UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The utilization of space in an isotropic environment : a predictive model of beach user behaviour 1977

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1977_A1 E83.pdf [ 7.31MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0076856.json
JSON-LD: 1.0076856+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0076856.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0076856+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0076856+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0076856+rdf-ntriples.txt
Citation
1.0076856.ris

Full Text

THE UTILIZATION OF SPACE IN AN ISOTROPIC ENVIRONMENT: A PREDICTIVE MODEL OF BEACH USER BEHAVIOUR. LAURENCE KENNETH EVANS M.S., University of Utah, 1969 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES I n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y Studies: School of Community & Regional Planning I n s t i t u t e of Animal Resource Ecology Department of Psychology We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA November, 1977 by i n Laurence Kenneth Evans, 1977 In present ing th is thes is in pa r t i a l fu l f i lment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the Un ivers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L ibrary sha l l make it f ree ly ava i l ab le for reference and study. I fur ther agree that permission for extensive copying of th is thes is for scho la r ly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h is representat ives . It is understood that copying or pub l ica t ion of th is thes is fo r f inanc ia l gain sha l l not be allowed without my wri t ten permission. Department of C o m m u n i t y R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g The Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date ?A October 1977 i ' A B S TRACT A public beach served as the site for a study of the impact of in- creasing density on human spatial behaviour. This setting provided a ; unique environment where the range of observed densities was wide, user behaviour could be monitored unobtrusively, and where effects due to the social and physical environment were not confounded. The specific goals of the research were: 1) to test the hypothesis that beach users require a minimum amount of intergroup space ard that such distances will be related to proper social functioning (cf. Edward T. Hall's proxemic zones),, 2) demonstrate a relationship between the overall spatial pattern of beach users and density, and 3) relate indi- vidual personality dispositions, mood states and socio/demographic differences to observed respondent spatial behaviour. A e r i a l photography was used to gather data concerning the spatial distribution of 1791 groups located on three public beaches or sunning areas. Coincidental psycho/demographic data were obtained by means of a paper and pencil survey for a subsample of 266 subjects located on the beaches during the 27 photographic sampling runs completed. A Monte Carlo simulation technique coupled with a 'distance to nearest neighbour' model were used to analyse the spatial pattern of beach users over the range of densities observed. Results indicate that at densities less than 110 groups/hectare the observed spatial pattern does not differ significantly from random. At higher densities however, users tend to maximize the distance to near neighbours which results in aypattern statistically described as uniform. The average distance separating groups at densities greater than 110 groups/hectare approached a constant at 2.7 meters. This latter observation plus Hall's claim that such distances may be utilized toreffectively screen or insulate persons from unwanted social inter- action suggests that beach users adapt to increasing density by obtaining i i just enough space to maintain the social integrity of the group. Survey results using groups produced few significant correlations and stepwise regression analysis indicated characteristically lowpredic- tability of target spatial variables. Analysis of response patterns of lone individuals however, produced a substantial increase/.in the ability of selected independent variables to account for variance in dependent variables. F o r example, respondent nearest neighbour distance was 2 predicted moderately well by six independent variables (R = .47). Similarly, eight variables accounted for 57% of the variance in the dependent variable which measured the amount of space demarcated by a respondent's personal possessions. These results suggest that at lower densities beach users may choose sites in relation to other "users which reflect individual preferences and since preferences are varied a random spatial pattern is observed. However, as space becomes limiting at higher densities such needs anddesires may remain unfulfilled. Finally, based on the above results maximum 'psychological carrying capacity' estimates were calculated and the implications for the planning and design professions discussed. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CHAPTER I. S p a t i a l Behaviour and the Regulation of So c i a l Interaction. - Goals and objectives. - The beach as an i s o t r o p i c environment. - O r i g i n of concepts. - Individual distance. - Personal Space. - Crowding. - Space as a l i m i t i n g f a c t o r : The f i r s t hypothesi - Density and s p a t i a l pattern. I I . Individual Differences and S p a t i a l Behaviour: The Role of Personality and Socio-economic C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . - Introduction - The ro l e of personality. - Personality c o r r e l a t e s . - The survey instruments. - The Environmental Response Inventory. - The Leisure A c t i v i t i e s Blank. - Mood Adjective C h e c k l i s t . - Socio-economic and demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . I I I . An Approach to the Study of Human S p a t i a l Behaviour Methods and App l i c a t i o n s . - The study areas. - A e r i a l photography. - Pattern analysis. - Space-time study. - Survey dissemination. - Psychological and demographic information. - Environmental Response Inventory. - Leisure A c t i v i t i e s Blank. - Socio-economic vari a b l e s . - Mood adjective c h e c k l i s t . i v Pago IV. Spacing Behaviour on Public Beaches: Analysis of Results. - User d i s t r i b u t i o n and external environmental features. - Density and s p a t i a l pattern. T Density and distance to nearest neighbor. V. Group C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s VI. Beach Carrying Capacities. - Introduction. - Carrying capacities and the response to density. VII. Predictors of S p a t i a l Behaviour: A n a l y s i s of Survey Results. - Predictors of s p a t i a l behaviour - a l l groups., - Lone i n d i v i d u a l s - a second look at the data 0 - predictors of respondents' distance to nearest neighbor. - Predictors of 'group a r e a 1 . - Marked group area and density, - Density and group s i z e . V III. Discussion and Summary of Results. 75 - Summary of r e s u l t s . - Methodology ap p l i c a t i o n s . - Implications f o r planning and design. - Toward further research. LITERATURE CITED 83 APPENDICES A B C D 89 100 108 110 V Iii ST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1. Map depicting K i t s i l a n o and English Bay study areas ' 30 2. Map depicting Skaha study area 31 3. The distance between points i s not maximized by a hexagonal 37 pattern 4. A pattern of e q u i l a t e r a l t r i a n g l e s maximizes the inter-point 37 distance 5. With more points in the same area, a pattern of squares 37 maximizes the distance 6. S p a t i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of beach users over time 47 7. S p a t i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of beach users over time 47 8. S p a t i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of beach users over time 47 9. S p a t i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of beach users over time 48 10. S p a t i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of beach users over time 48 11. S p a t i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of beach users over time 48 12. Relationship between density and pattern 50 13. Average distance between f i r s t nearest neighbours (NND) plotted against density f o r 27 runs 52 14. Density and group area 56 15. Density and group siz e 58 16. Hypothetical representation of two neighboring groups "marked" and " minimum" space boundaries 61 17. Random pattern c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of low de n s i t i e s 110 18. T r a n s i t i o n from random to regular pattern 110 19. Regular pattern c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of high d e n s i t i e s 111 v i LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. Proxemic zones f o r North Americans 7 2. Environmental Response Inventory Scales 21 3. Seven LEISURE ACTIVITIES BLANK - Past Factors 23 4. Correlations of the Adjectives with Eight Mood Factors 27 5. Group Area Related to the Number of Individuals in a Group 57 6. Maximum beach population estimates 62 2 7. I n i t i a l p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n s , F p r o b a b i l i t i e s and f i n a l r values f o r three dependent variables 66 2 8. r variables f o r s p a t i a l and group dependent variables 68 9. S i g n i f i c a n t independent variables contributing to the dependent var i a b l e s , centroid to centroid and nearest approach nearest neighbor distances (cc/nnd and na/nnd). 70 10. S i g n i f i c a n t independent variables contributing to the depen- dent v a r i a b l e 'group area'. 72 11. ERI v a r i a b l e s : means and standard deviations f o r English Bay, K i t s i l a n o , and Skaha Beaches 101 12. LAB va r i a b l e s : means and standard deviations f o r English Bay, K i t s i l a n o , and Skaha Beaches 101 13. McKechnie's (1973) LAB Results compared with those from the present study 102 14. Socio/demographic v a r i a b l e s : means and standard deviations f o r English Bay, K i t s i l a n o and Skaha beaches 104 15. Mood score means and standard deviations f o r English Bay, K i t s i l a n o , and Skaha beaches 107 16. Comparison of means for the two conditions: surveyed and not surveyed 109 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS An interdisciplinary dissertation cannot help but represent the efforts of a variety of people in addition to the author. Among these, William Rees my research supervisor has contributed more than his share of time, effort and enthusiasm. To him I would like to express a warm thank you. I wish also to thank the members of the guidance committee for their ideas, c r i t i c a l evaluation and sup- port during the course of my research and writing. Of these, John Collins and C.S. 'Buzz' Holling deserve special mention since each contributed to the research far in excess of committee re- quirements. F o r help in the computer analysis including the simulation project, I wish to thank Steve Borden of the TARE computing facility In addition, thanks are in order for Frank Maurer who aided the re- search by making the photographic and digitizer equipment so readil available. To the School of Community and Regional Planning and the Ford Foundation who helped fund the research, I wish to extend my sincere gratitude. I wish also to express my appreciation to Edward T. Hall who acted as external examiner. To my mate, Anna Friesen I wish to demonstrate my apprec- iation for her unfailing support, encouragement and love during the course of my work. Her help was all that it could and should be. Finally, I would like to express my thanks to my parents for their continued help and understanding. v i i i C H A P T E R I S P A T I A L B E H A V I O U R A N D T H E R E G U L A T I O N O F S O C I A L I N T E R A C T I O N - 1 - Coals and Objectives This study focuses on the problem of how users of p u b l i c beach f a c i l i t i e s respond s p a t i a l l y to i n c r e a s i n g n umbers of i n d i v i d u a l s i n a shared space and how t h i s response Is associated w i t h c e r t a i n p e r s o n a l i t y , socio-economic and demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . More s p e c i f i c a l l y the o b j e c t i v e s of the study are: to develop a methodology f o r o b t a i n i n g unobtrusive measures of beach user s p a t i a l and group behaviour. to d e s cribe the p a t t e r n or s p a t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of users as a f u n c t i o n of density. - to determine the extent to which aspects of the p h y s i c a l environment surrounding the beach a f i e c t user s p a t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n . to d e l i n e a t e how users adapt to decreasing a v a i l - able space as d e n s i t y increases. to examine the extent to which p e r s o n a l i t y and socio-economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s could be used as p r e d i c t o r s of s p a t i a l and group behaviour. The above goals formed the basis f o r three general hypotheses and one c o r r o l l a r y which I wished to t e s t . These w i l l be discussed more f u l l y i n l a t e r s e c t i o n s , however f o r the present they may b r i e f l y be s t a t e d as: 1) As space becomes l i m i t i n g at higher d e n s i t i e s the distance between nearest neighbours w i l l approach a minimum value the l i m i t of which w i l l be determined by c u l t u r a l norms r e l a t i n g to the r e g u l a t i o n of s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n . a) C o r r o l l a r y : The s p a t i a l p a t t e r n e x h i b i t e d by beach users w i l l be r e l a t e d to changes i n user d e n s i t y . 2) The distnnces maintained between nearest neighbours w i l l be some f u n c t i o n of c e r t a i n i n t e r n a l psychol- o g i c a l d i s p o s i t i o n s . 3) Nearest neighbor distance w i l l be r e l a t e d to user socio-economic and demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . - 2 - Although tho r e s u l t s of o t l i o r a n a l y s e s nro n l s n ro por tod, those t h r e e hypotheses r e f l e c t the major o b j e c t i v e s of the study. These o b j e c t i v e s r e l a t e t o n b r o a d e r t h e o r e t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e i n v o l v i n g the ways i n which space may be used as a r e g u l a t i n g mechanism of s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n . There are many ways i n which s o c i a l animals I n c l u d i n g man attempt t o r e g u l a t e the k i n d and i n t e n s i t y of s o c i a l i n t e r - a c t i o n , however as Kummer (1971) p o i n t s out, the m a n i p u l a t i o n of space i s the s a f e s t t e c h n i q u e a v a i l a b l e , T/his statement i s u n d e r l i n e d s i n c e c l o s e p h y s i c a l p r o x i m i t y i n many specie's c a r r i e s an i m p l i e d t h r e a t of a g g r e s s i o n and such d i s t a n c e s b r i n g i n t e r a c t a n t s w i t h i n the range of whatever weapons are a v a i l a b l e . Many s i g n a l s have e v o l v e d t o c o u n t e r a c t "aggressive r e s p o n s e s between members of a s p e c i e s s i n c e a c t i v i t i e s r e l a t e d t o r e p r o d u c t i o n and s o c i a l bonding would not be p o s s i b l e were t h e r e no mechanism a v a i l a b l e t o c o u n t e r - a c t such a g g r e s s i v e b e h a v i o u r s . T i n b e r g e n ' s (1952) now w e l l known de s - c r i p t i o n of the z i g - z a g dance of the male s t i c k l e b a c k i s an o f t e n c i t e d example of* s i g n a l l i n g d e v i c e s which s e r v e t o i n h i b i t a g o n i s t i c responses w h i l e s t i m u l a t i n g r e p r o d u c t i v e b e h a v i o u r s . In manr space may s t i l l be viewed as an important component r e - l a t i n g t o r e g u l a t i o n of s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n , however, modern methods of com- m u n i c a t i o n c o m p l i c a t e the i s s u e . The t e l e p h o n e , newspaper, t e l e v i s i o n , r a d i o , e t c . , a l l s e r v e to i n c r e a s e p e r c e i v e d s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n . D i s t a n c e , at l e a s t f o r these examples becomes me a n i n g l e s s . The p r e s e n t r e s e a r c h sought t o examine some of the ways humans use space where the p o t e n t i a l f o r s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n i n c r e a s e s d r a m a t i c a l l y . A p u b l i c beach was chosen as a p o t e n t i a l l y u s e f u l environment i n which t o conduct the r e s e a r c h s i n c e d e n s i t i e s v a r i e d over a wide range and s i n c e p e r c e i v e d and a c t u a l d e n s i t y c o u l d be assumed to be s i m i l a r i f not the same. The r a t i o n a l e f o r the c h o i c e of a beach as a r e s e a r c h s e t t i n g p l u s i s s u e s and c o n c e p t s r e l a t i n g t o d i s t a n c e , crowding and space c o n t r o l w i l l be d i s c u s s e d as they p e r t a i n to the study g o a l s . - 3 - The beach as an i s o t r o p i c environment. S i n c e most s t u d i e s of s p a c i n g b e h a v i o u r i n humans have been con- duc t e d under l a b o r a t o r y c o n d i t i o n s where the s e t t i n g i s o f t e n c o n t r i v e d , i s of s h o r t d u r a t i o n , o r has taken p l a c e i n complex s e t t i n g s where e f f e c t s due t o the p h y s i c a l environment are not known t I chose a p u b l i c beach as a s i t e l e a s t l i k e l y t o s u f f e r from shortcomings such as these. A p u b l i c beach r e p r e s e n t s a s e t t i n g which i s g e n e r a l l y u n i f o r m and r e l a t i v e l y f r e e from ' a r t i f a c t u a l c o n s t r a i n t s ' . Based on the assumption t h a t i n such an environment e f f e c t s due t o the p h y s i c a l s e t t i n g would be minimized I p r o - posed t h a t observed changes i n b e h a v i o u r a l p a t t e r n s must r e s u l t l a r g e l y from s o c i a l o r i n t e r p e r s o n a l f a c t o r s . Such ' f r e e f i e l d ' s e t t i n g s are r e f e r r e d t o as ' i s o t r o p i c ' . An i s o t r o p i c environment such as a beach thus has the advantage of a l l o w i n g the i n v e s t i g a t o r t o examine b e h a v i o u r r e l a t i n g t o s i t e s e l e c t i o n , s p a c i n g , and group phenomena i n i s o l a t i o n from p h y s i c a l s e t t i n g e f f e c t s . By c o n t r o l l i n g f o r these e f f e c t s and by ob- s e r v i n g b e h a v i o u r u n o b t r u s i v e l y , I hoped t o p r o v i d e ' b a s e l i n e ' r e s u l t s c o n c e r n i n g the ways i n which p e o p l e use space under c o n d i t i o n s of v a r y i n g d e n s i t y . An example may i l l u s t r a t e the p o i n t I wish to make. In an un- crowded t h e a t e r a p a t r o n c o u l d choose a s e a t which both s a t i s f i e d h i s d e s i r e d l o c a t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o the s t a g e as w e l l as h i s s p a t i a l p r e f e r - ence v i s a' v i s o t h e r p a t r o n s . In c o n t r a s t when d e n s i t i e s a r e h i g h , few a l t e r n a t i v e s remain and a c h o i c e of s e a t s would r e q u i r e s i t t i n g w i t h i n i n c h e s of a n o t h e r p a t r o n . S i n c e the s e a t s have been p l a c e d as they have by an ' a u t h o r i t y ' , the arrangement a c t s as a s a n c t i o n which a l l o w s the new a r r i v a l t o , i n e f f e c t , invade the p e r s o n a l space 1 of the p e r s o n a l r e a d y i n p l a c e . A beach w i t h o u t such c o n s t r a i n t s s h o u l d thus p r o v i d e a way of d e t e r m i n i n g s p a t i a l p r e f e r e n c e s based s o l e l y on the i n t e r n a l needs of the i n d i v i d u a l . I t i s i n t h i s sense t h a t the term ' b a s e l i n e ' i s used. - A - F i n n l l y , two other advantages of using a beach as a source f o r the study of human s p a t i a l behaviour are important. F i r s t , the actual density of the beach as expressed as ind i v i d u a l s or groups/unit area may be assumed to be the same as, or at least close to the density which users perceive. Rapoport (1975) emphasizes the importance of d i f f e r e n t i a - t i n g between perceived and actual density when one looks f o r e f f e c t s due to density considerations. He argues that f o r many environments these two values may be quite d i f f e r e n t . Of course, methodologically i t i s fa r easier to accurately measure the actual number of people in an area than to pin down how many i n d i v i d u a l s a person believes are there. A beach s e t t i n g avoids t h i s problem since an i n d i v i d u a l can v i s u a l l y i d e n t i f y the number of people i n the v i c i n i t y . The f i n a l aspect of a beach which i s important to a study of density e f f e c t s i s that an e t h o l o g i c a l approach may be used. Using t h i s technique the behaviour of i n d i v i d u a l s and groups may be observed unob- t r u s i v e l y with l i t t l e or no bias introduced by the investigator's presence. In t h i s way, observed behaviour may be considered 'natural' f o r the s e t t i n g involved and conclusions more e a s i l y translateable to everyday (r e a l world) events. Or i g i n of concepts Wilson (1975) reviews issues and concepts r e l a t i n g to spacing behaviour as i t applies to s o c i a l organisms and discusses six components of s o c i a l spacing: l ) t o t a l range, 2) home range, 3) core area, 4) t e r r i - tory, 5) i n d i v i d u a l distance, and 6) dominance. These categories may be b r i e f l y summarized i n the following manner: Total range: the area traversed by an i n d i v i d u a l animal over i t s e n t i r e l i f e cycle (Goin & Goin, 1962). Home range: the area over which an animal h a b i t u a l l y t r a v e l s (Seton, 1909; Burt, 1962). Core area: that area of heaviest useage within the home range (Kaufmann, 1962). - 5 - T e r r i t o r y : an area occupied more or less e x c l u s i v e l y through means of overt defense or advertisement (Noble, 1939; Brown, 1964). Individual distance: the minimum distance routinely kept between in d i v i d u a l s of a species (Hediger, 1941, 1955; Conder, 1949). Dominance: the assertion of one member of a group over another which gains the dominant i n d i v i d u a l increased access to resources such as food, water, sleeping s i t e s , space, etc. With respect to these concepts Wilson (1975) stresses that the behaviour of species in general show a continuously graded series with the boundaries of each of the above c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s becoming blurred and i n d i s t i n c t . The primary point i s that v a r i a t i o n s occur within, as well as between species with each behavioural manifestation serving a d i s t i n c t b i o l o g i c a l and/or s o c i a l function. Thus (a bird may maintain a home range with respect to i t s feeding a c t i v i t i e s , a t e r r i t o r y surrounding the nest s i t e and i n d i v i d u a l distance and dominance c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s within a f l o c k . Other examples of t h i s continuum rel a t e to changes in breeding f l u c t u a t i o n s and varying l i f e cycle conditions each requiring d i f f e r e n t s p a t i a l s t r a t e g i e s . In recent years the concept of t e r r i t o r i a l i t y has been invoked to explain a va r i e t v of human behaviours, most notably Lorenz (1966) and Ardrey <"1966) . At least one study of beach user behaviour has u t i l i z e d the t e r r i t o r y concept for t h e o r e t i c a l constructs (Edney and Jordan - Edney, 1974). Based upon the most commonly accepted d e f i n i t i o n s of what constitutes a t e r r i t o r y t h i s approach seems unwarranted. The point was made by Becker and Mayo (1971) that personal space and i n d i v i d u a l distance concepts were more appropriate than t e r r i t o r v i n d e f i n i n g the spacing behaviour of c a f e t e r i a patrons since in t h e i r study, subjects were not w i l l i n g to defend the area denoted by t h e i r possessions. These authors concluded that i n d i v i d u a l distance concepts were more parsimonious in that they made fewer assumptions about the r e l a t i v e value of a space. For the - 6 - present study the concepts r e l a t i n g to i n d i v i d u a l distance seemed most cl o s e l y to r e f l e c t the goals of the research as well as the observed behaviour of users. Individual distance. In studying the s p a t i a l behaviour of beach users, I was pre- dominantly interested i n the distances separating i n d i v i d u a l s and groups of i n d i v i d u a l s . Studies of spacing mechanisms of s o c i a l animals have referred to two measures of i n t r a s p e c i f i c spacing: personal or i n d i v i d u a l distance and s o c i a l distance (Hediger, 1941,1955; Conder, 1949) Personal distance re f e r s to a minimum distance which i n d i v i d u a l animals r o u t i n e l y keep between themselves and others, whereas s o c i a l distance r e l a t e s to the distance beyond which an animal apparently experiences a strong a t t r a c t i o n to return to i t s s o c i a l group. These two concepts underline the dynamic q u a l i t y of spacing i n s o c i a l animals,. In h i s re- view of sociobiology, Wilson (1975) highlighted t h i s dynamic character- i s t i c by defining personal distance as "the compromise struck by animals that are both attracted to other members of t h e i r own species and repelled by them at short distances." (p. 257). Much of the l i t e r a t u r e on s o c i a l animals i s concerned with i n t e r i n d i v i d u a l spacing behaviour. However, a few studies have i n d i c a - ted that groups may act c o l l e c t i v e l y i n maintaining intergroup distances. For example, Blank and Ash (1956) showed that coveys of partridge (P. perdix), although e x h i b i t i n g overlapping home ranges, normally remain separated by a c e r t a i n minimum distance. S i m i l a r l y , both i n d i v i d u a l s and groups of s a n d h i l l cranes (Grus canadensis) space themselves evenly with groups p r i m a r i l y composed of family units ( M i l l e r and Stephen, 1966). Other species e x h i b i t i n g s i m i l a r patterns are baboons (Hall and Devore, 1965), white-crowned sparrows (Zonotrichia leucophrys) (Blanchard and Erickson, 1949; Morton, 1967) and wintering f l o c k s of Juncos ( J . hyemalis and J . oregamus) (Sabine, 1956). - 7 - Hal l (1966) has studied the ways in which humans space them- selves i n a v a r i e t y of s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n s across several cultures. H a l l suggests that f o r humans, personal distance i s but one of four zones. Based on observations of behaviour patterns at various interpersonal dis- tances H a l l has termed the other three, * i n t i m a t e ' , ' s o c i a l ' , and 'public'. Table 1 outlines these zones f or North Americans and demonstrates the behaviours c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of each. Since these zones seem to have func-^ t i o n a l properties related TO me type and form of s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n permissable for North Americans, I w i l l return to these ideas when discussing the te s t i n g of relevant hypotheses. Table 1. Proxemic zones for.North Americans.. (from H a l l , 1966) TYPE OF ZONE Intimate Personal DISTANCES (meters) 0-.46 .46-1.22 So c i a l 1.22-3.66 • Public 3.66-7.62 CHARACTERISTIC BEHAVIOURS bodily contact possible, eg. lovemaking, comforting, protecting, wrestling, etc. bodily contact possible at close phase; most encounters between friends and close associates occur i n t h i s range. s o c i a l gatherings, imper- sonal business dealings, formal