Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Children’s conceptions of spatial appropriation : an aspect of social knowledge Svendsen, Ann Christine 1981

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1981_A8 S84.pdf [ 6.28MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0095466.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0095466-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0095466-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0095466-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0095466-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0095466-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0095466-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0095466-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0095466.ris

Full Text

CHILDREN'S  CONCEPTIONS OF SPATIAL APPROPRIATION:  AN ASPECT OF SOCIAL KNOWLEDGE  by ANN CHRISTINE SVENDSEN B.A., U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1977  A THESIS SUBMITTED  IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF  THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF  I&WW«§  T  ~  N A  "  Y  STUDIES .  in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES ( I n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y S t u d i e s / S o c i o l o g y and Community and R e g i o n a l  We accept t h i s t h e s i s as  conforming  to the r e q u i r e d standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA January  (c) Ann C h r i s t i n e  1981  Svendsen, 1981  Planning)  In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s  thesis  an advanced degree at the I  Library shall  f u r t h e r agree  for  the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia,  make i t  freely available  that permission  for  I agree  reference and  f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f  this  representatives. thesis  It  this  that  study. thesis  is understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n  f o r f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l  written permission.  Department of The  f u l f i l m e n t o f the requirements f o r  s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or  by h i s of  in p a r t i a l  University of B r i t i s h  2075 Wesbrook P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5  Columbia  not be allowed without my  ii  ABSTRACT The  purpose o f t h i s e x p l o r a t o r y  study was 1) t o i d e n t i f y and i l l u s t r a t e  a number o f components o f a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n used by c h i l d r e n t o comprehend and a c t a c c o r d i n g t o s o c i a l r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing the appropriation  o f space, and 2) t o develop and t e s t a model f o r examining  qualitative differences various  i n such a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , w i t h i n  and between  age groups.  The  model was based on two p r o p o s i t i o n s :  s o c i a l structure  and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n  a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , and second that w i l l become more a b s t r a c t ,  first  t h a t knowledge o f the  o f space are two components o f such a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n  d i f f e r e n t i a t e d , and i n t e g r a t e d  w i t h age.  In the f i n a l study f i f t e e n c h i l d r e n were i n t e r v i e w e d , i n c l u d i n g t e n s i x year olds on  and f i v e twelve and t h i r t e e n y e a r o l d s .  the c h i l d r e n ' s  awareness o f and j u s t i f i c a t i o n s  The i n t e r v i e w  f o r s o c i a l r u l e s and con-  v e n t i o n s governing access t o and use o f p r i v a t e , s e m i - p r i v a t e , spaces i n the neighborhood, s c h o o l , The  the  and p u b l i c  and home.  model was s u c c e s s f u l l y used i n the a n a l y s i s  ponses.  focussed  o f the c h i l d r e n ' s  res-  V a r i o u s a s p e c t s o f t h e i r c o n c e p t i o n s o f the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and  s o c i a l organization  classified  o f space were e x p l o r e d .  according to four  levels posited  Their  responses were a l s o  i n the model.  It was found that most o f the s i x year o l d s had an u n d i f f e r e n t i a t e d and c o n c r e t e scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . and  conventions.  They were aware o f c o n t e x t - s p e c i f i c  When asked t o e x p l a i n o r j u s t i f y the r u l e s they  rules  typically  r e f e r r e d t o the p h y s i c a l o r s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the s e t t i n g . By  twelve or t h i r t e e n years o f age the c h i l d r e n had developed a more  abstract,  d i f f e r e n t i a t e d , and i n t e g r a t e d  scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .  o f t e n r e f e r r e d t o concepts such as power o r ownership t o e x p l a i n  They  or j u s t i f y  iii  the  a b i l i t y of various  i n d i v i d u a l s to appropriate  space.  Thus, the r e s u l t s of t h i s study suggest t h a t an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of s p a t i a l appropriation  i n v o l v e s not simply  i n t e r n a l i z i n g a 'catalogue'  r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s , but r a t h e r c o n s t r u c t i n g  of s o c i a l  a more complex scheme o f  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n c o n s i s t i n g o f knowledge o f 1) the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e , 2) the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space, and 3) the r e l a t i o n s between  them.  iv  TABLE OF CONTENTS  CHAPTER ONE:  INTRODUCTION  Page  1.1  Statement o f the Problem  1  1.2  Background to the Problem 1.2.1 S p a t i a l Behavior Research  3 3  1.2.2  S o c i a l C o g n i t i o n Research  4  1.3  The T h e o r e t i c a l Framework  5  1.4  D e f i n i t i o n o f Terms and Concepts  6  1.5  The A n a l y t i c Framework: 1.5.1 The Model 1.5.2  I t s Development  and L i m i t a t i o n s  7 7  The Development of the Model  9  1.6  Limitations  12  1.7  Rationale  1  CHAPTER TWO:  3  LITERATURE REVIEW  2.1  Introduction  15  2.2  S p a t i a l Behavior Research  15  2.3  Symbolic I n t e r a c t i o n i s m :  2.4  Developmental Psychology L i t e r a t u r e 2.4.1 S o c i a l C o g n i t i o n Research  22 25!  2.5  Related Studies 2.5.1 C h i l d r e n ' s Use and Conceptions o f Space 2.5.2 Impact o f the S o c i o - C u l t u r a l Context  28 28 33  CHAPTER THREE:  a T h e o r e t i c a l Framework  20  METHODOLOGY  3.1  The A n a l y t i c Framework  37  3.2  The Model o f S p a t i a l A p p r o p r i a t i o n  38  3.3  The Model o f C h i l d r e n ' s Conceptions o f S p a t i a l A p p r o p r i a t i o n 3.3.1 Components of a Scheme of I n t e r p r e t a t i o n 3.3.2 L e v e l s o f Understand i n g  40 40 41  3.4  The I n t e r v i e w 3.4.1 Respondents 3.4.2 R a t i o n a l e f o r Age Groups S e l e c t e d  45 45 46  V.  3.4.3  Recruitment  47  3.4.4  Format o f Interviews  47  3.5  The I n t e r v i e w  Schedule  49  3.6  T r a n s c r i p t i o n and E d i t i n g Procedures  50  3.7  P h y s i c a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the F a l s e Creek Development  51  CHAPTER FOUR:  RESULTS  4.1  Introduction  53  4.2  Components o f an Understanding o f S p a t i a l A p p r o p r i a t i o n 4.2.1 Conceptions o f the S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e i. b e l i e f s about a d u l t s and c h i l d r e n ii. the manager iii. strategies iv. s o c i a l construction of authority v. s s t r a n g e r s vi. b e l i e f s about teachers and students 4.2.2 Conceptions o f the S o c i a l O r g a n i z a t i o n o f Space i. c o n d i t i o n s o f access ii. s o c i a l d e f i n i t i o n and use o f space i n conversations iii. s o c i a l versus a r c h i t e c t u r a l d e f i n i t i o n o f space iv. d e f i n i t i o n and use o f s e m i - p u b l i c space v. l o c a t i o n and meaning o f boundaries  54 54 54 56 57 , 59 60 61 64 65 67  4.3  L e v e l s o f Understanding 4.3.1 Introduction 4.3.2 L e v e l One 4.3.3 L e v e l Two 4.3.4 L e v e l Three 4.3.5 L e v e l Four  CHAPTER FIVE:  DISCUSSION AND  I  69 71 73  76 77 78 85 88  CONCLUSIONS  5.1  Components o f a Scheme o f I n t e r p r e t a t i o n  92  5.2  L e v e l s o f Understanding  95  5.3  Implications  f o r Future  Research  REFERENCES  96  101  APPENDICES Appendix A - Interview  Schedule  108  vi  Appendix B - Sample I n t e r v i e w  (13 year o l d )  111  Appendix C - Sample I n t e r v i e w  (6 year o l d )  123  Appendix D - Consent L e t t e r  132  Appendix E - Map  134  o f F a l s e Creek Development  LIST OF TABLES Title T a b l e I - L e v e l s of  Understanding  Table  I I - E n c l a v e s by Housing  Type and  Table  I I I - E n c l a v e s by B u i l d i n g Type and  T a b l e IV - L e v e l s of Understanding  Sponsor Group  by Age  Landscape Group  viii  ACKNOWLEDGEMENT  I would l i k e t o express my g r a t i t u d e t o the members o f my committee: Dr. Henry Hightower ( C h a i r ) , Dr. James Duncan, Dr. Gaalen E r i k s o n , and Barbara Williamson, f o r t h e i r h e l p f u l ,  thought  p r o v o k i n g s u g g e s t i o n s and c r i t i c i s m s .  I would a l s o l i k e t o thank Dr. George Gray, and Dr. Martha F o s c h i f o r t h e i r unfailing  support i n moments o f c r i s i s .  To my husband, Robert and u n d e r s t a n d i n g , And,  lastly,  Creek Elementary have been done.  Boutilier,  I am a l s o h e a v i l y I offer  School.  and my f r i e n d s who l i s t e n e d  with patience  indebted.  s i n c e r e thanks t o the students and s t a f f at F a l s e Without  their cooperation this  study c o u l d not  1.  CHAPTER ONE: 1.1  INTRODUCTION  Statement  o f the  Problem  Numerous r e s e a r c h e r s have argued that the a c t o f d e f i n i n g and d e f e n d i n g space i s an e x p r e s s i o n of b i o l o g i c a l or p s y c h o l o g i c a l d r i v e s Stea, 1970).  The e a r l i e s t  (Altman,  s t u d i e s o f t e r r i t o r i a l i t y r e f e r r e d to the  b e h a v i o r o f animals i n an attempt to e x p l a i n why defend boundaries (Ardrey, 1966;  Calhoun,  1962).  1970; spatial  human beings e s t a b l i s h I t was  and  suggested that  human b e i n g s , l i k e animals, have an i n n a t e tendency to defend "home" t e r r i t o r y , e s p e c i a l l y i n conditions of high population density 1972;  Schmidtt,  ( G a l l e , Gove and McPherson,  1957).  A broader spectrum of s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r r e s e a r c h , i n c l u d i n g s t u d i e s of p e r s o n a l space, proxemics, and crowding suggests, however, t h a t a narrow p s y c h o l o g i c a l or b i o l o g i c a l e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t e r r i t o r i a l adequate  be i n -  to account f o r the c o m p l e x i t i e s i n v o l v e d i n the p r o c e s s o f s p a t i a l  d e f i n i t i o n and c o n t r o l . the  b e h a v i o r may  Such a d e f i n i t i o n does not account, f o r example, f o r  demonstrated v a r i a t i o n i n p a t t e r n s o f s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r a c r o s s c u l t u r e s  and c o n t e x t s ( H a l l , adequate  1966;  Sommer, 1969;  S t o k o l s , 1978), nor does i t g i v e  c o n s i d e r a t i o n to the p r o c e s s o f n e g o t i a t i o n which  those who  attempt  takes p l a c e between  to e s t a b l i s h c l a i m s to space and those who  encounter those  claims. Thus,  t e r r i t o r i a l i t y has been r e c o n c e p t u a l i z e d f o r the purposes o f t h i s  study and a new  term " s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n " has been used.  r i a t i o n r e f e r s to a m u l t i - d i m e n s i o n a l ,  Spatial  i n t e r a c t i v e process of s p a t i a l  d e f i n i t i o n and c o n t r o l i n v o l v i n g both those who  attempt  to  I t i s assumed t h a t  space and those who  approp-  encounter those c l a i m s .  to e s t a b l i s h c l a i m s this  process i s governed by a complex system of s o c i a l r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s , and furthermore t h a t i n o r d e r to comprehend and a c t a c c o r d i n g to the r u l e s  and  c o n v e n t i o n s i n d i v i d u a l s c o n s t r u c t a "scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n " (Mead, 1944). For the purposes system  o f t h i s study a scheme of i n t e r p e t a t i o n i s d e f i n e d as a  o f i d e a s and b e l i e f s  about how space  i s o r should be used.  Although p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s have d e a l t w i t h a d u l t s ' c o n c e p t i o n s o f t h i s system o f r u l e s and conventions  (Hall,  1966;1961; Rappoport, 1972),  little  i n f o r m a t i o n i s a v a i l a b l e r e g a r d i n g the form or content o f a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n used by c h i l d r e n .  As B a l d a s s a r e  (1978) noted  i n h i s r e c e n t review  of the s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r l i t e r a t u r e "... s t u d i e s o f the s o c i a l i z a t i o n o f space use and the development o f s p a t i a l meaning and subsequent  responses have been  l a c k i n g " (p.'50). T h i s study addresses t h i s gap i n the l i t e r a t u r e as i t f o c u s s e s on the content o f c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f r u l e s and conventions governing to and use o f p r i v a t e , s e m i - p r i v a t e , and p u b l i c study which i s aimed f i r s t  space.  access  I t i s an e x p l o r a t o r y  at i d e n t i f y i n g and i l l u s t r a t i n g  s e v e r a l components  of a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n used by c h i l d r e n t o comprehend and a c t accordin; to r u l e s and conventions governing s p a t i a l  a p p r o p r i a t i o n , and second at  d e v e l o p i n g and t e s t i n g a framework f o r l o o k i n g at the q u a l i t a t i v e  differences  i n such a scheme w i t h i n and between v a r i o u s age groups. The  f o l l o w i n g r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s were 1.  To what extent do c h i l d r e n d i s t i n g u i s h between p r i v a t e ,  p r i v a t e , and p u b l i c spaces g a i n access t o those 2.  posed:  and the c a t e g o r i e s o f people who can  spaces?  What are t h e i r c o n c e p t i o n s o f the s o c i a l r o l e s and r e l a t i o n -  s h i p s which e x i s t between i n d i v i d u a l s who c o n t r o l space who encounter 3.  semi-  and those  those c l a i m s ?  What are t h e i r c o n c e p t i o n s o f the l o c a t i o n and meaning o f  boundaries?  , and  4.  What types o f e x p l a n a t i o n s  and j u s t i f i c a t i o n s  are used by the  c h i l d r e n t o support t h e i r statements i n ( 1 ) , ( 2 ) , and (3)? 1.2  Background t o the Problem  1.2.1  S p a t i a l Behavior Research It can be argued that  spatial appropriation  complex system o f s o c i a l r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s .  i s governed by a h i g h l y Although the c o m p l e x i t y  of t h i s system o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s has not been d e a l t w i t h i n the l i t e r a t u r e , may be a l e a r n e d 1966;  Stokols,  riation cific  a number o f s t u d i e s suggest t h a t s p a t i a l  explicitly  appropriation  r a t h e r than an innate c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f human a c t i o n  1976).  Furthermore, these s t u d i e s  imply t h a t  spatial  (Hall, approp-  i s governed by a l a r g e number o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s that are spe-  t o p a r t i c u l a r c u l t u r e s and c o n t e x t s . Studies  dealing with  'personal  space',  'proxemics', and ' c r o w d i n g , f o r 1  example, demonstrate that many r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s g o v e r n i n g s p a t i a l beh a v i o r vary  from one context  t o another.  who i s well-known f o r h i s r e s e a r c h claims  that  i n conversations  than s t r a n g e r s . servations adults  Edward H a l l  (1966), an a n t h r o p o l o g i s t  on 'proxemics' or i n t e r p e r s o n a l d i s t a n c i n g ,  friends maintain c l o s e r interpersonal  He bases t h i s c l a i m on e x t e n s i v e  fieldwork,  distances  as w e l l as ob-  and i n t e r v i e w s , w i t h a l a r g e sample o f middle c l a s s , North American  (Hall,  1966).  H a l l has a l s o s t u d i e d c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n proxemic b e h a v i o r and has found that  i n some c u l t u r e s i t i s a p p r o p r i a t e  distances  than i n others  (Hall,  1961).  universal  features o f s p a t i a l behavior  'proper' d i s t a n c e ) , the e x p r e s s i o n one  context  to the next  to maintain c l o s e r  interpersonal  Thus, although there may be some (e.g.,  the n o t i o n  t h a t there  isa  o f those u n i v e r s a l s o f t e n v a r i e s from  (see a l s o Altman, 1975).  