.5 2 2.0
In most cases, the breakdown of frequencies Neutral (−1 to +1) 20 10.0 6 6.0
shows similar views between the two groups. Positive (+2 to +5) 176 88.5 92 92.0
Two minor exceptions can be observed: more Total 199 100.0 100 100.0
neutral feelings towards the town by Sabras than
by the immigrants, who manifested somewhat Attachment to region (Galilee)
more positive views, and more neutral feelings
Sabras Immigrants
towards the state by immigrants than by the
Sabras, who manifested somewhat more positive n % n %
views.
The intensity levels of sense of place were Negative (−5 to −2) 2 1.0 2 2.0
probed regarding two variables: years of residence Neutral (−1 to +1) 13 6.5 8 8.0
in Kiryat Shemona and age. The correlation Positive (+2 to +5) 185 92.5 90 90.0
coefficients (r) and significant levels (α) for the Total 199 100.0 100 100.0
two groups are presented in Table 3.
These figures manifest two different patterns: Attachment to state (Israel)
The longer the Sabras have resided in a place,
Sabras Immigrants
the higher their level of attachment to the town
and region, while there is no such connection n % n %
found among the immigrants. Both groups
manifest no connection between the years of Negative (−5 to −2) 16 8.0 7 7.0
residence and the level of intensity of sense of Neutral (−1 to +1) 5 2.5 7 7.0
place towards Israel. The results regarding the Positive (+2 to +5) 178 89.5 86 86.0
age variable are somewhat different: both groups Total 199 100.0 100 100.0
manifested similar patterns, but with different
levels of intensity. The level of correlation coeffi-
cients among both groups decreased as the
unit of place increased expanded: it is highest The results indicate that the length of resi-
with respect to the town, less so (but still positive) dence in the place is an important factor for the
towards the region, and the lowest toward the veteran (Sabra) population, mainly towards the
state. close surrounding area. Age has a similar effect

Table 3. Sabras and immigrants in Kiryat Shemona – Spearman correlations between attachment to places and dependent
variables.

Attachment to Attachment Attachment

Kiryat Shemona to the Galilee to Israel

r α r α r α

Years of residence – Sabras (n = 137) 0.501 0.000 0.268 0.002 0.068 0.427
Years of residence – immigrants (n = 49) − 0.036 0.807 − 0.007 0.960 − 0.015 0.921
Age – Sabras (n = 137) 0.439 0.000 0.323 0.000 0.105 0.220
Age – Immigrants (n = 49) 0.308 0.031 0.261 0.070 0.047 0.747

© 2005 by the Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG

MEASURING SENSE OF PLACE: METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS 473

for both groups. Number of years of education number of children (up to 18 years old) of
was another variable that was probed. In all six the secular Sabras was 3.15 compared to 3.81
cases probed (with the level of attachment to among the traditional Sabras. The differences,
the town, region and state, for the two groups according to T-test, were statistically significant
separately), the absolute value for each of the (p = 0.043). Regarding years of study, the mean
correlations was less than 0.2. of the secular group (n = 57) was nine years, in
A regression was computed in order to study comparison to six years among the traditional
the multivariate relations of the independent group (n = 108), and the difference according
variables: age, years of residence in Kiryat to T-test was statistically significant (p = 0.000).
Shemona, years of education, and for the immi- Thus, among the veteran group, the socio-
grants only, years in Israel, toward each of the economic factor was an important intervening
three levels of attachment. This was done sep- variable.
arately for each group, thus six computations Among the immigrants the differences were
were performed. The R2 values of five out of six in the other direction: the secular (n = 46) mean
values were less than 0.2 (less than 20% of the number of children was somewhat higher (1.72)
variability of the dependent variables was than the traditional (n = 19) respondents (1.58
explained by the independent variables). The children). The mean number of years of
only exception was the regression computed for education in the secular group (n = 56) was 12,
the attachment level to Kiryat Shemona. (R2 = compared to 13 in the traditional group (n = 31).
0.288, α = 0.000). The independent variables Both variables were not statistically significant
that were included (whose explanatory power according to the T-test. Thus, regarding the
was significant statistically) were years of resi- traditional immigrants, the reason is not socio-
dence in Kiryat Shemona and age. economic. It may, however, be related to the fact
The level of intensity was probed with respect that they became traditional only after their
to religious affiliation, as well. The two largest immigration to Israel, and accepting a traditional
groups were examined: secular and traditional way of life means some affiliation with a syna-
Jews. The results are presented in Table 4. gogue on the local level, and an additional social
In most cases (5 out of 6), the traditional network. The change from a secular life in the
Jews manifested a higher level of attachment. former Soviet Union to a more religious affili-
Although the differences were not statistically ation is a substantial shift that indicates an
significant in most cases (except among the ideological change. Becoming more religious
secular with respect to attachment to the town), develops the Jewish nationalistic aspect of
the tendency is clear. The differences may be due Jewish-Israeli identity which could explain their
to two reasons: ideological-religious or socio- higher level of intensity of attachment to the
economic. state.
The socio-economic differences were tested
by two variables: number of children of the Language acquisition – Immigrants were asked
respondents, and education level. The mean about their efforts to learn Hebrew. The answers