business and s o c i a l events conducted at the far phase. behaviours which do not require interpersonal i n - volvement occur within t h i s range; public speakers and important people are often observed i n t h i s range. - 8 - Personal space. To this point I have referred to the spatial characteristics of animals as a linear distance. Excluding t e r r i t o r i a l i t y , evidence exists which indicates that members of social species maintain an area or volume around themselves which is relatively exclusive of others. McBride (1964) has studied this phenomenon in various species and terms i t a 'social force f i e l d ' . His research indicates that these areas are not circular and tend to 'axtend further in the direction in which the animal is facing. McBride's social force f i e l d has been extensively studied in humans and has been labeled 'personal space' by Sommer (1966; 1969). As a testimony to the*interest in the fi e l d of personal space, Altman (1975) has documented over 200 studies conducted since the early 1960's. Most of this work is tangential to the present study. However, researcli concerning intrusions into personal space boundaries as well as the personality correlates of personal space behaviour is relevant. The former w i l l be discussed below, however the latter w i l l be reviewed later. Research concerning intrusion of personal space has confirmed the notion that unwarranted crossing of personal space boundaries is a powerful event. Two early studies by Felipe & Sommer (1966) underscore this statement. The f i r s t study examined the flight reactions of mental patients when a confederate sat beside a patient at a distance of approx- imately six inches. In a park setting about one-third of the patients lef t within two minutes, about one-half lef t within nine minutes and over two-thirds left within 20 minutes. Many overt signs of discomfort such as fidgeting, mumbling and nervous rubbing of body parts were commonly observed. Similar results were also found in the second study which examined spacing behaviour of students in a library setting. Patterson, Mullens and Romano (1971) added strength to these findings through observ- ations of facial expressions and body orientation of patrons. In this .library study, the incidence of such behaviour as blocking themselves off, leaning away, and glaring increased the closer a confederate was to a subject - 9 - In a study of the extent to which l e v e l of arousal (as measured by the Galvanic Skin Response-GSR) was correlated with interpersonal d i s - tance, McBride, King and James (1965) found that subjects who were app- roached at distances of 1, 3 and 9 feet showed lower GSR readings as distance'increased. Another f i n d i n g indicated that approaches from the side produced lower readings than those from the front. Tn another study of i n t r u s i o n Efrnn and Clioyno (1973) observed shopping mall patrons to determine willingness to pass between two con- federates standing at varying distances. They found patrons seldom passed between the confederates when they were closer than four feet apart. It i s s i g n i f i c a n t that t h i s distance i s at the edge of Ha l l ' s (1966) personal and s o c i a l space zones referenced e a r l i e r . The above study thus tends to r e i n f o r c e the f u n c t i o n a l v a l i d i t y of H a l l ' s zones. In a l a t e r study, Efran and Cheyne (1974) forced subjects to pass between two c l o s e l y i n t e r a c t i n g confederates. Results showed that subjects displayed more ago n i s t i c f a c i a l gestures and l a t e r reported less p o s i t i v e mood ratings than did controls. Predicted heart rate changes however, were not obtained. Argyle and Dean (1965) obtained s i m i l a r r e s u l t s when subjects approached a photograph of a person or an actual person. Eye contact t y p i c a l l y decreased as distance decreased and other signs of tension were also reported when subjects were approx- imately two feet from the target person. The studies c i t e d above r e l a t e to two basic themes. The f i r s t i s that in general ,North Americans maintain s i m i l a r conventions about the amount of space appropriate f o r d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l and interpersonal occasions. The second i s that personal space boundaries do exist and to v i o l a t e them evokes f e e l i n g s and bodily symptoms i n d i c a t i v e of emotional d i s t r e s s both f o r the intruder and the person being intruded upon. With respect to the present study, these findings suggest that users of a public beach f a c i l i t y should choose s i t e s which allow for at least a minimum amount of space which i s consistent with s o c i a l norms and personal needs. Hypotheses were generated to test t h i s and other related constructs and w i l l be dealt with i n more d e t a i l i n a l a t e r section. - 10 - Crowding. The goals of the project did not include a d i r e c t attempt to assess the possible impact of crowding on beach users. This decision was based on the author's b e l i e f that although models e x i s t to define various aspects of the crowding experience (Stokols, 1976), the 'state of the art' i s such that an accurate assessment of such c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s remains problematical. Because of the d i f f i c u l t i e s i n defining when crowding may be said to occur, I preferred to concentrate on describing the actual behaviour of users which could be attributed to increasing numbers of others within the beach environment. Such a research strategy, I believe, should serve to produce a baseline i n d i c a t o r of how people a c t u a l l y respond to the amount pf space a v a i l a b l e and precludes the ne- c e s s i t y of determining how i n d i v i d u a l s f e e l about the experience in question. In addition, a primary hypothesis tested by the study pre-* dieted a minimum intergroup distance within which newly a r r i v i n g users would not s i t u a t e . Given the confirmation of such a hypothesis, one might conclude that crowding had not occurred since users were able to accrue some minimum amount of space necessary for maintaining a s a t i s f a c t o r y experience. In other words, one would not expect respondents to express more than mild d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n as long as t h e i r basic needs f o r space were being met. Of course, to d e f i n i t i v e l y answer questions r e l a t i n g to crowding i t would be necessary to interview p o t e n t i a l users who did not p a r t i c i p a t e because of extreme d e n s i t i e s . This strategy was not employed since such persons were not e a s i l y i n d e n t i f i a b l e . Although as I have pointed out, crowding was not a ce n t r a l issue f o r the present study, two other research e f f o r t s directed towards beach users have made attempts i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n . The f i r s t , by Brougham (1968), attempted to assess l e v e l s of perceived crowding through a va r i e t y of questions r e l a t i n g to the perceived q u a l i t y of the beach experience. The r e s u l t s of h i s study indicated that with eighteen independent variables r e l a t i n g to crowding and socio/demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of users, only 12% of the variance of the dependent variable (nearest neighbor distance) could be accounted f o r . Further, the crowding index used by Brougham was s i g n i f i c a n t only at the 0.90 p r o b a b i l i t y l e v e l and contrary to expectations - 1 1 - the groups p e r c e i v i n g the beach as overcrowded were found at greater distances than those not objecting to the number of others present. The second study which attempted to m e a s u r e p e r c e i v e d crowding in a beach setting was conducted by Edne y and Jordan-Edney ( 1 9 7 4 ) . The method they used involved a s k i n g beach u s e r s two questions; 1) How many people did t h e y (the users) think the beach could hold before it became overcrowded? and 2) How did they see the beach at the time - crowded, average, or underpopulated? Responses to these questions were then compared to a m e a s u r e of nearest neighbor distance. A n a n a l y s i s of responses to the second question which attempted to m e a s u r e crowding d i r e c t l y , produced no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between the crowding indices and nearest neighbor distance values. The data r e l a t i n g to estimates of the beach capacity was s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d with distance, but only when disaggregated by group s i z e and c o m p o s i t i o n by sex. Although the authors attempt to explain these findings using two alternate hypotheses r e l a t i n g to 'focus of attention' v e r s u s 'sense of c o n t r o l 1 these were not tested. This section has been included to demonstrate some of the d i f f i c u l t i e s associated with assessing the crowding experience d i r e c t l y . Because of such problems I chose not to include d i r e c t measures of crowding. However, the questionaire designed f o r the study did include several personality variables which could be used as i n d i r e c t indices of tolerance to crowding. These w i l l be discussed i n a later, section. Space as a l i m i t i n g f a c t o r : The f i r s t hypothesis. In a previous section I b r i e f l y referred to Hall's (1966) work in which he c l a s s i f i e s observed s o c i a l behaviours according to the distance separating interactants. H a l l ' s scheme (see Table 1) suggests that c e r t a i n classes of behaviour c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of North Americans can be grouped conveniently into four distance zones. These zones r e f l e c t increasing interpersonal and sensory involvement as distance decreases. These ob- servations imply that distance, r e l a t i v e to p o t e n t i a l or actual i n t e r a c t - ants, c a r r i e s meaning and t h i s meaning re l a t e s to the type and q u a l i t y of - 12 - s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n sought. S i m i l a r l y , as'Rapaport (1975) points out in a recent a r t i c l e , the d e f i n i t i o n of space by agreed upon rules serves as an organizing.element and thus decreases the amount of information needing to be processed at any given time. Thus by d i v i d i n g classes of behaviours along a space continuum, the need to communicate behavioural intentions, other than by the use of distance, i s diminished. Borrowing from Hall's and Rapaport's assessment of the functional q u a l i t i e s of space use I predicted that people on a public beach maintain basic s p a t i a l needs and that these needs are related to the regulation of s o c i a l Interaction. Further, I hypothesized that these needs and prefer- ences are influenced i n part by various personality and c u l t u r a l norms. In an attempt to examine the e f f i c a c y of these propositions, I chose Hall's (1966) schema of four distance zones as an i n i t i a l source for t h e o r e t i c a l constructs. Referring to Table 1, Hall's zone, 'public' i s characterized by behaviours not r e q u i r i n g interpersonal involvement. Since most people were observed to maintain t h e i r group i d e n t i t y and since at low d e n s i t i e s space was not thought to be l i m i t i n g , I predicted that under these density conditions most users would locate at: nearest neighbor distances greater than 3.7 meters (12 f t . ) . Further, as pressures due to increasing density were r e a l i z e d , I also predicted that observed distances would compress to some point within H a l l ' s (1966) ' s o c i a l distance zone' ( f a r phase). This predic- t i o n i s based on the argument that users could be expected to adopt various adaptational strategies which would allow somewhat closer i n t e r - group distances. The f a r phase of the s o c i a l distance zone (2.1-3.7 meters) i s the most l i k e l y lower l i m i t of t h i s compressibility since H a l l ' s c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n includes the statement that s o c i a l distance ( f a r phase), "can be used to insulate or screen people from each other." In contrast, the close phase (1.2 - 2.1 meters) i s t y p i f i e d by behaviours which are more casual than the f a r phase and contains more elements i n - d i c a t i v e of s o c i a l involvement, although of an impersonal nature. - 13 - Based on the above arguments the.following i s a statement of the f i r s t hypothesis to be tested: - At low to moderate density, distances to nearest neighbor w i l l be greater than 3.7 meters, however as space becomes l i m i t i n g at higher d e n s i t i e s , distances w i l l approach a minimum value between 2.1 and 3.7 meters. Such extreme densities would cr e a t e a situation in which newly a r r i v i n g groups would be f o r c e d to violate s p a t i a l norms, seek out another l e s s crowded beach or r e t u r n home. The t e s t i n g of the preceeding hypothesis was car r i e d out with the aid of a e r i a l photography covering three beaches over a broad range of d e n s i t i e s f o r each. This technique allowed for an instantaneous record to be made of the p o s i t i o n i n space of users of an ent i r e public beach. Density and s p a t i a l pattern. The d i s p e r s i o n of objects i n space and time are studied through pattern a n a l y s i s . Such analyses are widespread i n such f i e l d s as ecology (Pielou, 1969) Grieg-Smith, 1964) and s o c i a l geography (Dacey, 1964; Getis, 1964). The analysis of pattern i s contingent upon three types of s p a t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n , of which two, regular and aggregated represent the opposite ends of a continuum. The t h i r d type, random, r e f e r s to the sp e c i a l case where the placement of a point or i n d i v i d u a l i s uninfluenced by any other point. Aggregated or clumped patterns are exhibited when there i s a higher p r o b a b i l i t y that two or more points w i l l be found i n close proximity. A p e r f e c t l y regular or uniform pattern i s character- ized by a set of points where a l l distances between points are maximized. In t h i s extreme case, the pattern i s expressed as a hexagonal l a t t i c e , since t h i s type of d i s t r i b u t i o n i s the most e f f i c i e n t way to pack a space or volume. Of course, a d i s t r i b u t i o n may be c l a s s i f i e d as e i t h e r regular, random, or aggregated i n the s t a t i s t i c a l sense without t o t a l l y s a t i s f y i n g the conditions above. - 14 - The dispersion of animals i n space r e s u l t s from int e r a c t i o n s with the physical environment as well as the presence or absence of other i n d i v i d u a l s (Brown & Orians, 1970), Since f o r a public beach I have assumed that the environment i s s t r u c t u r a l l y uniform ( i s o t r o p i c ) then any changes in the s p a t i a l pattern as exhibited by beach users can be expected to r e s u l t from la r g e l y s o c i a l as opposed to environmental sources. If users of a p u b l i c beach are viewed as having s p a t i a l needs which are manifest as c u l t u r a l l y or b i o l o g i c a l l y appropriate i n t e r - personal distance, then one might expect that above a c e r t a i n o v e r a l l density the s p a t i a l pattern exhibited by the population would bo uniform as people s t r i v e to maintain the minimum amount of space which they re- quire. The process by which t h i s might occur i s easy to v i s u a l i z e since each i n d i v i d u a l or group a r r i v i n g at the beach would s t r i v e to gain at least the minimum amount of space which was required. C o n t r a r i l y , at low d e n s i t i e s each group could obtain much more than t h i s minimum amount and thus there would be no psychological 'pressure' from other groups that would influence the p o s i t i o n i n g of new a r r i v a l s . Thus at these d e n s i t i e s differences related to i n d i v i d u a l p ersonality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s could be manifest. Since the expression of these c h a r a t e r i s t i c s may be v i s u a l i z e d as many and varied, a pattern approaching random should be observed. _ In a study c i t e d previously, Brougham (1968) proposed a s i m i l a r argument to the one above. Through the use of oblique a e r i a l photographs over a one day period, Brougham sought to examine the e f f e c t s of density on s p a t i a l pattern and perceived crowding at Pinery P r o v i n c i a l Park beach in Ontario. His r e s u l t s seem to indicate that beach users did attempt to max- imize the space a v a i l a b l e to them as evidenced by an 'R' value (a measure of the extent to which the d i s t r i b u t i o n of objects i n space conform to one of three patterns, random, regular or aggregated) s i g n i f i c a n t i n the d i r e c t i o n of a regular pattern. Inexplicably, the 'R' values (although s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from a random pattern) tended to decrease as - 15 - density increased. These r e s u l t s are not conclusive however, since the use of oblique photographs may not have produced r e l i a b l e measurements, and since the photographs were taken f o r a single day only, the sample size ,as well as the range of observed d e n s i t i e s were r e l a t i v e l y small. Since d e n s i t i e s were expressed i n r e l a t i v e as opposed to absolute units d i r e c t comparisons between his study and the present research are not possible. To test these arguments, an analysis of the s p a t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of beach users examined the following c o r o l l a r y of the f i r s t hypothesis mentioned previously: - The d i s t r i b u t i o n of a groups over the beach surface w i l l approach a random pattern at low d e n s i t i e s and as den- s i t y increases the d i s t r i b u t i o n of groups w i l l e x h i b it an increasingly regular pattern. In summary, I predicted that since other studies have shown that humans and other s o c i a l animals maintain c e r t a i n s p a t i a l requirements which are related to proper s o c i a l functioning, there should e x i s t a den- s i t y range over which people on a public beach would maximize the space between themselves and neighboring groups thus r e s u l t i n g in a uniform s p a t i a l pattern. - 15a - CHAPTER II INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES AND SPATIAL BEHAVIOUR: THE ROLE OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS. - 16 - Introduction. The hypotheses l i s t e d i n the preyious section were generated to aid i n determining how en t i r e populations of beach users behave. How- ever, describing aggregate behaviour does l i t t l e to explain hw d i f f e r - ences between i n d i v i d u a l s influence observed patterns of behaviour.. ' In order to determine some of the factors influencing the s p a t i a l behaviour of i n d i v i d u a l s , I chose to administer a survey to randomly selected samples of beach users at a v a r i e t y of d i f f e r e n t d e n s i t i e s . The choice of survey instruments included tests designed to assess a broad range of environ- mental d i s p o s i t i o n s , mood variables and socio-economic and demographic charac- t e r i s t i c s . Besides interpersonal distance measures, I also chose to inves- t i g a t e how the personal a t t r i b u t e s referred to above r e l a t e to the area circumscribed by an i n d i v i d i i a l ' s or group's personal possessions (marked group area). These objectives were oriented toward gaining an understand- ing of psychological and socio-demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s as related to various aspects of beach user spacing and group behaviour. The r o l e of personality. The l i t e r a t u r e r e l a t i n g to personality correlates of spacing behaviour i s s u b s t a n t i a l . In general, however, the studies show l i t t l e coherence, with lack of t h e o r e t i c a l underpinnings being the most l i k e l y cause (Altman, 1975). Other than H a l l ' s (1966) q u a l i t a t i v e observations and c r o s s - c u l t u r a l comparisons few models ex i s t which attempt to explain the role of personality i n personal space preferences. An early model by Argyle and Dean (1965) proposed an e q u i l i - brium hypothesis which suggested that behavioural s h i f t s occur to main- t a i n desired l e v e l s of intimacy and s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n . Thus such behav- iours as eye contact, body or i e n t a t i o n , f a c i n l expressions, etc., operate to create desired interpersonal distances which they suggested are commensurate with the type of s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n involved. - 17 - An a d d i t i o n a l attempt to develop a t h e o r e t i c a l approach to spacing behaviour was proposed by Duke and Norwicki (1972). They sug- gested that appropriate distancing behaviours are related to s o c i a l - learning models and that reinforcements act as the d r i v i n g force for learning c u l t u r a l l y defined spacing norms. Altman (1975) suggests that spacing behaviour i s , "one of a ser i e s of s e l f / o t h e r boundary mechanisms that function in the service of desired l e v e l s of i n t e r a c t i o n . " Central to Altman's hypothesis i s the concept of privacy as a boundary control process. According to Altman, one of the ways in which people achieve desired l e v e l s of privacy i s through the use of space. Personality c o r r e l a t e s . Of the s p e c i f i c studies r e l a t i n g personality and s p a t i a l behaviour, only two areas maintain any degree of consistency. The f i r s t concerns the e f f e c t of anxiety on interpersonal distance. In general, measures i n d i c a t i n g high l e v e l s of anxiety correlate with increased per- sonal distance (Smith, 1953, 1954; Luft, 1966; Weinstein, 1968; Patterson, 1973; Karabenich and Meisels, 1972; and Bailey, Hartnett, and Gibson, 1972). The second area of research where personality a t t r i b u t e s have been r e l a t e d to spacing behaviour comes from studies of the i n t r o v e r s i o n / extroversion complex. For the most part, subjects scoring highly on measures of extroversion are observed to maintain gloser i n d i v i d u a l distances than those with elevated i n t r o v e r s i o n p r o f i l e s (Williams, 1971; Cook, 1970; Patterson and Holmes, 19G6). In another study which related scores on "exhibitionism" and " i m p u l s i v i t y " scales, Sewoll (1973) reported a s i g n i f i c a n t negative c o r r e l a t i o n between tin? personality measures nnd distance. Contrary r e s u l t s , however, were obtained by Meisels and Canter (1970). - I R - F i n a l l y , a study dealing with a t t i t u d e s and perceptions of crowding on a public beach underscores the p o t e n t i a l importance of person- a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of users of a r e c r e a t i o n a l resource. This study, conducted by Meyer and Bryan (1974) at Long Beach, Vancouver Island, B r i t i s h Columbia attempted to c o r r e l a t e user responses r e l a t i n g perceived crowding to s i t e density. They found that most respondents f e l t the num- ber of people at t h e i r s i t e was "about r i g h t " . Since Long Beach i s ex- tensive with many s i t e s a v a i l a b l e , Meyer and Bryan concluded that users may have selected the s i t e which was consistent with personal crowding preferences. Although not s p e c i f i c a l l y tested by Meyer and Bryan, t h i s ex- planation i s central to questions r e l a t i n g to the present research. Implici t i n the p r e d i c t i o n that people select the density which i s comen- surate with spacing needs and preferences i s the notion that s i t e s e l e c - t i o n i s mediated through various personality processes within the i n d i v - i d u a l . In t h i s way, a user by having previous knowledge of when a beach was less or more crowded could choose the time of day or day of the week most l i k e l y to f u l f i l l basic i n t e r n a l needs. S i m i l a r l y , once at the beach the user may choose a section which i s more or l e s s crowded and situate at a comfortable distance from neighbors. The key question regarding the discussion above i s : "What are the most l i k e l y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the user which influence such decisions?" Since the l i t e r a t u r e contained no guiding theory and few studies leading to such theory I chose to use scales derived p r i n c i p a l l y from the f i e l d of environmental psychology. This d e c i s i o n was based on the argument that the ways in which people perceive and respond to the physical environment may o f f e r v a l i d insights into other behaviours relating to interpersonal functioning. For example, with reference to the present study, a person who manifests a p o s i t i v e o r i e n t a t i o n toward the high density urban envir- onment should be more l i k e l y to be observed at the beach during high den- s i t y periods or at shorter distances than someone who prefers the quiet and solitude of a more r u r a l environment. S i m i l a r l y , a person who affirms a preference f o r highly stimulating environments or a c t i v i t i e s should be observed i n closer proximity to others and at higher d e n s i t i e s than a respondent who i s t y p i c a l l y f e a r f u l of such environments. 