Research concerned w i t h  'personal  space' i n d i c a t e s t h a t there  are a l s o  4.  c o n t e x t - s p e c i f i c rules and conventions governing the d e f i n i t i o n and c o n t r o l of s p a t i a l boundaries around the body ( B a l l , 1973; F e l i p e and Sommer, 1966). Robert Sommer, an environmental psychologist, found i n studies conducted i n n a t u r a l settings that the boundaries of an i n d i v i d u a l ' s 'personal space' seem to expand or contract depending on the s o c i a l and p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the s e t t i n g (Sommer, 1969). Crowding studies suggest that responses to r e s t r i c t e d amounts of space, and the r e s u l t i n g close interpersonal distances are r e l a t e d to an i n d i v i d u a l ' s perception of the cause of the s p a t i a l r e s t r i c t i o n .  Where close interpersonal  distance i s a n t i c i p a t e d and interpreted as a 'normal' feature of the s e t t i n g (e.g., at a rock concert) i n d i v i d u a l s w i l l not react negatively t o the high d e n s i t i e s , and close interpersonal distances.  In other s e t t i n g s , (e.g., i n  a l i b r a r y ) , where close interpersonal distance i s u s u a l l y considered  inapprop-  r i a t e , an i n d i v i d u a l i s more l i k e l y t o f e e l 'crowded' (Stokols, 1976). 1.2.2  S o c i a l Cognition L i t e r a t u r e  As t h i s study involves c h i l d r e n , the developmental psychology l i t e r a t u r e i s relevant i n terms of the influence c o g n i t i v e development may have on the form or content of a c h i l d ' s conceptions of r u l e s and conventions governing s p a t i a l appropriation. Based on Jean Piaget's theory of c o g n i t i v e development (Furth, 1969; Piaget, 1956; Flave11, 1973) studies have been done on the development of d i f f e r e n t aspects of s o c i a l knowledge i n c l u d i n g knowledge of s o c i a l rules and conventions,  the economic system, and the operation of s o c i a l i n s t i t u -  tions such as government and stores (Damon, 1978; Furth, 1977; Jahoda, 1978). These studies which involve North American and European c h i l d r e n , suggest that at l e a s t i n these cultures children's understanding of society becomes more d i f f e r e n t i a t e d , abstract, and principle-governed with age.  Furthermore,  they i n d i c a t e t h a t the c h i l d r e n i n i t i a l l y c o n v e n t i o n s , but w i t h age understanding 1.3  learn s i t u a t i o n s p e c i f i c rules  and e x p e r i e n c e develop more g e n e r a l  social institutions  and  'schemes' f o r  events.  The T h e o r e t i c a l Framework Much of the t e r r i t o r i a l i t y r e s e a r c h has been based  ponse' or The  and  ' b e h a v i o r i s t ' theory o f human a c t i o n  focus o f these s t u d i e s has  the environmental argued  1970;  a g g r e s s i v e defense  Stea, 1970).  t h e r e f o r e been on the r e l a t i o n s h i p between  s t i m u l i and v a r i o u s b e h a v i o r a l responses.  that a stimulus  T h i s study,  (Altman,  on a 'stimulus r e s -  I t has  (e.g., h i g h d e n s i t y ) produces a response  (e.g.,  of s p a c e ) .  i n c o n t r a s t , d e a l s w i t h c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s , or  ideas and b e l i e f s and use of space.  been  about the r u l e s and conventions which govern More s p e c i f i c a l l y ,  i t i s concerned  the  their definition  with i d e n t i f y i n g  and  i l l u s t r a t i n g v a r i o u s components o f a scheme of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n which i s used by c h i l d r e n to comprehend and The is  act a c c o r d i n g to those r u l e s and  focus on an i n d i v i d u a l ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of s o c i a l  action  a s s o c i a t e d , on a t h e o r e t i c a l l e v e l , w i t h the w r i t i n g s of George Herbert  Mead (1944).  Mead argues  t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s do not merely  s t i m u l i , but r a t h e r i n t e r p r e t what c o n f r o n t s them and t h a t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . ' Mead a l s o suggests of  conventions.  respond  to e x t e r n a l  act on the b a s i s of  t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s c o n s t r u c t 'schemes  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ' o r systems o f i d e a s and b e l i e f s which a l l o w them t o par-  t i c i p a t e i n s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n or  'joint action'  (Blumer, 1966).  A concern w i t h the q u a l i t a t i v e d i f f e r e n c e s i n c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s across v a r i o u s age development tivist  l e v e l s a l s o r e f l e c t s a ' c o n s t r u c t i v i s t ' theory o f s o c i a l  ( P i a g e t , 1972;  Furth e t . a l . ,  1976;  Damon, 1978).  A construc-  p e r s p e c t i v e can be c o n t r a s t e d w i t h a s o c i a l l e a r n i n g t h e o r y o f human  development which i s based  on the assumption  that a c h i l d  i s a 'tabula rasa'  who a c q u i r e s s o c i a l knowledge as a r e s u l t o f the i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n o f a d u l t norms, v a l u e s and b e l i e f s  (Bandura,  1969).  In comparing the two approaches  i t can be s a i d t h a t s o c i a l  learning  t h e o r y t r e a t s s o c i a l knowledge as the product o f i m m i t a t i o n and m o d e l l i n g , whereas a c c o r d i n g t o a c o n s t r u c t i v i s t  theory s o c i a l knowledge i s gained  through the c h i l d ' s a c t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and d e f i n i t i o n o f s o c i a l  activities  and events'. Thus, as t h i s study f o c u s s e s on the q u a l i t a t i v e r a t h e r than q u a n t i t a t i v e aspects o f the c h i l d ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f s o c i a l r u l e s and conventions it  i s compatible w i t h a c o n s t r u c t i v i s t r a t h e r than a s o c i a l  l e a r n i n g theory  of knowledge. 1.4  D e f i n i t i o n o f Terms and Concepts As the i s s u e o f c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s  governing  the use o f space has not been d e a l t w i t h e x t e n s i v e l y i n the l i t e r a t u r e i t was n e c e s s a r y t o use s e v e r a l concepts " S p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n " was used  from o t h e r areas o f r e s e a r c h . i n s t e a d o f " t e r r i t o r i a l i t y " as i t  acknowledges the i n t e r a c t i v e nature o f the d e f i n i t i o n and c o n t r o l o f space and t h e r e f o r e c a l l s The  a t t e n t i o n t o the s o c i a l aspects o f s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r .  term " a p p r o p r i a t i o n " l i t e r a l l y means, " t o make one's own, t o c l a i m or  take t o one's s e l f  i n e x c l u s i o n o f o t h e r s as by an e x c l u s i v e r i g h t ; t o s e t  a p a r t f o r o r a s s i g n t o a p a r t i c u l a r purpose"  (Webster's  Dictionary,  1973).  In t h i s study, the term s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n r e f e r s t o an i n t e r a c t i v e whereby c l a i m s t o space  process  are e s t a b l i s h e d and maintained by an i n d i v i d u a l or  group w i t h i n a p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l c o n t e x t . The  term  'scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ' r e f e r s t o a system o f i d e a s and  b e l i e f s used by i n d i v i d u a l s t o p a r t i c i p a t e riation.  i n the process o f s p a t i a l  approp-  G. H. Mead i n i t i a l l y used the term i n a more g e n e r a l sense t o  7.  r e f e r to a system o f knowledge which a l l o w s i n d i v i d u a l s social action The  (Blumer,  1966,  p. 539).  framework f o r l o o k i n g  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n was social cognition  at the q u a l i t a t i v e changes  literatures.  of the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e  organization  The  Two  components of a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n The  first  which c o n s i s t s  second component i s d e f i n e d  o f space which c o n s i s t s  The A n a l y t i c  1.511  component i s d e f i n e d  of b e l i e f s about  Framework:  as knowledge  social roles  and  as knowledge o f the s o c i a l  of i d e a s and b e l i e f s about the l o c a t i o n  and meaning o f boundaries d e f i n i n g p r i v a t e , 1.5  i n a scheme o f  developed based on a review o f the s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r and  were i d e n t i f i e d and i l l u s t r a t e d .  relationships.  to p a r t i c i p a t e i n  s e m i - p r i v a t e and p u b l i c  i t s Development and  space.  Limitations  The Model A model o f c h i l d r e n ' s  spatial appropriation  c o n c e p t i o n s o f the r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing  i s used as a t o o l f o r e x p l o r i n g  the form and c o n t e n t  o f a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n used by the c h i l d r e n at d i f f e r e n t ages. i s based on two major p r o p o s i t i o n s . structure  First,  that  It  knowledge o f the s o c i a l  and knowledge o f the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n  o f space are two  components  o f a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n used by c h i l d r e n to make sense o f r u l e s and conv e n t i o n s g o v e r n i n g the a p p r o p r i a t i o n  o f space; and second, that  scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w i l l become more a b s t r a c t  such a  and d i f f e r e n t i a t e d w i t h  age. The model c o n s i s t s  o f four  l e v e l s r a n g i n g from no awareness o f the  s o c i a l r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s to a h i g h l y r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s . are  social rules  categories all  At the f i r s t  d i f f e r e n t i a t e d u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the  l e v e l the c h i l d  i s not aware that t h e r e  and c o n v e n t i o n s which p r o h i b i t access of c e r t a i n s o c i a l  o f persons to c e r t a i n spaces.  spaces are e q u a l l y  accessible  The c h i l d  to a l l p e o p l e .  simply b e l i e v e s  that  8.  At the second  l e v e l the c h i l d  i s aware o f the r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s but  does not c o n s t r u c t an e x p l a n a t i o n or j u s t i f i c a t i o n  f o r those r u l e s which  i s based on the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and the o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space.  social  For example, the c h i l d w i l l d i f f e r e n t i a t e between the  " p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e " and o t h e r "non p r i v a t e " spaces i n the s c h o o l .  He or  she w i l l r e c o g n i z e t h a t students cannot g a i n access t o the p r i n c i p a l ' s at w i l l .  But, the c h i l d ' s e x p l a n a t i o n s f o r t h a t d i s t i n c t i o n w i l l not  office con-  t a i n any r e f e r e n c e t o the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the s o c i a l r o l e s o f the principal  and students and h i s or her c a p a c i t y to c o n t r o l access to space.  T h i s i s not t o say, however, t h a t the c h i l d does not r e c o g n i z e the r e l a t i o n s h i p between membership i n a s o c i a l c a t e g o r y and the a b i l i t y to  approp-  1 r i a t e space, but simply t h a t the c h i l d does not use  that understanding  to e x p l a i n or j u s t i f y the r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s . At the t h i r d  l e v e l the c h i l d ' s j u s t i f i c a t i o n s  v e n t i o n s c o n t a i n s an e x p l i c i t ,  f o r the r u l e s and  con-  i f c o n c r e t e and s i m p l i s t i c , r e f e r e n c e t o the  r e l a t i o n s h i p between the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of space.  The c h i l d  s t a t e s , f o r example, t h a t a l l people can go t o the park  because  i t i s " p u b l i c " , but t h a t o n l y the people who  can use the c o u r t y a r d .  live  i n the  The c h i l d does not use concepts such as  apartment ownership,  2 . or a f a c s i m i l i e of ownership  such as r e n t i n g  , to j u s t i f y  that  distinction.  It i s p o s s i b l e t h a t c h i l d r e n at a young age may have developed knowledge t h a t they do not express due t o l i m i t e d v e r b a l s k i l l s .  social  2 Although a j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r c o n t r o l over space c o u l d i n c l u d e " r e n t i n g " as opposed t o "owning" none o f the c h i l d r e n i n the f i n a l study mentioned that p o s s i b i l i t y . Thus, i t s h o u l d be noted that a l t h o u g h the c h i l d r e n were not encouraged t o t a l k about r e n t i n g whereas they were probed about t h e i r c o n c e p t i o n s o f ownership, t h i s does not r u l e out the r e l e vance o f the concept of r e n t i n g to the r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing the d e f i n i t i o n and use o f space i n a North American c o n t e x t .  At the f o u r t h l e v e l the c h i l d has developed  a more a b s t r a c t c o n c e p t i o n  of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l  organization  o f space and i s aware t h a t c e r t a i n s o c i a l c a t e g o r i e s o f persons have r i g h t s and powers which enable them to l e g i t i m a t e l y e s t a b l i s h and m a i n t a i n c o n t r o l over space.  At t h i s  l e v e l the c h i l d  justifies  the r u l e s and  conventions  by r e f e r r i n g to a b s t r a c t concepts such as power, s t a t u s , and ownership. c h i l d might  The  s t a t e , f o r example, t h a t the p r i n c i p a l can c o n t r o l access t o h i s  o f f i c e because  he i s the p r i n c i p a l and t h e r e f o r e has more power than the  students. It s h o u l d be noted, however, that i t i s not assumed t h a t t h e r e are o n l y f o u r l e v e l s o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f r u l e s and conventions governing the r i a t i o n o f space.  O b v i o u s l y , a newborn c h i l d has a v e r y l i m i t e d u n d e r s t a n d i n g  of the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and v i r t u a l l y no knowledge o f the s o c i a l of space.  approp-  Thus, t h e r e may  be l e s s s o p h i s t i c a t e d  organization  l e v e l s than l e v e l one.  On  the o t h e r hand, i t i s l i k e l y t h a t a d u l t s have developed a more d i f f e r e n t i a t e d and complex scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n than a d o l e s c e n t s have and t h e r e f o r e l e v e l s o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g may The  extend past l e v e l  four l e v e l s were used i n t h i s  four.  study because  they were a p p r o p r i a t e  to c h i l d r e n between the ages o f s i x and twelve, the two selected  f o r i n c l u s i o n i n the study.  monstrated  The  age groups  initially  social cognition literature  de-  that by s i x y e a r s o f age most c h i l d r e n have some knowledge o f r u l e s  and c o n v e n t i o n s , and t h a t by twelve or t h i r t e e n they have c o n s t r u c t e d a more a b s t r a c t and d i f f e r e n t i a t e d  scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n f o r making sense o f  those r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s . 1.5.2  The Development o f the Model The model was  developed based on a review of the s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r  social cognition literatures.  I t was  and  then m o d i f i e d on the b a s i s o f a p i l o t  10.  study and The  t e s t e d i n a f i n a l study i n v o l v i n g i n t e r v i e w s w i t h f i f t e e n c h i l d r e n . s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r l i t e r a t u r e was  first  reviewed i n order  to develop  a framework f o r l o o k i n g at the process of s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n . n e c e s s a r y to have some u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the process of s p a t i a l before  developing  a model of c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s of t h a t  A review of the general  s p a t i a l behavior l i t e r a t u r e  a correspondence between the  z a t i o n of space. appropriation r o l e s and  It  was  appropriation  process.  