Table 4. Secular and traditional Sabras and immigrants in Kiryat Shemona – attachment to places.

Attachment to place

Town Region State

Means S.D. Means S.D. Means S.D.

Sabras: Secular (n = 47) 3.15* 2.00 3.83 1.71 3.87 2.23

Sabras: Traditional (n = 87) 4.24* 1.44 4.15 1.49 3.37 2.91
Immigrants: Secular (n = 32) 3.78 2.07 3.72 2.02 3.56 2.35
Immigrants: Traditional (n = 18) 4.33 1.19 4.33 1.19 4.06 1.73

* The differences between the groups were statistically significant according to T-test (α = 0.002).

© 2005 by the Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG

474 SHMUEL SHAMAI & ZINAIDA ILATOV

Table 5. Immigrants in Kiryat Shemona – Hebrew acquisition and attachment to places.

Attachment to place

Town Region State

Means S.D. Means S.D. Means S.D.

Acquiring actively (‘yes’) (n = 26) 3.50 2.37 3.35 2.36 4.42 1.17
Do not acquire (‘no’) (n = 31) 4.48 0.72 4.39 0.88 3.32 2.52
T-test score Probability 0.032 0.027 0.046

were ‘yes’ or ‘no’, combined with a great deal differences between the two groups, Sabras and
of effort. The results are presented in Table 5. immigrants. The similarities between the groups
The results indicate an interesting pattern: may point to the influences of the physical
immigrants who actively acquire the language environment which override the differences
are less attached to their immediate places (town between the groups. Most of the respondents in
and region), and are more attached to the state. both groups had similar patterns of positive
Immigrants who actively acquire the language feelings towards the place where they live. More
have more heterogeneous answers than the other than 90 per cent mentioned positive attachment
group, regarding their attachment to the town towards the town, region and state they live in.
and region. Immigrants who do not acquire the In both groups, the older the respondents are,
language actively have more heterogeneous the more attached they are to their town and
answers than the other group regarding their region. Regarding religious affiliation, in both
attachment to Israel. The differences were found groups, the traditional group is more attached
to be significant statistically according to the T-test. to their town and region than the secular group.
The reason for this pattern of attachment Thus, places are experienced differently by dif-
may be related to the age differences between ferent social groups.
the groups. The ‘yes’ group mean age is 47 years There are also other differences between the
old compared to 56 for the ‘no’ group. (The dif- groups. The differences may point to the fact
ference was statistically significant according to that the influence of the personal and social
the T-test, α = 0.011.) Of the ‘no’ group, 36 per perception and interaction overrides the
cent are 65 years old and over, compared to only physical dimension of sense of place. The dif-
10 per cent among the ‘yes’ group. Thus, more ferences were fewer than the similarities. The
of the ‘yes’ sample is engaged in the workforce main differences related to the years of resi-
and has a broader sense of place, while the ‘no’ dence in the place: the Sabras’ level of sense of
group has a narrower sense of place, focusing place intensity, mainly towards the town and
on the local community. also towards the region, is positively correlated
with the years of residence, while this tendency
DISCUSSION does not occur among the immigrants. Another
difference is the differing reasons explaining
The central aspect of the study demonstrates the lower affiliation to place of the secular group:
that sense of place can be measured empirically. socio-economic differences among the Sabras
The simplicity of the scale makes it an under- and age differences among the immigrants.
standable and clear concept. However, what Place is not merely a bounded area on a map;
contributes to it is not completely clear. The however, the physical attributes of the map are
question remains: what creates the sense of important too.
place, the perception of physical environment Places can be sensed differently by different
or the perception of the personal and social groups. However, as Rose (1995) has pointed
contact and interaction in the place. The out, the immigrant sense of place did not
specific case study points to similarities and challenge the dominant sense of place. They