'The main thrust of t h i s component of the study was to determine whether a v a r i e t y of personality and socio-economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of beach users are related to spacing preferences. Since I predicted e a r l i e r that due to the pressures associated with high density conditions, nearest neighbor distance would be constant at these times, the above preferences could only be e f f e c t i v e l y manifest at lower d e n s i t i e s when choices are not i n h i b i t e d by crowding influences. Thus the p r e d i c t i o n i s that at lower d e n s i t i e s users may se l e c t * a s i t e based on preferences mediated by personality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , whereas at high de n s i t i e s s i t e s e l e c t i o n i s a function of adaptational processes d i r e c t l y related to gaining the min- imum amount of space required for c o n t r o l l i n g s o c i a l i n t e r a t i o n between neighboring groups. The survey instruments. The survey instruments which I chose were designed to measure a respondent'sorientat ion toward various aspects of: 1) the physical and to a l e s s e r extent s o c i a l environment, 2) the rec r e a t i o n a l environ- ment, and 3) his own i n t e r n a l "moods" within the s e t t i n g . An a d d i t i o n a l section e l i c i t e d background information designed to tap important socio- economic and demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the user. Two of these tests, the Environmental Response Inventory (ERI) and the Leisure A c t i v i t i e s Blank (LAB) were developed by George McKechnie (1974). The mood scale was designed by Lorr, Daston and Smith (1967) and the background section was developed for the study by the author. A f a c s i m i l e of the survey occurs i n Appendix A. - 20 - The Environmental Response Inventory. The ERI was s p e c i f i c a l l y designed to assess what Craik (1966, 1969, 1970a, 1970b) has termed "environmental d i s p o s i t i o n s . " Environmental d i s p o s i t i o n s are defined as r e l a t i v e l y enduring psychological dimensions which are, used by the i n d i v i d u a l to describe and evaluate various aspects of the physical environment. The ERI consists of 184 statements which tap a d i v e r s i t y of environmental themes, most of which r e l a t e to the non-human environment. The remainder r e l a t e to various aspects of the human s o c i a l environment. The inventory y i e l d s scores on eight scales plus one test r e - l i a b i l i t y scale (termed communality) designed as a v a l i d i t y check for response bias. The nine scales and McKechnie's (1974) d e s c r i p t i o n of each are l i s t e d in Table 2. To f a c i l i t a t e the process of enumerating the hypotheses derived f o r the study I have also included in Table 2 a sign i n d i c a t i n g the predicted d i r e c t i o n of the c o r r e l a t i o n between each scale and the distance from a respondent and his or her nearest neighbor. In t h i s way for example, a respondent scoring highly on the Urbanism scale i s thus predicted to be found nearer than average to the closest neighboring group. This i s based on the argument that people reporting a p o s i t i v e o r i e n t a t i o n to high density urban environments should t o l e r a t e or even seek out settings where crowds are l i k e l y to occur. Similar arguments can be generated f o r the other eight scales as well. A more s p e c i f i c discussion of the scales and response format occurs in the section on methods. The Leisure A c t i v i t i e s Blank. The second part of the survey (Leisure A c t i v i t i e s Blank, LAB) consisted of a comprehensive range of l e i s u r e and rec r e a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s which subjects responded to on the basis of past p a r t i c i p a t i o n f o r each item. Through f a c t o r analysis McKechnie (1974) developed seven scales which he broadly c l a s s i f i e d as: Mechanics, Crafts, I n t e l l e c t u a l , Slow L i v i n g , Neighborhood Sports, Glamour Sports, and Fast L i v i n g . Table 3 l i s t s the a c t i v i t i e s and t h e i r f a c t o r loadings f o r each of the seven scales. The choice of the LAB f o r the present study was based on the argument that the a c t i v i t i e s a person v o l u n t a r i l y chooses to p a r t i c i p a t e Table 2: Environmental Response Inventory Scales (adapted from McKechnie, 1973) Scale and Major Themes: High Scorers often Described as: Low Scorers often Described as: PASTORALISM. (+) Opposition to land development: concern about population growth: preservation of natural forces as shapers of human l i f e : sensitivity to pure environmental experiences: self- sufficiency in the natural en- vironment. URBANISM. (-) Enjoyment of high density living; appre- ciation of unusual and varied stimulus patterns of the city; Interest in cultural l i f e ; en- joyment of interpersonal rich- ness and diversity. ENVIRONMENTAL ADAPTATION. (+) Modification of the environ- ment to satisfy needs and desires, and to provide com- fort and leisure: opposition to government control over private land use: preference for highly designed or adapted environments: use of tech- nolofry to solve environmental problems: preference for stylized environmental details. STIMULUS SEEKING. (-) Interest in travel and exploration of unusual places: enjoyment of complex and intense physical sensations; breadth of interests. Aesthetic, affectionate, compli- cated, distractible, outspoken, progressive, rebellious, uncon- ventional, unpredictable, selfish. C r i t i c a l , skeptical, responsive to urban aesthetics, high-brow, concerned with philosophical problems in l i f e , valuing Intel- tectual activity, managerial i n - terests. Autocratic, condescending, con- servative, efficient, inter- prising, extraverted, hard-headed, mannerly, methodical, power and money oriented, judgmental, aesthetically unresponsive. Advonturous, disorderly, dis- tractible, dreamy, easy-going, immature, impulsive, progressive, unconventional, ^independable. Apathetic, conscientious, con- servative, conventional, delib- erate, dependable, friendly, honest, practical, self-con- trolled. Conscientious, conventional, friendly, generous, non- verbal, opportunistic, robust, simple, unselfish. Artistic, awkward, compas- sionate, curious, distractible, idealistic, introspective, moody, non-conforming, sensitive, sensuous, worrying, forthright. Conscientious, conservative, fastidious, practical, res- ponsible, rigid, severe, stingy. Table 2 (continued) Scale and Major Themes: ENVIRONMENTAL TRUST. (-) General environmental openness, respon- siveness, and trust, competence in finding one's way about the environment . vs Fear of poten- t i a l l y dangerous environments: security of home: fear of being alone and unprotected. ANTIQUARIANISM. (-) Enjoyment of antiques and historical places: preference for tradi- tional vs modern design: aesthetic sensitivity to man- made environments and to land- scape; appreciation of cul- tural artifacts of earlier eras; tendency to collect ob- jects for their emotional significance. NEED FOR PRIVACY. ( + ) Need for physical isolation from stimuli: enjoyment of so l i - tude; dislike of neighboring; need for freedom from dis- traction. MECHANICAL ORIENTATION. . (+) Interest in mechanics in i t s various forms: enjoyment in working with one's hands, interest in technological processes and basic prin- ciples of science: app- reciation of the functional properties of objects. COMMUNALITY. ( + ) A Validity scale, tapping honest, attentive, and care- f u l test-taking attitude; response to items in statis- t i c a l l y modal manner. High Scorers often Described as: Low Scorers often Described as: Capable, competent, diligent, efficient, helpful, ingenious, resourceful, stable, thorough, tolerant, well-adjusted. Bitter, cold, coarse, dis- satisfied, distrustful, i n t o l - erant, moody, prejudiced, spendthrift, unkind. Affectionate, art i s t i c , change- able, dependent, dreamy, emotional, forgiving, ideal- i s t i c , introspective, aes- thetically reactive, warm. Coarse, cool, conservative, deliberate, mischievous, moralistic, practical, sky, stolid, unemotional. Aloof, arrogant, autocratic, bitter, cold, formal, hard- hearted, sulky, polished, resentful, stubborn. Appreciative, cooperative, easy-going, friendly, seeking reassurance, warm, seeks ac- ceptance, lacks confidence, introverted. Arrogant, conceited, ego- t i s t i c a l , hard-hearted, mas- culine, self-seeking, in- flexible, sociable, mani- pulative . Affectionate, feminine, generous, sincere, under- standing, submissive, sym- pathetic, warm. Calm, civilized, initiative, mannerly, patient, tactful, trusting, rule-following. Hard-headed, flirtatious, good looking, immature, opportun- i s t i c , versatile, witty, inde- pendent-minded, psychologically complex. Table 3 : Seven LEISURE ACTIVITIES BLANK - Past Factors (adapted from McKechnie, 1 9 7 4 ) Factor 1 : Mechanics Factor 2 : Crafts Loading* # Item Loading * •# Item . 3 2 7 2 A inn tour radio . 4 4 0 22 Ceramics or pottery . 3 5 3 6 Auto racing . 2 8 9 2 7 C o l l e c t i n g things . 7 2 2 7 Auto re p a i r i n g . 5 2 1 2 9 Cooking and baking . 4 5 5 13 B i l l i a r d s or pool . 3 0 1 3 0 Crossword puzzles . 516 18 Boxing . 4 4 6 3 1 Dancing ( b a l l e t , mod) . 3 1 1 19 Camping . 506 3 4 Designing clothes . 6 8 3 21 Carpentry . 4 7 6 43 Flower arranging . 4 8 8 3 7 E l e c t r o n i cs . 3 5 4 4 5 Folk dancing . 4 0 5 41 Fishing (saltwater) . 4 1 5 57 Home decorating . 4 8 4 42 Fishing (fresh) . 4 5 5 6 3 Jewelry making . 2 4 6 44 F l y i n g (or g l i d i n g ) . 4 1 2 6 4 Jig-saw puzzles . 4 2 3 6 0 Horseshoes . 5 3 9 6 9 Knitting-crocheting . 5 7 5 61 Hunting . 3 5 1 7 0 Leatherwork . 6 8 2 72 Marksmanship . 6 0 3 79 Needlework . 8 2 9 73 Mechanics . 4 3 5 8 0 Painting and drawing . 7 0 9 7 4 Metalwork . 3 5 1 91 Sculpture . 4 6 9 7 5 Model b u i l d i n g . 6 4 1 92 Sewing . 3 3 6 8 1 Playing poker . 4 9 3 1 1 5 Weaving . 5 2 4 1 1 1 Vol. f i r e f i g h t i n g . 4 1 0 116 Weight l i f t i n g . 523 1 1 8 Wrest 1ing . 6 2 2 121 Woodworking Factor 4 : Slow L i v i n g . 4 1 3 3 2 Social dancing Factor 3 : I n t e l l e c t u a l . 4 2 2 3 5 Dining out . 4 1 3 36 Driving . 3 2 9 1 Acting (dramatics) . 3 2 3 39 Exercising . 6 3 1 4 Attending concerts . 4 3 0 4 9 Gardening . 3 4 4 8 Backpacking . 4 9 7 50 Going to movies . 3 5 7 24 Chess . 3 8 0 71 Listening to radio . 4 4 2 26 C i v i c Organizations . 3 2 4 " 83 Playing records . 3 2 8 33 Darkroom work . 3 3 1 8 7 Reading: l i g h t . 7 0 5 51 Going to plays . 3 2 9 94 Sightseeing . 4 2 4 56 Hiking or walking . 4 7 6 98 S o c i a l drinking . 2 4 6 84 Musical instruments . 4 7 3 1 0 0 Sunbathing . 541 8 5 P o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t i e s , 2 8 8 1 0 4 Taking pictures . 4 2 6 86 Reading: serious . 4 5 0 1 0 5 Talking on telephone . 2 51 9 5 Singing . 4 7 2 1 0 9 V i s 1t i ng f r i end s . 3 5 3 107 Travel abroad . 3 4 0 1 1 2 Watch team sports . 5 4 8 1 0 8 Vi s i t ing museums . 4 5 3 113 Watch TV shows . 4 28 1 1 9 Writing poetry, etc. . 4 3 8 1 1 7 ' Window shopping . 4 9 4 28 Conservat ion-ecology . 3 4 7 1 2 0 Writing l e t t e r s * A 1 1 f a c t o r loadings reported here are p o s i t i v e . - '/A - Table 3: continued Factor 5: Neighborhood Sports Factor 6: Glamour Sports Loading * ff Item Loading * # I tern .407 9 Badminton .356 3 Archery .628 10 Baseball .430 15 Boating (rowing) .644 11 Basketball .439 20 Canoeing .355 12 B i c y c l i n g .339 59 Horseback r i d i n g .324 17 Bowling . 275 62 Ice Skating .370 23 Checkers or Go . 498 , 76 Motor Boating . 506 46 Football .372 77 Motorcycling . 402 65 Jogging .376 78 Mountain climbing .338 68 K i t e F l y i n g . 551 90 S a i l i n g .226 93 Shuffleboard i 550 96 Ski ing . 436 99 Squash or Handball .350 97 Skindiving .389 103 Ping pong a .455 101 Surfboard ing .540 110 V o l l e y b a l l . 410 102 Swimming .381 106 Tennis Factor 7: Fast L i v i n g . 583 114 Water s k i i n g .284 47 Fraternal organizations .419 48 Gambling (casino) .442 52 Going to Horseraces .354 53 Going to Nightclubs - 25 - in during periods of l e i s u r e time may be related to other personal psy- chological c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Evidence r e l a t i n g to t h i s argument stems from McKechnie's (1974) study where he was able to correlate each LAB factor with various Environmental Response Inventory scales, socio-economic and environmental attitu d e v a r i a b l e s . Based on these r e s u l t s he types high scores on each of the LAB factors i n the following manner: Mechanics: ". . . a rugged, mechanically-minded male, who enjoys the outdoors, working with his hands and getting away from home fo r periods of time." C r a f t s : " . . . a woman who enjoys doing things at home: decorating the house, making clothing f o r the family, or engaging i n other a c t i v i t i e s to make the home a cozy and emotionally s a t i s f y i n g place." I n t e l l e c t u a l : "A high scorer. . . i s from an educationally and econ- omically priviledged sector of society, enjoys the natural environment and desires to preserve i t , and devotes his l e i s u r e time to pursuing t h i s and other worthwhile community goals." Slow L i v i n g : ". . . a person for whom the home i s a refuge from com- muting to and f r o m a white c o l l a r job, who might r e l a x by sett- l i n g down on the patio and passively enjoying his periods of l e i sure." Neighborhood Sports: ". . . a young, well educated male who enjoys the outdoors so long as some sort of playing f i e l d i s nearby and a game i s on." Glamor Sports: "The person scoring high on Glamor Sports seems to l i k e getting out in the environment and enjoying the intense stim- u l a t i o n that such a c t i v i t i e s as motorcycling, waterskiing, and s a i l i n g can af f o r d . The high scorer on the factor i s t y p i c a l l y a young, well educated male; he i s pro-conservation and enjoys sports equipment as a means of stimulating environmental exper- ience." Fast L i v i n g : * Not typed by McKechnie since the fac t o r had but four item definers. Although McKechnie does not r e l a t e the LAB factors to personality t r a i t s per se the typology which he derives does show how people d i f f e r according to t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l l e i s u r e a c t i v i t y patterns. A study which did r e l a t e l e i s u r e a c t i v i t y patterns to person- a l i t y t r a i t s was conducted by Lamphear (1970). He noted that subjects with "normal" MMPI (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory) scores maintain recreation patterns which are s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from those with elevated p r o f i l e s . For the present study, predictions of spacing behaviour as i t corresponds to scores on the LAB were made based on the extent to which a c t i v i t i e s within a f a c t o r were predominantly oriented toward s o l i t a r y or individual, pastimes versus group a c t i v i t i e s of a more gregarious nature. This c r i t e r i o n led to the following predicted correlations between LAB f a c t o r scores and respondent nearest neighbor distance: Mechanics, Crafts, Slow L i v i n g , and Glamour Sports - larger distance to nearest neighbor; Neighborhood Sports and Fast L i v i n g - smaller distance to nearest neighbor. A p r e d i c t i o n of spacing and the I n t e l l e c t u a l f a c t o r was not made since the a c t i v i t i e s seemed to be evenly s p l i t with respect to the s e l e c t i o n c r i t e r i o n Mood Adjective Checklist. The mood scale consists of s i x t y adjectives which, when sub- jected to f a c t o r analysis by Lorr, Daston & Smith (1967) produced eight i d e n t i f i a b l e mood factors (Table 4). These they termed: Cheerful, Energetic, A n g e r - h o s t i l i t y , Tense-anxious, Depressed, Inert-fatigued, Thoughtful, and Relaxed-composed. Since the other portions of the survey were included to assess more enduring psychological dimensions which might r e l a t e to s p a t i a l behaviour, the mood adjective c h e c k l i s t was i n - serted as a way of measuring more momentary and transient:aspects of a subject's psychological p r o f i l e . In t h i s way I hoped to determine the extent to which a respondent's mood was influenced by the l e v e l of s p a t i a l press due to the proximity of others. One might expect, f o r example that a respondent who had chosen a s i t e well away from more crowded por- tions of the beach and who had been subsequently intruded upon by another group would show elevated scores on the more "negative" mood varia b l e s . Although, i t was not possible to know when such a scenario occurred the c o r r e l a t i o n between the mood variables and distance measures would indicate, in a r e l a t i v e way, the extent that t h i s and s i m i l a r s i t u a t i o n s prevailed. A f i n a l aspect of the survey related to the decision to make the mood c h e c k l i s t an optional feature of the questional re package. Since the time required to complete the survey was lengthy (about 35 - 40 min- utes), I reasoned that i f a respondent was not enjoying the beach exper- ience p r i o r to f i l l i n g out the survey then he would be less l i k e l y to Table 4: Correlations of the Adjectives with Eight Mood Factors (Adapted from Lorr et a.l, 1967). ' Factor 1: Cheerful Factor 2: Energetic Loading ff Item Loading ff I tern .70 • E l a t e d .62 1 Active .69 35 On top of the world . 56 42 Energetic .60 6 Excited .54 38 F u l l of pep .56 39 Light-hearted .53 50 A l e r t .56 49 Carefree .51 24 Vigorous ,.54 12 Gay .50 55 L i v e l y . 52 2 Cheerful .44 47 Enthusiastic .51 34 Happy-go-lucky .34 9 Pretty good .33 58 Optimistic „ Factor 3 : A n g e r - H o s t i l i t y Factor 4: Tense-Anxious .68 27 Furious .59 10 Nervous .67 13 Annoyed .53 51 Anxious .65 5 Angry .39 53 Shaky .45 54 S p i t e f u l .36 59 Worried .45 15 Resentful .36 3 J i t t e r y . 44 48 Ready to f i g h t .31 26 Tense .41 7 Bad-tempered .30 9 On edge .33 52 Grouchy Factor 5 : Thoughtful Factor 6 : Depressed .62 30 Introspective .61 36 Hopeless . 58 33 Thoughtful .59 16 Helpless . 56 22 Contemplative . 57 19 Worthless . 55 11 Pensive .36 46 Unhappy .40 14 Earnest .32 44 Lonely .35 25 Serious .29 56 Blue .32 32 Preoccupied .28 20 Frightened .26 8 Apathetic Factor 7 : Inert-Fatigued Factor 8: Relaxed-Composed .66 37 Weary .59 21 Calm .66 40 Tired .52 45 At ease .43 17 Sluggish .44 43 Composed .38 60 Lethargic .44 41 Relaxed .38 31 Lazy .34 18 Serene .25 57 L i s t l e s s .29 23 Nonchalant .28 28 Languid •'Elated' deleted from present survey as i t was mis-typed 'hated'. - 28 - complete the f i n a l segment i f given a choice. Thus to the extent that crowding influences are related to a decrement i n user s a t i s f a c t i o n , I predicted that a respondent who chooses not to f i l l out the mood survey would be found at high d e n s i t i e s and thus small nearest neighbor distances. Socio-economic and demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Questions r e l a t i n g to a respondent's socio-economic background were included to determine the extent to which such variables as age, sex, marital status, income, etc. were related to s p a t i a l and group behaviour as well as a way of describing the sample. - 2 8 a - CHAPTER III An Approach to the Study of Human S p a t i a l Behaviour: METHODS AND APPLICATIONS The study areas. Three beaches were chosen ns s u i t a b l e environments for the pur- poses of the study. The s i t e s chosen were r e l a t i v e l y d i s t i n c t i v e thus ensuring as comprehensive a data base as possible. Two of these areas, English Bay beach and a grassy, sunning area near K i t s i l a n o beach are located near the center of Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia (49° 17' No. Lat., 123° 8' Long.). The t h i r d s i t e i s located on Skaha Lake near the c i t y of Pent i c t i o n , B r i t i s h Columbia (49° 27' No. Lat., 119° 36' Long.). Maps depicting- the three areas are shown i n figures 1 and 2. English Bay i s a gently curving, sand beach with the ocean along the western edge. The beach i s characterized by two d i s t i n c t i v e areas, one of which contains logs placed i n p a r a l l e l rows by the l o c a l parks board. Beach users u t i l i z e these logs as back supports and as a r e s u l t , d i s t r i b u t i o n s of users i n t h i s area tends to be l i n e a r . This area runs p a r a l l e l to the shoreline and i s situated on the landward ha l f of the beach. The other area nearer the ocean, has no logs and i s thus free from such environmental influences. Since the research required a uniform envir onment i t was t h i s l a t t e r s i t e which was chosen as the study area. The dimensions of t h i s section of the beach are approximately 470 meters by 12 to 43 meters depending on the l e v e l of the t i d e . The average area as calculated from the a e r i a l photographs was 1.20 hectares. The s i t e a lso contained a c e n t r a l l y located beach house/refresh- ment stand. Access to the beach was varied with some on street parking and a parking l o t located near the south-east end. The second study s i t e , K i t s i l a n o , i s a complex area of ocean fronted beach containing "backrest" logs and two adjacent rectangular sunning areas covered with grass rather than sand. The southern-most sunning area was chosen because of i t s uniformity, wide range of density (over time) and basic rectangular shape. The area i s 146 x 31 meters (.453 hectares)and i s v i r t u a l l y free from physical obstructions such as back rest logs which might act to influence spacing behaviour. A small exception i s a pathway sl a n t i n g diagonally across the east end. Entrance i s open except on the north and south where a seawall and a fence respec- t i v e l y l i m i t d i r e c t access. A parking l o t e x i s t s near the east end and a refreshment stand i s situated on the west. - 30 - Figure 1. Map depicting K i t s i l a n o and English Bay study areas. - 31 - Figure 2. Map depicting Skaha study area. The study s i t e at Penticton (Skaha beach) i s the middle of three beaches on the north shore of Skaha Lnke. The study area dimensions are 260 x 25 meters (.54 hectares). A refreshment stand i s located on the landward side near the mid-point and access i s not l i m i t e d . Skaha was chosen because of i t s uniform character and because most users are vacationers and originate outside the immediate area. In fac t the survey revealed that over 95% of a l l respondents did not reside i n or near the c i t y of Penticton. In summary, the three s i t e s were chosen for t h e i r e s s e n t i a l l y within beach uniform character, although c e r t a i n aspects such as substrate type and refreshment stand l o c a t i o n d i f f e r e d between beaches. A e r i a l Photography. Data concerning s p a t i a l behaviour and group phenomena were c o l - lected v i a a e r i a l photography. This technique although complicated and prone to mechanical problems was chosen over others because of i t s a b i l i t y to produce large q u a n t i t i e s of date quickly as well as the r e l a t i v e ease with which the information can be d i g i t i z e d for.computer analysis. Another important aspect was that data could be co l l e c t e d unobtrusively so that a l l behaviour i s observed as 'natural' and thus uninfluenced by the observer. Before o u t l i n i n g the methodology, three terms are operationally defined f o r purposes of c l a r i t y : 1) group - any set of i n t e r a c t i n g i n - d i v i d u a l s situated i n close proximity to one another so as to form an eas- i l y recognizable unit (for most purposes a lone i n d i v i d u a l i s also l a b e l l e d a group except where i t i s important to d i s t i n g u i s h between single persons and larger numbers of people), 2) run - any a e r i a l photographic pass over the study area which resulted i n a complete record of the beach and Its users, and 3) boundary - the geographical l i m i t s of the beach or sunning area except i n the case of English Bay where only that portion of the beach between backrest logs and the water was used. Although a e r i a l photography i s often a complex and rather costly undertaking, a method was devised which s a t i s f i e d the requirements of the research and was at the same time only moderately expensive. Of the 27 runs f i n a l l y used with the analysis, 23 were completed without the use of commercial a e r i a l photographic techniques or equipment. The method ent a i l e d the use of a l i g h t a i r c r a f t (Cessna 150) - 33 - converted f o r a e r i a l photographic purposes by removing both doors. This pra c t i c e provided the required v i s i b i l i t y f o r both p i l o t and photograph- er where the key to a successful run was the maintenance of the proper f l i g h t path d i r e c t l y above the study area. The camera, a 35 mm, motorized Nikon, equipped with a 135 mm lens was hand held and set to maintain a f i l m t r a n s f e r rate of 2.5 frames per second. At a f l i g h t a l t i t u d e of 305 meters (1,000 f e e t ) , t h i s equip- ment provided a good image of people and most of t h e i r beach a r t i c l e s . With an airspeed of 113-145 Km per hour (70-90 miles per hour) there was s u f f i c i e n t interframe overlap to ensure a complete record of the beach on any given run. In order to scale the photographs for any given run three ob- j e c t s such as sidewalks, diving platforms, s l i d e s , etc, were chosen as environmental features e a s i l y v i s i b l e within the photograph and permanent enough not to be moved during the duration of the study. Two of the ob- j e c t s were located at the respective ends of any given beach and a t h i r d was situated i n the middle. A conversion f a c t o r wa s obtained f o r each of the three objects by d i v i d i n g the known ground dimension of the ob- j e c t by i t s corresponding image dimension. In order to minimize errors due to a l t i t u d e f l u c t u a t i o n s the three conversion factors were averaged to obtain the f i n a l conversion value. These errors were minimal as the d i f f e r e n c e between the two most d i f f e r e n t values f o r any given run, was most often two to three percent and only once approached ten percent. A l l f i l m analyses were completed using a Vanguard motion anal- yzer and DEC 11/45 computer. The motion analyzer i s designed so that a single photographic frame i s projected onto an opaque glass screen. Two t h i n wires running at righ t angles to each other act as cross-hairs and t h e i r movement i s controlled by the r o t a t i o n of two knobs on the console. By moving the cross-hairs over the screen to tip desired point and by a c t i v a t i n g a switch, the X, Y co-ordinates of the point are trans- ferred onto computer compatible paper punch tape. By d i g i t i z i n g around the perimeter of a group or i n d i v i d u a l as indicated by t h e i r physical belongings I was able to construct a representation of each group's s p a t i a l boundaries. This process was carried out f o r every group on the beach. The program designed f o r the project connects the points for any given group i n such a way as to construct an i r r e g u l a r polygon. The area subtended by each polygon was defined as the 'marked group area' f o r any given group. Since the motion analyzer was not i n f a l l i b l e , a l l polygons (group areas) were plotted using a standard calcomplotter and as a r e s u l t of t h i s process large errors due to d i g i t i z e r malfunctions could be detected by v i s u a l inspection of the completed maps. Since i t takes many frames to compose one beach image, i t was necessary to subtract the overlap from each p a i r of frames. This was done by d i g i t i z i n g s i x recognizable points (objects on the beach surface) within each frame, three at the 'top' and three at the 'bottom'. Each set of three points was picked such that one was at the extreme l e f t of the frame, one i n the middle and one on the extreme r i g h t . A f t e r the analysis of that frame the 'lower' three points were found on the 'top' of the next frame and t h e i r positions placed on the tape. At t h i s time the points were chosen and punched f o r the next frame at the 'bottom' of the frame currently being analyzed. The three distances between corres- ponding points on adjacent frames were then averaged. This average d i s t - ance between corresponding points on adjacent frames was thus the amount of overlap f o r each frame. Averaging the distances of the widely separate points was done to minimize errors due to lens abberation and possible deviations r e s u l t i n g from the a i r c r a f t not maintaining i t s p o s i t i o n d i r - e c t l y above the study s i t e . These errors were thought to be samll since a high q u a l i t y lens was used and care was taken to maintain a f l i g h t path d i r e c t l y above the beach. In addition to the d i g i t i z i n g process the number of people in each group was entered into the record. For t h i s study i t was generally easy to determine what did and what did not define a group, although one can v i s u a l i z e an area so crowded that group d e f i n i t i o n s by purely photo- graphic means becomes d i f f i c u l t . Such d e n s i t i e s were not observed and i n most circumstances the placement of beach a r t i c l e s was s u f f i c i e n t to dem- arcate one group from another. In order to determine the o v e r a l l beach density during a run the area of each beach was required. This was obtained by d i g i t i z i n g around the perimeter of that portion of the study plot represented on one frame. These points were then taken as the v e r t i c e s of a polygon and the area computed. - 35 - This process was completed for each frame with care taken to superimpose adjacent sides of each pair of contiguous polygons. Again these