i n d i c a t e d t h a t there was social  organi-  I t i n d i c a t e d more s p e c i f i c a l l y that the product o f  spatial  (e.g.,  the  s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and  the  in  s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of space) r e f l e c t e d the  r e l a t i o n s h i p s (e.g., the  social  s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e ) e x i s t i n g between members  of a p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l s e t t i n g . Although the s t u d i e s d i d not  d e a l w i t h t h i s i s s u e , i t was  the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the  s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and  o f space d i d not  from the  e x i s t apart  c r e t e terms i t was adhered to and of  the  social  organization  actions of i n d i v i d u a l s .  the c o l l e c t i v e a c t i o n s of i n d i v i d u a l s who  enforced  c l e a r that  boundaries which reproduced the  In more conrepeatedly  social  organization  space. As there were no r e l e v a n t  i n d i v i d u a l ' s conception  s t u d i e s d e a l i n g w i t h the  of boundaries i t was  formulate a framework f o r l o o k i n g at the of s p a t i a l The as the  an  necessary at t h i s p o i n t  to  " s u b j e c t i v e " a s p e c t s of the  process  appropriation.  p h y s i c i s t , G.  s t a r t i n g point  Spencer-Brown's d e f i n i t i o n of a boundary was for constructing this  a boundary as a d i s t i n c t i o n , mind i t was  s t r u c t u r e of  argued that  a point  i n order  have to d i s t i n g u i s h between two  framework.  on a plane.  taken  Brown (1969) d e f i n e s  With t h i s d e f i n i t i o n i n  to adhere to a boundary an i n d i v i d u a l would categories  l e g i t i m a t e l y g a i n access to a space and  of persons  those who  (e.g.,  those who  c o u l d n ' t ) and  two  could  categories  of space  (e.g., p r i v a t e and n o n - p r i v a t e s p a c e ) .  t i n g u i s h between two  s p a t i a l and  Thus, the a b i l i t y to d i s -  s o c i a l c a t e g o r i e s r e q u i r e d some knowledge  3 of both the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of In o r d e r to go beyond simply i d e n t i f y i n g these two scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , the developmental sulted.  components o f a l i t e r a t u r e was  an attempt was  made to apply the f i n d i n g s to the model.  r e l e v a n t f i n d i n g s were e x t r a c t e d from the s o c i a l c o g n i t i o n  First,  con-  S t u d i e s r e g a r d i n g the content of c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f s o c i e t y  were f o c u s s e d on, and Two  psychology  space.  i t was  studies.  r e p o r t e d that c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s of s o c i e t y become more  a b s t r a c t and d i f f e r e n t i a t e d w i t h age, they c o n s t r u c t more i n t e g r a t e d  and second  t h a t as c h i l d r e n get o l d e r  'schemes' o f 'systems o f r e l a t i o n s '  (Youniss,  1978). A model was  then c o n s t r u c t e d o f the c h i l d r e n ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f  r u l e s and conventions governing s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n . assumption  I t was  t h a t c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f the s o c i a l r u l e s and  social  based on the conventions  governing s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n would be s t r u c t u r a l l y c o n s i s t e n t w i t h  their  c o n c e p t i o n s o f o t h e r aspects o f s o c i e t y . As t h e r e were no instruments f o r e l i c i t i n g v e r b a l i n f o r m a t i o n from c h i l d r e n about  t h e i r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f s p a t i a l r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s , i t was  n e c e s s a r y t o c o n s t r u c t an i n t e r v i e w schedule f o r use i n the f i n a l Thus a p i l o t  the  study.  study, i n v o l v i n g i n t e r v i e w s w i t h f i f t e e n c h i l d r e n between the  ages o f f i v e and f i f t e e n , was  conducted.  3 It should be noted however that i t i s assumed t h a t an i n d i v i d u a l c o u l d choose t o d i s r e g a r d a boundary g i v e n e x t e n s i v e knowledge o f the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space. Although such knowledge i s a p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r adherence to boundaries, simply b e i n g aware o f the l o c a t i o n o f a boundary does not c o n s t i t u t e a s u f f i c i e n t c o n d i t i o n f o r adhering to that boundary.  The  pilot  study p r o v i d e d a meanscof narrowing  the focus of the  questions  to s i t u a t i o n s which were r e l e v e n t to the c h i l d r e n , and of d e v e l o p i n g which were s t y l i s t i c l y  and grammatically  Based on the p i l o t questions  d a t a , an i n t e r v i e w schedule was  f o c u s s e d on r u l e s and conventions  the home, s c h o o l and neighborhood.  The  p u b l i c , s e m i - p u b l i c and p r i v a t e spaces, persons  who  At t h i s p o i n t i t was  I t was  constructed.  The  operating i n three contexts:  the v a r i o u s s o c i a l c a t e g o r i e s of to those  f o r the r u l e s and  decided to l i m i t  the age  group of s i x year o l d s and one group o f twelve  T h i s was  levels.  q u e s t i o n s d e a l t w i t h the l o c a t i o n o f  c o u l d or c o u l d not g a i n access  e x p l a n a t i o n s and j u s t i f i c a t i o n s  one  a p p r o p r i a t e to v a r i o u s age  questions  spaces,  and  the c h i l d r e n ' s  conventions. groups i n the study to and  two;  t h i r t e e n year o l d s .  done so as to f a c i l i t a t e comparison between and w i t h i n age  groups.  a n t i c i p a t e d , based on'the f i n d i n g s i n the s o c i a l c o g n i t i o n l i t e r a t u r e ,  that t h e r e would be q u a l i t a t i v e d i f f e r e n c e s i n the scheme of used by the c h i l d r e n i n the two  age  interpretation  groups.  1.6 L i m i t a t i o n s T h i s study  i s e x p l o r a t o r y and as such  g e n e r a t i n g r a t h e r than h y p o t h e s i s  i s concerned  testing.  range of socio-economic Although  study  f i n d i n g s must be  s u b j e c t to r i g o r o u s e m p i r i c a l t e s t s across a wide and  age  groups.  the model p r o v i d e s a p r e l i m i n a r y t o o l f o r o r g a n i z i n g and  c l a s s i f y i n g the c h i l d r e n ' s responses, f u r t h e r s p e c i f i c a t i o n and t e s t i n g . reliability  hypothesis  As the r e s u l t s of the  are based on i n t e r v i e w s w i t h o n l y f i f t e e n c h i l d r e n any seen as t e n t a t i v e and  with  the i n t e r v i e w schedule r e q u i r e s  As t h i s  of the i n t e r v i e w schedule has  f o r example, whether or not the way  i s an e x p l o r a t o r y study,  not been e s t a b l i s h e d .  the  It i s unclear,  i n which the c h i l d r e n i n t e r p r e t  the  q u e s t i o n s i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n intended by the r e s e a r c h e r .  13.  Age  d i f f e r e n c e s i n the c h i l d r e n ' s comprehension of terms such as  may  a l s o be p r o b l e m a t i c .  And,  finally,  s t r u c t u r e the c h i l d r e n ' s responses 1.7  'ownership'  the e x t e n t t o which the q u e s t i o n s  should a l s o be examined.  Rationale The  study o f c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n has  impli-  c a t i o n s f o r s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r and s o c i a l c o g n i t i o n r e s e a r c h as w e l l as f o r the p l a n n i n g and d e s i g n on m u l t i p l e f a m i l y housing developments. the c h i l d r e n ' s responses about  p r o v i d e us w i t h an i n i t i a l  First,  source of i n f o r m a t i o n  the components o f a scheme of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n used by i n d i v i d u a l s to*  p a r t i c i p a t e i n the process of s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n . an instrument  for e l i c i t i n g  s o c i o - s p a t i a l world, and c l a s s i f y i n g  i n f o r m a t i o n about  The  study a l s o p r o v i d e s  c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s of t h e i r  and, by v i r t u e o f the model o f f e r s a means o f o r g a n i z i n g  that information.  Second, the study i s r e l e v a n t t o the c u r r e n t s o c i a l c o g n i t i o n r e s e a r c h which d e a l s w i t h the development o f c h i l d r e n ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e i r world.  The  study thus p r o v i d e s a complementary source o f i n f o r m a t i o n about  a p r e v i o u s l y unexplored  area o f s o c i a l  thought.  T h i r d , the study i s r e l e v a n t to our u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f c h i l d r e n ' s behavior.  The  study may,  by d i s c o n t i n u i n g what i s c u r r e n t l y  c h i l d r e n ' s knowledge o f boundaries, their spatial.behavior.  assumed  about  A p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h i s knowledge can  They have argued  be  Designers have  t o change c h i l d r e n ' s s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r by d e s i g n i n g more  and v i s i b l e b o u n d a r i e s .  spatial  l e a d t o an a l t e r n a t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f  seen i n the case o f the d e s i g n o f m u l t i p l e - f a m i l y h o u s i n g . attempted  social  impenetrable  t h a t i n order t o keep c h i l d r e n out  of p r i v a t e and s e m i - p r i v a t e spaces a l l t h a t i s needed i s to make them aware of the boundary The  c  location.  r e s u l t s o f t h i s study may  i n d i c a t e , however, t h a t c h i l d r e n i n some  14.  cases t r a n s g r e s s boundaries challenge. "something reflect their  simply t o aggrevate  a d u l t s or t o meet a p h y s i c a l  They may see a fence as a symbol o f a d u l t domination t o c l i m b on."  Thus, t h e i r  or as a  l a c k o f adherence t o a boundary may  r e b e l l i o u s n e s s or l a c k o f o p p o r t u n i t y f o r p h y s i c a l p l a y r a t h e r than  l a c k o f knowledge o f t h a t boundary. T h e r e f o r e , by e x p l o r i n g c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s and e x p l a n a t i o n s f o r r u l e s  and conventions governing the use o f space, i t may be p o s s i b l e t o d i s c o v e r more about formation  t h e i r motives  f o r adhering t o o r i g n o r i n g b o u n d a r i e s .  s h o u l d enable p l a n n e r s t o p r e d i c t  improve the d e s i g n o f s e m i - p u b l i c spaces ments.  That i n -  t h e i r s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r and t h e r e f o r e  i n m u l t i p l e family housing  develop-  15.  CHAPTER TWO:  LITERATURE REVIEW  2.1 I n t r o d u c t i o n The  l i t e r a t u r e review begins w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n o f the t h e o r e t i c a l  empirical of  l i m i t a t i o n s o f the concept o f t e r r i t o r i a l i t y ,  crowding,  p e r s o n a l space and proxemic  studies.  and  and moves t o a review  T h i s broad spectrum of  s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r r e s e a r c h i s used to develop a c o n c e p t u a l framework f o r l o o k i n g at the process o f s p a t i a l The  appropriation.  social cognition literature  i s reviewed next.  A number o f P i a g e t i a n -  based s t u d i e s d e a l i n g w i t h c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f t h e i r s o c i a l w o r l d prov i d e the b a s i s f o r d e v e l o p i n g an a n a l y t i c  framework f o r l o o k i n g at c h i l d r e n ' s  c o n c e p t i o n s o f r u l e s and conventions governing s p a t i a l F i n a l l y , r e l a t e d s t u d i e s are c o n s i d e r e d .  appropriation.  In t h i s s e c t i o n an  eclectic  mixture o f s t u d i e s i n environmental psychology, a r c h i t e c t u r e , h i s t o r y ,  and  s o c i o l o g y are reviewed as they r e l a t e to the form and content o f c h i l d r e n ' s conceptions of t h e i r s o c i o - s p a t i a l world. 2.2  S p a t i a l Behavior  Research  Over the past decade the i s s u e o f ' t e r r i t o r i a l i t y ' i n the s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r l i t e r a t u r e  (Altman  1970;  has been  prominent  B a l d a s s a r e 1978;  Numerous r e s e a r c h e r s have argued t h a t t e r r i t o r i a l i t y ,  Edney 1974).  the act o f d e f i n i n g  and d e f e n d i n g space, i s an i n h e r e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f human b e h a v i o r . the e a r l i e s t  studies of t e r r i t o r i a l i t y ,  b e h a v i o r was  n e c e s s a r y t o i n s u r e the s u r v i v a l o f s p e c i e s , f o r c e d to compete  for  l i m i t e d amounts of space  Hediger  e t h o l o g i s t s suggested t h a t  In  (Calhoun 1962;  territorial  C h r i s t i a n , Flyger & Davis,  1960;  1964).  S o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s e x t r a p o l a t e d from these e t h o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s and the concept o f t e r r i t o r i a l i t y urban a r e a s .  used  t o account f o r i n c r e a s i n g s o c i a l pathology i n  They suggested t h a t i n c r e a s e s i n crime, d i s e a s e , and  suicide  16.  c o u l d be a t t r i b u t e d t o the i n a b i l i t y  o f i n d i v i d u a l s and groups  living  h i g h d e n s i t y environments, t o e s t a b l i s h and m a i n t a i n c l a i m s to space et.  a l . 1972;  Schmidtt 1966).  the  e x t e n t to which  drives  (Galle  Although t h e r e has been some disagreement  about  i t i s p o s s i b l e to g e n e r a l i z e about human b e h a v i o r from  r e s e a r c h w i t h animals, a common assumption territoriality  in  i n most o f the s t u d i e s i s t h a t  i s an e x p r e s s i o n o f i n h e r i t e d b i o l o g i c a l or p s y c h o l o g i c a l  (Ardrey 1966;  Altman  1970;  S t e a , 1970).  S e v e r a l sub-areas i n the s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r l i t e r a t u r e ,  i n c l u d i n g the  proxemic, p e r s o n a l space and crowding r e s e a r c h , can be subsumed under conceptual umbrella of ' t e r r i t o r i a l i t y . 1  the  Although these sub-areas have not  i n the past been c o n c e p t u a l l y l i n k e d w i t h t e r r i t o r i a l i t y ,  they are a l l  focussed on the same g e n e r a l i s s u e - the d e f i n i t i o n and defense o f s p a t i a l boundaries. "Personal space' s t u d i e s , f o r example, have been concerned w i t h the d e f i n i t i o n and defense o f boundaries around the body which, u n l i k e the t e r r i t o r i a l b o u n d a r i e s , are c o n c e i v e d o f assbeing mobile r a t h e r than f i x e d 1975;  Sundstrom  1975;  Sommer 1969).  (Altman,  'Proxemics', the study o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l  d i s t a n c i n g , has d e a l t w i t h the e s t a b l i s h m e n t and r e g u l a t i o n of boundaries between two or more persons  ( A i e l l o & Jones 1971; H a l l ;  1966).  Finally,  crowding s t u d i e s have examined the p s y c h o l o g i c a l and b e h a v i o r a l responses to  e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y produced c o n d i t i o n s o f r e s t r i c t e d  (Freedman Klevansky and E h r l i c h In  1966;  interpersonal  Hutt & V a i z e y 1966;  Stokols  distance 1976).  these sub-areas, c o n t e x t u a l and c u l t u r a l v a r i a t i o n i n p a t t e r n s o f  s p a t i a l d e f i n i t i o n and c o n t r o l have been r e p o r t e d .  Edward H a l l  (1961), has  shown t h a t i n f a c e - t o - f a c e i n t e r a c t i o n , the amount o f space c l a i m e d by i n d i v i d u a l s v a r i e s across c u l t u r e s .  Some c u l t u r a l groups m a i n t a i n c l o s e r  i n t e r p e r s o n a l d i s t a n c e s i n c o n v e r s a t i o n s than do o t h e r s .  H a l l e x p l a i n s the  17.  d i f f e r e n c e s i n proxemic b e h a v i o r by r e f e r r i n g to macroscopic such as p o p u l a t i o n  density.  He  argues t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s who  conditions grow up  in  higher  d e n s i t y environments f e e l more comfortable i n t e r a c t i n g at c l o s e r i n t e r p e r sonal  distances. Hall  (1966) has  f a c t o r s and He  thus i s not  simply  'proxemic' b e h a v i o r i s a l s o i n f l u e n c e d by  on the  i n the  laboratory  and  in naturalistic  s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t i n g between two  s e t t i n g s , vary  or more p e r s o n s .  found, m a i n t a i n e d c l o s e r i n t e r p e r s o n a l d i s t a n c e s  Researchers have examined the cultural,  and  psychological  and  consequence of s p a c i n g  i n f l u e n c e of c o u n t l e s s  social,  Studies  published among dyads.  environmental,  f a c t o r s on proxemic b e h a v i o r .  Numerous s t u d i e s have a l s o demonstrated that the d e f i n i t i o n and of  'personal  features  space' boundaries v a r i e s depending on the p h y s i c a l and  o f the  depending  fifteen  In f a c t , Altman (1975) e s t i m a t e d t h a t there were over 200  s t u d i e s d e a l i n g w i t h the d e t e r m i n a t i o n  s e t t i n g (Leibman 1970;  Sommer 1969).  