© 2005 by the Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG

MEASURING SENSE OF PLACE: METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS 475

accepted/adopted the dominant (Zionist) sense presume their own views, and there is a danger
of place, perhaps because of the uniqueness of that they will impose specific views (even if
the Kiryat Shemona experience, or because of they are multidimensional, they are still limited
their positive process of integration, or because compared to the comprehensive concept of sense
of both of these factors. It seems that the of place) and, therefore, may decrease the
involvement in the place can be achieved rela- breadth of the concept of sense of place. Using
tively fast, within a few years, and does not a specific interpretation as the ‘right’ solution,
necessarily take a long (or life-long) period. based on the theoretical literature narrows the
This is particularly true in an assimilatory state scope of the concept.
like Israel, where a large number of national The idea that the more complicated the scale
symbols are prevalent in the assimilation process. is, the more sophisticated it is and thus, the better
It would seem that the ‘Israeli experience’ over- it is, is questionable. For example, ‘empirical
rides any other way of sensing a place. In Israel, investigations of sense of place utilising quanti-
perhaps the symbolic and ideological milieu, tative methods have been relatively few in
rather than the natural landscape, is the domi- number and have generally lagged behind
nant factor which shapes the sense of place. The theory . . . [W]e suggest that these attempts
‘cultural turn’ regarding sense of place is more have not reflected theoretical imperatives well,
effective on all segments of the Jewish population specifically, the multidimensionality of the
in Israel, and does not divide them, but rather sense of place concept’ ( Jorgensen & Stedman
unites them, shaping the sense of ‘togetherness’ 2001, p. 235). Regarding one interpretation,
as Jews (and perhaps excludes the non-Jews. But even if it is ‘multidimensional’, as the only cor-
that is a matter for another study). rect way, is wrong. Moreover, this specific study
This study uses a bipolar, unidimensional has examined a rural recreational region, while
scale which is composed of one component of the studies criticised (Shamai 1991; Lalli 1992)
scaling, using a ‘direct’ technique. This scale dealt with urban contexts. The measure should
has the advantage of being a simple tool that is be tailored to each case, and the variety of meth-
understandable to all types of respondents. It odological tools are only an advantage which
does not pre-suppose a variety of components widens the scope of sense of place.
that compose the sense of place, but rather tries
to explain its relation to a variety of variables.
It does not attempt to try to explain the multi- REFERENCES
dimensional nature of sense of place, but rather
is a more modest attempt to propose a straight- Allen, J., D. Massey & A. Cochrane (1998),
forward technique which can be useful when Rethinking the Region. London: Routledge.
addressing any audience, from elementary Altman, I. & S.M. Low (1992), Place Attachment: A
school-aged children to adults. The pilot for Conceptual Inquiry. In: I. Altman & S.M. Low, eds.,
this scale was developed among students from Place Attachment, pp. 11–30. New York: Plenum Press.
Grades 5 to 12, including immigrants, when the Arnon, S. (2001), The Ramifications of a State of
possibility of negative feelings towards the state Continuous Uncertainty of Personal and Social
was a real concern among educators. Thus, the Process – the Individual and Community on the
need to use the negative side of the spectrum Golan Heights Confronted with Threat of
was very important. Uprooting in the Years 1995–1996. (Ph.D. thesis,
The question of which scaling technique is University of Haifa in Hebrew.)
the appropriate method to examine sense of Barker, J.E. (1979), Designing for a Sense of Place
place is an open one, due to the complicated in Mississippi Small Towns. In: W.P. Prenshaw &
nature of the phenomenon. We support the J.O. McKee, eds., Sense of Place: Mississippi, pp. 162–
view that the many methods reflect the various 178. Jackson, MI: University of Mississippi.
aspects of this concept. There is room for the Canter, D. (1977), The Psychology of Place. London:
different methods, considering that the litera- Architectural Press.
ture is not clear. Each method has it own advan- Chang, T.C. (2000), Singapore’s Little India: A
tages and disadvantages. The more the scale is Tourist Attraction as a Contested Landscape. Urban
‘multi-oriented’, the more the researchers Studies 37, pp. 343–366.