values are plotted to validate data transcription and the result- ing polygons fitted together to represent the outline of the study area. This process was necessary once only for Skaha and Kitsilano . However, since English Bay is located directly on the ocean, a. separate area compu- tation for each run was required due to/changes in the tide level. Pattern Analysis. The analysis of pattern originated with and has been developed primarily through work of ecologists and biometricians. Gleason (1920) was the f i r s t to develop a method describing pattern type using sample quadrats and the Poisson series. Criticism of techniques u t i l i z i n g quadrat methods center around the influence of quadrat size on frequency data (Curtis and Mcintosh, 1950; Skellam, 1952) and because of these criticisms, newer techniques were used for this study. Another technique widely used by ecologists is the distance to nearest neighbor technique. This method of pattern analysis was origin- ated by Dice (1952) and subsequently elaborated upon by Skellam (1952), Clark and Evans (1954), Morisita (1954) and Thompson (1956). This tech- nique was used for the present study since i t is the most accepted and widely used method of pattern analysis and since nearest neighbor dis- tances were easily calculated from the aerial photographs. The method as described by Clark and Evans (1954) consists of measuring the distance between an individual and his nearest neighbor, where individuals are chosen by some random process. An alternate method involves calculating the distance between individuals and their nearest neighbors for a l l members of the population. Of course, this variation only applies when the population is discrete and small enough that such measurement is feasible. Such was the case for this study, so that near- est neighbor distances for a l l groups on a beach for any given run were measured. Here a "run" refers to a photographic sequence of the entire length of a beach. The pattern s a t i s t i c *'R' is defined by Clark and Evans (1954) from the ratio of the observed to expected mean nearest neighbor distance 36 - such that R= r /v , where r i s equal to the mean observed nearest nelgh-o e o bor distance and r i s equal to the mean expected nearest neighbor distance. e - The mean expected nearest neighbor distance (r ) i s the mean distance e ' which would be expected i f the population i n question were d i s t r i b u t e d at random. Clark and Evans show that r i s equal to 1/2 \/d~7 where d equals e the density in i n d i v i d u a l s per unit area. The value of R i s shown by Clark and Evans to exhibit a l i m i t e d range with a lower l i m i t of zero and an upper l i m i t of 2.1491. Thus p e r f e c t l y random, aggregated or regu- l a r patterns are described re s p e c t i v e l y , by R values of 1, 0, and 2.1491. Maximum aggregation occurs when a l l members of a population f a l l on the same locus and thus the mean distance to nearest neighbor i s zero. Per- fe c t uniformity e x i s t s when i n t e r - i n d i v i d u a l distance i s maximized. Un- der these conditions a hexagonal pattern i s formed and each member of the population (except those at the periphery) w i l l be equidistant from s i x other i n d i v i d u a l s . A test of the s i g n i f i c a n t departure of from r i s assesed by l e t t i n g Z equal the standard v a r i a t e of the normal curve such that Z = ( r - r ) / r j r , where O r equals the standard error of the mean d i s -o e e e tance to nearest neighbor in a randomly d i s t r i b u t e d population of the same density as the observed. The standard error ( O r )' as derived by Clark and Evans (1954) i s expressed as: . a r ' = 0.26136/ /nd , e where n equals the number of measurements and d i s the density. Another study of spacing behaviour of beach users has shown that the upper l i m i t of R i s influenced by l i n e a r environments such as beaches when d e n s i t i e s are low (Brougham, 1968). This i s based on the fact that under such conditions the primary assumptions associated with the nearest neighbor distance s t a t i s t i c : are v i o l a t e d . The de r i v a t i o n of the formulae f o r r and also the upper l i m i t of the R s t a t i s t i c , 2.1491, are based e upon the assumptions of an i n f i n i t e number of points and an unbounded surface. These assumptions are ra r e l y , i f ever met in pr a c t i c e . However, when the v i o l a t i o n i s extreme such as i n Figures 3, 4, and 5 a hexagonal d i s t r i b u t i o n does not maximize the spacing between points. r 37 - Figure 3. The distance between points i s not maximized by a hexagonal pattern. (Adapted from Brougham, 1968) • • • Figure 4. A pattern of e q u i l a t e r a l t r i a n g l e s maximizes the inter-point distance. • • • • • Figure 5. With more points i n the same area, a pattern of squares maximizes the distance. -38 - In a test of the e f f e c t of a l i n e a r , bounded surface with few points (81 points i n an area 40" x 0.866")' Brougham found that with a d i s t r i b u t i o n s i m i l a r to the one in F i g . 3, an R s t a t i s t i c of 3.0590 was obtained, a considerable deviation from the t h e o r e t i c a l maximum value of 2.1491. Since English Bay, K i t s i l a n o and Skaha beaches r e f l e c t vary- ing degrees of l i n e a r i t y and since much of the work depended upon an accurate assessment of pattern, the following procedure was developed: Because r e must be an unbiased estimate of the mean distance between points scattered by some random process, a Monte Carlo simulation routine was used to place points across a rectangular representation of each beach. Although English Bay beach was not exactly rectangular, i t was so considered f o r the purpose of the simulation. Errors introduced by t h i s s i m p l i f i c a t i o n seems small since the beach i s a long, gently curving beach and i s probably perceived as rectangular by users. For each run, the length and average width (with the same area as the actual beach in question was entered with the observed number of groups. For example, English Bay run number ten was observed to maintain an area of approxim- ately 12,690 square meters (a length of 470 meters and an average width of 27 meters). For purposes of the simulation, the values used were the untransformed screen dimensions, i . e . the dimensions as taken from the projected image on the motion analyzer. The above values were: length = 152 cm., average width = 9 cm. and area = 1,368 square cm. The number of groups f o r run number ten as observed from the f i l m was 76. Given the area dimensions and the number of groups the model was programmed to scatt e r these groups as points (centroids of polygons) in a random fash- ion over the a v a i l a b l e area. This process was i t e r a t e d 100 times and f o r each i t e r a t i o n the average observed one to four nearest neighbor distances was calculated. This process was completed f o r a l l 27 runs and as a r e s u l t of the i t e r a t i v e procedure each simulation produced a sampling d i s t r i b u t i o n of means and therefore a r e l i a b l e estimate of the true pop- u l a t i o n mean nearest neighbor distance for each of the four orders. In addition, the process allows one to calculate the standard error of sample means ( a r ) to be used i n place of the t h e o r e t i c a l value as derived from s the Clark and Evans method. The simulated mean nearest neighbor distance - 39 - f o r each run then becomes the expected value, r , f o r that same run. e The Clark and Evans model i s therefore: R = r / r O S where r equals the mean of the simulated sampling d i s t r i b u t i o n of the mean. The r e s u l t s indicated'a d i f f e r e n c e between the simulated and t h e o r e t i c a l values e s p e c i a l l y at low d e n s i t i e s and thus the method seems of worth f o r studies with s i m i l a r p h y s i c a l constraints. Since a large number of R values were calculated, an e f f o r t was made to s i m p l i f y comparisons between runs by normalizing R according to the formula: Z„ = (r - r )/ n r R o s G s Using t h i s formula any Z value between - 1,96 indicates a random s p a t i a l pattern at the 0.05 p r o b a b i l i t y l e v e l . Any value greater than 1.96 was considered a r e f l e c t i o n of a regular pattern and any value less than -1.96 was considered clumped or aggregated. Two s t r a t e g i e s were employed to calculate the distance to near- est neighbor: (1) the centroid of each polygon was calculated and used as a point source f o r the 'R' s t a t i s t i c , and (2) 'nearest approach distance' calculated as the distance between the edges of any two nearest neighbor polygons. I predicted that the l a t t e r distance would be m o f e r e s p o n s i v e to any possible i n t e r a c t i v e e f f e c t s due to psychological variables than the d i s - tance between group area centroids. This p r e d i c t i o n was based upon reas- oning which supposed that an i n d i v i d u a l or group probably decided where to ' s e t t l e ' on the basis of distances between edges of groups rather than on center to center distances. The nearest approach distance was used as a dependent v a r i a b l e i n that portion of the study designed to determine possible s p a t i a l group correlates of the various psychological indices; how- ever, i t s use in the analysis of pattern was precluded for t h e o r e t i c a l rea- sons. For example, in a recent paper Mohn and Stavem (1974) showed that f o r a Monte Carlo simulation of randomly sp aced discs (red blood c e l l s ) in a haemocytometer, the poisson, binominal and hypergeometric models provided poor f i t s to the data. Although two of t h e i r models f i t t e d the empirical r e s u l t s reasonably well, the f a c t that the sizes of the discs were r e l a t i v e l y - 40 - uniform made t h e i r use i n the present study d i f f i c u l t since the group areas were thought to be too variable to be applicable to t h e i r models. Space-time study. Since external features of the beaches such as bath houses, parking l o t s and refreshment stands seemed to exert a ce r t a i n amount of influence over the general d i s t r i b u t i o n patterns of beach users, an e f f o r t was made to determine the r e l a t i v e e f f e c t s of these aspects of the beach environment. To maximize the range of observed d e n s i t i e s the study took place at the K i t s i l a n o s i t e on a Saturday when crowds were expected to be large. As mentioned previously, the K i t s i l a n o study area extends in an east west d i r e c t i o n with a parking l o t near the east end and r e f r e s h - ment stand adjacent to the west end. Since these two features were at opposite ends of the beach, i t was possible to determine t h e i r r e l a t i v e e f f e c t s . To determine the s p a t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of i s ers as the day pro- gressed, hourly maps were made. To f a c i l i t a t e the mapping, the study s i t e was divided into 20 quadrats 15.2 meters on a side with the outside corners marked with engineer tape. Maps were drawn to scale and at the appointed time the p o s i t i o n and number of people in each group were placed on the sheet. The f i r s t census commenced at 1030 hours and a f i n a l count was made at 1530 hours, making a t o t a l of s i x separate enumerations. Plots of these data thus provided a time-series of the placement of each group over the study area. In t h i s way e f f e c t s due to environmental fea- tures such as the refreshment stand, parking l o t and swimming pool could be ascertained. Survey dissemination. Two main factors influenced the choice of sampling methods for t h i s phase of the research. F i r s t , since one of the primary goals of the study depended upon the coincident gathering of both overt and behavioural data r e l a t i n g to the d i s t r i b u t i o n of beach users as well as subjective responses concerning various psychological variables, i t was necessary to coordinate the a e r i a l photography with the d i s p e r s a l of the survey - 41 - booklets. This was accomplished by having the person d i s t r i b u t i n g the surveys (surveyor), telephone the a i r p o r t when the appropriate density was observed. At t h i s time, the surveyor began d i s t r i b u t i n g the booklets. When t h i s was completed, a large b r i g h t l y colored marker panel was s i t - uated in a predetermined spot thus s i g n a l l i n g the a e r i a l photographer to begin the photographic run over the study area. This method was found to work well except f o r low density s i t u a t i o n s . On most: days the length of time which passed between low to medium density conditions was so short that a surveyor might begin handing out surveys at a low density, but by the time the a e r i a l photographs were taken, enough new beach users had arr i v e d as to make the density f a l l within the medium range. This problem was la r g e l y overcome by sampling on weekdays when the beach did not f i l l as f a s t . The second aspect of the study areas which determined sampling procedures was the extreme length to width r a t i o of two of the three study s i t e s . Because of t h i s problem English Bay and Skaha were sampled i n a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t manner than K i t s i l a n o . The method developed for K i t s i l a n o consisted of d i v i d i n g the sunning area into six equally spaced 'lanes' which ran the length of the study s i t e . Prior to d i s t r i b u t i n g ' the booklets, the surveyor picked a number between one and s i x from a hat and used the corresponding imaginary l i n e as the sampling transect. The surveyor then proceeded to d i s t r i b u t e the booklets by pac- ing a prescribed number of paces. The person chosen was the closest i n d i v i d u a l in.the closest group within the forward 180° v i s i o n of the surveyor. If the person declined to complete the survey, the next closest group was chosen , and so on. A f t e r a subject had agreed to complete the questionaire, the surveyor returned to the transect and again paced the re- quired number of steps before approaching the next po t e n t i a l respondent. This process was continued u n t i l ten surveys had been given out or, as happened occasionally at low d e n s i t i e s , everyone had been asked. The number of paces between stops was determined'by the length of the study area such that in most cases the complete length of the beach was surveyed. - 42 - This process was modified for English Bay and Skaha since they were so narrow that choosing 'lanes' was impractical. For these beaches the surveyor picked a midline path f o r the sampling transect and as with K i t s i l a n o used the pacing technique to d i s t r i b u t e the surveys evenly over, the length of the beach. The most important aspect of the dissemination of surveys was the need to assure that the respondents would be v i s u a l l y i d e n t i f i a b l e i n the a e r i a l photograph. This was accomplished with the aid of two foot square black and white marker panels, each with a d i s t i n c t i v e pat- tern. A f t e r a p o t e n t i a l respondent had been t o l d of the purpose of the research, and had accepted the i n v i t a t i o n to f i l l out the survey, the per- son d i s t r i b u t i n g the surveys staked down the d i s t i n c t i v e panel beside the i n d i v i d u a l or group .and placed the corresponding marker panel symbol on the cover of the survey. Since the panel was v i s i b l e i n the a e r i a l photo- graph, each subject's responses on the survey could be correlated with his or her s p a t i a l and group c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . V i r t u a l l y no one questioned the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the panel, apparently b e l i e v i n g i t was necessary to guide the surveyor back to the spot when c o l l e c t i n g the surveys. The cover of the survey booklet contained a t i t l e 'Recreational A t t i t u d e Survey' as well as the purpose of the research and a short l i s t of i n s t r u c t i o n s . The planning aspects of the survey was implied by the l a b e l 'School of Community and Regional Planning, University of B r i t i s h Columbia.' The front cover also contained blanks for information which the surveyor obtained d i r e c t l y from the respondent. The l i g h t i n t e n s i t y on the beaches was c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y high. To reduce eyestrain, the booklet was printed on blue paper. Psychological and demographic information. B r i e f l y again, the survey of personal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s consis- ted of four parts: the Environmental Response Inventory (ERI), the L e i - sure A c t i v i t i e s Blank (LAB),and a socio/demographic section and a mood adjective c h e c k l i s t (MACL). The ERI, LAB and socio/demographic p r o f i l e were included to tap the more stable psychological dimensions, whereas the adjective c h e c k l i s t measured more transient mood states. - 4 3 - The Environmental Response Inventory. The ERI consists of 184 statements or items which pertain to various aspects of designed and natural environments. To respond to these statements a subject c i r c l e s the extent to which they agree or disagree with the item according to the following pattern: 1) SA = strongly agree, 2) A = agrees, 3) N = neutral, 4) D = disagree, and 5) SD = strongly disagree. On the basis of each subject's response pattern, a numerical score i s obtained f o r the nine separate factors or d i s p o s i t i o n s . Documented on pages 21 and ,22.. Leisure A c t i v i t i e s Blank. McKechnie's (1973) stated goal in producing the IAB was to present "a summary picture of a respondent's self-reported past recrea- t i o n and l e i s u r e behaviours." This he accomplished by developing a l i s t of 121 l e i s u r e a c t i v i t i e s which he f e l t comprehensively surveyed the cur- ren t l y popular recreation pastimes i n the United States. The response format used in the present study i s s i m i l a r to the one developed by McKechnie except where he used a four point response scale, I used f i v e . The response format which d i f f e r e d from McKechnie's was, " you occasion- a l l y p a r t i c i p a t e i n the a c t i v i t y at t h i s time." The addition of t h i s statement allowed for f i v e response types and thus conformed with the ERI i n t h i s regard. The response format was developed as follows: Below i s a l i s t of l e i s u r e and rec r e a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s . For each a c t i v i t y indicate the extent of your p a r t i c i p a t i o n using the following system: N - You have never engaged in the a c t i v i t y . T - You t r i e d i t once or a few times. U - You used to do i t re g u l a r l y , but not no longer do i t re g u l a r l y . 0 - You occasionally p a r t i c i p a t e in the a c t i v i t y at t h i s time. . R - You currently p a r t i c i p a t e regularly i n the a c t i v i t y . Check the appropriate blank to indicate your p a r t i c - i p a t i o n i n each o,f the following a c t i v i t i e s : In a d d i t i o n to the 121 l e i s u r e a c t i v i t i e s space was provided for a d d i t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s which the respondent p a r t i c i p a t e d in but which was not included i n the l i s t . In McKechnie's sample of 288 subjects and f o r the present study only a few a d d i t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s were mentioned. Socio-economic Variables. In order to ascertain the degree of asso c i a t i o n between demogra- phic and socio-economic variables with beach behaviour, a series of ten questions concerning the following categories were asked: 1. age 2. sex 3. marital status 4. number of children 5. number of s i b l i n g s 6. education 7. number of years r e s i d i n g i n s i x d i f f e r e n t sizes of urban centres (6 variables) 8. number of automobiles 9. occupation 10. household income An a d d i t i o n a l question tapped the amount of l e i s u r e time spent i n the urban environment, and i n r u r a l environments. This v a r i a b l e was included to test whether persons who spend a majority of t h e i r time i n non-urban a c t i v i t i e s have a higher need f o r space than those p a r t i c i p a - t i n g i n predominantly urban a c t i v i t i e s . Mood Adjective Checklist. The mood adjective c h e c k l i s t was developed by Lorr et a l (1967). This survey consists of 60 adjectives which act as descriptors of various mood conditions. When these adjectives were factor analyzed by Lorr and his associates, eight factors emerged. Individual factors are l i s t e d on page 27. The survey used f o r the present research used only 59 adjectives rather than 60, since the adjective 'elated' was mis-typed as 'hated' and as a consequence was dropped from the analysis. A re - f a c t o r i n g of the adjectives as used for tlie present study produced e s s e n t i a l l y the same factors as Lorr et a l (1967) and as n r e s u l t t h e i r f a c t ors were used to c a l c u l a t e respondent scores f o r the mood scale. The c h e c k l i s t was made as an optional part of the survey, and each respondent chose whether he wished to complete t h i s section. This f i n a l section was t i t l e d an 'Optional Word L i s t Survey' and the response format was as follows: If you f e e l you have any extra time there i s an optional survey below which consists of 60 words which describe how you may f e e l at t h i s time. The survey takes about f i v e minutes, and i s designed to measure your personal f e e l - ings at t h i s time. If you wish to complete the survey, f o r each word merely c i r c l e the number which best indicates how you f e e l at t h i s moment according to the following scheme: 1. Not at a l l 2. A l i t t l e 3. Moderately 4. Strongly 5. Extremely Work quickly — f i r s t impressions are usually the most accurate. Each adjective was followed by numbers from one to f i v e and a respondent merely c i r c l e d the number most nearly approximating his immed- iate f e e l i n g s . -. 45a - CHAPTER IV SPACING BEHAVIOUR ON PUBLIC BEACHES: ANALYSIS OF RESULTS. - 46 - User d i s t r i b u t i o n and external environmental features. A primary assumption of t h i s study was that a beach represents an i s o t r o p i c environment free from a r t i f a c t u a l constraints. However, i n i t i a l observations suggested that users did respond to c e r t a i n aspects of the beach environment, namely, bath houses, parking l o t s , and r e f r e s h - ment stands, e s p e c i a l l y at lower d e n s i t i e s . In an attempt to quantify these observations I c a r r i e d out a space-time study of the d i s t r i b u t i o n a l pattern of users f o r the K i t s i l a n o s i t e f o r one complete day. (See methods) The r e s u l t s of the census are represented by s i x separate plots (Figs. 6 -11), each the r e s u l t of a single hourly census. A group's pos- i t i o n i s indicated by a dot and the diameter of the dot i s proportional to the number of persons i n the group. Only those groups which were act- u a l l y present during any one census are represented by each f i g u r e . Referring to the figures i n succession, the f i r s t people to a r r i v e tend to locate near the west end, close to the refreshment stand and d e n s i t i e s continue to be higher i n t h i s area throughout the day. It also seems that larger sized groups tend to concentrate i n t h i s area as w e l l . Although these r e s u l t s tend to suggest that f o r K i t s i l a n o there are behavioural e f f e c t s due to c e r t a i n physical structures surround- ing the beach, l a t e r r e s u l t s indicate that the e f f e c t i s s l i g h t since at no time did the pattern s t a t i s t i c (R) suggest an aggregated pattern was present f o r any of the three beaches studied. The most probable explan- ati o n i s that environmental features such as refreshment stands exert a small a t t r a c t i v e force but the repellent force of s i t u a t i n g near other groups quickly becomes the dominant determinant in the s i t e s e l e c t i o n process of newly a r r i v i n g groups. Density and s p a t i a l pattern. The t e s t i n g of the f i r s t hypothesis and i t s c o r o l l a r y are the subject of t h i s and the following section. To re-orient the reader they are restated below: - 4 7 - Figures G - 11. Sp a t i a l chni-acteri s I ics of bench u s e r s o v e r time Figure 6. Time - 1030 hours, Density - 11 grOups/hectare Figure 7. Time - 1130 hours, Density - 4 2 groups/hectare • • • Figure 8 . Time - 1230 hours, Density - 86 groups/hectare - 4 8 - F i g u r e 9. Time - 1330 hours, D e n s i t y - 139. groups/hootn re • • • • i i . Figure 10. Time - 1430 hours,.Density - 188 .groups/hectare » • • • • • • • • • • • • • • * • • • • • • • * » * • • • • • • « • • • * • • • • • • • • • * • * • • Figure 11. Time -.1530 hours, Density - 168 groups/hectare • • 9 9 * • • • • • • * » • • o • • • • • • * 9 • • • • • • • i • • • t • • • » » • • • • • • • • t... 4 * -.49 - Hypothesis: At low to moderate d e n s i t i e s , distances to nearest neighbor w i l l be greater than 3.7 meters, however, as space becomes l i m i t i n g at higher d e n s i t i e s , distances w i l l approach a minimum value between 2.1 • and 3.7 meters. Co r o l l a r y : The d i s t r i b u t i o n of groups over the beach w i l l approach a random pattern at low d e n s i t i e s and as density increases the d i s t r i b u t i o n of groups w i l l e x h i b i t an increasingly regular pattern. The r e s u l t s r e l a t i n g to the c o r o l l a r y w i l l be discussed f i r s t . To test the r e l a t i o n s h i p between density and pattern, the norm- a l i z e d R s t a t i s t i c (Z R) was calculated from nearest neighbor distance data covering 1791 groups f o r 27 separate photographic runs. Inspection of F i g . 