defense social  Barasch (1973) has  shown f o r example, t h a t the  l e n g t h o f time which s p a t i a l c l a i m s w i l l be  fended i s i n f l u e n c e d by the  apparent s t a t u s of the  l i b r a r y s e t t i n g defended t h e i r p e r s o n a l i n v a d e r was  dressed  invader.  de-  Students i n a  space more a g g r e s s i v e l y when the  as a student as opposed to a f a c u l t y member.  In s t u d i e s of s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r conducted w i t h i n such as h o s p i t a l s and  institutional  settings  l i b r a r i e s , Robert Sommer (1969) found that the  arrangement o f f u r n i t u r e i n f l u e n c e d the nature and interaction.  adopted  Friends,  than s t r a n g e r s .  s i m i l a r to those done by H a l l have been widespread over the past years.  social  an i n h e r i t e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of human b e h a v i o r .  found i n experiments i n v o l v i n g North American a d u l t s , t h a t d i s t a n c e s  i n conversations  he  shown t h a t  Although the  f i n d i n g s may  not  duration  of  be g e n e r a l i z a b l e  physical  social  to a l l s e t t i n g s ,  r the  argument can  still  be made that boundaries of p e r s o n a l  space expand  and  18.  c o n t r a c t depending  on the s o c i a l and p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the  Although Freedman e t . a l . (1971) o r i g i n a l l y d e c l a r e d t h a t  setting.  'crowding'  n e c e s s a r i l y caused n e g a t i v e responses i n humans, S t o k o l s (1976) has  recently  argued t h a t responses to h i g h d e n s i t y and c l o s e i n t e r p e r s o n a l d i s t a n c e s v a r y depending tion.  on the i n d i v i d u a l ' s p e r c e p t i o n o f the cause o f the s p a t i a l  restric-  At a p a r t y , f o r example, where c l o s e i n t e r p e r s o n a l d i s t a n c e s are  a n t i c i p a t e d and are o f t e n seen as b e i n g a 'normal' an i n d i v i d u a l w i l l  f e a t u r e o f the  l i k e l y not r e a c t n e g a t i v e l y or f e e l  'crowded'.  s i t u a t i o n s , such as on an uncrowded bus where c l o s e i n t e r p e r s o n a l i s unexpected  setting, In o t h e r distance  and i n a p p r o p r i a t e , the p e r c e p t i o n of 'crowding' i s more  When c o n s i d e r e d c o l l e c t i v e l y , the p e r s o n a l space, proxemic r e s e a r c h c i t e d demonstrates  and  likely.  crowding  that s p a t i a l d e f i n i t i o n and use i s not simply  an e x p r e s s i o n o f b i o l o g i c a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l f a c t o r s .  Rather, the e s t a b -  lishment and maintenance  by a h i g h l y complex  o f c l a i m s t o space i s governed  system o f s o c i a l r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s . illustrates,  As the s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r r e s e a r c h  these r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s are c o n t e x t - s p e c i f i c .  The amount  o f space c l a i m e d , the n o n - v e r b a l cues used to e s t a b l i s h and m a i n t a i n c l a i m s to space, and the e f f e c t s o f reduced amounts o f space a l l v a r y depending the s o c i a l , c u l t u r a l and p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the  setting.  The n o t i o n t h a t s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r i s governed by c o n t e x t - s p e c i f i c and c o n v e n t i o n s i s an important element e c o l o g i c a l psychology. which  and b e h a v i o r .  rules  of Roger Barker's (1968) t h e o r y o f  Barker developed the concept o f the  accounted f o r the synomorphy o r s i m i l a r i t y  vironment  on  'behavior s e t t i n g  i n s t r u c t u r e between en-  Behavior s e t t i n g s c o n s i s t o f 1. n o n - b e h a v i o r a l  f a c t o r s such as time and space, 2. s t a n d i n g p a t t e r n s o f b e h a v i o r or the comp l e x but s t a b l e p a t t e r n s o f b e h a v i o r which  c h a r a c t e r i z e the s e t t i n g ,  3. a r e l a t i o n s h i p between b e h a v i o r a l and n o n - b e h a v i o r a l f a c t o r s  and  (Gump; 1974).  1  19.  An example of a b e h a v i o r s e t t i n g used it  by Barker  i s a music c l a s s ,  as  occurs at a p a r t i c u l a r time at a p a r t i c u l a r p l a c e , i t has a s s o c i a t e d  w i t h i t p a r t i c u l a r p a t t e r n s of b e h a v i o r i n c l u d i n g p l a y i n g instruments d i s c u s s i o n , and  and  i t i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between the  o r g a n i z a t i o n of the p h y s i c a l environment (e.g., the arrangement of c h a i r s and t a b l e s ) and the s t a n d i n g p a t t e r n s of b e h a v i o r instrument  playing).  A c c o r d i n g t o Barker of  (e.g., d i s c u s s i o n and  (1968) s t a n d i n g p a t t e r n s o f b e h a v i o r , o r the  the game a c c o r d i n g t o which people  rules  and t h i n g s are arranged, u n d e r l y  synomorphy between the p h y s i c a l environment and s o c i a l b e h a v i o r . c l a s s r o o m f o r example, the t e a c h e r s and  the  In a  students behave a c c o r d i n g t o  'standing  p a t t e r n s of b e h a v i o r ' which s t r u c t u r e t h e i r use of the environment as w e l l as the o r g a n i z a t i o n o f the p h y s i c a l f e a t u r e s of t h a t environment. who of  b e h a v i o r w i t h i n the c l a s s r o o m i n c l u d e l i s t e n i n g t o the t e a c h e r , and at the  thus  front  the room. The  i d e a t h a t s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r i s governed by complex systems of  r u l e s and conventions research. or  student  i s f a m i l i a r w i t h the c l a s s r o o m s e t t i n g i s aware t h a t the s t a n d i n g p a t t e r n s  the student chooses a desk f a c i n g the t e a c h e r r a t h e r than one of  The  i s not however, acknowledged i n the  I t has been assumed t h a t t e r r i t o r i a l i t y  spatial  territoriality  i s 'caused'  by  biological  p s y c h o l o g i c a l d r i v e s , and thus the c o m p l e x i t i e s i n v o l v e d i n the c o n t e x t  s p e c i f i c p r o c e s s e s of s p a t i a l d e f i n i t i o n and c o n t r o l have been g e n e r a l l y of little  interest  or concern  An e x c e p t i o n t o t h i s  to r e s e a r c h e r s working i n t h i s  lacuna i s , however, a number o f urban  which focusron s t r e e t gangs and t h e i r  attempts  i n i n n e r c i t y neighborhoods  1968;  for  area.  (Suttles  example i n h i s ethnography o f a Boston  ethnographies  to d e f i n e and defend  Whyte 1955). neighborhood  Suttles' observed  territory (1968),  that street  gangs c l a i m e d p a r t i c u l a r areas i n a neighborhoodopark, women and younger  20.  female c h i l d r e n occupied  the stoops and porches o f houses, and the-middle  aged men's ' s o c i a l c l u b s ' met i n the s p a t i a l l y r e a r rooms o f l o c a l s t o r e s .  segregated open garages, and  Although S u t t l e s does not make e x p l i c i t r e f e r -  ence t o the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between s t a t u s and power o f p a r t i c u l a r peer groups i n the community, and t h e i r a b i l i t y  to c o n t r o l semi-public  we f i n d evidence i n h i s d e s c r i p t i o n s t o support t h a t 2.3  Symbolic  Interactionism:  I f we c o n s i d e r  claim.  a T h e o r e t i c a l Framework  a broader spectrum o f r e s e a r c h ,  e x i s t i n g unidimensional  space,  d e f i n i t i o n of t e r r i t o r i a l i t y  e f f e c t i v e l y w i t h the c o m p l e x i t i e s  involved  to space are e s t a b l i s h e d and m a i n t a i n e d .  i t i s c l e a r t h a t the i s inadequate t o d e a l  i n the process by which A b i o l o g i c a l or narrow  model cannot account f o r the c r o s s - c u l t u r a l and c o n t e x t u a l  claims  psychological  differences i n  s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r , nor can i t account f o r the correspondence which e x i s t s between the s o c i a l Therefore,  s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space. i n the context  r a t h e r than t e r r i t o r i a l i t y  o f t h i s study the term s p a t i a l  i s used t o r e f e r t o an i n t e r a c t i v e , multi-dimen-  s i o n a l process by which c l a i m s  t o space a r e e e s t a b l i s h e d  i s assumed t h a t s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n than simply  an e x p r e s s i o n  appropriation  and m a i n t a i n e d .  i s an i n h e r e n t l y s o c i a l process  It  rather  o f b i o l o g i c a l or p s y c h o l o g i c a l d r i v e s i n t h a t i t  i s governed by a complex system o f s o c i a l r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s . Bedrooms, o f f i c e s and houses are a few examples o f spaces t h a t are genera l l y recognized elements o f t h i s by v a r i o u s  as "belonging  t o " an i n d i v i d u a l or group.  One o f the primary  " b e l o n g i n g n e s s " i s t h a t access t o the space i s r e g u l a t e d  s o c i a l r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s , as w e l l as, i n some cases,  by p h y s i c a l  b a r r i e r s such as doors and l o c k s . In the case o f an o f f i c e f o r example, non-occupants are g e n e r a l l y expected t o knock b e f o r e  e n t e r i n g and wait f o r p e r m i s s i o n  to enter.  However,  21.  an i n d i v i d u a l who  i s u n f a m i l i a r w i t h the c u l t u r a l or s o c i a l c o n t e x t w i t h i n which  the o f f i c e  and the r u l e s and conventions are meaningful, may  directly.  An i n d i v i d u a l may  office  a l s o choose t o -disregard the r u l e and the boundary  i n o r d e r t o c h a l l e n g e the occupant's a s o c i a l r u l e has been broken The  e n t e r the  c l a i m t o the o f f i c e .  In e i t h e r  case  and a boundary t r a n s g r e s s e d .  act of t r a n s g r e s s i n g the boundary i n many cases f o r c e s a process o f  n e g o t i a t i o n t o occur between the occupant  and the i n v a d e r .  Depending on  s e v e r a l f a c t o r s , i n c l u d i n g the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f power between the two the d e f i n i t i o n o f one  p a r t y about  the meaning o f the boundary may  parties,  be e n f o r c e d  over the o b j e c t i o n s of the o t h e r . In  any case, i t can be argued  t h a t c l a i m s t o space  are e s t a b l i s h e d  maintained by v i r t u e o f an i n t e r a c t i v e process between those who c l a i m and those who exist  and p e r s i s t  relevant  encounter  it.  Furthermore,  and  make the  i n o r d e r f o r the c l a i m t o  i n d i v i d u a l s must comprehend and act a c c o r d i n g t o the  s o c i a l r u l e s and  conventions.  T h i s dynamic p e r s p e c t i v e on s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n can be t r a c e d to George Herbert Mead's theory o f symbolic i n t e r a c t i o n i s m . o u t l i n e s Mead's concept  of ' j o i n t  Blumer  (1966)  action':  Group l i f e takes on the c h a r a c t e r o f an on-going process a c o n t i n u i n g matter of f i t t i n g d e v e l o p i n g l i n e s o f conduct t o one another. The f i t t i n g t o g e t h e r o f l i n e s o f conduct i s done through the d u a l process o f d e f i n i t i o n and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . T h i s d u a l process operates both t o s u s t a i n e s t a b l i s h e d p a t t e r n s of j o i n t a c t i o n and open them to t r a n s f o r m a t i o n . E s t a b l i s h e d p a t t e r n s o f group l i f e e x i s t and p e r s i s t o n l y through the cont i n u e d use o f the same schemes o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ; and such schemes of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n are maintained o n l y through t h e i r c o n t i n u e d c o n f i r m a t i o n by the d e f i n i n g a c t s o f o t h e r s (p. 286). A c c o r d i n g t o Mead,'joint  a c t i o n ' or s o c i a l  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and d e f i n i t i o n . a l l o w such j o i n t interpretation.  i n t e r a c t i o n i n v o l v e s a process o f  P a t t e r n s o f a c t i o n , or l i n e s o f conduct  which  a c t i o n , e x i s t because i n d i v i d u a l s use the same schemes o f  22.  In terms o f s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n , the s c a t t e r i n g o f books and a r t i c l e s of c l o t h i n g on a desk i n a l i b r a r y , o r knocking at an o f f i c e door b e f o r e e n t e r i n g , are p a t t e r n s o f a c t i o n s which c o n t r i b u t e t o the e s t a b l i s h m e n t and maintenance o f s p a t i a l c l a i m s . the c l a i m and those who encounter  I f both the person who i s e s t a b l i s h i n g i t d i d not i n t e r p r e t  the a c t i o n i n the  same way, i t would no l o n g e r be an e f f e c t i v e means o f e s t a b l i s h i n g a s p a t i a l c l a i m and t h e r e f o r e would f a l l The  into disuse.  second p o i n t made by Mead i s that  o n l y because  schemes o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n  they are confirmed by the d e f i n i n g a c t i o n s o f o t h e r s .  as i n d i v i d u a l s c o n t i n u e t o d e f i n e and i n t e r p r e t  persist So long  s p a t i a l boundaries i n the same  way, a c c o r d i n g t o the same schemes, then those schemes w i l l be confirmed i n the minds o f o t h e r s and thus w i l l c o n t i n u e t o be used. Thus, s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n as one example o f a ' j o i n t a c t i o n ' and p e r s i s t s because interpretation.  exists  p a r t i c i p a n t s operate a c c o r d i n g t o a common scheme o f  The q u e s t i o n o f the form and content o f such a scheme  still  remains unanswered, however. 2.4 Developmental  Psychology  Literature  As t h e r e are few e x i s t i n g s t u d i e s o f c h i l d r e n ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing the use o f space, the developmental l i t e r a t u r e was c o n s u l t e d .  psychology  I n f o r m a t i o n was sought r e g a r d i n g the p o t e n t i a l  i n f l u e n c e o f age on a c h i l d ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing spatial  appropriation.  The p s y c h o l o g i c a l l i t e r a t u r e i n d i c a t e s that the l e v e l s o f c o g n i t i v e development, which g e n e r a l l y correspond w i t h age, s t r u c t u r e s a c h i l d ' s s t a n d i n g o f h i s or her s o c i a l and p h y s i c a l world Turiel, ists,  1975)  ( P i a g e t , 1972; F u r t h , 1977;  Jean P i a g e t , one o f the most i n f l u e n t i a l developmental  posits a direct  correspondence  under-  between the l e v e l o f c o g n i t i v e  theor-  23.  development and the growth of knowledge ( F l a v e l l , developmental  1  model i s based  on the assumption  1973).  His  'organismic-  t h a t t h e r e are  s t r u c t u r e s which r e g u l a t e the a c q u i s i t i o n o f knowledge.  P i a g e t argues  an i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t r u c t s an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the w o r l d through p r o c e s s of a s s i m i l a t i o n and accommodation. the w o r l d by  ' a s s i m i l a t i n g ' new  That  logical that  a dialectical  i s , an i n d i v i d u a l  information into existing cognitive  interprets structures  or schemas,^ or 'accommodates' or changes those schemas t o r e s o l v e i n c o n sistencies.  The  schemas become more s o p h i s t i c a t e d w i t h age,  i n c r e a s i n g l y complex and a b s t r a c t  allowing for  thought.  P i a g e t has d e f i n e d f o u r stages o f c o g n i t i v e development, which  although  they are a s s o c i a t e d w i t h p a r t i c u l a r age ranges  are more i m p o r t a n t l y thought  to be c o n s e c u t i v e stages  s k i p a stage but must move  from one  ( i . e . , a c h i l d cannot  l e v e l t o the n e x t ) .  Movement from one  stage t o the next i s con-  t i n g e n t upon the development o f ' o p e r a t i v e ' knowledge, or "the o p e r a t i o n s by which the c h i l d  transforms p a r t s o f the world  t e r n s " (Hartand Moore; 1973).  The  i n t o r e c o n s t r u c t a b l e pat-  stages are 1) sensory motor 2) pre-  o p e r a t i o n a l 3) c o n c r e t e o p e r a t i o n a l and 4) formal o p e r a t i o n a l . The  sensory motor stage from b i r t h u n t i l approximately two years o f  i s e s s e n t i a l l y the stage o f the  'conquest  o f the o b j e c t ' ( E l k i n d ;  age  1970)  r e p r e s e n t e d by the c a p a b i l i t y o f d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g between the s e l f and o b j e c t s i n the e x t e r n a l environment.  