© 2005 by the Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG

476 SHMUEL SHAMAI & ZINAIDA ILATOV

Datel, R. & D. Dingemans (1984), Environmental McAndrew, T. (1998), The Measurement of

Perception, Historic Preservation, and Sense of Place, ‘Rootedness’ and the Prediction of Attachment
pp. 131–144. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago, to Home towns in College Students. Journal of
Department of Geography. Environmental Psychology 18, pp. 409– 417.
Eisenhauer, B., R. Kannich & D. Blahna (2000), Paasi, A. (2002a), Place and Region: Regional
Attachments to Special Places on Public Lands: An Worlds and Works. Progress in Human Geography 26,
Analysis of Activities, Reason for Attachments, and pp. 802–811.
Community Connections. Society & Natural Resources Paasi, A. (2002b), Bound Spaces in the Mobile Word:
13, pp. 421– 440. Deconstructing ‘Regional Identity’. Tijdschrift voor
Entrikin, J.N. (1997), Place and Region, 3. Progress Economische en Sociale Geografie 93, pp. 137–148.
in Human Geography 21, pp. 263–268. Paasi, A. (2003). Region and Place: Regional Identity
Gold, J.R. (1980), An Introduction to Behavioral in Question. Progress in Human Geography 27, pp. 475–
Geography. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 485.
Goldlust, J. & A. Richmond (1977), Factors Peterson, G. & T. Saarinen (1986), Local Symbols
Associated with Commitment to Identification with and Sense of Place, The Journal of Geography 85,
Canada. In: W. Isajiw, ed., Identities, pp. 132–153. pp. 164–168.
Toronto: Peter Martin Associates. Piveteau, J.L. (1969), Le Sentiment d’Appartence
Hay, R. (1998), A Rooted Sense of Place in Cross- Regional en Suisse, Revue Geographie Alpine 59,
Cultural Perspective. Canadian Geographer 42, pp. 364–386.
pp. 245–266. Relph, E. (1976), Place and Placelessness. London: Pion.
Horowitz, T., S. Shamai & Z. Ilatov (2003), Rose, G. (1993), Feminism and Geography: The Limits
Assimilation, Dialogue and Empowerment: Immigrants of Geographical Knowledge. Cambridge, UK: Polity
and Non-immigrants in Katzrin. Tel Aviv: Ramot Press,
(Hebrew). Rose, G. (1995), Place and Identity: A Sense of Place.
Jorgensen, B. & R. Stedman (2001), Sense of Place In: D. Massey & P. Jess, eds., A Place in the World?
as an Attitude: Lakeshore Owners’ Attitudes towards Places, Cultures and Globalization, pp. 87–132. Oxford:
Their Properties. Journal of Environmental Psychology The Open University.
21, pp. 233 –248. Rose, G. (1999), Performing Space. In: D. Massey,
Kaltenborn, B.P. (1997), Nature of Place Attachment: J. Allen & P. Sarre, eds., Human Geography Today,
A Study among Recreation Homeowners in Southern pp. 247–259. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Norway. Leisure Sciences 19, pp. 175–189. Shamai, S. (1991), Sense of Place: An Empirical
La Grange, A. & Y. Ming (2001), Social Belonging, Measurement. Geoforum 22, pp. 347–358.
Social Capital and Promotion of Home Ownership: Shamai, S. & Z. Ilatov (2002), ‘Ethnic Schema
A Case Study of Hong Kong. Housing Studies 16, Typology’ – a Bidimensional Model of Ethnic
pp. 291–310. Identity. Paper presented at the Crossroads in
Lalli, M. (1992), Urban Related Identity: Theory, Cultural Studies, 4th International Conference.
Measurement, and Empirical Findings. Journal of Tampere, Finland. 29 June, 2002.
Environmental Psychology 12, pp. 285–303. Sigelman, L. & J. Henig (2001), Crossing the Great
Lewis, P. (1979), Defining Sense of Place. In: W.P. Divide – Race and Preferences for Living in the City
Prenshaw & J.O. McKee, eds., Sense of Place: versus the Suburbs. Urban Affairs Review 37, pp. 3 –18.
Mississippi, pp. 24–46. Jackson, MI: University of Shamai, S. & A. Kellerman (1985), Conceptual and
Mississippi. Experimental Aspects of Regional Awareness: An
Lidskog, R. (1996), In Science We Trust? On the Israeli Case Study. Tijdschrift voor Economische en
Relation between Scientific Knowledge, Risk Con- Sociale Geografie 76, pp. 88–89.
sciousness and Public Trust. Acta Sociologica 39, Tuan, Y.F. (1977), Space and Place. Minneapolis, MN:
pp. 31–56. University of Minnesota Press.
Massey, D. (1995), The Conceptualization of Place. Williams, D.R., M.E. Patterson, J.W. Roggenbuck
In: D. Massey & P. Jess, eds., A Place in the World? & A.E. Watson (1992), Beyond the Commodity
Places, Cultures and Globalization, pp. 45–85. Oxford: Metaphor: Examining Emotional and Symbolic
The Open University. Attachment to Place. Leisure Science 14, pp. 29–46.

© 2005 by the Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG

View publication stats