12 reveals a b a s i c a l l y l i n e a r r e l a t i o n s h i p between density and Z^ (points f i t t e d by least squares regression). These data further ind- i c a t e a continuous trend from a random pattern toward a regular d i s t r i - bution, that departs s i g n i f i c a n t l y from random (p< .05) at 110 groups/ hectare. Although b a s i c a l l y confirming the c o r o l l a r y r e l a t i n g density to pattern, I must point out that except f o r one case (Skaha), only K i t - s i l a n o r e g u l a r l y reached d e n s i t i e s s u f f i c i e n t l y high to exhibit a Z value greater than 1.96. This f a c t o r does not seriously detract from the v a l - i d i t y of the r e s u l t s since the o v e r a l l trend i s b a s i c a l l y l i n e a r and i t seems J u s t i f i e d to expect that i f higher d e n s i t i e s could be sampled from these other s i t e s they would show the same trend as K i t s i l a n o . (See App- endix D f o r photographs of t y p i c a l s p a t i a l patterns of users as a r e s u l t of d i f f e r e n t density conditions) These r e s u l t s suggest several implications r e l a t i n g to s i t e s e l - e c t i o n and the r e l a t i v e influence of other users on t h i s behaviour. The r e s u l t s lend support to the argument that within a density range of 20 - 110 groups/hectare, beach users are able to select a s i t e based on i n t e r - nal needs and preferences without reference to other groups. In addition, since an aggregated pattern was not observed, major c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the p h y s i c a l environment do not exert a s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t . Thus i f one views a v a i l a b l e space on the beach as a resource, then the f i r s t group or i n d i v i d u a l to a r r i v e at the beach has unlimited freedom to e x p l o i t this, resource. As each new group a r r i v e s and chooses a s i t e , the "degrees - 50 - Figure 12. Relationship between density and pattern. -r 27.0 54.0 —1 1 6J.0 100.D 135.0 1E2.D DENSITY (GROUPS/HECTRRE) 1(39.0 — I 216.0 — 1 1 243.0 270 Pattern i s measured by the normalized 'IT s t a t i s t i c (7, R). The dashed l i n e represents the .05 p r o b a b i l i t y l e v e l f o r a regular pattern, r = 0. Z =-1.88 + 0.03 (d), where d equals the density i n groups/hectare. K R= K i t s i l a n o , S = Skaha, and E = English Bay. - 5 1 - of freedom" for a subsequently a r r i v i n g group have diminished, i . e . the physical space taken up by a group, plus as I w i l l show i n a l a t e r sec- t i o n , a c e r t a i n amount of space surrounding the group, i s not a v a i l a b l e f o r use by any other group. However, since the pattern i s b a s i c a l l y random f o r d e n s i t i e s less than 110 groups/hectare, i t seems evident that groups a r r i v i n g within t h i s density range have enough vdegrees of freedom" or options a v a i l a b l e to them to select a s i t e according to personal pref- erences, r e l a t i v e l y uninfluenced by the s o c i a l and psychological factors r e l a t i n g to space needs and preferences. Further, as d e n s i t i e s exceed 110 groups/hectare, there i s a decreasing p r o b a b i l i t y that any newly a r r i v i n g group can locate s o l e l y on the basis.of personal preferences without regard f o r t h e i r own s p a t i a l needs, i . e . other groups are the major influence with respect to s i t e s e l e c t i o n . The degree to which these s p a t i a l needs become primary i s r e f l e c t e d i n the extremely high Z R values associated with higher d e n s i t i e s . Since these values indicate an extremely low p r o b a b i l i t y that the pattern reg- u l a r i t y i s due to chance,users a r r i v i n g at•the beach must, choose to locate with reference to i n situ groups such that distances between the chosen spot and near neighbors are maximized. This inter-neighbor distance and how i t is influenced by density forms the basis of the following section. Density and distance to nearest neighbor. An analysis of the average distance to nearest neighbor (nnd) was c a r r i e d out to test the hypothesis that spacing behaviour of beach users i s related to density and that average nearest neighbor distance at a given density i s related to c u l t u r a l norms and proper s o c i a l func- t i o n i n g . To make t h i s test i t was necessary to examine the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the average nearest neighbor distance f o r a l l runs on a l l beaches and the density.nt which each run was completed. Figure 13 i s a graphical representation of these data where the two curves shown are: 1) the average distances between polygon centrolds of nearest noighbor groups, and 2) the average distances between the edges of nearest neighbor poly- gons. These measures are termed average centroid to centroid nearest neighbor distance (cc/nnd) and nearest approach nearest neighbor distance (na/nnd) res p e c t i v e l y . (See page 39 f o r d e t a i l s of these distance measures). - 52 - Figure 13. Average distance between f i r s t nearest neighbors (NNU) plotted againtit density f o r 27 runs. X "1 _ , , , , T -| Q>0 2 7 . 0 5 4 . 0 B 1 . 0 1 C 3 . 0 1 3 5 . 0 1 5 2 . 0 • . DENSITY (GR0UP5/HECTRRE) ID9.C 2 ) 6 . 0 I 2-13.0 270.0 The symbols E, K and S r e f e r to the three study s i t e s , English Bay, K i t - s i l a n o , and Skaha f o r the centroid to centroid NNO. The points denoted by X r e f e r to the measure nearest approach NND, whereas the l e t t e r s E, K and S r e f e r to centroid to centroid NND. Distances are in meters and the sample i s based on 1791 groups. The f i r s t aspect of Figure 13 to note i s the existence of a constant r e l a t i o n s h i p between the two measures of nnd such that the av- erage diffe r e n c e between corresponding values of cc/nnd and na/nnd i s 2.2 meters (S.D. = 0.23). The r e l a t i v e l y small standard deviation about the mean d i f f e r - ence between.cc/nnd and na/nnd i s explained by two other r e s u l t s r e l a t i n g to group size and space c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . F i r s t , over 83% of a l l per- sons observed on the three s i t e s were found in e i t h e r one or two person groups and second, the average group area f o r one and two person groups as delineated by a group's possessions does not change appreciably over the observed density range. Most important, Figure 13 shows that nnd becomes asymptotic to the x-axis (density) at about 110-120 grps/ha., i . e . within an observed density range of 110 - 264 grps/ha the average cc/nnd remains constant at 5.0 meters (S.D. = 0.36) and the average na/nnd i s 2.7 meters (S.D. = 0.45). Thus within the 110-264 grps/ha density range, most groups main- t a i n an edge to edge distance of about 2.7 meters which remains i n v a r i - ant despite density. Since the d i s t r i b u t i o n , even though s t a t i s t i c a l l y regular, i s patchy, newly a r r i v i n g groups can " f i t " into the remaining spaces or holes. Figure 12 shows that the pattern of spacing becomes s t a t i s t i c - a l l y regular ( Z R < 1.96) at about the same density as nnd becomes asymp- t o t i c i.e.,110 groups/hectare. This f a c t i s important since i t i s possible to conceive of beach users e x h i b i t i n g a regular s p a t i a l pattern while con- t i n u i n g to decrease the distance between nearest neighbors u n t i l the point i s reached where groups' s p a t i a l boundaries touch t h e i r neighbors and average na/nnd i s zero. However, t h i s did not occur. At approxim- at e l y 110 groups/hectare beach users have adapted to the influence of crowded conditions on the beach, and have done so by maximizing the d i s - tance between t h e i r near neighbors thus producing a regular d i s t r i b u t i o n . The distance between neighbors remains constant above t h i s density sug- gesting that there i s a l i m i t to the compressibility of any group's s p a t i a l preferences. •r 5 4 - The l i m i t to the compressibility of space preferences as dem- onstrated above was 2.7 meters. This value (na/nnd) i s the average d i s - tance between the edges of two neighboring groups' marked space at den- s i t i e s greater than 110 grps/ha. and l i e s near the mid-point between the extremes of H a l l ' s (1966) s o c i a l distance zone ( f a r phase). These r e s u l t s are thus consistent with the f i r s t hypothesis which stated that at higher d e n s i t i e s distance to nearest neighbor would approach a minimum value and that t h i s distance would f a l l within H a l l ' s s o c i a l distance zone ( f a r phase). These r e s u l t s suggest that i n d i v i d u a l s and groups adapt to i n - creasing density by maintaining a minimum 'bubble' of space around them- selves. This minimum distance between neighbors i s l i k e l y related to the control of unwanted s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n and may thus be a privacy reg- u l a t i o n mechanism. This proposition i s consistent with H a l l ' s (1966) claim that, f o r North Americans, the s o c i a l distance zone (far phase) i s often used to screen or insulate one person or group from another. In summary, the r e s u l t s r e l a t i n g to the e f f e c t s of density on s p a t i a l pattern and distance to nearest neighbor indicates that for the three beaches studied, users respond to increasing numbers of others in c h a r a c t e r i s t i c ways. F i r s t , at low d e n s i t i e s the observed s p a t i a l pattern i s random and thus i t i s proposed that e f f e c t s due to other groups (soc- i a l e f f e c t s ) are minimal. Further, since the choice of a s i t e seems not to be affected by other groups, users maintain more degrees of freedom i n the process of s e l e c t i n g a s i t e . Second, as density increases space be- comes a l i m i t i n g f a c t o r with respect to s i t e choice. This i s r e f l e c t e d in the existence of a s t a t i s t i c a l l y regular pattern as well as a constant average distance to nearest neighbor at densities, greater than 110 grps/ha. F i n a l l y , a mechanism i s proposed to explain these findings which relates inter-group distances to the control of s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n . - 54a - CHAPTER V GROUP CHARACTERISTICS Marked group area and density. Although not tested as s p e c i f i c hypotheses, several aspects of the group size and group area of beach users are presented here since they are relevant to c a l c u l a t i o n s i n the following chapter on maximum beach population s i z e . A group's area was defined previously as the area circumscribed by the sides of a polygon, the v e r t i c e s of which were beach paraphernalia, possessions owned or shared by a group, or i n many cases the bodies of users themselves. Possessions used i n t h i s way have been termed s p a t i a l or " t e r r i t o r i a l " markers (Sommer and Becker, 1966; Becker, 1973; and for the present study, the area included within these objects has been oper- a t i o n a l l y defined as a group's marked space. Are the marked areas of groups influenced by density? Figure 14 indicates that f o r group sizes of from one to four persons, density had l i t - t l e or no e f f e c t on the marked area f o r a given si z e group. These r e s u l t s sug- gest that groups do not decrease the size of the marked space as a way of adapting to increasing density. These and other previous r e s u l t s sug- gest that t a c t i c a l space-saving maneuvers may not be necessary on the part of i n s i t u groups since new a r r i v a l s seem reluctant to situate within the 2.7 meter zone referred to e a r l i e r . Another r e s u l t expressed by Figure 14 i s that the mean group area grows in l i n e a r proportion to the number of people f o r groups of one to three persons. Table 5 shows that f o r these group sizes (1 - 3 ) , the space u t i l i z e d increases by approximately two square meters f o r each group s i z e . The next four group siz e classes (4 - 7) increase by amounts ranging from 2.6 to 3.4 square meters. These l a t t e r values must be viewed with caution however, since sample si z e s are small and standard deviations s u b s t a n t i a l . These data may be explained i n two ways. F i r s t , each per- son may bring to the beach a c e r t a i n requirement f o r space which remains uninfluenced by the proximity of other i n d i v i d u a l s and groups. Such spa- t i a l needs i f r e a l would then be f u n c t i o n a l l y related to the personal space construct of H a l l (1966) and Sommer (1969). Second, since beach equipment such as towels and blankets are r e l a t i v e l y uniform i n si z e and shape, these a r t i c l e s may determine the spacing of i n d i v i d u a l s within a group. These may not necessarily be competing explanations since users - 5 6 - Figure 14. Density and group area. tn u X X X X X X X X 0 X X J,? I * X A * L*5 X xo^ J ^ * x o * K - x X >< - £ -X X ^ "X X X X X X X v * * X X X + - — ± ' + X •+r + -t- X — — 7 5 ~w ST* o . n i ^ T n n ir,?.0 inoTo ?]"ii7o 2 4 3 . 0 2 7 0 . 0 V o 2 7 0 510 fli.o 100.0 i.is.o ir,?.o mo.o Z I B . O °-° 2 '° • DENSITY tGRQUPS/HEClRNL) Means f o r one to four person groups represented by s o l i d l i n e s . Lone in d i v i d u a l s (+); Two person groups (X); Three person groups (O) ; Four person groups (*). -'57 - may choose towels, blankets, etc. which r e f l e c t personal space needs and preferences. In a test of a possible r e l a t i o n s h i p between marked space and the distance between neighboring groups (nearest approach nnd), analysis by simple c o r r e l a t i o n produced an r value of -0.07. This r e s u l t suggest there i s no c l e a r r e l a t i o n s h i p between the size of the marked space anu the distance between the edges of neighboring groups' marked areas. Table 5: Group Area Related to the Number of Individuals in a Group Group Size Class 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7 T o t a l 2 Mean (meters ) 1.9 3.9 5.7 9.0 12.1 14.7 18.1 11.1 3.8 S. D. 1.0 2.0 3.3 7.7 11.4 10.7 26.6 4.1 3.4 N 828 664 155 102 22 10 8 2 1791 Density and group s i z e . A f i n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of beach user groups worthy of mention, concerns the r e l a t i o n s h i p between density and the number of i n d i v i d u a l s i n a group (group s i z e ) . . Analysis by simple l i n e a r regression indicates 2 a moderate increase i n group siz e as density r i s e s (r = 0.29, p _̂  0.01). Figure 15 shows t h i s r e s u l t g r a p h i c a l l y . This r e s u l t leads one to specu- l a t e that i n d i v i d u a l s or groups come to the beach at low d e n s i t i e s be- cause of a high need f o r privacy or f o r the solitude which these times a f f o r d . Evidence from the survey r e s u l t s however, does not support t h i s hypothesis. For example, the ERI scale 'need f o r privacy' only c o r r e l a - ted -0.06 with nearest neighbor distance measures. Other possible causes of t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p may be r e l a t e d to the temporal and s t r u c t u r a l dynamics of group formation, however t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p was not tested and there- fore remains hypothetical.  - 58a - CHAPTER VI CARRYING CAPACITIES AND THE BEACH EXPERIENCE - 59 - Introduction. Previous r e s u l t s indicated most people on a public beach re- spond to increasing density by choosing s i t e s with at least 2.7 meters between t h e i r own and neighboring groups' marked areas. From other re- search i t seems l i k e l y that t h i s distance i s f u n c t i o n a l l y related to the regulation of s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n . Thus i t should be possible to calculate the maximum population size which each beach could sustain and s t i l l allow users the benefit of t h i s minimum space requirement. Resource managers often r e f e r to the carrying capacity of a s i t e or geographical region. As the term applies to recreation, i t generally refers to the number of persons ( l e v e l of use) which a resource can sup- port without a loss i n user s a t i s f a c t i o n and without a decrement i n the qu a l i t y of the physical environment. (For a review of the carrying ca- pacity concept see Verburg & Rees, 1975) For the purpose of c a l c u l a t i n g maximum to l e r a b l e use rates f o r the present study, I have disregarded e f f e c t s due to the user on the physical environment, since other than l i t t e r , the environment seems r e s i l i e n t to high i n t e n s i t y use rates. Of course f o r beaches with vegetated dunes, e f f e c t s due to overuse could be severe. Before proceeding with the r e s u l t s of these c a l c u l a t i o n s several terms require c l a r i f i c a t i o n : * Group siz e - the average number of in d i v i d u a l s per group f o r a l l observations at each of the study s i t e s . * Marked group area - the average observed space subtended by (l y i n g within) the personal possessions of user groups. * Minimum group space - the calculated group space requirement (i n addition to marked space) based on the average nearest neighbor distance values f o r de n s i t i e s ?" 110 groups/hectare. *- Maximum carrying capacity estimate - the number of average s i z e groups which each beach could sustain, based upon observed s p a t i a l behaviour. * Load factor - a value representing the extent to which each s i t e reached i t s maximum carrying capacity. - 60 - Carrying capacity and the response to density. The c a l c u l a t i o n of the carrying capacities f o r each of the three s i t e s requires knowledge of the average centroid to centroid near- est neighbor distance for de n s i t i e s e x h i b i t i n g a constant nearest neigh- bor distance, i . e . de n s i t i e s 2l 110 groups/hectare. Since capacity estimates required a constant representation of the average group areas, I chose a regular hexagon as a suitable geometric shape f o r th i s purpose. This shape approximates a c i r c l e (a study by Edney and Jordan-Edney, 1974 suggested the areas claimed by beach users approximated a c i r c l e ) , how- ever i n contrast to c i r c u l a r areas, hexagons leave no space unaccounted f o r . For purposes of c a l c u l a t i n g the carrying capacity estimates, the distance between any two nearest neighbor group's marked space boundaries was considered to be*shared evenly, i . e . each group maintained j u r i s d i c t i o n over one-half the intergroup space. In r e a l i t y , t h i s space i s most l i k e l y perceived by users as common property with each group u t i l i z i n g the space j o i n t l y . In any event, the equal space assumption above i s merely u t i l i z e d f o r c a l c u l a t i o n purposes and i s not meant to convey the existence of such behaviour. Figure 16 i s a conceptual representation of the s p a t i a l config- uration of any two average groups at or above 110 groups/hectare. The smaller of the two hexagons simulates the 'marked area', whereas the larger i s a representation of the minimum s p a t i a l requirement of the group. To c a l c u l a t e the minimum s p a t i a l requirement of a group (large hexagon), one need only c a l c u l a t e the area of the t r i a n g l e ADE and multiply by six. Referring to figu r e 16, the altitude- of the t r i a n g l e ADE i s equivalent to one-half the centroid to centroid distance AA'. Knowledge of the al t i t u d e AC, allows one to calculate the area of the t r i a n g l e ADE by the formula Area = h 2 / where h equals the a l t i t u d e AC. The maximum carry- ing capacity (# of groups) i s therefore the area of the beach divided by the minimum space reauirement (large hexagon). Table 6 contains the re s u l t s of these c a l c u l a t i o n s as well as the maximum de n s i t i e s at each s i t e which were observed during the study. By comparing the ma-ximum t h e o r e t i c a l population density for each beach with the highest observed densitv (load f a c t o r ) , i t i s read i l y apparent that at no time did any of the s i t e s reach these l i m i t s . K i t s i l a n o maintained the highest recorded density (264 grps/ha). During t h i s - 61 - Figure 16. Hypothetical representation of two neighboring groups' "marked" and "minimum" space boundaries. - 62 - Table 6. Maximum beach population estimates. E. BAY KITSILANO SKAHA 2 Beach Area (meters ) 11967 4522 6500 Group Size 1.6 1. 8 2.1 Marked Group Area (meters^) 3.0 3.9 4.5 Minimum Group Space* 21.7 21.7 21.7 Maximum Carrying Capacity of Beach (number of groups) 551 208 299 Maximum Carrying Capacity (groups/hectare) 461 461 461 Maximum Observed Density 151 264 175 Load Factor (observed/maximum) 33% 57% 38% * Based.on average nearest neighbor distance values across beaches f o r den s i t i e s > 110 groups/hectare. - 63 - period the beach was 57% of the estimated maximum carrying capacity. English Bay and Skaha beaches maintained d e n s i t i e s which were only 33% and 38% respectively, of t h e i r estimates. These r e s u l t s suggest that even at the highest recorded d e n s i t i e s newcomers were s t i l l able to locate i n a spot which would allow them the minimum intergroup distance (nearest approach nearest neighbor distance) of 2.7 meters. This i s an important point since i t suggests that a density was never reached where a l l open space was ut i l i z e d , thus f o r c i n g newcomers to locate within the s p a t i a l boundaries of others. Note that i f beach d e n s i t i e s exceeded carrying capacity estimates derived above, the distances between neighboring groups would be reduced sharply. For example, i f an 'average group' were to locate midway be- tween neighboring groups at the maximum carrying capacity density, there would remain but 0.3 meters between the edges of any two of the three groups i n question.. Such distances f a l l within what H a l l (1966) c l a s s i f i e s as the 'intimate distance - f a r phase'. He characterizes this zone by s t a t i n g that the use of such distances in public i s not considered proper by most adult North Americans. He goes on to state however, that in many situ a t i o n s such as crowded elevators, t r a i n s , buses, etc., other t a c t i c s are used which serve to decrease v i s u a l and body contact. It seems probable that as such d e n s i t i e s are approached, most users of a public beach f a c i l i t y would search f o r another s i t e or return home, thus foregoing the experience rather than subjecting themselves to such close i n t e r - personal distances. Of course beaches do e x i s t where such high density conditions occassionally occur. It i s l i k e l y that for these s i t e s , users are highly motivated to p a r t i c i p a t e e i t h e r because no other s i t e s are a v a i l a b l e or f o r reasons r e l a t i n g to costs involved i n reaching the beach. Beaches where such l e v e l s of crowding occur would provide i d e a l environments for studying the range of t a c t i c s used by persons and groups i n order to cope with personal space v i o l a t i o n s which occur at these extreme d e n s i t i e s . The above r e s u l t s are important since they demonstrate the effectiveness of using actual p a r t i c i p a n t behaviour to a r r i v e at carrying capacity estimates. What i s apparent i s that for the areas studied, users r a r e l y select s i t e s which v i o l a t e p r e v a i l i n g s o c i a l norms with respect to appropriate spacing behaviour. Since we assume that t h i s behaviour serves - 64 - some basic s o c i a l function, the manager or planner of such f a c i l i t i e s may make policy decisions based on the needs and preferences of users themselves. In t h i s way the decision maker can be reasonably well assured of adeauately serving the in t e r e s t s of the greatest number of people without detracting s e r i o u s l y from the q u a l i t y of the experience. Using t h i s c r i t e r i o n , we may speak of optimal solutions to design and manage- ment problems. Of course, at such d e n s i t i e s i n d i v i d u a l s a t i s f a c t i o n may not be maximimal, however a s a t i s f a c t o r y experience can be expected to be provided f o r the largest number of people. Such behaviourally based guidelines would surely serve as an improvement over more a r b i - trary techniques commonly used i n the past. - 6 4 a - CHAPTER VII PREDICTORS OF SPATIAL BEHAVIOUR: ANALYSIS OF SURVEY RESPONSES - 65 - Predictors of s p a t i a l behaviour - a l l groups. Results th a preceeding section indicated the existence of a minimum intergroup distance which was associated with high density condi- t i o n s . This distance was in turn postulated as a mechanism by which peo- ple control s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n . The purpose of the following section i s to present evidence which demonstrates that c e r t a i n psychological d i s - p o s i t i o n s , mood states and socio-economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are r e l a t e d to spading and group behaviour. A t o t a l of 329 surveys were d i s t r i b u t e d (English Bay - 105, K i t s i l a n o - 127, Skaha - 97) of which 23 were unuseable and 46 deleted due to camera malfunction or because the marker f l a g was not v i s i b l e in the photograph. Of the 266 surveys remaining,84 were from English Bay, and 99 from K i t s i l a n o and 83 from Skaha. The data were analyzed by a stepwise multiple regression pro- gram with an F p r o b a b i l i t y to accept and r e j e c t p o t e n t i a l independent v a r i a b l e s of .05000 and .050001 re s p e c t i v e l y . Forty-eight independent va r i a b l e s (ERI - 8, LAB - 7, Mood - 9, Socio-economic - 24) were used as p o t e n t i a l predictors of three dependent va r i a b l e s (two measures of near- est neighbor distance, and the area marked by a group). Table 7 shows the p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n s at the f i r s t step i n the regression analysis as well as the f i n a l values f o r the dependent var- i a b l e s . Inspection shows few s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s and c h a r a c t e r i s t i - c a l l y low p r e d i c t a b i l i t y of target v a r i a b l e s . Although discouraging, these r e s u l t s suggested an alternate approach which focussed attention on res- ponse patterns of s o l i t a r y i n d i v i d u a l s not part of l a r g e r groups. Lone Individuals - A second look at the data. The analysis of survey data f o r lone i n d i v i d u a l s was based on the argument that s o l i t a r y persons are probably more in control of where they locate, since in groups the decision may be made by someone other than the respondent, or may be a c o l l e c t i v e decision which does not ex- a c t l y r e f l e c t the desires of the person completing the survey. S i m i l a r l y , i f only one i n d i v i d u a l i n the group makes the decision as to s i t e l o ca- t i o n , then as group size increases there e x i s t s a decreasing p r o b a b i l i t y Table 7. I n i t i a l p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n s , F probabi vari a b l e s . ( a l l group sizes considered 1 VARIABLES GROUP AREA ERI P a r t i a l Corr. F Prob. PASTORALISM URBANISM ENVIRCNMENTAL ADAPTATION STIMULUS SEEKING ENVIRONMENTAL TRUST ANTIQUARIAN!. SM NEED FOR PRIVACY MECHANICAL ORIENTATION COMMUNALITY LAB MECHANICS CRAFTS INTELLECTUAL SLOW LIVING NEIGHBORHOOD SPORTS GLAMOUR SPORTS FAST LIVING MOOD CHEERFUL ENERGETIC ANGRY TENSE-ANXIOUS THOUGHTFUL DEPRESSED FATIGUED RELAXED MOOD 0. 322 0. 060 0.065 0. 001 0. 077 0.097 0.107 0.001 0.036 0.050 0.091 0.088 0.016 0.073 0.031 0.089 0.093 0.038 0.050 0.088 0.096 0.148 0.092 0.029 0.012 0.001 0.396 0. 353 0.937 0.270 0.161 0.122 0.934 0.616 0.479 0.189 0.203 0.805 0.294 0.661 0.198 0.179 0. 594 0.485 0.204 0.164 0.032 0.185 0.683 0.845 es and f i n a l values f o r three dependent pproximate degrees of freedom = 207) CENTROID TO CENTROID NEAREST APPROACH NND NND P a r t i a l Corr. F Prob. P a r t i a l Corr. F Prob. 0.022 0. 0,59 0.017 0.128 0.001 0.047 0.036 0.059 0.013 0.748 0.406 0.796 0.062 0.936 0. 510 0.609 0.408 0.834 0. 008 0.078 0.018 0.115 0.002 0.034 0.047 0.062 0.011 0. 875 0.265 0.786 0.096 0.923 0.629 0. 512 0.381 0.852 0.133 0.027 0.041 0.139 0.217 0.096 0.182 0.053 0.703 0.569 0.043 0.002 0.166 0.009 0.153 0.008 0.000 0.140 0.197 0.058 0.171 0.026 0.874 0.948 0.042 0.005 0.416 0.013 0.063 0.062 0.064 0.066 0.103 0.026 0.042 0.011 0.120 0.375 0.376 0.364 0.351 0.135 0.714 0. 557 0.845 0.082 0.036 0.048 0.124 0.014 0.102 0.080 0.020 0.021 0.142 0.616 0.497 0.071 0. 827 0.140 0.252 0.765 0.760 0.039 Table 7. (continued) VARIABLES GROUP AREA SOCIO/DEMOGRAPHIC P a r t i a l Corr. F Prob. AGE 0.029 SEX 0.032 MARITAL STATUS 0.091 NO. OF CHILDREN 0.105 NO. OF SIBLINGS 0.092 EDUCATION 0.069 NO. OF YEARS LIVED IN CITIES V.'ITH POPULATIONS OF : . OVER ONE MILLION 0.098 100,000 - ONE MILLION 0.068 50,000 - 100,000 0.111 10,000 - 50,000 0.110 5,000 - 10,000 0.133 BELOW 5,000 0.067 NO. OF AUTOMOBILES 0.T35 JOB CATEGORY 0.027 INCOME 0.075 % TIME RECREATING OUTSIDE URBAN ENVIRONMENT 0.015 DAY OF THE WEEK 0.117 TIME OF DAY 0.049 NO. OF CHILDREN IN GROUP 0.119 % OF GROUP WHO WERE MALES 0.071 % OF GROUP WHO WERE FEMALES 0.016 % OF GROUP WHO WERE CHILDREN 0.094 DISTANCE TO HOME CITY 0.065 POPULATION OF HOME CITY 0.026 R 2 0.18 0.684 0.651 0.190 0.130 0.184 0.324 0.155 0.332 0.106 0.111 0.053 0.342 0.049 0.696 0.286 0.814 0.089 0.495 0. 