During t h i s stage a c h i l d becomes capable o f  i n t e r n a l i z e d thought r a t h e r than simply r e f l e x  action.  During a p r e - o p e r a t i o n a l stage o f c o g n i t i v e development from a p p r o x i mately  two  language  to s i x years o f age,  and  the c h i l d  i s capable o f u s i n g symbols.  i s i n the process o f l e a r n i n g a The c h i l d  i s thus able t o t h i n k  It should be noted t h a t the term 'scheme' as i t i s used i n t h i s study i s not equated w i t h P i a g e t ' s concept of a 'schema'. A 'scheme' r e f e r s t o the content r a t h e r than the l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e o f i d e a s about space.  24.  about o b j e c t s which are not d i r e c t l y o b s e r v a b l e . thought  is s t i l l  At t h i s  stage the  child's  e g o c e n t r i c as he or she cannot take the p e r s p e c t i v e of  others. At a c o n c r e t e o p e r a t i o n a l stage y e a r s of age  from approximately  seven to e l e v e n  the c h i l d masters c l a s s e s and r e l a t i o n s and can d e a l w i t h  elements, p r o p e r t i e s or r e l a t i o n s at one l o g i c a l thought,  albeit  at elementary  time.  The  levels.  c h i l d i s now  Elementary  two  capable  of  s y l l o g i s t i c rea-  soning can be employed and the c h i l d can formulate hypotheses about  concrete  matters. At formal o p e r a t i o n a l l e v e l from approximately of  age  and  beyond, the a d o l e s c e n t  differentiate child  h y p o t h e t i c a l deductive In terms of t h i s  to f o u r t e e n years  i s able to t h i n k i n a b s t r a c t terms and  between the s e l f ' s thoughts  i s able to reason  twelve  and  the thoughts  of o t h e r s .  to  The  and to make hypotheses about a b s t r a c t phenomena u s i n g reasoning.  study, t h e r e are at l e a s t  t h r e e elements of t h i s  theory  of c o g n i t i v e development which are of d i r e c t  r e l e v a n c e to the study of c h i l d -  ren's u n d e r s t a n d i n g  governing  o f r u l e s and conventions  They are 1) the i d e a t h a t a c h i l d progresses universalistic  cognitive orientation.  i s able to decentre (Mead, 1944)  That  from an e g o c e n t r i c to a more i s , as the c h i l d grows o l d e r she  and take the p e r s p e c t i v e o f the " g e n e r a l i z e d o t h e r "  2) t h a t t h e r e i s a p r o g r e s s i o n i n an i n d i v i d u a l ' s c o g n i t i v e  development from a r e l a t i v e l y g l o b a l stage  accompanied by  t i a t i o n , t o a s t a t e of i n c r e a s i n g d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , hie  integration  from c o n c r e t e reaches  spatial appropriation.  (Werner 1955)  and  l a c k of  articulation  differen-  and  heirarc-.  3) the p r o g r e s s i o n of c o g n i t i v e development  to formal o p e r a t i o n s e n a b l i n g the c h i l d , by the time  formal o p e r a t i o n s to d e a l w i t h a b s t r a c t as w e l l as c o n c r e t e  she concepts.  25.  2.4.1  S o c i a l Cognition The  Research  study o f a c h i l d ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n s as opposed  t o impersonal o b j e c t s has emerged as a s u b - f i e l d w i t h i n developmental psychology over the past twenty years z a t i o n o f P i a g e t i a n theory contained Piaget's  (Chandler,  1977).  P r i o r t o the p o p u l a r i -  i n North America, s o c i a l development r e s e a r c h was  w i t h i n the r e a l m o f s o c i a l psychology and p s y c h o a n a l y s i s . theory  o f knowledge i s not n e c e s s a r i l y r e s t r i c t e d t o the development  of knowledge o f p h y s i c a l o b j e c t s , most o f the r e s e a r c h u s i n g model has been c o n c e n t r a t e d world  a Piagetian  on the c h i l d ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the n o n - s o c i a l  (Kuhn, 1978). In the past decade, however, P i a g e t i a n - b a s e d  has  Although  flourished.  ledge  research  Researchers have d e a l t w i t h t o p i c s such as c h i l d r e n ' s know-  of s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s  (Youniss,  social cognition  ( F u r t h , 1978), s o c i a l r o l e s and r e l a t i o n s h i p s  1978), the p o l i t i c a l system (Adelson  and O'-Neil,  1966), and the  economic system (Jahoda, 1978). An  important c o n t r i b u t i o n t o the study o f c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s  t h e i r s o c i a l world i s the work o f p s y c h o l o g i s t Hans F u r t h  (1976).  of  Furth,  o p e r a t i n g w i t h i n a P i a g e t i a n framework, s t u d i e d c h i l d r e n ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g of s o c i a l events such as the o p e r a t i o n  of s t o r e s , schools  and governments.  A f t e r i n t e r v i e w i n g approximately 200 c h i l d r e n between the ages o f 5 and 11 Furth claimed tiated and  t h a t f i v e and s i x year o l d s conceive  o f s o c i e t y as u n d i f f e r e n -  (minimal r o l e and i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s ) , p e r s o n a l i z e d  operating  according  based t h e i r e x p l a n a t i o n s  to set r u l e s .  (voluntaristic),  In h i s study the youngest c h i l d r e n  f o r s o c i a l events s o l e l y on t h e i r  observations.  They b e l i e v e d , f o r example, t h a t a l l money o r i g i n a t e d i n the change by the shopkeeper t o the customer. pay  given  I f the c h i l d ' s mothers needed money t o  the r e n t , many o f the c h i l d r e n b e l i e v e d that she would go t o the s t o r e  26.  and ask the shopkeeper f o r some. and o b l i g a t i o n s at about just pay  They came t o r e c o g n i z e s o c i a l f u n c t i o n s  nine or ten years o f age.  as customers pay f o r goods brought f o r goods d e l i v e r e d t o the s t o r e .  They understood  then  i n the s t o r e , so shopkeepers  that  also  By e l e v e n years o f age the c h i l d r e n  began t o use an ' o v e r a l l system o f r e l a t i o n s ' t o check the reasonableness and c o n s i s t e n c y o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o r e x p l a n a t i o n s . c o n s i s t e d o f d i f f e r e n t i a t e d r u l e s about  T h i s system o f r e l a t i o n s  s e v e r a l sub-systems (e.g., r o l e s ,  the exchange o f money e t c . ) . Gustav  Jahoda (1978) extended  F u r t h ' s study by e x p l o r i n g c h i l d r e n ' s  c o n c e p t i o n s o f the economic system o r the 'system o f money'. approximately  120 c h i l d r e n between the ages o f 6 and 12.  He i n t e r v i e w e d  Jahoda argues  that  w h i l e p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s f o c u s s e d on c h i l d r e n ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f a 'concept', of money, what was needed was an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f the f u n c t i o n i n g o f systems w i t h i n which money p l a y s a c r u c i a l His r e s u l t s show t h a t i n q u a l i t a t i v e terms, economic system progress toward relationships.  The youngest  role.  c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f an  an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f systems and t h e i r  inter-  c h i l d r e n i n t e r v i e w e d i n the study d i d not under-  stand the r e l a t i o n s h i p between money exchanged between customers and shopkeepers,  and the buying and s e l l i n g o f goods.  As the c h i l d r e n got o l d e r ,  however, they came t o r e a l i z e t h a t the shopkeeper had t o pay f o r h i s goods and t h a t money f o r t h i s comes from customers.  By about  t e n y e a r s o f age  the c h i l d r e n were more aware o f the d i f f e r e n c e s between buying and s e l l i n g prices,  a p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g how the two systems  (e.g., buying  and s e l l i n g ) are intermeshed. Jahoda, l i k e many o t h e r r e s e a r c h e r s d e a l i n g w i t h s o c i a l  cognition,  assumes a ' c o n s t r u c t i v i s t ' t h e o r y o f knowledge. The c h i l d r e n were not j u s t r e p e a t i n g something t h a t they had heard at s c h o o l or had been t o l d at home. They were faced w i t h  27.  q u e s t i o n s t h a t were u s u a l l y q u i t e new f o r them and they a c t i v e l y t r i e d t o f i t together whatever i n f o r m a t i o n was at t h e i r d i s p o s a l i n order t o produce an answer. This i s the j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r employing the term ' c o n s t r u c t i o n ' to c h a r a c t e r i z e t h e i r e f f o r t s (p. 119). T h i s c o n s t r u c t i v i s t p o s i t i o n has a l s o been adopted by W i l l i a m Damon (1978) i n h i s study o f the development o f c h i l d r e n ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f s o c i a l r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s i n c l u d i n g those governing f r i e n d s h i p , d r e s s , and  eating habits.  Damon, who a l s o works w i t h i n a P i a g e t i a n  framework,  found t h a t c h i l d r e n ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f s o c i a l r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s becomes more a b s t r a c t , d i f f e r e n t i a t e d and p r i n c i p l e - g o v e r n e d  w i t h age.  Children  at a p p r o x i m a t e l y s i x y e a r s o f age were g e n e r a l l y aware o f c o n t e x t - s p e c i f i c r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s at t h e d i n n e r had  (e.g.,  table").  "eating  food w i t h your hands i s n o t allowed  By about twelve or t h i r t e e n y e a r s o f age the c h i l d r e n  however developed a more complex and g e n e r a l i z a b l e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f s o c i a l  r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s  (e.g.,  "eating habits  North America i t i s not s o c i a l l y According  acceptable  are c u l t u r a l l y d e f i n e d , i n t o e a t w i t h one's hands").  t o Damon, young c h i l d r e n i n i t i a l l y  r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s by t a k i n g the p e r s p e c t i v e a parent or t e a c h e r .  rule exists.  o f one other  The c h i l d must be aware that  a d i f f e r e n t perspective  learn situation specific  another i n d i v i d u a l has  than h i s or h e r own i n o r d e r t t o r e c o g n i z e  that a  As the c h i l d gets o l d e r and i s capable o f a b s t r a c t and r e f l e x -  i v e thought, he o r she i s able t o take the p e r s p e c t i v e or t h e " g e n e r a l i z e d  other"  (Mead, 1944).  comprehend and a c t a c c o r d i n g not  person, such as  o f the l a r g e r s o c i e t y  Only then i s the c h i l d  able t o  t o the s o c i a l r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s which are  c o n t e x t - s p e c i f i c p r e s c r i p t i o n s f o r b e h a v i o r l a i d out by p a r t i c u l a r i n -  dividuals. Two common themes emerge from these s o c i a l c o g n i t i o n s t u d i e s . i s t h a t s o c i a l knowledge i s c o n s t r u c t e d  given  The f i r s t  c e r t a i n c o g n i t i v e s k i l l s and  28.  experiences.  The  second i s t h a t c h i l d r e n ' s s o c i a l thought  abstract, differentiated,  and p r i n c i p l e - g o v e r n e d with^age.  o l d e r they c o n s t r u c t more complex, a b s t r a c t and t e r p r e t i n g s o c i a l a c t i o n s and 2.5  Related  2.5.1  becomes more As c h i l d r e n  get  i n t e g r a t e d schemes f o r i n -  events.  Studies  Children's Use  and Conceptions  o f Space  There are a number of r e s e a r c h e r s who  have attempted to t e s t  Piaget's  theory of c o g n i t i v e development i n r e l a t i o n to c h i l d r e n ' s d e v e l o p i n g unders t a n d i n g and knowledge of the p h y s i c a l environment.  Hart  and Moore (1973)  f o r example examined the development of ' s p a t i a l c o g n i t i o n ' which they f i n e d as "the knowledge and structure, entities  and  i n t e r n a l or c o g n i t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of the  r e l a t i o n s of space  c h i l d r e n ' s image of space develops  ...  (p. 248)."  They argue t h a t  d u r i n g the p r e - o p e r a t i o n a l p e r i o d .  t h i s stage of a ' f i x e d system of r e f e r e n c e of u n c o o r d i n a t e d  1  At  the c h i l d uses a s m a l l number  landmarks or p l a c e s to o r g a n i z e a s p a t i a l image.  seems to be b e g i n n i n g  de-  The  on one hand to d i f f e r e n t i a t e between h i m s e l f and  child the  environment, and on the other between elements w i t h i n the environment. During  c o n c r e t e o p e r a t i o n s these  landmarks begin to be c o o r d i n a t e d  the c h i l d ' s c o g n i t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of l a r g e - s c a l e environments begins take shape.  Upon r e a c h i n g the formal o p e r a t i o n a l stage the authors  t h a t c h i l d r e n were not o n l y able to c o o r d i n a t e m e n t a l l y  the c o n c r e t e  o f the environment, but they were a l s o a b l e t o t h i n k about concepts l e n g t h and d i s t a n c e  and to  found details such  as  abstractly.  A c r e d o l o e t . a l . (1976) t e s t e d Mart and Moore's (1973) model o f the  de-  velopment of s p a t i a l c o g n i t i o n i n t h e i r study of frames of r e f e r e n c e used by children for orientation i n unfamiliar places. knowledge of the environment progresses  They a l s o found*~that c h i l d r e n ' s  from an e g o c e n t r i c f f r a m e of r e f e r e n c e  29.  based on the r e l a t i o n o f o b j e c t s reference  t o t h e i r own bodies t o a f i x e d frame o f  based on landmarks, and f i n a l l y t o a c o o r d i n a t e d  and a b s t r a c t  frame o f r e f e r e n c e . We must be c a u t i o u s n i z i n g that there representation  about a c c e p t i n g  these r e s u l t s however without  recog-  i s not n e c e s s a r i l y a correspondence between an i n t e r n a l  and the c h i l d ' s a b i l i t y t o communicate t h a t  p i c t o r i a l l y , v e r b a l l y , or t o p o g r a p h i c a l l y .  representation  It i s possible that a c h i l d of  f i v e or s i x may appear not t o have an i n t e r n a l i z e d image o f the s p a t i a l environment, because, f o r example, he o r she l a c k s l i k e drawing o r v e r b a l  'sophicated'  or a d u l t -  skills.  Given t h a t r e c o g n i t i o n , however, and the f a c t t h a t t h i s study i s focussed on the c h i l d ' s v e r b a l i z a t i o n s o f knowledge about t h e i r s o c i o - s p a t i a l w o r l d , we can e x t r a c t from these s t u d i e s support f o r the i d e a t h a t c h i l d r e n as they get o l d e r w i l l  at l e a s t d i s p l a y i n c r e a s i n g l y a b s t r a c t  and c o o r d i n a t e d  know-  ledge o f the s o c i o - s p a t i a l environment, even though t h e i r knowledge might have developed at an e a r l i e r age. Thor.nberg (1973) was a l s o i n t e r e s t e d i n s t u d y i n g stages i n c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f space. i n out o f c l a y b l o c k s .  He had c h i l d r e n b u i l d p l a c e s  Three t o f i v e year o l d s b u i l t  w i t h no d i s t i n c t i o n made between the c o n t a i n e r operational children b u i l t places  enclosed  i n t h e i r conceptions o f places  show some evidence o f a b s t r a c t  and the c o n t e n t s .  to i d e n t i f y  to l i v e  to describe  olds  i n and although they d i d l i n k i n g the thought  Formal o p e r a t i o n a l c h i l d r e n demon-  s t r a t e d an e x p e r i m e n t a l a t t i t u d e toward the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f p l a c e s and were able  Concrete  The. e i g h t and n i n e year  thought they had d i f f i c u l t y  w i t h the m a n i p u l a t i o n o f the m a t e r i a l .  to l i v e  s o l i d massive forms  spaces and were i n c l i n e d  a c c o r d i n g -to t h e i r f u n c t i o n a l p o t e n t i a l .  were c o n c r e t e  the e v o l u t i o n o f P i a g e t i a n  to l i v e i n ,  t h e i r b u i l d i n g s at a l e v e l o f p h y s i c a l and s o c i a l  30.  functioning. Rand's (1972) study o f the development o f c h i l d r e n ' s p i c t o r i a l and s o c i a l images o f houses a l s o documents the i n f l u e n c e o f c o g n i t i v e development on children's c o n c e p t i o n s o f t h e i r s o c i o - s p a t i a l w o r l d . t o draw and d e s c r i b e the houses they l i v e d s i x year o l d s viewed  When he asked  children  i n he found t h a t the f i v e and  the house as a c o l l a g e o f o b j e c t s although they under-  stood the fundamental  s p a t i a l r u l e s which operated i n the house such as r u l e s  about  access t o and uses o f d i f f e r e n t  spaces.  