084 0.312 0. 804 0.174 0.353 0.709 CENTROID TO CENTROID NND P a r t i a l Corr. F Prob. NEAREST APPROACH NND P a r t i a l Corr. F Prob. 0.080 0.042 0.099 0.135 0.050 0.019 0.005 0.085 0.071 0.072 0.088 0.174 0.140 0.015 0.089 0.127 0.044 0.212 0.047 0.025 0.019 0.081 0.010 0.096 0 . 22 0. 253 0. 558 0.153 0.050 0.479 0.779 0. 898 0.221 0.308 0.301 0.205 0.012 0.042 0. 810 0.198 0.066 0. 538 0.003 0. 509 0.716 0.781 0.245 0. 862 0.167 0.093 0.065 0.149 0.171 0.046 0. 040 0.019 0.114 0.035 0.084 0.096 0.177 0.181 0.007 0.106 0.134 0.024 0. 215 0. 007 0. 029 0. 014 0.040 0. 082 0. 219 0.19 0.180 0.359 0.030 0.013 0. 517 0. 579 0.779 0.099 0.618 0.225 0.164 0.010 0.009 0.882 0.123 0.051 0. 726 0.002 0.888 0.679 0.824 0. 573 0.240 0.002 - 68 - that the survey had been given to the person making the decision. In addition, I argued that with respect to the-area which any size group marks as t h e i r s , lone i n d i v i d u a l s w i l l have more control over the size of the area than a single i n d i v i d u a l i n a larger group. Based on these arguments, the dependent variables cc/nnd, na/nnd, and group area, were analyzed f o r lone i n d i v i d u a l s only. Because of a sampling discrepancey associated with the nearest neighbor distance values (cc/nnd and na/nnd) f o r English Bay, these data were omitted from the analysis as well. (See Appendix C f o r a discussion of t h i s problem) To r e i t e r a t e , on the basis of the above considerations, the dependent va r i a b l e s cc/nnd and na/nnd were analyzed for lone i n d i v i d u a l s at K i t s i l a n o and Skaha beaches only, whereas the variable group area was analyzed f o r lone i n d i v i d u a l s at a l l beaches. Since the former two var- iables (cc/nnd and na/nnd) were based on response patterns and s p a t i a l data f o r lone i n d i v i d u a l s at two of the three s i t e s the number of observa- tions declined sharply (n = 64 with approximately 54 degrees of freedom). The r e s u l t s of t h i s analysis must therefore be viewed with a c e r t a i n de- gree of caution since the number of observations approach the number of independent variables used i n the a n a l y s i s . 2 Table 8 presents the R values associated with the various analyses conducted f o r a l l beaches and group siz e s , plus those completed f o r lone i n d i v i d u a l s only. These r e s u l t s indicate a comparatively large increase i n the a b i l i t y of the selected v a r i a b l e s to account f o r the var- iance i n the dependent variables when English Bay was dropped from the analysis and when groups containing two or more i n d i v i d u a l s were ommited. 2 Table 8: R Values For S p a t i a l And Group Dependent Variables. Group Area cc/nnd na/nnd EKS ( a l l / S i ) .18/.57 .22/.10 .19/.08 KS ( a l l / S i ) .26/.66 .20/.46 .21/.47 E = English Bay; K = K i t s i l a n o ; S = Skaha; a l l = a l l group s i z e s ; S i = single i n d i v i d u a l s . - 69 - Predictors of respondents' distance to nearest neighbor. The two distance measures, nearest approach nnd and centroid to centroid nnd were predicted by i d e n t i c a l independent variables and main- tained very s i m i l a r R2 values f o r lone i n d i v i d u a l s . The only di f f e r e n c e s were the extent to which each independent variable contributed 2 to the o v e r a l l R. . The Independent variables: accounting for a s i g n i f i c a n t amount of the variance i n the two distance measures are l i s t e d i n Table 9. These data indicate that people from small towns, those with high scores on 'pastoralism* , 'environmental adaptation' and the mood var- i a b l e 'relaxed' are a l l found at a greater than average distance from t h e i r nearest neighbor. Thus users who have spent much of t h e i r l i v e s i n r u r a l environments, or who haye a 'pastoral' d i s p o s i t i o n tend to choose a s i t e with more intergroup space. The 'pastoralism' variable i s defined by McKechnie with such phrases as, "concern about population growth and preservation of natural resources, including open space." These r e s u l t s would suggest that i n s o f a r as .the 'pastoralism' scale measures a respon- dent's a t t i t u d e and needs f o r space, the s p a t i a l behaviour of beach users tends to val i d a t e the scale. The second best predictor of intergroup distance i s the 'man over nature' v a r i a b l e (environmental adaptation). A person scoring highly on 'environmental adaptation' may be characterized as one who seeks to modify "the environment to s a t i s f y needs and desires, and to provide com- f o r t and l e i s u r e . " This person i s also "opposed to governmental control over private land use" and shows a "preference f o r highly designed or adapted environments." Adjective descriptors include, "autocratic, con- descending, conservative, e f f i c i e n t , judgemental" etc. It seems l i k e l y that high scorers on 'environmental adaptation' have a basic need to control t h e i r environment and in an i s o t r o p i c s e t t i n g such as a beach dominating space i s the most a v a i l a b l e way of maintaining t h i s control. The i n c l u s i o n of the mood variable 'relaxed' i s important since (ills indicates that respondents at larger distances tend to bo less tense than those i n d i v i d u a l s situated nearer other groups. - 70 - Table 9: S i g n i f i c a n t independent variables contributing to the dependent var i a b l e s , centroid to centroid and nearest approach nearest neighbor distances (cc/nnd and na/nnd). VARIABLE F PROBABILITY CC/NND NA/NND NORMALIZED REGRESSION COEFFICIENT CC/NND NA/NND 1. Years l i v e d in c i t i e s with populations between 5,000 - 10,000 people. .0003 . 0003 .4506 . 4608 2. 'Urbanism' .0010 .0021 -.4494 -.4128 3. 'Environmental Adaptation' .0124 .0193 .3072 .2836 4. 'Pastoralism' .0188 .0117 .2919 .3136 5. Number of chil d r e n .0104 .0050 -.2910 -.3217 6. 'Relaxed' .0354 .0368 . 2505 .2466 (Results based upon lone i n d i v i d u a l s at K i t s i l a n o and Skaha beaches only) - 71 - The two variables negatively correlated with distance to near- est neighbors were the ERI scale 'urbanism' and'the number of chi l d r e n a respondent claimed.' . The scale 'urbanism' describes subjects who are or- iented to high density urban environments and who maintain an interest i n the unusual arid varied aspects of c i t y l i f e . High scorers on 'urbanism' are thus those people who e i t h e r enjoy the crowds a c i t y affords or are those who are capable of adapting to such high density environments,, Since our urban public beaches often r e f l e c t such environments, i t i s not s u r p r i s i n g that t h i s scale was a strong predictor of user spacing behaviours„ The correspondence of the second variable ' number of children' with smaller intergroup distances may be explained by the fact that a person who chooses to have a large family i s probably more gregarious and enjoys being around larger groups of people. This l a t t e r statement, of course, i s conjectural and awaits further t e s t i n g . S u r p r i s i n g l y , the Environmental Response Inventory scale, 'Need f o r Privacy' did not c o r r e l a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y with the distance to nearest neighbor measures. In f a c t , the c o r r e l a t i o n was close to zero (r = -.05) f o r both nearest neighbor distance measures. One explanation f o r these r e s u l t s may be that the beaches chosen f o r the study are primarily urban public beaches which may only a t t r a c t i n d i v i d u a l s with diminished privacy needs. These settings may thus convey the image of a crowded, high stimulus environment, even though the beaches exhibit lower d e n s i t i e s f o r a portion of each day. Predictors of 'group area*. - The R value in Table 8 r e l a t i n g to the dependent va r i a b l e 'group area' f o r single i n d i v i d u a l s at a l l s i t e s was 0.57. The variables contributing to the regression equation are summarized in Table 10 . (Eng- l i s h Bay included). These data suggest that lone in d i v i d u a l s who a t t a i n larger amounts of marked space may be characterized as having more auto- mobiles than average, spend more re c r e a t i o n a l time away from the urban environment, have more children, have spent more of t h e i r l i v e s i n c i t i e s with populations between 50,000 to 100,000 and are more often at the beach on weekends when de n s i t i e s are highest. S i m i l a r l y , i n d i v i d u a l s with - 72 - Table 10. S i g n i f i c a n t independent variables contributing to the dep- endent va r i a b l e 'group area'. VARIABLE' 1. Number of automobiles 2. % recreation time spent outside the c i t y 3. 'Environmental Trust' 4. Number of chi l d r e n 5. Years l i v e d i n c i t i e s with fewer than 5,000 people 6. Years l i v e d in c i t i e s with population sizes between 50,000 - 100,000 people 7. Years l i v e d in c i t i e s with population sizes between 10,000 - 50,000 people 8. Day of the week F PROBABILITY < .0001 .0005 NORMALIZED REGRESSION COEFFICIENT .4602 .3306 .0006 .0002 .0029 -.2966 .2797 -.2696 ,0179 ,2207 .0209 -.1996 ,0447 1720 Values based upon lone i n d i v i d u a l s at. English Bay, K i t s i l a n o and Skaha Beaches. (n = 85) - 73 - smaller than average marked spaces tend to have a higher trus t of poten- t i a l l y threatening environments (Environmental Trust) and have spent more of t h e i r l i v e s i n small towns and c i t i e s with populations between 10,000 and 50,000 people, , Five variables correlated p o s i t i v e l y with an i n d i v i d u a l s ' marked space. Two of these, the number of ch i l d r e n claimed by the respon- dent and the number of automobiles i n the household may a c t u a l l y be a r t i - f a c t s a t t r i b u t a b l e to the data c o l l e c t i o n technique u t i l i z e d . For example, even though persons were v i s i b l e i n the photographs as lone i n d i v i d u a l s , a few may a c t u a l l y have been part of a larger family group. Children, f o r example, may have been playing elsewhere pr other members of the,fam- i l y may have been s t r o l l i n g nearby. Since f a m i l i e s could be expected to have a higher p r o b a b i l i t y of owning more than one car and since such a family group would maintain larger marked areas on the beach, these var- ia b l e s would be selected as s i g n i f i c a n t predictors of the dependent var- i a b l e , group area. The data do not permit a test of t h i s hypothesis and thus such an explanation remains conjectural. The i n c l u s i o n of 'percent time spent recreating outside the c i t y ' can be j u s t i f i e d since i t could be argued that each v a r i a b l e , large group area and high percentage of recreation time away from the c i t y , are related to an increased need f o r open space. It i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note that people who come to the beach on weekends also have larger marked spaces. This may r e f l e c t the need to buffer oneself from others by the use of space, since weekends o f f e r the user the highest density conditions i n which to recreate. The l a t t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p i s conjectural since e a r l i e r r e s u l t s on the e f f e c t of density on group area indicated l i t t l e or no e f f e c t . It i s also of i n t e r e s t that people who spend many years in-small towns seem to maintain smaller marked areas. This r e s u l t i s i n contrast to an e a r l i e r f i n d i n g which suggested that persons from smaller c i t i e s tended to be at greater distances from t h e i r nearest neighbor. One explanation for these r e s u l t s may be that most people who came from small c i t i e s and towns were vacationers at Skaha beach and thus i n order to save space on route may have brought fewer beach a r t i c l e s with them and thus had fewer materials to spread around. This argument may also - 74 - explain the f i n d i n g that people l i v i n g much of t h e i r l i v e s i n moderately large c i t i e s obtained l a r g e r amounts of marked space. Beach users who scored highly on the ERI variable "Environmental Tr u s t " tended to maintain smaller amounts of space which was marked. McKech- l i i e ' s d e f i n i t i o n of t h i s v ariable sheds l i g h t on t h i s c o r r e l a t i o n : Environmental Trust: General environmental opennesg, responsiveness, and t r u s t ; competence in f i n d i n g one's way about the environment. vs Fear of i n t e n t i o n a l l y dangerour environments, security of house; fear of being alone and unprotected. * McKechnie also describes high scorers on t h i s v ariable as: Capable, competent, d i l i g e n t , e f f i c i e n t , h e l p f u l , ingen- ious, resourceful, stable, thorough, well adjusted. and conversely low scorers as: B i t t e r , cold, coarse, d i s a t i s f i e d , d i s t r u s t f u l , i n t o l - erant, moody, prejudiced, spendthrift, unkind. The picture which emerges i s that respondents categorized as capable, competent, well adjusted etc., have a greater a b i l i t y to cope with smaller amounts of space whereas low scorers require larger i n d i v - idual marked areas as a buffer against a perceived, inhospitable environ- ment . In summary, the three dependent variables,, group area and the two nearest neighbor distance variables were moderately well predicted with percentage variance accounted f o r ranging from 46 to 57 percent. In most cases the independent v a r i a b l e selected by the regres- sion analysis were those that could be e a s i l y explained on the basis of t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l content and meaning. The independent variables of most inte r e s t were those r e l a t i n g to respondent's scores on various ERI scales and those r e l a t i n g to the number of years a subject had spent in high density urban centres versus those who had l i v e d predomintly in smaller towns and v i l l a g e s . Tn general those respondents who maintain pastoral a t t i t u d e s and who have spent a large proportion of t h e i r l i v e s in small towns are more often found at greater distances from t h e i r closest neigh- bors than average and those who derive s a t i s f a c t i o n from high density environments are most l i k e l y observed in close proximity to t h e i r near neighbors. -. 74a - CHAPTER VIII DISCUSSION AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS - 75 - Summary of r e s u l t s . The two most important objectives of the studv as set f o r t h i n the introduction were f i r s t , to determine i f behavioural s h i f t s occur i n response to increasing density and second, to examine the ex- tent to .which i n d i v i d u a l personality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are related to s p a t i a l behaviour differences. With respect to the f i r s t objective, evidence was presented which indicate s h i f t s i n behaviour did occur (analysis of the s p a t i a l pattern of users showed a gradual change from random at low d e n s i t i e s to regular at high densities) and coinciding with these events users began to choose s i t e s which were on the average 2.7 meters from t h e i r nearest neighbor. This distance f e l l within Ha l l ' s (1966) ' s o c i a l distance zone' (far phase) which he claims i s used by North Americans to e f f e c t i v e l y insulate themselves from unwanted s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n . The r e s u l t s of the present study thus add strong empirical support f o r H a l l ' s claim. The second major objective was achieved by analyzing the s p a t i a l behaviour of beach users who chose to complete a questionaire designed for the study. The survey, composed of items dealing with environmentally based d i s p o s i t i o n s , p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n l e i s u r e a c t i v i t i e s , mood states and socio- demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s was analyzed by a stepwise multiple regression technique.. The dependent variable in t h i s analysis was the observed subject to nearest neighbor distance as obtained from the a e r i a l photo- graphs. The r e s u l t s indicated only a limited a b i l i t y to predict the depen- dent v a r i a b l e when data f o r a l l group sizes were used. Based on the ar- gument that lone i n d i v i d u a l s are more i n control of the s i t e s e l e c t i o n process than groups of two or more, the data were reanalyzed f o r s o l i t a r y respondents only. These r e s u l t s showed a substantial increase in the a- mount of variance accounted f o r by the selected independent var i a b l e s . The most s a l i e n t variables selected as s i g n i f i c a n t predictors of distance to nearest neighbor measures were the Environmental Response Inventory v a r i a b l e s : 'Urbanism', 'Pastoralism', and 'Environmental Adaptation'. In a ddition d i r e c t e x p e r i e n t i a l measures of the number of years a respon- dent had l i v e d i n towns and c i t i e s of various s i z e s proved to be of impor- tance. Other s i g n i f i c a n t variables included the number of ch i l d r e n a respondent claimed and the mood variable 'relaxed'. - 76 - In addition to the problems associated with sampling f o r groups containing two or more i n d i v i d u a l s , one other factor may explain why the selected independent variables were not capable of explaining a greater percentage of the t o t a l variance. Because of the dynamic q u a l i t y of the beach environment, a user may have chosen a s i t e under d i f f e r e n t con- d i t i o n s from those obtaining when he was selected as a respondent and subsequently photographed. This would decrease the p r e d i c t i v e power of the independent variables since a user's s p a t i a l environment would have changed as more people arrived at the beach and f i l l e d i n the area around him. A future research strategy might be devised which delineated the s p a t i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of a beach user, immediately upon his s e l e c t i n g a s i t e . Of couurse, methods other than a e r i a l photography would have to be used for obtaining data on the spacing behaviour of users in such a study. F i n a l l y , based on the observed s p a t i a l behaviour of users men- tioned above, the carrying capacity of each of the three study s i t e s were calculated. Based on these c a l c u l a t i o n s i t was shown that at no time during the study did d e n s i t i e s at the three s i t e s surpass the estimated upper l i m i t s . These r e s u l t s indicated that on the average, conditions were never so crowded that new a r r i v a l s were forced to select a s i t e within the 2.7 meter zone referred to above. The extent to which t h i s s i t u a t i o n prevailed as a r e s u l t of new a r r i v a l s choosing not to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the beach experience i s not known. Methodology applications. Webb et a l . (1966) , among others, ; have e f f e c t i v e l y demonstrated the advantages of using multi-method approaches to problem solving i n the s o c i a l sciences. In p a r t i c u l a r , Webb et a l . argue persuasively f or the expanded use of nonreactive techniques to assess human behaviour, The present study sought to u t i l i z e each of these research strategies. F i r s t l y , the spacing and group behaviour of beach users were studied i n a completely unobtrusive way through the use of a e r i a l photography. This technique circumvented obvious sources of bias where the objective of the research i s known or suspected by the subject . Such a procedure maximized the - 77 - pr o b a b i l i t y that observed behaviour was t y p i c a l and uninfluenced by the presence of the investigator or his equipment. Secondly, the study was undertaken i n a 'natural' as opposed to a laboratory setting and as a re- su l t , conclusions reached o f f e r ''.real world' v a l i d i t y with l i t t l e or no fear that r e s u l t s represent a r t i f a c t s of experimental conditions. F i n a l l y , questionaire response patterns were correlated with each subject's s p a t i a l and group behaviour. Thus, both survey data and extant behaviour were j o i n t l y u t i l i z e d to broadly describe how people i n an i s o t r o p i c environment respond to f l u c t u a t i o n s i n density conditions. This procedure offered some insight into i n d i v i d u a l personality differences and the extent to which they r e l a t e to beach user"behaviour. Implications f o r planning and design. Although some caution must be applied grhen placing the re s u l t s of the present study i n a planning or design context, I should point out that most space standards have been based primarily pn a r b i t r a r y decisions. For example, the C a l i f o r n i a Outdoor Recreation Committee Report (1960) set the optimum space allotment f o r beaches at 100 square 2 feet (9.3 meters ) per person. This value was based on seasonal attendance records excluding the three most crowded days which f e l l on holidays. This report f u r t h e r stated that i f attendance was higher than 70% of the density on the si x t h most crowded day, then the area was considered over-used. The present study represents a d i s t i n c t improvement over such guidelines i n that the behavioural c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of users have been used to a r r i v e at s o c i a l carrying capacity estimates. It i s i n t e r e s t i n g 2 to compare the C a l i f o r n i a standard of 100 f t . /person, to r e s u l t s based on the present research. This comparison may be roughly made by d i v i d i n g the average group size estimate (1.8 persons/group) into the minimum group 2 2 space standard (21.7 meters )/ This value (12.1 meters ) represents over a 20% increase over the 9.3 meter 2 estimate from the above report. We may conclude that, to the extent the two populations ( C a l i f o r n i a and western Canada) share s i m i l a r s p a t i a l needs and preferences, the C a l i f o r n i a beaches would be considered 'over-crowded' by the c r i t e r i o n suggested by the present study, at population d e n s i t i e s considered 'optimal' by the C.O.R.C. report. - 78 - A n important aspect of the r e s u l t s relevant to the planning and design p r o f e s s i o n s concerns the c a r r y i n g capacity estimates r e f e r r e d to above. T o place these r e s u l t s in p e r s p e c t i v e it is n e c e s s a r y to examine the question of optimality which the c a r r y i n g capacity concept i m p l i e s . Depending upon ones frame of reference, the population estimates derived f o r the three beaches may r e f l e c t 'maxima' instead of 'optima'. I stress t h i s point f o r two related reasons. The f i r s t point concerns the extent to which people adapt to high density conditions and how such adaptation r e l a t e s to user preferences and s a t i s f a c t i o n s . One might expect that users present during high density .periods might possess s k i l l s which allow them to cope successfully with con- d i t i o n s r e l a t i n g to crowded environments. However, coping successfully does not necessarily imply maximum s a t i s f a c t i o n . For example, users may tol e r a t e such conditions at less than optimum s a t i s f a c t i o n and p a r t i c i p a t e in the a c t i v i t y even though they might prefer to experience the beach at lower density l e v e l s . Thus we might predict that a cer t a i n segment of society maintains s k i l l s which allow them to cope successfully with conditions r e l a t i n g to crowded environments and do sp, even though t h e i r preferences might d i c t a t e otherwise. Since I made no d i r e c t attempt to asses user prefer- ences and s a t i s f a c t i o n based on such f a c t o r s as perceived crowding , I t i s not possible to know the extent to which t h i s problem applies to the question of optimum vs maximum carrying c a p a c i t i e s . The second reason f o r emphasizing the optimality question i s that the present r e s u l t s do not allow one to know the extent to which the sample of beach users i s representative of the o v e r a l l source population. Only those people a c t u a l l y at the beach were sampled and thus no data exist f o r those i n d i v i d u a l s who do not p a r t i c i p a t e . For example, c e r t a i n people may forego a t r i p to the beach because they per- ceive the area to be over crowded, too f a r away, or f a c i l i t i e s not con- s i s t e n t with expectations. Such people are thus ' f i l t e r e d out' and there- fore not represented i n any sampling procedure u t i l i z i n g on s i t e i n t e r - views or observations. S i m i l a r l y , as the re s u l t s have shown, personal- i t i e s of users d i f f e r and c e r t a i n differences seem to re l a t e to spacing preferences. These differences, of course, only r e l a t e to the sample, - 79 - and given the sample was representative*, of users at the three s i t e s in general. Since i t i s d i f f i c u l t to know whether various s e l e c t i o n pro- cesses mitigate against c e r t a i n segments of the regional population i t i s doubtful that the personality indices are r e f l e c t i v e of people i n gen- e r a l . Without an understanding of the r e l a t i v e proportion of key person- a l i t y v a r i a b l e s of the source population i t i s also doubtful whether optimal carrying capacity estimates can be calculated. For example, in the present study respondents with elevated p r o f i l e s on the pastor- alism scale were observed to require more open space than those scoring highly on the urbanism scale. It seems probable that others not found i n the sample would score more highly on the pastoralism scale and have even higher needs f o r space. Such people would r a r e l y v i s i t s i t e s such as the three areas in the present study since t h e i r need f o r open space could not e a s i l y be s a t i s f i e d i n such environments. The arguments above would suggest that to equitably manage rec- r e a t i o n a l resources such as beaches, the manager should sample the source population to determine the r e l a t i v e proportion of i n d i v i d u a l s maintaining relevant personality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Armed with such data the designer or manager should be i n a p o s i t i o n to b u i l d or maintain f a c i l i t i e s con- s i s t e n t with the needs of both actual and p o t e n t i a l users. Such a s t r a t - egy would eliminate the p o s s i b i l i t y of s e l e c t i n g against various segments of society. Granting, that, i n many cases, the manager may not have s u f f i c - ient resources to complete the requirements of such a study, an alternate strategy might consist of ensuring the presence of a range of f a c i l i t i e s , each s a t i s f y i n g one segment of the range of user preferences. Such a t a c t i c would provide valuable data on use rates f o r each f a c i l i t y and the manager could then i n f e r the r e l a t i v e need f or each class of f a c i l i t y . As mentioned i n an e a r l i e r section, i f such guidelines or procedures are not forthcoming, then the estimates derived from the present study would probabably serve to ensure adequate s a t i s f a c t i o n f o r the largest number of people. At le a s t using these estimates one can be r e l a t i v e l y well assured of not se r i o u s l y detracting from the spatial"hee~ds~of users. - 80 - The discussion to t h i s point has centered on space guidelines f o r public beaches; however, since the r e s u l t s were consistent with other more general work (H a l l , 1966 f o r example), the findings may apply to other setti n g s . The r e s u l t s seem e s p e c i a l l y applicable to environments where the type of s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n (or lack of i t ) i s consistent with behaviours c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of H a l l ' s ' s o c i a l and public distance zones'. For example, i n settings where the maintenance of the i n t e g r i t y of the s o c i a l group (including s o l i t a r y indivduals) i s important, the present research suggests designers should allow f o r at least 2.7 meters between the boundaries of any two design elements. A t y p i c a l example of the type of design setting where these r e s u l t s could be applied, are a i r p o r t , t r a i n and bus waiting areas. The present research suggests that f o r these areas, seating c l u s t e r s should not be placed much cl o s e r than the 2.7 meter zone above. Other areas where these r e s u l t s might apply are, plazas, parks, restaurants, etc. Of course, i n these settings the use of plants and other suitable perceptual b a r r i e r systems might be used to e f f e c t i v e l y decrease t h i s space requirement The most important point of the above discussion i s that space i t s e l f communicates the need to be separate from others. By struc- turing space i n t h i s way, other more c o s t l y , behaviourally oriented space control mechanisms need not be c a l l e d upon by the i n d i v i d u a l to maintain the s o c i a l i d e n t i t y of the group. In an age where high density environ- ments are often common features of our d a i l y l i v e s , the use of space stan- dards based on behavioural c r i t e r i a of actual and p o t e n t i a l users seem c r u c i a l . Without such standards, i t seems l i k e l y that many environments w i l l continue to compromise user needs and as a res u l t exacerbate the stress such high density settings undoubtedly o f f e r . Toward further research. Many questions r e l a t i n g to the ways in which people structure and use space, e x p e c i a l l y with respect to increasing density remain unanswered. The present research served as a source f o r many such questions, the most important of which are l i s t e d below: - 81 - 1) What arc the e f f e c t s of various v i s u a l and auditory b a r r i e r s on perceived density and s p a t i a l needs? 2) Does the experience of l i v i n g i n large urban envir- onments provide people with coping strategies not a v a i l a b l e to r u r a l inhabitants? 3) If these coping strategies e x i s t what are t h e i r form and how do they function under varying density conditions? 4) What are the c u l t u r a l t r a d i t i o n s and behaviour patterns that increase or decrease the a b i l i t y of i n d i v - iduals and groups to cope with close s p a t i a l proximity and high density conditions? 5) What are the forces of s e l e c t i o n in determining who uses a p a r t i c u l a r environment and how do these forces r e l a t e to the observed population, i . e . who are the people who decided not to p a r t i c i p a t e ? Answers to these questions might be best acquired by studying a population of beach users from a large metropolitan area such as New York, Los Angeles, or Hong Kong where beach den s i t i e s reach l e v e l s i n excess of the maximum derived from the present study. Of s p e c i a l i n t e r - est would be the plot of average nearest neighbor distance versus density. For example one might predict a threshold e f f e c t such that as in the pre- sent study a s i m i l a r asymptote would be observed u n t i l the maximum derived density was reached whereupon a new lower asymptote would appear. This would indicate a need f o r a basic amount of space but would d i f f e r i n that users at the highest d e n s i t i e s would be s a t i s f i e d to obtain much less space in order to p a r t i c i p a t e in the beach experience. This process i f observed might be linked to p r i o r expectations of how crowded the beach would be or to the perceived costs and benefits of the rec r e a t i o n a l exper- ience. Such high density beaches would also o f f e r the opportunity to examine ways of l i m i t i n g s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n other than the regulation of space. Such mechanisms might include behaviours associated with minimizing - 82 - eye contact, such as c o n t r o l l i n g body o r i e n t a t i o n and gaze, l y i n g face down, f a l l i n g asleep, reading, etc. S i m i l a r behaviours have been shown to serve as powerful regulators of s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n nnd sensory input (Chance 1962; Argyle and Dean, 1965; Grant, 1969; Goldberg. K i e s l e r and C o l l i n s , 1969; McGrew, 1972; Efran and Cheyne, 1974). Such a study would provide important data on how and when these behaviours are used and whe- ther t h e i r occurrence and frequency are related to density considerations in a natural s e t t i n g . The answers to these questions and others would provide valuable information pertaining to issues and concepts r e l a t i n g to crowding, stim- ulus overload and the e f f e c t s of "selection i n determining the composition of any given referent group. A public beach may be one of the most useful settings i n which to conduct such research. - 83 - LITERATURE CITED Altman, J. 1975. The Env i ronmcnt and S o c i a l Behaviour: Privacy, Personal Space, T e r r i t o r y , Crowding. Monterey: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co. Ardrey, R. 1966. The T e r r i t o r i a l Imperative. Atheneum, New York. Argylo, M. & Dean, J. 1965. Eye contact, distance & a f f i l i a t i o n . Sociometry 28:289-304. Bailey, K. G., Hartnett, J. J. & Gibson, S. W. 1972. Tmplied threat and the t e r r i t o r i a l f a ctor i n personal space. Psychological Reports 30:263-270 Barker, R„ I960. Ecology and motivation. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation 8:1-50. Barker, R„ & Gump, P. 1964. Big School, Small School. Stanford Univ. Press. Becker, F. D. & Mayo, C. 1971. Delineating personal distance and t e r r i - tory, Environment and Behaviour 3:375-382. Becker, F.D. 1973. Study of s p a t i a l markers. J. of Personality and S o c i a l Psychology 26:439. Blanchard, D. B., & Erickson, M. M. 1949. The cycle of the Gambel sparrow. University of C a l i f o r n i a Publications in Zoology 47:255-318 Blank, T. H. & Ash, J. S. 1956. The concept of t e r r i t o r y in the partridge Perdix p. perdix. Ibis 98:379-389. Blishen, B. 1958. The construction and use of an occupational class scale. Canadian Journal of Economics and P o l i t i c a l Science 24:519-53lT ' Brougham, J. 1968. An evaluation of crowding upon the q u a l i t y of the r e c r e a t i o n a l experience. M.A. Thesis. Department of Geography University of Western Ontario. Brown, J.L. 1964. The evolution of d i v e r s i t y in avian t e r r i t o r i a l systems. The Wilson B u l l e t i n 76:160-169. Brown, J. L. & Orians, G. H. 1970. Spacing patterns in mobile animals. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 1:239-262. Burt, W.H. 1943. T e r r i t o r i a l i t y and home range concepts as applied to mammals. Journal of Mammalogy 24(3):346-52. C a l i f o r n i a Public Outdoor Recreation Plan, Part II. C a l i f o r n i a Public Outdoor Recreation Committee. 1960. p. 48. Chance, M. R. A. 1962. An i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of some agonistic postures; the r o l e of " c u t - o f f " acts and postures. Symposia of the Geological Society of London 8:71-89. - 84 - Clarke, P. J. & Evans, F. C. 1954. Distance to nearest neighbour as a measure of s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n populations. Ecology 35:445-453. Conder, P. J. 1949. Individual distance. Ibis 91:649-655. Cook, M. 1970. Experiments on or i e n t a t i o n and proxemics. Human Relations 23:61-76. Craik, K. II. 1966. The prospects f o r an environmental psychology. I PAR Research B u l l e t i n . Berkeley: University of C a l i f o r n i a . Craik, K. H. 1969. Assessing environmental d i s p o s i t i o n s . Paper read at the Annual Meetings of the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C. Craik, K. H. 1970 (a). The environmental d i s p o s i t i o n s of environmental decision-makers. Annals of the American Academy of P o l i t i c a l and Soc i a l Science 389:87-94. Craik, K. H. 1970 (b). Environmental Psychology. In K. II. Craik, et a l New Directions i n Psychology IV. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Cur t i s , J. T. & Mcintosh, R. P. 1950. The i n t e r - r e l a t i o n s h i p of cer t a i n a n a l y t i c phyto-sociological characters. Ecology 31:434-455. Dacey, M. F. 1964. Two dimensional random point patterns: A Review and an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Papers and Proceedings of the Regional Science Association 13:41-58. Davis, Go & Ayres, V„ 1973, Photographic methods on behavior i n the human m i l i e u : New developments and c r i t i q u e . In Environmental Design Research Assoc. V o l . 2,. pp. 280-285. ' '. ~~ Dice, L. R. 1952. Measure of spacing between ind i v i d u a l s within a pop- u l a t i o n . Contributions of the Laboratory of Verebrate Biology. Uni v e r s i t y of Michigan 55:1-23. Duke, M. P. & Nowicki, S. J r . 1972. A new measure and s o c i a l learning model f or interpersonal distance. Journal of Experimental Research i n Personality 6:119-132. Edney, J. J. & Jordon-Edhey, N.L. 1974. T e r r i t o r i a l spacing on a beach. Sociometry 37 (1): 92-104. Efran,M. G. & Cheyne, J.A. 1973. Shared space: Cooperative control of s p a t i a l areas by two i n t e r a c t i n g i n d i v i d u a l s . Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 5:201. Efran, M. G. & Cheyne, J.A. 1974. A f f e c t i v e concomitance of the inva- sion of shared space: Behavioural, p h y s i o l o g i c a l and verbal i n d i c a - tors. Journal of Personality and S o c i a l Psychology 29:219-226. - 85 - Felip e , N. J. & Sommer, R. 1966. Invasions of personal space. So c i a l Problems 14 (2):206-214 - Getis, A. 1964. Temporal land-use pattern with the use of nearest neigh- bour and quadi-at methods. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 54:391-399. Gleason, H. A. 1920. Some applications of the quadrat method. B u l l e t i n of the Torey Botanical Club 47:21-33. Goldberg, G.N., K e i s l e r , C. A. & C o l l i n s , 13. E. 1969. Visual behaviour and face-to-face distance during i n t e r a c t i o n . Sociometry 32:43-53. Goin, Olive B. & Goin, C.J. 1962. Introduction to Herpetology. W.H. Freeman, San Francisco. Grant, E. C. 1969. Human faciad expression. Man 4:525-536. Greig-Smith, P. 1964. Quantitative Plant Ecology. Second e d i t i o n . London: Butterworth and Co. Limited. H a l l , E.T. 1966. The Hidden Dimension. New York: Doubleday. H a l l , E. R. L. & Devore, I. 1965. Baboon s o c i a l behaviour. In Primate Behaviour: F i e l d Studies of Monkeys and Apes. ( I . Devore, Ed.). 53-110. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Hardwick, W. G. & C o l l i n s , J. B. 1973. Vancouver Urban Futures Project: Interim Report Series. University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Departments of Geography and Adult Education. Hediger, H. 1941. Biologische Gesetzmassigkeiten im Verhalten von Wirbeltieren. Mitteilungen der Naturforschenden Gesellshaft Bern, 1940, pp.37-55" " ~ ' Hediger, H. 1955. Studies of the psychology and behaviour of captive animals i n zoos and circuses, trans, by G. Sircom. C r i t e r i o n Books, New York. Reprinted as The psychology and behaviour of animals i n zoos and circuses, Dover, New York, 1968. Karabenick, S. & Meisels, M. 1972. E f f e c t s of performance evaluation on interpersonal distance. Journal of Personality 40:275-286. Kaufman, J.H. 1962. Ecology and s o c i a l behavior of the co a t i , Nasua narica, on Barro Colorado Island, Panama. University of C a l i f o r n i a Publications in Zoology 60:95-222. Kummer, H. 1971. Spacing mechanisms i n s o c i a l behaviour. In Man and Beast: Comparative So c i a l Behaviour. (J.F. Eisenberg & W. S. D i l l o n , Eds.) Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n Press. - 86 - Lamphear, S. C. 1970. Personality and recreation: Study of particpant behaviour in selected outdoor recreation a c t i v i t i e s . D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstract International 30, 12-B.5314. Lorenz, K.Z. 1966. On Aggression. Harcourt, Brace & Jovanovich, New York. Lorr, M., Daston, P. & Smith, I. R. 1967. An analysis of mood states. Education and Psychological Measurement 27:89-96. Luft, J. 1966. On nonverbal interaction.. Journal of Psychology 63:261-26* McBride, G. 1964. A general theory of s o c i a l organization and behaviour. University of Queensland Papers. Faculty of Veterinary Science Vol. 1 (2). The University of Queensland Press. St. Lucia. McBride, G., King, M.G. & James, J.W. 1965. Social proximity e f f e c t s on galvanic skin responses i n adult humans. Journal of Psychology 61:153-157. McGrew, W. C. 1972. An e t h o i o g i c a l study of children's behaviour. New York: Academic Press. McKechnic, G. E. 1973. Manual for the Environmental Response Inventory (ERI). Research E d i t i o n , Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc., Palo A l t o , C a l i f o r n i a . McKechnie, G. E. 1974. The psychological structure of l e i s u r e : past behaviour. Journal of Leisure Research 6:27-45. Meisels, M. & Canter, F. M. 1970. Personal space and personality charac- t e r i s t i c s : A non-confirmation. Psychological Reports 27:287-290. Meyer, P. A. & Bryan, R. C. 1974. Recreational crowding and the prospects f o r f i s h - r e l a t e d recreation - P a c i f i c Rim National Park. Fisheries and Marine Service, Southern Operations Branch, P a c i f i c Region; Technical Report series No. PAC/T-74-22. M i l l e r , R. S. & Stephen, W. J. D. 1966. S p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n flocks of s a n d h i l l cranes. (Grus canadensis). Ecology 47:323-327. Mohn, E. & Stavem, P. 1974. On the d i s t r i b u t i o n of randomly placed d i s c s . Biometrics 30:137-156. Mo r i s i t a , M. 1954. Estimation of population density by spacing method. Mem. Faculty of Science, Kyushu University. Series E 1:187-197. Morton, M. L. 1967. Diurnal feeding patterns in white-crowned sparrows, Zonotrichia leucophrys gambelii. Condor 69:45-64. Noble, G.K. 1939. The role of dominance in the s o c i a l l i f e of birds. Auk 56:263-73. - 87 - Patterson, M. L. 1973. S t a b i l i t y of non-verbal immediacy behaviours. Journal of Experimental S o c i a l Psychology. 9:97-109. Patterson, M. L. & Holmes, D. S. 1966. Soci a l i n t e r a c t i o n correlates of MMPI extroversion-introversion scale. American Psychologist 21:724-725. Patterson, M. L., Mullens, S. & Romano, J. 1971. Compensatory reactions to s p a t i a l i n t r u s i o n . Sociometry 34:114-121. Pielou, E. C. 1969. An Introduction to Mathematical Ecology. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Rapoport, A. 1975„ Toward a r e d e f i n i t i o n of density,, Environment & Behavior 7.(2) :133-1580 " Sabine, W. S. 1956. Integrating mechanisms of the junco winter f l o c k . Condor 58:338-341. Seton, E.T. 1909. L i f e - h i s t o r i e s of northern animals: An account of the mammals of Manitoba, 2 vols. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York. Sewell, A. F. & Heisler, J.T. 1973, Personality-correlates of proximity preferences. Journal of Psychology 85:151. Skellam, J. G. 1952. Studies i n s t a t i s t i c a l ecology. I. Sp a t i a l pattern, Biometrika 39:346-362. Smith, G. H. 1953. Size-distance judgements of human faces (projected images). Journal of General Psychology 49:45-64. Smith, G. H. 1954. Personality scores and personal distance e f f e c t . Journal of So c i a l Psychology 39:57-62. Sommer, R. 1966. Man's proximate environment. Journal of Social Issues 22 (4) :59-70. Sommer, R. 1969. Personal space: The behavioural basis of design. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J. : P r e n t i c e - H a l l , Inc. Sommer, R. & Becker, F. D. 1966. T e r r i t o r i a l defense and the good neigh- bor. Journal, of Personality and So c i a l Psychology 11:85-92. Stokols, D..1976. The experience of crowding i n primary and secondary environments. Environment & Behavior 8(1) :49-86„ Thompson, H. R. 1956. D i s t r i b u t i o n of distance to Nth neighbour i n a popu- l a t i o n of randomly d i s t r i b u t e d i n d i v i d u a l s . Ecology 37 (2):391-394. - 88 - Tinbergen, N. 1952. The curious behavior of the Stickleback. S c i e n t i f i c American 182 (6):22-26, Verburg, K. & Rees, W. E. 1975. The carrying capacity of recr e a t i o n a l lands: A review. Occasional Paper No. 1, Parks Canada, P r a i r i e Region. Winnipeg, Manitoba. Webb, E.J., Campbell, D.T., Schwartz, R.D. & Sechrest, L. 1966. Unobtrusive Measures: Nonreactive Research i n the Soci a l Sciences. Rand McNally, Chicago, 111. Weinstein, L. 1968. The mother-child schema, anxiety, and academic achieve- ment i n elementary school boys. Child Development 39:257-264. Wicker,.A. 1973. Undermanning theory and research; Implications f o r the study of psychological and behavioral e f f e c t s of excess populations. Representation Research i n Soci a l Psychology 4:185-206, Wicker, A,, McGrath, J , and Armstrong, G. 1972. Organization size and be- havior setting capacity as determinants of member p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Behavioral Science 17:499-513. Willems, E.P. & Campbell, D.E. 1976. One path through the c a f e t e r i a . Environment & Behavior 8(1):125-140. Williams, J. L. 1971. Personal space and i t s r e l a t i o n to extroversion- in t r o v e r s i o n . Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 3:156-160. Wilson, E. 1975. Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. 88a - APPENDIX A THE SURVEY - 89 - School of Community & University of B r i t i s h Time Group M F Map No. Regional Planning Area_ Columbia Date RECREATIONAL ATTITUDE SURVEY As part of a study to determine how people view p a r t i c u l a r r e c r e a t i o n a l environments, we have devised three surveys which are contained in this booklet. Your co-operation w i l l provide a better understanding of how people perceive and behave with respect to each other as well as toward certain aspects of recreational.settings. The f i r s t section contains 184 statements concerning various aspects of the environment and your own att i t u d e s . The second i s a c h e c k l i s t of recreational and leis u r e a c t i v i t i e s which you may have pa r t i c i p a t e d i n at one time or another. The t h i r d i s a short l i s t of questions concerning your own background which w i l l help in understanding why people d i f f e r . No name or other i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i s required and your anonymity i s ensured. Work quickly -- f i r s t impressions are usually the most accurate. Most people f i n i s h in 20 - 25 minutes. Each section i s self-explanatory and contains i t s own set of i n s t r u c t i o n s . Thank you for your co-operation and time! The f i r s t section begins on the next page. - 90 - - 2 - ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE INVENTORY Please read each statement and decide quickly whether you personally agree or disagree with i t . To respond, simply c i r c l e the answer to the l e f t of each statement according to these categories: SA ~ Strongly Agree A — Agree N — Neutral D — Disagree SD — Strongly Disagree Again, work quickly. Do not be concerned i f some items seem s i m i l a r to ones you have seen e a r l i e r . SA A N D SD 1. I l i k e amusement parks. SA A N D SD 2. I would enjoy the work ' of an archi t e c t SA A N D SD 3. SA A N D SD 4. SA A N D SD SA A N D SD 6. SA A N D SD 7. SA A N D SD 8. SA A N D SD 9. Machines increase man's freedom. I prefer to l i v e in an area where neighbours keep to themselves. I would enjoy d r i v i n g a racing car. The idea of walking into the forest and " l i v i n g o f f the land" for a week appeals to me. L i f e in the c i t y i s more int e r e s t i n g than l i f e on a farm. I would enjoy building a radio. T r a v e l l i n g i s n ' t r e a l l y worth the e f f o r t . SA A N D SD 10. I have my best thoughts when I am alone. SA A N D SD 11. I enjoy browsing in bookstores. SA A N D SD 12. It would be fun to move around and l i v e in di f f e r e n t parts of the country. SA A N D SD 13. It i s boring to spend a l l day working with . your hands. SA A N D SD 14. SA A N D SD 15. SA A N D SD 16. SA A N D SD 17. SA A N D SD 18. SA A N D SD 19. It i s ex c i t i n g to go shopping in a large c i t y . There should be a law against skyscrapers. I l i k e to be by myself much of the time. I enjoy browsing i n antique shops. I sometimes daydream of being stranded on a t r o p i c a l i s l a n d . I l i k e places that have the fe e l i n g of being o l d . SA A N D SD 20. I shudder at the thought of fin d i n g a spider i n my bed. SA A N D SD 21. SA A N D SD 22. SA A N D SD 23. SA A N D SD 24. SA A N D SD 25. SA A N D SD 26. SA A N D SD 27. SA A N D SD 28. I would enjoy t r a v e l i n g around the world on a s a i l i n g ship. A l l e y s are i n t e r e s t i n g places to explore. I prefer a s t i c k - s h i f t car to one with an automatic transmission. I l i k e c r y s t a l chandeliers. I l i k e homes with stone f l o o r s . I l i k e the vari e t y of stimulation one finds i n the c i t y . I usually save spare nuts and bolt3. I get annoyed when my neighbours are noisy. SR A N D SD 29. SA A N D SD 30. SA A N D SD 31. SA A N D SD 32. SA A N D SD 33. SA A N D SD 34. SA A N D SD 35. SA A N D SD 36. SA A N D SD 37. SA A N D SD 38. SA A N D SD 39. SA A N D SD 40. SA A N D SD 41. SA A N D SD 42. SA A N D SD 43. SA A N D SD 44 . SA A N D SD 45. SA A N D SD 4G. SA A N D SD 47. When buying clothes, I usually look more for comfort than for s t y l e . _ • I am quite s k i l l f u l with my hands. It's annoying to have to share an o f f i c e or work space with someone. I l i k e to v i s i t h i s t o r i c places. Suburbs should replace the c i t y as the centre of c u l t u r a l l i f e . I would prefer working with precision power tools. I have d i f f i c u l t y concentrating when things are noisy. I would rather remodel an old house than b u i l d a new one. Wo must move ahead and not worry about past f a i l u r e s . C i t i e s are too noisy and crowded for me. I often f e e l uneasy in a large crowd of people. I can repair just about anything around the house. I often have trouble getting the privacy I want. There should be a law against anyone owning more than a thousand acres of land. I f e e l most secure when I am working around the house. It i s hopeless to try to save our c i t i e s . It would be fun to own some o l d - fashioned costumes. Motorcycles should be kept out of recreation areas. I l i k e modern furniture better than the more t r a d i t i o n a l s t y l e s . SA A N D SD 48. SA A N D SD 49. SA A N D SD 50. SA A N D. SD 51. SA A N D SD 52. SA A N D SD 53. SA A N D SD 54. SA A N D SD 55. SA A N D SD 56. SA A N D SD 57. SA A N D SD 58. SA A N D SD 59. SA A N D SD 60. SA A N D SD 61. SA A N D SD 62. I would l i k e a job that involved a l o t of t r a v e l i n g . It i s important f o r me to own top q u a l i t y equipment. As a c h i l d , I often watched when someone repaired things around the house. I l i k e the sounds of a c i t y s t r e e t . Old sections of the c i t y are more i n t e r e s t - ing than the new areas. I often f e e l lonely when I am by myself. As a c h i l d , I was taught respect for a l l l i v i n g things. It i s good for man to submit to the forces of nature. I prefer friends who are r e l i a b l e and even- tempered. I often think of s e t t l i n g down on a farm some day. I don't l i k e being completely alone. I would l i k e to l i v e i n a modern, planned community. Zoning laws and other building controls are necessary to protect the r i g h t s of the p u b l i c . I l i k e things that have pr e c i s i o n moving parts. I would enjoy enter- t a i n i n g famous people. - 4 - SA A N D SD 63. SA A N D SD 64. SA A N D SD 65. SA A N D SD 66. SA A N D SD 67. SA A N D SD 68. SA A N D SD 69. SA A N D SD 70. SA A N D SD 71. SA A N D SD 72. SA A N D SD 73. SA A N D SD 74. SA A N D SD 75. SA A N D SD 76. SA A N D SD 77. SA A N D SD 78. SA A N D SD 79. I often f e e l that I am a part of the space around me. I can i d e n t i f y many of the lo c a l flowers and trees. I would l i k e to work with computers. I have v i v i d memories of where I l i v e d as a c h i l d . Our national forests should be preserved in t h e i r natural state, with roads and buildings prohibited. Plying in a small airplane would make me nervous. As a c h i l d , I was a f r a i d of being outside by myself. It i s better i f people l i v e out th e i r l i v e s i n one place. I would enjoy owning a fancy watch. ' I would enjoy r i d i n g a motorcycle. Making ra i n by a r t i f i c i a l l y "seeded" clouds i s a great technological advance. I enjoy staying up a l l night. I am happiest when I am alone. No c h i l d should have to grow up in a ru r a l area. I get annoyed when people drop by my house without warning. A firep l a c e adds a special f e e l i n g of cor.incss to a room. It's i n teresting to learn about the history of the Place where you l i v e . SA A N D SD 80. SA A N D SD 81. SA A N D SD 82. SA A N D SD 83. SA A N D SD 84. SA A N D SD 85. SA A N D SD 86. SA A N D SD 87. SA A N D SD 88. SA A N D SD 89. SA A N D SD 90. SA A N D SD 91. SA A N D SD 92. SA A N D SD 93. SA A N D SD 94. SA A N D SD 95. SA A N D SD 96. It i s fun to make scale models of things. I would enjoy l i v i n g the rest of my l i f e i n a large c i t y . E l e c t r i c i t y fascinates me. I l i k e s o c i a l gatherings where I can enjoy myself without worrying about other people. I don't think that I would ever want to be hypnotized Small town l i f e i s too boring for me. F e r t i l i z e r s improve the qu a l i t y of food. I often get the f e e l i n g that I j u s t must be alone. A person has a r i g h t to modify the environment to s u i t his needs. Sometimes I'm a f r a i d of too much stimulation - from sounds, colours, odors, etc I understand the a r c h i t e c t - u r a l idea that form follows function. I enjoy working i n a flower garden. I enjoy owning a good piece of equipment, even i f I don't get to use i t much. I pride myself on having a home which i s always open to f r i e n d s . Fences make good neighbours I'd rather l i v e i n the suburbs than i n the c i t y . A complex technological society cannot t o l e r a t e i n d i v i d u a l i t y . - 5 - SA A N D SD 97. SA A N D SD 98. SA A N D SD 99. SA A N D SD 100. SA A N D SD 101. SA A N D SD 102. SA A N D SD 103. SA A N D SD 104. SA A N D SD 105. SA A N D SD 106. SA A N D SD 107. SA A N D SD 108. SA A N D SD 109. SA A N D SD 110. SA A N D SD 111. SA A N D SD 112. SA A N D SD 113. I enjoy a change i n the weather even when i t .turns bad. It i s unsafe to ride on buses these days. Country people are more honest than c i t y people. Hiking i s boring. I'd be a f r a i d to l i v e i n a place where there were no people nearby. I f i n d street noise very d i s t r a c t i n g . I have always been some- what of a daredevil. I would enjoy r i d i n g i n a crowded subway. I am quite s e n s i t i v e to the "character" of a bui l d i n g . I l i k e to ride on r o l l e r coasters. I enjoy tinkering with mechanical things. I do not l i k e to loan things to neighbours. I would enjoy l i v i n g i n a h i s t o r i c house. Sometimes I wish I had power over the forces of nature. I have no interest i n b a l l e t . I li k e to read about the history of places. DirtH control practices should be