Boundary markers such as f e n c e s ,  doors  and l a n d s c a p i n g were c o n c e i v e d o f as p l a y o b j e c t s .  E i g h t and n i n e year  o l d s on the o t h e r hand r e c o g n i z e d t h e g e n e r a l p r o p e r t i e s o f the s o c i a l i z a t i o n o f the f a m i l y and had developed  an awareness o f the l o c a l  organ-  neighborhood.  C h i l d r e n at t e n and e l e v e n years o f age had f u l l y a s s i m i l a t e d the r u l e s ass o c i a t e d w i t h the s o c i o - s p a t i a l order o f t h e home and f a m i l y .  The o l d e r  c h i l d r e n were a l s o able t o generate a b s t r a c t and s y s t e m a t i c r u l e s r e g a r d i n g a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r over a wide range Another  important  of situations.  study by Wolfe and L a u f e r (1974) on c h i l d r e n ' s  concept  o f p r i v a c y t r e a t s c o g n i t i v e development as a f a c t o r which determines the s t r u c t u r a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of a c h i l d ' s understanding of s o c i o - s p a t i a l The  authors i n t e r v i e w e d approximately  17 and asked them t o d e f i n e p r i v a c y .  concepts.  287 c h i l d r e n between the ages o f 5 and The authors found t h a t the c h i l d r e n ' s  concepts o f p r i v a c y i n g e n e r a l became more complex and d i f f e r e n t i a t e d w i t h age.  This f i n d i n g i s consistent with other studies d e a l i n g with socio-cog-  nitive  development.  The  authors  found t h a t the use o f 'alone' as a d e f i n i t i o n o f p r i v a c y  i n c r e a s e d w i t h age, p a r a l l e l l i n g the development o f s e l f - o b j e c t tiation,  differen-  and t h a t w i t h i n c r e a s i n g age t h e c h i l d r e n were able t o g i v e more  ' o p e r a t i v e ' concepts o f p r i v a c y based  on a b s t r a c t p r i n c i p l e s such as c o n t r o l .  31.  Wolfe and capacities  and  Laufer  p o i n t to the importance to both the c h i l d ' s c o g n i t i v e  t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e , i n the development o f s o c i a l knowledge.  argue that a c o n c e p t i o n  of p r i v a c y i s i n f l u e n c e d by  1) the  c h i l d develops a sense o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l s e l f which has autonomy and  at which  the  implications for  c o n t r o l 2) the ways i n which a d u l t s i n the c h i l d ' s immediate  milieu perceive, to p r i v a c y ,  age  They  and  r e a c t to and  define  the c h i l d ' s d e s i r e s f o r p r i v a c y , r i g h t s  r i g h t s to freedom from i n v a s i o n , 4) the extent  i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h others  and  5) the c h i l d ' s g e n e r a l  abilities  and  and  type of  emotional  maturity. The  r e l a t i o n s h i p between the  l a r g e r s o c i a l and  c u l t u r a l context  c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s of the  s o c i o - s p a t i a l w o r l d i s an  of Wolfe and  They do not  perspective  Laufer's  study.  the  take a s t r i c t l y  on the development of s o c i a l knowledge but  the c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s w i l l r e f l e c t  the  authors argue that the b e l i e f s h e l d by  to p r i v a c y w i l l  i n f l u e n c e the extent  or d e s i r e f o r , The t o r s but  children w i l l  For  example,  a d u l t s about the c h i l d ' s " r i g h t "  bathroom.  actually control  Thus, the  social  i n d i r e c t l y shape the c h i l d ' s c o n c e p t i o n  of,  "privacy".  argument t h a t s o c i a l knowledge r e f l e c t s not also environmental s o c i a l ,  In the  r a t h e r assume that  to which the c h i l d can  and  only p s y c h o l o g i c a l  c u l t u r a l patterns  of U r i e Bronfenbrenner's e c o l o g i c a l theory 1979)^.  feature  psychological  s o c i a l context.  access to p r i v a t e spaces such as bedrooms, and attitudes regarding  important  and  is a central  of human development  i n t r o d u c t i o n t o h i s book Bronfenbrenner d e f i n e s  see a l s o McGurk, 1977; human development.  facfeature  (Bronfenbrenner, the  ecology  f o r a d i s c u s s i o n of an e c o l o g i c a l approach t o  32.  of human development as: ... the s c i e n t i f i c study o f the p r o g r e s s i v e , mutual accomodation between an a c t i v e growing human b e i n g and the changing p r o p e r t i e s o f the immediate s e t t i n g s i n which that d e v e l o p i n g person l i v e s , as t h a t process i s a f f e c t e d by r e l a t i o n s between the s e t t i n g s and by the l a r g e r contexts i n which the s e t t i n g s are embedded, (p. 21). There are a number o f assumptions u n d e r l y i n g  this e c o l o g i c a l perspective  which are c e n t r a l t o the model o f c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s t i o n s governing  s p a t i a l appropriation.-  o f r u l e s and conven-  These assumptions are the grounds  upon which Bronfenbrenner's model and the model presented be compared, and at the same time d i f f e r e n t i a t e d  i n t h i s study can  from o t h e r c u r r e n t  theories  of human development and human a c t i o n i n the p s y c h o l o g i c a l and s o c i o l o g i c a l literatures. F i r s t , i n c o n t r a s t t o t r a d i t i o n a l p s y c h o l o g i c a l models which focus on processes  such as p e r c e p t i o n , m o t i v a t i o n ,  t h i n k i n g and l e a r n i n g , an e c o l o -  g i c a l model advocates a focus on the content i s perceived,  o f s o c i a l knowledge (e.g., what  thought about and a c q u i r e d as knowledge).  Second an e c o l o g i c a l  model examines how the p s y c h o l o g i c a l m a t e r i a l changes as a r e s u l t person's exposure t o an i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h An e c o l o g i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e d i f f e r s development  o f the  the s o c i a l - p h y s i c a l environment.  from c u r r e n t p s y c h o l o g i c a l t h e o r i e s o f  (e.g., P i a g e t , 1967) i n terms o f the importance p l a c e d on  Although P i a g e t ' s  theory  "context".  o f c o g n i t i v e development i s based on the assumption  t h a t knowledge i s c o n s t r u c t e d out o f an i n d i v i d u a l ' s i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h the p h y s i c a l and s o c i a l environment, he and h i s c o l l e a g u e s have focussed m a r i l y on the n o n - s o c i a l or " d e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d " aspects  pri-  o f knowledge.  Bronfenbrenner, on the other hand s t r e s s e s t h a t development never takes  place  i n a vacuum, and t h a t i t always i s embedded and expressed  through  behavior  i n a p a r t i c u l a r environmental c o n t e x t .  Lewin's  (1936)  He r e f e r s t o Kurt  33.  premise t h a t b e h a v i o r evolves i n d i v i d u a l and  the environment.  human development has  focussed  s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and e q u a t i o n i t s due. a developing and  as a f u n c t i o n o f t t h e i n t e r a c t i o n between  has  Bronfenbrenner argues t h a t r e s e a r c h too h e a v i l y on g e n e t i c  not  To c o u n t e r a c t  human being  given that  occuring  i n other  the environmental s i d e of  s e t t i n g s and  i n the  i n the  on  and  phy-  the  l i m i t a t i o n Bronfenbrenner suggests  i s a f f e c t e d not o n l y by the  p s y c h o l o g i c a l systems o p e r a t i n g  propensities  the  environmental,  immediate s e t t i n g , b b u t  l a r g e r context  i n which the  that  social  a l s o events settings  are embedded. Thus, Bronfenbrenner's t h e o r e t i c a l framework o f f e r s support f o r argument that c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s of the r u l e s and the  appropriation  of space w i l l r e f l e c t v a r i o u s  t u r a l system i n which they l i v e . with extensively  i n the  Although t h i s  c o n v e n t i o n s governing  a s p e c t s of t h e s s o c i o - c u l i s s u e has  o f the ways i n which s o c i a l and and  2.5.2  Impact of the  b e l i e f s about the  P h i l l i p e Aries of the  the middle of the  w i t h the r i s e  structure  d e f i n i t i o n and use  un-  children's  of space.  S o c i o - C u l t u r a l Context (1962), a s o c i a l h i s t o r i a n , has  as a d i s t i n c t  p e r i o d i n l i f e d i d not  s i x t e e n t h century.  same r i g h t s and  i n education  explored  Based on h i s t o r i c a l r e c o r d s  and  t h a t c h i l d r e n were r e c o g n i z e d  he  the  development  argues t h a t  a f t e r the  age  as a d i s t i n c t  social  Thus, A r i e s ' s o c i a l h h i s t o r y of c h i l d h o o d  medieval  of seven or  p r i v i l e d g e s as were a d u l t s .  r e l i g i o u s i d e a l i s m i n the  the  e x i s t p r i o r to  He notes that c h i l d r e n i n the  p e r i o d were t r e a t e d as " s m a l l a d u l t s " and were accorded the  been d e a l t  to i l l u s t r a t e some  c u l t u r a l c o n d i t i o n s may  appropriate  i d e a of " c h i l d h o o d " .  i d e a of " c h i l d h o o d "  not  s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r l i t e r a t u r e , t t h e r e are s e v e r a l  r e l a t e d s t u d i e s which can be r e f e r r e d to at t h i s p o i n t  ideas  the  eight  I t was  seventeenth  only century  category.  suggests that c h i l d r e n ' s  con-  34.  ceptions  of r u l e s and  c u l t u r a l context.  c o n v e n t i o n s must be  More s p e c i f i c a l l y  s o c i a l d e f i n i t i o n of c h i l d h o o d c h i l d r e n have, i t w i l l which they are  seen as an a r t i f a c t  of the  socio-  A r i e s would argue that i n so f a r as  i n f l u e n c e s the range and  type o f e x p e r i e n c e  s t r u c t u r e t h e i r c o n c e p t i o n s of the  s o c i a l world  world i s a f u n c t i o n of t h e i r  socio-cultural milieu.  He  states  the c h i l d i s s o c i a l i z e d by ... h i s {siq} s c h o o l , peer as the mass media and the p o s i t i o n which h i s p a r e n t ' s social structure. He i s a l s o s o c i a l i z e d by v i r t u e of a p a r t i c u l a r c u l t u r e at a p a r t i c u l a r stage i n h i s t o r y A study by Fry and W i l l i s  The  (1971) demonstrates how  influences adults' reactions  to the  by c h i l d r e n of d i f f e r e n t ages.  They found that  p o s i t i v e r e a c t i o n , e i g h t year o l d s were ignored  ation.  The  ferently  sanctioned  f o r c h i l d r e n o f d i f f e r e n t ages and the c h i l d  f o r h i s or her  own  1973;  and  social  the  and  located outside the  f i v e year o l d s  Brussard  same s i t u -  i n t r u s i o n are d e f i n e d  as such r e f l e c t  adults'  dif-  perceptions  c a p a b l e of being  the parents r e s t r i c t and  the  respon-  sex  'home (Andrews  (1974), f o r example, s t u d i e d  stayed w i t h i n  fifty  children's  found t h a t  f e e t of the d w e l l i n g  unit  t r a v e l l e d to t h e i r f r i e n d ' s houses which were o f t e n  of the c u l - d e - s a c .  s i t e to s t o r e s and  a  actions.  Coates and  s i x to n i n e year o l d s  space  ten year o l d s were  s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r i n a moderate d e n s i t y h o u s i n g development and w h i l e f o u r and  definition  i n v a s i o n of p e r s o n a l  t e r r i t o r y of c h i l d r e n depending on t h e i r age  Hart 1979).  group as w e l l occupy i n the b e l o n g i n g to (p. 18).  as would an a d u l t i n the  i s an independent being  Numerous s t u d i e s have a l s o shown that range' or the  that:  f i v e year o l d s r e c e i v e d  authors argue that norms f o r p r i v a c y  of whether or not sible  i n a s i m i l a r fashion  the  social  s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r of c h i l d r e n .  authors examined the r e a c t i o n s o f a d u l t s to the  negatively  of  a part.  Danzinger (1970) a l s o argues t h a t c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s of t h e i r  of childhood  the  The  boys a l s o were allowed to go  'wild areas' w h i l e g i r l s of the  off  same age were r e s t r i c t e d  35.  to o n - s i t e l o c a t i o n s .  Parents were much s t r i c t e r w i t h g i r l s  w i t h younger as opposed to o l d e r c h i l d r e n . childhood  d i s p l a y e d by the  Thus, the  spatial restrictions  set by  the range of c h i l d r e n ' s environmental e x p e r i e n c e s . of childhood impact on The are not our  As  b e l i e f t h a t c h i l d r e n are responsible  culture.  The  f o r t h e i r own  the parents the  literatures.  For  instance,  i n the C a l i f o r n i a Law  social  of  influences definition  t h e r e f o r e have  an  s o c i o - s p a t i a l environment. socially  incompetent members of s o c i e t y  a c t i o n s , i s one  b e t t e r " has  in  b o u n d a r i e s , f o r example,  been expressed i n s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t  a d i s c u s s i o n o f " t r e s p a s s i n g c h i l d r e n " was  Review ( P r o s s e r ,  who  which seems to be c u r r e n t  assumption that c h i l d r e n t r a n s g r e s s  because they don't "know any  and  social definition  s t r u c t u r e s the c h i l d ' s e x p e r i e n c e i t should  t h e i r c o n c e p t i o n s o f the  than boys,  found  1957) :  C h i l d r e n , as i s w e l l known to anyone who has been a c h i l d , are by n a t u r e u n r e l i a b l e and u n r e s p o n s i b l e people, who are q u i t e l i k e l y to do almost anything. In p a r t i c u l a r , they have a d e p l o r a b l e tendency to s t r a y upon land which does not belong to them and to meddle w i t h what they f i n d there (p. 427). The  author, W i l l i a m P r o s s e r ,  assumes that c h i l d r e n are  i n d i v i d u a l s who  continually f a i l  proper a c t i o n .  He  "private property"  to heed s o c i a l c o n v e n t i o n s and  implies that c h i l d r e n transgress because they are not  and  the r u l e s and  p r i v a t e and  adults  She  r u l e s of invade  "civilized". the other hand draws  that c h i l d r e n are unaware of boundaries  c o n v e n t i o n s which govern access and  p u b l i c space.  incompetent  boundaries and  S h e r i Cavan (1974), as w e l l known s o c i o l o g i s t , on a t t e n t i o n to the b e l i e f h e l d by  socially  use  of p r i v a t e , semi-  writes:  The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of c h i l d i s h b e h a v i o r as opposed to a d u l t or mature b e h a v i o r r e v o l v e s p r i m a r i l y around the n o t i o n that the c h i l d does not have a complete sense o f other people's p r i v a c y , or t h e , l i m i t s o f h i s own i n d i v i d u a l area. C h i l d r e n are p i c t u r e d as i n t r u d i n g and p r o t r u d i n g at w i l l (p. 55). A number of p l a n n e r s and  a r c h i t e c t s have r e c e n t l y p o i n t e d  to the  problems  36.  generated  i n multiple  f a m i l y housing developments by c h i l d r e n ' s l a c k o f  adherence t o s o c i a l r u l e s and conventions governing the use o f space.  According  to a number o f s t u d i e s , one o f the major problems a s s o c i a t e d w i t h h i g h e r d e n s i t y h o u s i n g i s the d i f f i c u l t y  i n e s t a b l i s h i n g and m a i n t a i n i n g p r i v a c y  (Cooper-Marcus,  1972).  1972; U n i t e d Way,  C h i l d r e n , due t o t h e i r  tendency  to invade p r i v a t e spaces have been i d e n t i f i e d as one o f the primary o f the d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n 1975).  An assumption  e x p e r i e n c e d by a d u l t s  (Beck 1977; Becker,  i s a r e f l e c t i o n of t h e i r  public  failure  l a c k o f awareness o f the  s o c i a l r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s r e g a r d i n g use and access t o space, g e n e r a l terms t h e i r  1976; Cooper,  u n d e r l y i n g these s t u d i e s i s that c h i l d r e n ' s  to adhere t o boundaries  sources  and i n more  l a c k o f awareness o f boundaries between p r i v a t e and  space.  Although  the study w i l l not i n v e s t i g a t e c h i l d r e n ' s s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r , o r  the e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f v a r i o u s types o f boundaries, u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the c h i l d r e n ' s motives  f o r transgressing  e x p l o r i n g t h e i r c o n c e p t i o n s or ideas about use o f and access t o space, of t h e i r  spatial  behavior.  i t may c o n t r i b u t e  t o an  boundaries.  r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s which  i t may be p o s s i b l e to develop  a better  By govern  understanding  37.  CHAPTER THREE: 3.1  METHODOLOGY  The A n a l y t i c  Framework  A review o f the s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r l i t e r a t u r e i n d i c a t e s mensional concept o f t e r r i t o r i a l i t y  T h e r e f o r e the concept o f s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n i s defined  the u n i d i -  i s inadequate t o d e a l w i t h the c o m p l e x i t y  of the process by which c l a i m s t o space are e s t a b l i s h e d  appropriation  that  and m a i n t a i n e d .  has been i n t r o d u c e d .  Spatial  as a m u l t i - d i m e n s i o n a l , s o c i a l process which  involves  both the i n d i v i d u a l s who e s t a b l i s h c l a i m s t o space and those who encounter those c l a i m s . that  The l i t e r a t u r e on p e r s o n a l space, proxemics. and crowding suggests  s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r i n g e n e r a l , and the process o f s p a t i a l  appropriation  i n p a r t i c u l a r , i s governed by a complex system o f c o n t e x t - s p e c i f i c  r u l e s and  conventions. The  notion that  i n d i v i d u a l s construct  a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n  o r d e r t o comprehend and a c t a c c o r d i n g t o these c o n t e x t s p e c i f i c r u l e s and conventions i s based on G.H. Mead's theory o f ' j o i n t a c t i o n ' . argued that and tial can  Mead (1936)  i n order f o r patterns of s o c i a l action or 'joint action'  p e r s i s t i n d i v i d u a l s must use common schemes o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . appropriation therefore  involves  be d e f i n e d  to exist As spa-  a process o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and d e f i n i t i o n , and  as a j o i n t a c t i o n ,  i t can be argued that  indivi-  d u a l s are a b l e t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n the process o f s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n  because  they use a common scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . The  s o c i a l cognition  l i t e r a t u r e , based on Jean P i a g e t ' s t h e o r y o f  cognitive  development, p r o v i d e s a framework f o r l o o k i n g  construct  schemes o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .  that  The s o c i a l c o g n i t i o n  c h i l d r e n do not simply i n t e r n a l i z e a s e t o f r u l e s  r e g a r d i n g the use o f space, but r a t h e r  at how i n d i v i d u a l s  construct  studies  suggest  and c o n v e n t i o n s  an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f those  r u l e s based on an i n t e r a c t i o n between t h e i r c o g n i t i v e  s k i l l s and e x p e r i e n c e .  38.  These s t u d i e s a l s o suggest t h a t although c h i l d r e n may i n i t i a l l y s p e c i f i c r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s , w i t h age they c o n s t r u c t i n t e g r a t e d schemes from which they can d e r i v e  learn  context-  more a b s t r a c t and  situation specific prescriptions  f o r proper a c t i o n . F i n a l l y , the e n v i r o n m e n t a l and s o c i a l h i s t o r i c a l  s t u d i e s reviewed  t h a t c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f t h e i r s o c i o - s p a t i a l w o r l d i s an o f the s o c i a l , c u l t u r a l and h i s t o r i c a l context 3.2 The Model o f S p a t i a l The  d e a l i n g w i t h some o f the c o m p l e x i t i e s d e f i n i t i o n and use w h i l e s t i l l  provides  involved  aspect  on the dynamic, m u l t i -  the proposed model o f s p a t i a l  o f human a c t i o n r a t h e r  b i o l o g i c a l or p s y c h o l o g i c a l d r i v e s . appropriate  an a n a l y t i c a l t o o l f o r  i n the process o f s p a t i a l  r e t a i n i n g a focus  i t i s assumed t h a t the e s t a b l i s h m e n t  i s a learned  live.  involved.  Four assumptions u n d e r l y First,  expression  Appropriation  model o f s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n  dimensional processes  i n which they  suggest  appropriation.  and maintenance o f c l a i m s than an e x p r e s s i o n  T h i s means that  t o space  of inherited  i n d i v i d u a l s do not  space out o f any p h y s i o l o g i c a l "need" t o have and c o n t r o l t e r -  r i t o r y , but r a t h e r t h a t they l e a r n the c u l t u r a l and c o n t e x t - s p e c i f i c r u l e s and  conventions regarding  the a p p r o p r i a t e  d e f i n i t i o n and use o f space, and  act on the b a s i s o f t h e i r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of those r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s . The  second assumption i s t h a t s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n  process o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and d e f i n i t i o n .  involves a dual  Both the i n d i v i d u a l s who are  e s t a b l i s h i n g a c l a i m t o a space and those who encounter that c l a i m are seen as being  c o - p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the process of s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n .  to the assumption a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t e r r i t o r i a l i t y ,  In c o n t r a s t  t h a t the d e f i n i t i o n and de-  fense o f space i s an independent a c t i o n committed by i n d i v i d u a l s o r groups, the model o f s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n  assumes the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between  those who attempt to c l a i m a space and those who d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y  39.  encounter that claim. For a space to be s u c c e s s f u l l y appropriated, not only must the boundaries be recognized, but the i n d i v i d u a l s who encounter those boundaries must accept the claim as l e g i t i m a t e .  Otherwise, the boundary w i l l be ignored and the  c l a i m w i l l be up for n e g o t i a t i o n .  For example, a theater-goer's  attempt to  e s t a b l i s h and maintain a c l a i m to a seat by leaving a jacket on the seat at i n t e r m i s s i o n w i l l only be successful i f other theater-goers  f i r s t interpret  the jacket as a symbol of a boundary and second accept the legitimacy of the claim.  I f the other theater patrons simply remove the jacket because  they do not accept the notion that seats can be "saved", or i f they sat down because they did not i n t e r p r e t i t as a boundary market, the attempt to appropriate that space would f a i l .  That i s , unless the jacket owner de-  fended h i s c l a i m and enforced h i s d e f i n i t i o n over the objections of the new occupant the attempt to appropriate the theater seat would be unsuccessful. Thus, i t i s argued that both p a r t i e s p a r t i c i p a t e i n the process of s p a t i a l appropriation according to a> dynamic process of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and d e f i n i t i o n . The t h i r d assumption i s that s p a t i a l appropriation i s a multi-dimensional process.  The arrangement of the p h y s i c a l environment, the actions of i n d i -  viduals w i t h i n that s e t t i n g , and the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of both the s o c i a l and p h y s i c a l d e f i n i t i o n of space by the p a r t i c i p a n t s are three major dimensions of the process of s p a t i a l appropriation.  Thus, as opposed to the unidimen-  s i o n a l concept of t e r r i t o r i a l i t y , which i s defined as simply a b i o l o g i c a l or psychological phenomenon, the model of s p a t i a l appropriation acknowledges the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p among p h y s i c a l , s o c i a l and psychological f a c t o r s . The fourth assumption i s that s p a t i a l appropriation reproduces the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between the s o c i a l structure and the s o c i a l organization of space.  That i s , the product of s p a t i a l appropriation (e.g., the s o c i a l  40.  organization  o f space) r e f l e c t s the s o c i a l r o l e s and r e l a t i o n s h i p s  the  social  The  s o c i a l structure i s defined  (e.g.,  s t r u c t u r e ) e x i s t i n g among members o f a p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l s e t t i n g . as the composite o f s o c i a l r o l e s and r e l a -  t i o n s h i p s which e x i s t between members o f a p a r t i c u l a r s e t t i n g , and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space i s d e f i n e d d i f f e r e n t i a t e one g e o g r a p h i c a l from p r i v a t e , t o s e m i - p r i v a t e 3.3. Model o f C h i l d r e n ' s The  as a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n  system which i s used t o  space from another (e.g., and p u b l i c  Appropriation  model i s based on the premise t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s c o n s t r u c t  a scheme  t o make sense o f the complex system o f r u l e s and  c o n v e n t i o n s governing the use and d e f i n i t i o n o f space. dary assumptions r e g a r d i n g  heirarchy  space).  Conceptions o f S p a t i a l  of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n order  first  a spatial  There are two secon-  the form o f such a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .  The  i s t h a t a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n c o n s i s t s o f two i n t e r r e l a t e d com-  ponents ,kknowledge o f the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and knowledge o f the s o c i a l z a t i o n o f space.  The second assumption i s that  organi-  a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n  w i l l become more a b s t r a c t , i n t e g r a t e d and d i f f e r e n t i a t e d w i t h age, and t h a t i n a more mature form i t c o n s i s t s o f an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n 3.3.1  o f space.  Components o f a Scheme o f I n t e r p r e t a t i o n i.  knowledge o f the s o c i a l  structure  Knowledge o f the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e i s d e f i n e d  as a system o f ideas and  b e l i e f s about s o c i a l r o l e s , r e l a t i o n s h i p s and s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n . of the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e can range from a s i m p l i s t i c  and c o n c r e t e  Knowledge  understanding  of s o c i a l r o l e s t o a more complex and a b s t r a c t u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f s o c i a l organization.  The l e v e l o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g may vary depending upon a number  of f a c t o r s , one o f which i s age. At a s i m p l i s t i c  l e v e l , knowledge o f the s o c i a l  s t r u c t u r e i n v o l v e s making  41.  a distinction of s p a t i a l  between two  categories  appropriation,  of persons.  a relatively simplistic  s t r u c t u r e of a p a r t i c u l a r s e t t i n g would be differentiate  between those who  ( s o c i a l c a t e g o r y A)  and  are not  The  social organization  In our c u l t u r e the  dimensions of s o c i a l  one  social organization  geographical  is a distinction  3.3.2  semi-private  and  the occupant may  Levels  organization  appropriation  is  specific  classifi-  space from another.  and  public  of  space.  social organization  of  l o c a t i o n and meaning of boundaries.  between one  l e v e l , knowledge of the  of an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the  a more  of space c o n s i s t s of a h e i r a r c h y  More s p e c i f i c a l l y i t i n v o l v e s r e c o g n i z i n g  more a b s t r a c t  At a more  s o c i a l , as opposed to  as a c u l t u r a l l y  l e v e l an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the  space c o n s i s t s of knowledge about the  t h a t there  The  from p r i v a t e , to s e m i - p r i v a t e  At a s i m p l i s t i c  to  of space  o f space.  of space i s d e f i n e d  discrete categories  ability  ( s o c i a l c a t e g o r y A).  social organization  c a t i o n system used to d i f f e r e n t i a t e  i n that  the  second component of an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of s p a t i a l  legal, organization  private,  d i s p l a y e d by  social  authority.  knowledge of the  knowledge of the  issue  u n d e r s t a n d i n g of ;the  s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e i s d i s p l a y e d by  a b s t r a c t u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the u n d e r l y i n g such as power, s t a t u s , and  to the  are allowed access to a p a r t i c u l a r space  those who  complex l e v e l , knowledge of the  ii.  With r e s p e c t  that a boundary e x i s t s and  space (A) and  another (A).  social organization  (eg. a d w e l l i n g  l e g i t i m a t e l y c o n t r o l access and  At  a  of space c o n s i s t s  s o c i a l meaning of the d i s t i n c t i o n s p u b l i c space,  therefore  between  i s a " p r i v a t e " space use  of t h a t  space).  of Understanding  According  to the  social cognition literature  mately s i x y e a r s of age  c h i l d r e n have a c o n c r e t e  i t appears t h a t by and  c o n t e x t - s p e c i f i c u n d e r s t a n d i n g of s o c i a l r u l e s and  relatively  conventions.  approxi-  simplistic, With  age  42.  and e x p e r i e n c e they c o n s t r u c t , however, a more a b s t r a c t and  integrated  scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n c o n s i s t i n g o f knowledge of the s o c i a l and of  s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of space  and  the r e l a t i o n s between them.  An example  a 'concrete' c o n c e p t i o n o f a rule'would be t h a t "the workmen can go i n  the park any time they l i k e because they b u i l t c o n c e p t i o n would be and  structure  i t " , whereas a more a b s t r a c t  "anyone can go i n t o the park because everyone  owns i t  i t is public". A scheme of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n at the f i r s t  l e v e l i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by some  awareness o f s o c i a l r o l e s w i t h no u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the r u l e s and governing access to space. first  I t was  conventions  decided that "no u n d e r s t a n d i n g " at the  l e v e l would be c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a statement  that everyone  had  equal  r i g h t s o f access to " p r i v a t e spaces" such as the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e at s c h o o l or a p r i v a t e d w e l l i n g . At the second  l e v e l the c h i l d would be aware o f the r u l e s and  but would not be able to formulate an e x p l a n a t i o n which took i n t o  conventions account  the r e l a t i o n s h i p between an i n d i v i d u a l ' s s o c i a l r o l e or p o s i t i o n i n the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and h i s or her a b i l i t y  to g a i n access to a p a r t i c u l a r  The c h i l d ' s e x p l a n a t i o n would c o n s i s t of d e s c r i p t i v e statements the a t t r i b u t e s o f the s o c i a l c a t e g o r y o f person  concerning  (eg. " c h i l d r e n can't go  the s t a f f r o o m because they might s p i l l m i l k " ) , or c a t e g o r i e s o f space "students can't go i n t o the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e because the door Or,  space.  into  (eg.  i s locked").  the c h i l d might simply i n d i c a t e t h a t he or she d i d not know why  the  rule  existed. At the t h i r d  l e v e l the c h i l d would d i s p l a y i n h i s or her e x p l a n a t i o n  some u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space. r u l e by making an e x p l i c i t  and  The c h i l d would, f o r example, e x p l a i n a  comparison  between two  s o c i a l c a t e g o r i e s of  43.  persons  (eg. t e a c h e r ' s can go i n t o the s t a f f r o o m because  they are o l d e r  b i g g e r than s t u d e n t s ) , or between two c a t e g o r i e s o f space i n the park because y a r d because  (eg."I can p l a y  i t i s p u b l i c , but I can't go i n t o the apartment  I don't  live  and  court-  there".)  At the f o u r t h l e v e l the' c h i l d ' s e x p l a n a t i o n would simply be more a b s t r a c t and i n t e g r a t e d than at the t h i r d  level.  The c h i l d would e x p l a i n a r u l e or  c o n v e n t i o n s by r e f e r r i n g to concepts such as power, s t a t u s , or which u n d e r l y  the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and the  o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space "because  ownership  (eg. students can't go i n t o the p r i n c i p a l ' s  social  office  he i s i n charge and has more power than the s t u d e n t s " , or " s t r a n g e r s  can't come i n t o our house because r i g h t to t e l l  our f a m i l y owns i t and we have the  legal  them t o l e a v e " ) .  