accepted by everyone. SA A N D SD 114. SA A N D SD 115. SA A N D SD 116. SA A N D SD 117. SA A N D SD 118. SA A N D SD 119. SA A N D SD 120. SA A N D SD 121. SA A N D SD 122. SA A N D SD 123. SA A H D SD 124. SA A N D SD 125. SA A N D SD 126. SA A N D SD 127. SA A N D SD 128. SA A N D SD 129. Jet a i r t r a v e l i s one of the great advances of our society. I have v i v i d memories of the neighbourhood where I grew up. I would enjoy going to the opera. Today people are too i s o l a t e d from the forces of nature. It i s easy f o r me to work undistracted i n most si t u a t i o n s . I l i k e to dress i n the l a t e s t fashions. I seldom pay a t t e n t i o n to what I eat. I t i s dangerous to work around heavy machinery. The wilderness i s c r u e l and harsh. Modern buildings are seldom as a t t r a c t i v e as older ones. I l i k e experimental a r t . I often wish for the seclusion of a weekend re t r e a t . I would l i k e to own an expensive camera. Building projects which disrupt the ecology should be abandoned and the land returned to i t s natural state. The problems of the c i t i e s w i l l never be solved. I am e a s i l y d i s t r a c t e d by people moving about. -94 - SA A N D SD 130. SA A N D SD 131. SA A N D SD 132. SA A N D SD 133. SA A N D SD 134. SA A N D SD 135. SA A N D SD 136. SA A N D SD 137. SA A N D SD 138. SA A N D SD 139. SA A N D SD 140. SA A N D SD 141. SA A N D SD 142. SA A N D SD 143. SA A N D SD 144. SA A N D SD 145. I often have trouble finding my way around a new area. In spite of a l l talk about p o l l u t i o n , the earth i s s t i l l a safe place to l i v e . I need more variety i n my l i f e than other people seem to need. I usually avoid public rest rooms. I often have trouble fi g u r i n g out how to use household appliances. I usually enjoy having l o t s of people around. I would enjoy watching movies made 15 or 20 years ago. Natural resources must be preserved even i f people must do without. I l i k e to get up early to see the sun r i s e . I am a f r a i d of d r i v i n g in the c i t y . Trespassing laws should be more c a r e f u l l y enforced. I am an adventurous person. I often have strong emotional reactions to buildings. There i s too l i t t l e emphasis on privacy i n our society. It i s dangerous nowadays to l i v e in a large c i t y . I seldom vary the route I take to everyday destinations. SA A N D SD 146. SA A N D SD 147. SA A N D SD 148. SA A N D SD 149. SA A N D SD 150. SA A N D SD 151. SA A N D SD 152. SA A N D SD 153. SA A N D SD 154. SA A N D SD 155. SA A N D SD 156. SA A N D SD 157. SA A N D SD 158. SA A N D SD 159. SA A N D SD 160. SA A N D SD 161. SA A N D SD 162. SA A N D SD 163. It i s important for me to f e e l that I am in harmony with the forces of nature. When i t comes to f i x i n g things, I am hopeless. Modern communities are p l a s t i c and ugly. Science does as much harm as good. I get upset i f I must do too many things at once. I would f e e l safer on the highway i f speed l i m i t s were reduced. I would l i k e to take f l y i n g lessons. Most jewellry i s a waste of money. I l i k e to say h e l l o to my neighbours. I enjoy c o l l e c t i n g things that most people would consider junk. There are often times when I need complete s i l e n c e . I worry a l o t about the r i s i n g crime rate. The c u l t u r a l l i f e of a b i g c i t y i s very important to me I l i k e to go to shopping centres where everything i s i n one place. I ara fond of o r i e n t a l rugs. I am a f r a i d of heights. People who try to r e p a i r appliances themselves usually end up breaking them I would l i k e to l i v e i n a palace or a c a s t l e . - 95' - - 7 - SA A N D SD 164. SA A N D SD 165. SA A N D SD 166. SA A N D SD 167. SA A N D SD 168. SA A N D SD 169. SA A N D SD 170. SA A N D SD 171. SA A N D SD 172. SA A N D SD 173. SA A N D SD 174. Sight-seeing i s tedious and boring. The c i t i e s contain the best aspects of modern l i f e . I t ' s nice to buy a new car every year or so. Bathtubs have become obsolete. Places often play an important role i n my dreams. I would l i k e to b u i l d a cabin i n the woods. I enjoy being i n dangerous places. Everyone should have the opportunity to l i v e i n a great c i t y . It's fun to walk in the rain even i f you get wet. Old buildings are usually depressing. I would enjoy l i v i n g on a houseboat. SA A N D SD 175. SA A N D SD 176. SA A N D SD 177. SA A N D SD 178. SA A N D SD 179. SA A N D SD 180. SA A N D SD 181. SA A N D SD 182. SA A N D SD 183. SA A N D SD 184. Computers may someday take over the world. I l i k e to be on the move, not t i e d down to any one place. Mental problems are more common i n the c i t y than i n the country. Odors often bring back distant memories. I l i k e to care for animals. A man should spend h i s l e i s u r e time at home with his family. If I had the money, I would enjoy owning an expensive stereo set. I f e e l a great a t t r a c t i o n to the sea. I would rather sleep on the open ground, than i n a tent. Given enough time, science w i l l solve most human problems. -96- - LEISURE ACTIVITIES BLANK Balow i s a l i s t of l e i s u r e and recreational a c t i v i t i e s . For each a c t i v i t y indicate the extent of your p a r t i c i p a t i o n using the following system: N - You have never engaged i n the a c t i v i t y . T You t r i e d i t once or a few times. 0 - You used to to i t regularly, but now no longer do i t regularly. 0 - You occasionally p a r t i c i p a t e in the . a c t i v i t y at t h i s time. R - You currently p a r t i c i p a t e regularly i n the a c t i v i t y . Check the appropriate blank to indicate your p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n each of the following a c t i v i t i e s : >. iH r H iO >. •P C •H 0 0 U 4J •H <0 u •o 0) r H UJ -0 id 3 > •H 0) u tr> 01 U U) o 01 z E-i D o oz, N T u 0 R 10 >. 4J c r H •H 0 0 IH 4J - r l 10 u • d Ul r H di 01 •a 10 3 > •H o CP Cl U 01 u <1) H o a; N T u 0 R 1 Acting (dramatics 2 Amateur radio 3 Archery 4 Attending concerts 5 Attending auctions 6 Auto racing 7 Auto repairing 8 Back packing 9 Badminton 10 Baseball or S o f t b a l l 11 Basketball 12 B i c y c l i n g .13 B i l l i a r d s or pool 14 Bird watching 15 Boating (rowing) 16 Bookbinding 17 Bowling 18 Boxing 19 Camping 20 Canoeing 21. Carpentry 22 Ceramics or pottery 23 Checkers or go 24 Clu-sr. 25 C h i l d - r e l a t e d a c t i v i t i e s (e.g. , scouts, PTA) 26 C i v i c organizations 27 C o l l e c t i n g (antiques, coins, etc.) 28 Conservation or ecology organizations 29 Cooking and baking 30 Crossword puzzles 31 Dancing b a l l e t or modern 32 Dancing (social) 33 Darkroom work (photography) 34 Designing clothes 35 Dining out 36 Driving (motoring) 37 Electronics 30 Encounter groups 39 Exercising 40 Fencing 41. Fishing (deep-sea) 42 Fishing (fresh water) 43 Flower arranging 44 Flying (or gliding) 45 Folkdancing 46 Footbal1 47 Fraternal organizations 48 Gambling (casino) 49 Gardening 50 Going to movies - 97 -. •• LEISURE ACTIVITIES BLANK, p. 2. >, rH" Hi >. r. fH •ri 0 o - H JJ •a u T) tn ai •o 10 3 > •H ai o C u Ul u 01 sr. E-i D O OS N T U 0 R 4J c •H o o U .u •<-t D TI 111 0) •a 3 > •H o • al U in o a) Z E-i g a; N T U (3 R 51 Going to plays or lectures 91 Sculpture 52 Going to horseraces 92 Sewing 53 Going to nightclubs 93 Shuffleboard 54 Golf 94 Sightseeing 55 Gymnastics 95 Singing 56 Hiking or walking ; 96 Skiing 57 Home decorating 97 Skin diving 58 Homeowner organizations . 98 Social drinking 59 Horseback r i d i n g ; 99 Squash or handball 60 Horseshoes 100 Sunbathing 61 Hunting 101 Surfboarding 62 Ice skating 102 Swimming 63 Jewelry making 103 Table tennis (ping 64 Jig-saw puzzles pong) 65 Jogging 104 Taking pictures 66 Judo or karate ^ (photography) 67 Keeping pets 105 Talking on telephone 68 Kite f l y i n g ; ; 106 Tennis 69 K n i t t i n g or crocheting 107 T r a v e l l i n g abroad 70 Leatherworking 108 V i s i t i n g Museums 109 V i s i t i n g friends 71 Listening to the radio ' 110 V o l l e y b a l l 72 Marksmanship \ 73 Mechanics 111 Volunteer f i r e f i g h t i n g 74 Mctalworking 11.2 Watching team sports 75 Model building 113 Watching TV shows 76 Motorboating ; 114 Waterskiing 77 Motorcycling . 115 Weaving 78 Mountain climbing 116 Wei.ghtlifting 79 Needlework 117 Windowshopping 80 Painting and drawing 118 Wrestling 119 Writing poetry or 81 Playing poker s t o r i e s 82 Playing bridge . 120 Writing l e t t e r s 83 Playing records (music) 84 Playing a musical 121 Woodworking and instrument related c r a f t s 85 P o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t i e s . 86 Reading (books, plays, Others not l i s t e d (specify): poetry) 87 Reading (newspapers, ; . magazines) . ; •88 Religious organizations 89 Ro l l e r skating 90 S a i l i n g . BACKGROUND INFORMATION Age: Sex: F M Marital Status: a. Single d. Divorced b. Married e. Separated c. Widowed f. Co-habiting If you have any children, how many? How many brothers and s i s t e r s do you have? Check the highest l e v e l of education which you attained? Elementary Some High School High School graduate Some University or College University Degree Some graduate work M.A. or equivalent Ph.D., M.D., L.L.B., E.D.D., etc. How many years have you l i v e d i n each of these urban centres: over 1 m i l l i o n -10,000 - 50,000 100,000 - 1 m i l l i o n 5,000 - 10,000 50,000 - 100,000 below 5,000 How many automobiles are at your disposal in your household? What i s your occupation? Please be s p e c i f i c . What was your household income before taxes during the l a s t tax year? Of your total time spent in recreational and leisure a c t i v i t i e s , what percentage i s spent away from the c i t y as opposed to in the ci t y ? Away from the c i t y »( + i n the c i t y % = 100% OPTIONAL WORD LIST SURVEY If you f e c i you have any extra time there i s an optional survey below which consists of 60 words which describe how you may f e e l at t h i s time. The survey takes about 5 minutes and i s designed to measure your personal feelings at this time. If you wish to complete the survey, for each word merely c i r c l e the number which best indicates how you f e e l at t h i s moment according to the following scheme: 1. Not at a l l 2. A l i t t l e 3. Moderately 4. Strongly 5. Extremely Work, quickly — f i r s t impressions are usually the most accurate. rH rH rH >1 rt a m >. rH •p rH 4-1 •p <d e id •P ki c OJ •rJ a> 0 u 4J rH •0 u p. 0 0 4J X Z < Ul w 1 2 3 4 5 rH >. rH rH >. id III HI >. rH rH •P rH 0) P •P rd Oi G id •P c (1) •H 01 o U JJ rH XI n *J 0 0 •p X 2 «: s in w 1 2 3 4 5 1. Active 1 2 3 4 5 2. Cheerful 1 2 3 4 5 3. J i t t e r y 1 2 3 4 5 4. Pretty good 1 2 3 4 5 5. Angry 1 2 3 4 5 6. Excited 1 2 3 4 5 7. Bad-tempered 1 2 3 4 5 8. Apathetic 1 2 3 4 5 9. On edge 1 o 3 4 5 10. Nervous 1 .2 3 4 5 11. Pensive 1 2 3 4 ' 5 .12. Gay 1 2 3 4 5 13. Annoyed 1 2 3 4 5 14. Earnest 1 2 3 .4 5 15. Resentful 1 2 3 4 5 16. Helpless 1 2 3' 4 5 17. Sluggish 1 2 3 4 5 18. Serene 1 2 3 4 5 19. Worthless 1 2 3 4 5 20. Frightened 1 2 3 4 5 21. Calm 1 2 3 4 5 22. Contemplative 1 2 3 4 5 23. Nonchalant 1 2 3 4 5 24. Vigorous . 1 2 3 4 5 25. Serious 1 2 3 4 5 26. Tense 1 2 3 4 5 27. Furious 1 2 3 4 5 28. Languid 1 2 3 4 •5 29. Hated 1 2 3 4 5 30. Introspective 1 2 3 • 4 5 31. Lazy 1 2 3 4 5 32. Treoccupied 1 2 3 4 5 33. Thoughtful 1 2 3 4 5 34. Happy-go-lucky 1 2 3 4 ' 5 35. Top of the world 1 2 3 4 5 36. Hopeless 1 2 3 4 5 37. Weary 1 2 3 4 5 38. F u l l of pep 1 2 3 4 5 39. Light-hearted 1 2 3 4 5 40. Tired 1 2 '3 4 5 41. Relaxed 1 2 3 4 5 42. . Energetic 1 2 3 4 5 43. Composed 1 2 3 4 5 44. Lonely 1 2 3 4 5 45. At ease 1 2 3 4 5 46. Unhappy 1 2 3 4 5 47. Enthusiastic 1 2 3 4 5 48. Ready to f i g h t 1 2 3 4 5 49. Carefree 1 2 3 4 5 50. Al e r t 1 2 3 4 5 51. Anxious 1 2 3 4 5 52. Grouchy 1 2 3 4 5 53. Shaky 1 2 3 4 5 54. S p i t e f u l 1 2 3 4 5 55. Li v e l y 1 2 3 . 4 5 56. Blue 1 2 3 4 5 57. L i s t l e s s 1 2 3 4 5 58. Optimistic 1 2 3 4 5 59. Worried 1 2 3 4 5 60. Lethargic 1 2 3 4 5 - 99a - APPENDIX B BEACH USER PROFILE: SURVEY DIMENSIONS - 100 - Environmental Response Inventory. The means and standard deviations (by beach) f o r the f i r s t s ection of the survey (Environmental Response Inventory, ERI) are l i s t e d i n Table 11 . Comparison of these r e s u l t s with those of Hardwick & C o l l i n s (1973) (Vancouver Urban Futures Project) and McKechnie (1973) indicate o v e r a l l congruence with samples from Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia, Marin County, C a l i f o r n i a and a cross section of students from U. S. colleges and u n i v e r s i t i e s . Leisure A c t i v i t i e s Blank. The second por. t i o n of the survey concerned the p a r t i c i p a t i o n by respondents i n 121 l e i s u r e a c t i v i t i e s (Leisure A c t i v i t i e s Blank, LAB). The means and standard deviations are l i s t e d i n Table 12. These r e s u l t s are not d i r e c t l y comparable to McKechnie's means since his survey used a four point response format, whereas I used f i v e . By multiplying the means f o r the present study by 0.8, a rough comparison i s possible. Table 13 l i s t s the transformed means for the beach study, McKechnie's means. The r e s u l t s o f t tests (correlated means) indicated that the trans- formed means f o r the beach r e s u l t s d i f f e r e d from McKechnie's f o r the f o l - lowing scales: Mechanics, Slow L i v i n g , and Neighborhood Sports (p< .01). Of the three scales which d i f f e r , only "slow l i v i n g " i s e a s i l y explained. On McKechnie's LAB the a c t i v i t y "sunbathing" loads highly on the fa c t o r "slow l i v i n g " and thus, persons on a beach engaged i n t h i s a c t i v i t y could be expected to maintain a higher score than those persons sampled from the population at large who were not engaged i n s i m i l a r a c t i v i t i e s at the time the survey was administered. The differences between the scales "mechanics" and "neighborhood sports" may be due to d i f f e r i n g r e c r e a t i o n a l preferences of Canadians and Americans, since McKechnie took his sample from Marin County, C a l i f o r n i a . - 101 - Table 11. ERI v a r i a b l e s : means and standard deviations f o r English Bay, K i t s i l a n o , and Skaha Beaches, (n. = 266) VARIABLE ENGLISH BAY KITSILANO SKAHA GRAND MEAN Mean S.D. Mean S. D. Mean S.D. PASTORALISM 77.3 9.6 77. 5 15. 8 78. 1 11. 2 77. 1 URBANISM 59.9 9.4 58.8 9. 6 56. 1 10. 0 57. 5 ENVIRONMENTAL ADAPTATION 68.9 9.4 67.1 9. 2 69. 0 10. 7 69. 1 STIMULUS SEEKING 67.6 11.0 70.1 10. 4 71. 0 12. 4 68. 9 ENVIRONMENTAL TRUST 61.9 9.3 63.0 8. 1 63. 4 8. 5 62. 6 ANTIQUARIANISM 67.2 10.2 69.7 9. 7 66. 9 9. 8 66. 9 NEED FOR PRIVACY 54.6 7.6 54.2 7. 0 54. 1 8. 2 54. 6 MECHANICAL ORIENTATION 63.6 9.3 62.0 8. 9 64. 5 9. 1 63. 5 COMMUNAL!TY 80.7 6.3 81.7 6. 4 80. 5 10. 0 80. 8 Table 12. LAB v a r i a b l e s : means and standard deviations f o r English Bay, K i t s i l a n o , and Skaha Beaches. VARIABLE ENGLISH BAY KITSILANO SKAHA GRAND MEAN Mean: S.D, Mean S.D. Mean: S.D. MECHANICS 38 .6 10.7 39. 7 10. 9 46.3 12. 7 42. 3 INTELLECTUAL 41 .4 8.9 42. 8 7. 5 40.6 9. 3 40. 7 CRAFTS 41 .6 12.1 40. 8 10. 1 37. 8 10. 3 39. 5 SLOW LIVING 74 .8 10.4 77. 8 6. 0 76.9 8. 2 76. 9 NEIGHBORHOOD SPORTS 33 .9 8.7 37. 2 8. 0 37.9 7. 6 36. 6 GLAMOUR SPORTS 33 .6 7.5 36. 1 8. 7 36 .6 8. 6 35. 2 FAST LIVING 9 .0 2.9 8. 7 2. 8 9.5 2. 7 9. 0 - 102 - Table 13. McKechnie's (1973) LAB Results Compared With Those From The Present Study. Scales McKechnie S.D. Present Study S.O. Mechanics 38.4 •11,3 33. 8 12.8 Crafts 33.0 8.8 31. 6 11.4 I n t e l l e c t u a l 34.2 8.4 32. 6 9.3 Slow L i v i n g 59.7 9.1 61. 5 8.5 Neighbourhood Sports 26.0 5.6 29. 3 8.4 Glamour Sports 27.0 6.9 28. 2 8.9 (Note: McKechnie did not use the scale " f a s t l i v i n g " in further analyses). - 103 - Socio-economic and demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . The r e s u l t s of the questions requesting background information (socio/demographic data) of beach respondents i s included in Table 14, • . Before categorizing users f o r these dimensions, several items require c l a r i f i c a t i o n . The f i r s t question (age of respondent) samples only those users 18 and over. Although the de c i s i o n to exclude persons younger than 18 from the sample was to a c e r t a i n extent a r b i r t a r y , I f e l t that the sur- vey was more applicable to adults whose attitudes and opinions are prob- ably more stable and less subject to change. The average age of the res- pondent (30.1) i s thus biased upwards compared to that of the beach pop- u l a t i o n f o r t h i s study. . • To ease mathematical computation, va r i a b l e three (marital s t a - tus) was reduced from s i x response p o s s i b i l i t i e s to two. Thus, unmarried (1) included " s i n g l e " , widowed", "divorced", and "separated" whereas married (2) included the category "co-habiting". The r e s u l t s thus indicate that s l i g h t l y over one ha l f (58%) of a l l respondents were mar- r i e d . Question six regarding education, was divided into eight res- ponse blanks where a respondent checked his l e v e l of education. Low numbers correspond to low education l e v e l attained and vice versa. Question seven asked respondents the number of years they had l i v e d i n s i x d i f f e r e n t s i z e urban centers. These data thus represent si x independent variables and were asked i n the following order: 1. Over one m i l l i o n 2. 100,000 - one m i l l i o n 3. 50,000 - 100,000 4. 10,000 - 50,000 o 5. 5,000 - 10,000 6. Below 5,000 Responses to question nine, "What i s your occupation?" were categorized according to an occupation cl a s s scale (Blishen, 1958) which i s a scheme whereby a respondent's Job i s ranked according to i t s r e l a - t i v e prestige. In t h i s case low numbers are associated with high status. There are a t o t a l of seven classes with the following four c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s Table 14. Socio/demographic v a r i a b l e s : means and standard deviations f o r English Bay, K i t s i l a n o and Skaha beaches. (n=266) VARIABLE ENGLISH KITSILANO SKAHA BAY GRAND Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D. MEAN AGE 31.1 8.6 29.4 9.9 30.2 9.9 30.7 SEX- 1.4 0.4 1.4 0.5 1.6 0.5 1.4 MARITAL STATUS 1.5 0.5 1.4 0.5 1.6 0.5 1.6 NO. OF CHILDREN 1.1 1.4 0.7 1.2 1.3 1.6 1.2 NO. OF SIBLINGS 3.6 2.4 2.9 3.1 2.8 2.3 3.1 EDUCATION 3.6 1.2 3.8 1.4 3.6 1.5 3.5 NO". OF YEARS LIVED IN CITIES WITH POPULATIONS OF: OVER ONE MILLION 8.6 9.8 6.6 10.0 5.2 8.3 5.6 100,000 - ONE MILLION 10.5 10.4 8.0 10.3 8.5 9.9 8.6 50,000 - 100,000 2.9 7.2 2.8 7.2 2.6 6.0 3.1 10,000 - 50,000 3.2 5.4 3.8 6.4 3.0 6.6 3.6 5,000 - 10,000 0.9 1.9 2.3 5.2 2.1 5.1 1.9 BELOW 5,000 1.6 3.2 4.6 6.6 7.2 10.3 5.8 NO. OF AUTOMOBILES 1.0 0.7 0.9 0.7 1.5 0.9 1.3 JOB CATEGORY 3.8 1.3 3.1 1.2 3.5 1.2 3.5 INCOME 8191 3534 10677 9301 12848 6893 11324 % TIME RECREATING OUTSIDE URBAN ENVIRONMENT 34 24 27 20 40 30 35 DISTANCE TO HOME 498 1136 221 835 331 664 360 POPULATION OF HOME CITY 1052500 552660 1084600 285680 676740 492880 824385 - 105 - excluded from the a n a l y s i s : 1) housewife, 2) r e t i r e d , 3) unemployed, and 4) student. Income (question ten) i s expressed as t o t a l household income before taxes f o r the previous tax year. A f i n a l question provided a d e s c r i p t i o n of the percentage of time a user spent i n r e c r e a t i o n a l and l e i s u r e a c t i v i t i e s outside the urban environment. A d d i t i o n a l information c o l l e c t e d from the respondent by the surveyor included the following: 1) T o t a l number of people i n the group from which the respon- dent was selected. 2) Group composition according to sex. 3) The number of ch i l d r e n i n the group. 4) The st r a i g h t l i n e distance i n miles from the c i t y where the beach was located, to the c i t y where the respondent resided. Note: This v a r i a b l e only applied to non-residents. 5) Population of the c i t y of o r i g i n of the respondent. Note: This v a r i a b l e was c o l l e c t e d f o r every respondent whether resident or non- resident. The v a r i a b l e s , day of the week and time of day were encoded so that a low number corresponded to low density conditions. For example, de n s i t i e s follow a generally increasing trend from Monday through the weedend, and from morning to afternoon. As a r e s u l t , Monday was l a b e l l e d as one, and time was encoded on a 24 hour clock basis, and morning hours were thus numerically smaller than afternoon times. The average beach, user who responded to the survey may be cat- egorized by the socio/demographic variables i n the following manner: 1) Approximately 31 years old (biased upwards because no users les s than 17 were asked to complete the;', survey) . 2) 45% were males. 3) 58% were married. 4) Number of c h i l d r e n - 1.2. 5) Number of s i b l i n g s - 3.1. 6) Level of education reached,equal to a point between high school graduate and some college. - 106 - 7) Spent the most years in urban centers which were very large (50,000 - over 1 M i l l i o n ) and very small (les s than 5,000). 8) Had at t h e i r disposal 1.3 automobiles. 9) Maintained occupations which were exactly midway between extremes on a prestige scale. 10) Had a household income before taxes of $11,324. 11) Spent a l i t t l e over one-third of t h e i r r e c r e a t i o n a l time away from the c i t y . 12) Non-residents were, on the average, 360 st r a i g h t l i n e miles from home. 13) The average population of the c i t y where the respondent res- ided was approximately 825,000 ppople. Mood Adjective Checklist. The analysis of the mood scale resulted in a p r o f i l e much as one would expect given the context of the beach environment. Table 15 indicates that respondents scored most highly on the factors " c h e e r f u l " , "energetic", "thoughtful", and "relaxed". As mentioned previously, these r e s u l t s are probably biased toward these more"positive" mood states, since the c h e c k l i s t was an optional feature of the survey. Of the 266 surveys f i n a l l y included i n the analysis, 68% elected to complete the mood, c h e c k l i s t . - 107 - Table 15. Mood score means and sta K i t s i l a n o , and Skaha bea ENGLISH VARIABLE BAY Mean.' S.D. CHEERFUL 29.0 5.2 ENERGETIC 20.1 4.3 ANGER - HOSTILITY 10.7 2.9 TENSE - ANXIOUS 10.3 3.0 DEPRESSED 10.4 2.7 INERT - FATIGUED 10.7 2.7 THOUGHTFUL 18.1 3.8 RELAXED - COMPOSED 18.1 3.1 MOOD 1.6 0.6 dard deviations f o r English Bay, lies. GRAND KITSILANO SKAHA MEAN Mean S.D. Mean S. D. 28.1 6.8 28. ,7 6. 3 29.0 19.8 5.9 19. ,2 5. 9 19.7 11.7 4.1 9. . 5 2. 2 10.6 10.7 4.0 9. , 2 2. 6 10.0 12.0 4.6 9, . 8 2. 1 10.7 11.8 3.2 11. .9 3. 3 11.7 18.2 4.6 17. ,6 4. 2 17.6 17.9 4.2 18. . 8 3. 2 18.4 1.8 0.4 1. ,7 0. 4 1.7 - 107a - APPENDIX C SOURCES OF SAMPLING ERROR - 108 - Interviewer e f f e c t s . To test f o r possible interviewer e f f e c t s a 3 X 3 (3 interview- ers and 3 beaches) analysis of variance was conducted using two dependent v a r i a b l e s : the percentage of respondents refusing to complete a survey and the percentage of p a r t i a l l y completed surveys f o r any given i n t e r - viewer (percentages were normalized by an arc-sine transformation). The use of these v a r i a b l e s was based on the argument that any negative e f f e c t s due to interviewer-respondent i n t e r a c t i o n s would be r e f l e c t e d i n the proportion of respondents who were unwilling to f i l l out a survey or not complete i t once they had accepted the proposal. Based upon these two v a r i a b l e s , e f f e c t s due to interviewer were not s i g n i f i c a n t (survey unfinished, F p r o b a b i l i t y > .27; survey pro- posal rejected, F p r o b a b i l i t y >.32). Although t h i s test may not have covered a l l sources of interviewer bias, i t was considered s u f f i c i e n t f or the purposes of the present research. Sampling procedure. The second test of sample bias u t i l i z e d discriminant analysis and was concerned with determining .whether the sample taken from the beach population was t y p i c a l . For t h i s test four s p a t i a l and group var- i a b l e s were compared f o r those i n d i v i d u a l s r e c e i v i n g surveys (n = 266) versus the t o t a l population sampled whether surveyed or not (n =1791). The variables employed were: 1) t o t a l number of people i n the group, 2) the area of a group as evidenced by personal markers, 3) centroid to centroid nearest neighbor distance, and 4) nearest approach nearest neighbor distance. The r e s u l t s of the analysis f o r the two conditions, 'surveyed' and 'not surveyed*, indicated a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between means (p < .01). Comparison of the means f o r surveyed and unsurveyed users for the three beaches indicated that surveyed subjects sampled on English Bay and Skaha were from l a r g e r groups with l a r g e r areas and r e s - pondents at English Bay tended to be on the average more distant from t h e i r nearest neighbors. The mean values f o r these variables and condi- tions are l i s t e d in Table 16. - 109 - Table 16. Comparison of means f o r the three s i t e s f o r the two conditions: surveyed by questionnaire (s), and surveyed +< not surveyed (ns) . E = English Bay, K = K i t s i l a n o , Sk = Skaha. Areas are i n meters and distances are in meters. E/ns E/S K/ns K/s Sk/ns Sk/s Group siz e 1.63 2.48 1.81 1.92 2.08 2.33 Group area 2.95 3.64 3.81 4.10 4.43 4.89 cc/nnd 7.00 10.04 5.63 6.52 5.42 5.56 na/nnd 4. 97 7.92 3.40 4.36 3.05 3.11 The r e s u l t s which indicate larger mean group sizes and areas f o r English Bay and Skaha survey respondents can be explained by the fact that group members at these two s i t e s were often observed to be swimming, s t r o l l i n g , going to the refreshment stand, etc. and were thus not v i s i b l e i n the a e r i a l photographs. Since a respondent indicated on the survey booklet the number of i n d i v i d u a l s i n the group whether immediately pre- sent or not, these data would obviously be d i f f e r e n t from those obtained from the photographs. K i t s i l a n o did not show t h i s discrepancy as much as the other two s i t e s since i t was a much more compact area and most people tended to stay at t h e i r s i t e . This may have been due to the fa c t that the area was grass covered and was not as hot as the other beaches which were sandy. The second d i f f e r e n c e between surveyed and unsurveyed data men- tioned previously was that surveyed respondents at English Bay tended to have greater nearest neighbor distances than the average. Thus respondents with greater than average nnd's were over-represented i n the sample. These r e s u l t s are not explained e a s i l y since three d i f f e r e n t interviewers d i s t r i b t i t e d surveys on that beach and thus i t seems u n l i k e l y that i n t e r - viewer bias was the source. Since no explanation was apparent the data f o r nearest neighbor distance f o r English Bay was not used i n the regres- sion analyses and thus the r e s u l t s f o r these two distance measures are based on data from Skaha and K i t s i l a n o only. - 109a - APPENDIX D REPRESENTATIVE DENSITY AND PATTERN CONFIGURATIONS Figure 17. ( K i t s i l a n o - - 110 - Random pattern c h a r a c t e r i c t i c of density = 66 groups/hectare). low d e n s i t i e s . - I l l - Figure 19. Regular p a t t e r n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of high d e n s i t i e s ( K i t s i l a n o - d e n s i t y - 264 groups/hectare).

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
Japan 3 0
France 2 0
China 2 22
United States 2 0
City Views Downloads
Tokyo 3 0
Beijing 2 0
Unknown 2 9
Buffalo 1 0
Ashburn 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}

Share

Share to:

Comment

Related Items