It should be noted that these l e v e l s o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g are meant to r e p r e s e n t p o i n t s on a continuum  r a t h e r than d i s c o n t i n u o u s " s t a g e s " .  l e v e l i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a c e r t a i n degree  Each  o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g of both the  s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space. Because the l e v e l s do not r e f l e c t r a t h e r r e l a t i v e degrees can be p r o b l e m a t i c .  a b s o l u t e q u a n t i t i e s o f knowledge, but  o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g , the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f responses  For i n s t a n c e , when a response c o n t a i n s r e f e r e n c e to  both the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space, i t may difficult  be  to a s c e r t a i n whether or not the i n d i v i d u a l i s aware o f the  r e l a t i o n s h i p between the two components. components i n one  sentence may  The  l e v e l s two  Thus, c a r e must be  and t h r e e as some'-.conception  i s b e i n g formulated at l e v e l two, l e v e l three. ,  both  imply an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p  when i n f a c t no such u n d e r s t a n d i n g i s p r e s e n t . in classifying  i n c l u s i o n o f ideas about  taken  o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p  but i t i s not e x p l i c i t l y  stated  until  44.  T a b l e I:  L e v e l s o f Understanding  Categories  a. knowledge o f the social structure b. knowledge o f the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space c. knowledge o f c o n c r e t e relations d. knowledge of a b s t r a c t relations  Levels I  II  III  IV  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  45.  3.4 The I n t e r v i e w 3.4.1 Respondents F i f t e e n c h i l d r e n were i n t e r v i e w e d i n the f i n a l o l d s and f i v e twelve  and t h i r t e e n year o l d s .  i n grade one w h i l e the twelve s i x or seven.  study, t e n s i x year  The s i x year o l d s were a l l  and t h i r t e e n year o l d s were e i t h e r  Of the younger c h i l d r e n s i x were female  w h i l e o f the o l d e r c h i l d r e n one was female the anonymity o f the respondents  and f o u r were male,  and four were male.  a l l o f the names used  i n grade  To p r o t e c t  i n t h i s r e p o r t are  ficticious. A l l o f the c h i l d r e n attended F a l s e Creek Elementary s m a l l s c h o o l w i t h an e n r o l l m e n t o f approximately  School, a r e l a t i v e l y  one hundred s t u d e n t s .  s c h o o l i s l o c a t e d i n an urban s e t t i n g , approximately  two m i l e s from the  downtown core and i s p a r t o f the F a l s e Creek Housing  Development.  the c h i l d r e n were e i t h e r  A l l of  l i v i n g i n the F a l s e Creek Development, or had done  so u n t i l one or two months p r e v i o u s t o the study. completed  The  As the development was  o n l y three y e a r s p r i o r to the i n t e r v i e w i n g t h i s means t h a t there  is a control  f o r length of residence.  Although  no demographic d a t a was f o r m a l l y c o l l e c t e d ,  w i t h the p r i n c i p a l geneous group.  suggest  t h a t the respondents  informal interviews  form a r e l a t i v e l y  hetero-  As the p o p u l a t i o n o f F a l s e Creek as a whole i s 'mixed' w i t h  r e s p e c t t o income, e d u c a t i o n and e t h n i c i t y  (Vischer-Skaburskis Planners,  1980), i t is. assumed t h a t the c h i l d r e n i n t e r v i e w e d i n t h i s from a range o f socio-economic,  study were a l s o  r e l i g i o u s and e t h n i c backgrounds.  No i n f o r m a t i o n was gathered, however, r e g a r d i n g the p r e v i o u s h i s t o r y o f the respondents.  residential  As c h i l d r e n who have grown up i n s i n g l e f a m i l y  housing would have had l e s s exposure t o s e m i - p u b l i c spaces  in a residential  context and t h e r e f o r e would be l e s s f a m i l i a r w i t h the r u l e s and conventions  46.  governing use o f that space, t h i s v a r i a b l e studies.  A l s o , as e t h n i c i t y may  should be c o n t r o l l e d  i n further  be r e l e v a n t to the content o f a c h i l d ' s  c o n c e p t i o n o f the r u l e s and conventions governing s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n , i t should a l s o be taken i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n f u t u r e r e s e a r c h . 3.4.2  R a t i o n a l e f o r Age Although  Groups S e l e c t e d  i t would be i n t e r e s t i n g and  i n f o r m a t i v e to study  children's  c o n c e p t i o n s o f r u l e s and conventions governing s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n at a l l ages,  f o r the purposes  age groups to two. age  o f t h i s e x p l o r a t o r y study i t was  T h i s was  d e c i d e d to l i m i t  done to allow f o r comparison  w i t h i n and between  groups. S i x and twelve year o l d s were chosen  reasons.  First,  as the two  the c o g n i t i v e development l i t e r a t u r e  were c o n s i d e r a b l e d i f f e r e n c e s between the two of c o g n i t i v e development. y e a r s o f age  age groups f o r s e v e r a l indicated  age groups i n terms o f  are aware o f c o n t e x t - s p e c i f i c r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s  and d i f f e r e n t i a t e d and i n t e r p r e t i n g  schemes f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g  context-specific  something  about  although  relatively  the s o c i a l r u l e s and  s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s and e v e n t s .  not o n l y understand  levels  f u n c t i o n o f those r u l e s ; by twelve or  t h i r t e e n years o f age however most c h i l d r e n have developed  understand  that t h e r e  The r e s e a r c h i n d i c a t e d t h a t most c h i l d r e n by s i x  they don't understand' the s o c i a l  and  the  abstract  conventions  By t h i s age most c h i l d r e n  r u l e s and conventions but they  the u n d e r l y i n g s o c i a l  f u n c t i o n s o f those  also rules  conventions. Second, the c o g n i t i v e development l i t e r a t u r e  indicated that  children  younger than s i x y e a r s o f age o f t e n are not a b l e to v e r b a l i z e t h e i r knowledge o f s o c i a l r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s due  to l a c k o f v e r b a l s k i l l s  Thus c h i l d r e n younger than s i x years o f age would have had the i n t e r v i e w format.  I t was  decided t h e r e f o r e to l i m i t  ( P i a g e t , 1929).  d i f f i c u l t y with  the lower age  level  47.  to  c h i l d r e n s i x years of T h i r d , i t was  age.  argued that c h i l d r e n  from F a l s e Creek Housing  would be the most a p p r o p r i a t e respondents as they would have had exposure been more d i f f i c u l t  Development  f o r t h i s type of e x p l o r a t o r y study  to a range  o f spaces.  and time-consumming to r e c r u i t  Thus, as i t would have  the c h i l d r e n from the  community through p e r s o n a l c o n t a c t s , and as the support o f the p r i n c i p a l at F a l s e Creek  School had been o b t a i n e d , i t was  from the s c h o o l .  T h e r e f o r e , c o n s i d e r i n g the c o g n i t i v e development  and the a v a i l a b i l i t y o f respondents, o l d s , were chosen.  d e c i d e d to r e c r u i t the c h i l d r e n  Due  the two  age groups,  to the s m a l l number o f grade  s i x and twelve y e a r  seven c h i l d r e n  i n the s c h o o l the o l d e r age group had to be extended six  findings,  enrolled  to i n c l u d e both  grades  and seven, or both twelve and t h i r t e e n year o l d s .  3.4.3  Recruitment A f t e r O b t a i n i n g the p r i n c i p a l ' s  and the School Board's  were sent home w i t h the c h i l d r e n to s o l i c i t  approval, l e t t e r s  t h e i r p a r e n t s ' consent  Appendix E). The response r a t e f o r both age groups was low response r a t e c o u l d have been due  (see  approximately  percent.  The  study was  c a r r i e d out i n the l a s t two weeks o f June and t h e r e f o r e the parents:  were inundated w i t h s c h o o l forms. to  the f a c t  to the f a c t that  thirty  T h i s low r a t e c o u l d a l s o be  the  attributed  that F a l s e Creek i s a p r o t o - t y p i c a l housing development and  i t s r e s i d e n t s have been exposed  thus  to an i n o r d i n a t e l y h i g h number o f r e s e a r c h  projects. 3.4.4  Format o f I n t e r v i e w s The  i n t e r v i e w s were tape r e c o r d e d and  l a s t e d approximately t h i r t y  T h i s was c o r r o b o r a t e d i n the p i l o t study i n t e r v i e w s . C h i l d r e n at f o u r or f i v e y e a r s o f age were not a b l e to answer the q u e s t i o n s .  minutes.  48.  Each c h i l d was  interviewed  Each c h i l d was  called  s e p a r a t e l y i n a s m a l l storage  f o r , at h i s or her classroom,  the  c h i l d r e n seemed a l i t t l e nervous, they  i n t e r v i e w got underway.  The  which'was c l u t t e r e d w i t h m u s i c a l chairs  school.  g r e e t e d warmly and  to accompany the i n t e r v i e w e r to the i n t e r v i e w room. grade one  room i n the  Although some of  asked the  a l l seemed ,at ease once  i n t e r v i e w s took p l a c e i n a storage  room  instruments  Two  and  s p o r t s equipment.  ( p l a c e d about f o u r f e e t a p a r t ) were used, and  a t a b l e f o r the  small  tape  recorder. C h i l d r e n i n both age and w i t h  groups seemed comfortable  the tape r e c o r d e r .  may  have had  about the  room, may  school.  As the q u e s t i o n s  In many cases  however t h i s e x e r c i s e was  continually.  During  for e l i c i t i n g  ' l o o s e n i n g ' up  any  f e a r s the c h i l d r e n  c o u l d be answered  or making the c h i l d  unneccessary as the c h i l d r e n t a l k e d  answer, and  i n a l l but  one  sentence type v e r b a l responses especially  case t h i s  format was  drawing served  One  success-  (see Appendix A).  i n the case o f the younger c h i l d r e l i v e d or  played.  seemed to come near the middle of the i n t e r v i e w p e r i o d , perhaps  as a r e s u l t o f the c h i l d ' s r e s t l e s s n e s s .  h i s or her  easily  f e e l more at ease.  asked to draw a p a r t i c u l a r p l a c e to i n d i c a t e where they  T h i s request  typified  the i n t e r v i e w , q u e s t i o n s were asked which r e q u i r e d more  In a d d i t i o n , i n some cases, they  informal setting  of the i n t e r v i e w the c h i l d r e n were engaged i n  a way  ful  r e l a x e d and  have d i m i n i s h e d  they p r o v i d e d  than a "yes" or "no"  of  The  interview.  P r i o r to the b e g i n n i n g i n f o r m a l t a l k about the  the i n t e r v i e w format  They seemed s e l f - a s s u r e d and were g e n e r a l l y able  and w i l l i n g to express themselves. by the c l u t t e r e d storage  with  to p r o v i d e  a 'break' and  However, i n these a l s o allowed  instances,  the c h i l d  to  the  clarify  statements.  o f the c h i l d r e n c o n t i n u a l l y r e f e r r e d to events u n r e l a t e d to  the  49.  topic  and i n s e v e r a l i n s t a n c e s was reminded o f the q u e s t i o n and asked t o  g i v e an answer. The  l e n g t h o f the i n t e r v i e w d i d not seem t o be troublesome f o r the  c h i l d r e n although  they d i d become more r e s t l e s s  3.5 The I n t e r v i e w  Schedule  The  i n t e r v i e w schedule  conventions  consisted of questions r e l a t i n g  i n three d i f f e r e n t  neighborhood.  W i t h i n each o f the c o n t e x t s and 2.  c a t i o n s f o r those r u l e s and conventions  questions d e a l t with:  1..their  t h e i r e x p l a n a t i o n s and  justifi-  (see Appendix A f o r a copy o f the  schedule).  Questions  d e a l i n g w i t h t h e i r awareness o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s  open-ended q u e s t i o n s  such  as "Where can or can't you p l a y i n your  hood?", or more s t r u c t u r e d q u e s t i o n s office  t o r u l e s and  s o c i o - s p a t i a l c o n t e x t s , the s c h o o l , home and  awareness o f r u l e s and conventions  interview  toward the end o f the s e s s i o n .  such  included  neighbor-  as "Can you go i n the p r i n c i p a l ' s  any time you l i k e ? " .  More s p e c i f i c  q u e s t i o n s were a l s o asked i n c l u d i n g ,  f o r example, "When  can you go t o the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e ? " or "When can a policeman  come i n t o  your house?". The  second type o f q u e s t i o n i n v o l v e d a s k i n g the c h i l d r e n t o e x p l a i n why  c e r t a i n i n d i v i d u a l s or groups c o u l d c o n t r o l access  t o space,  why  students go i n t o the  some i n d i v i d u a l s were excluded  s t a f f room any time they and  p l a y any time they The  first  children's  l i k e ? " or "Why  can't  can't  s t r a n g e r s come i n t o your y a r d  like?").  type o f q u e s t i o n was meant t o e l i c i t  ideas about who c o n t r o l s access  can and cannot g a i n access spaces.  (eg. "Why  Through these  or a l t e r n a t e l y  information regarding  to space and a l t e r n a t e l y  who  t o p a r t i c u l a r p r i v a t e , s e m i - p r i v a t e , and p u b l i c  q u e s t i o n s the c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s  of s o c i a l  roles  50.  and  r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n c l u d i n g those o f a u t h o r i t y  p a r e n t s and policemen were e x p l o r e d . to e l i c i t  information  In a d d i t i o n the q u e s t i o n s were intended  about the c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f the s o c i a l  n i t i o n and use o f p r i v a t e , s e m i - p r i v a t e The  f i g u r e s such as t e a c h e r s ,  children's explanations  and p u b l i c  defi-  space.  and j u s t i f i c a t i o n s  f o r the r u l e s and con-  v e n t i o n s were used to assess t h e i r l e v e l o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e  and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n  o f space.  Although the a n a l y s i s o f the l e v e l s o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g i n c l u d e d to a l l three  contexts,  an emphasis was p l a c e d  reference  on the scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n  used by the c h i l d r e n t o make sense o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s a p p l y i n g t o neighborhood space.  The c h i l d r e n ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the concept o f owner-  s h i p , the r e l a t i o n s h i p between r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s and ownership, and t h e i r explanations  and j u s t i f i c a t i o n s  f o r that r e l a t i o n s h i p , were focussed  on i n  particular. 3.6 T r a n s c r i p t i o n and E d i t i n g Procedures The  tapes were t r a n s c r i b e d verbatum, except i n two cases where the  response t o a p a r t i c u l a r q u e s t i o n topic.  Following  i n order to discover  content o f the c h i l d r e n ' s The  long  and u n r e l a t e d  the t r a n s c r i b i n g , the responses were c a t e g o r i z e d  to groups o f s i m i l a r q u e s t i o n s . contrasted  was e x c e s s i v e l y  to the according  The responses were then compared and similarities  and d i f f e r e n c e s  i n the form and  conceptions.  responses were chosen f o r i n c l u s i o n i n the t e x t based on t h e i r  representativeness  as w e l l as t h e i r u s e f u l n e s s  as an i l l u s t r a t i v e  tool.  O v e r a l l , the c h i l d r e n ' s verbatum accounts were used, even when the c h i l d ' s confusion dices  or uncertainty  made the response l e s s comprehensible  B and C f o r t r a n s c r i b e d  interviews).  (see Appen-  51.  3.7  P h y s i c a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the F a l s e Creek Development The F a l s e Creek Housing  and e n g i n e e r s , was concept  Development Group, a team o f a r c h i t e c t s ,  h i r e d by the C i t y of Vancouver  f o r F a l s e Creek.  The  i n 1974  The  to develop  C i t y r e t a i n e d p a r t o f the s i t e  income l e v e l s ,  f o r a p u b l i c park.  most m u l t i p l e f a m i l y h o u s i n g developments the d e s i g n concept complete  range o f spaces,  a design  terms o f r e f e r e n c e were f o r a f a m i l y - o r i e n t a t e d ,  r e s i d e n t i a l community w i t h a mixture o f households, tenures.  planners  and  Thus, u n l i k e  included a  from p u b l i c , to s e m i - p r i v a t e and p r i v a t e  space.  A number o f c o - o p e r a t i v e and o t h e r n o n - p r o f i t sponsor groups were solicited  to work w i t h the Development Group.  s i t e p l a n f o r each the sponsor  'enclave' was  developed  group (see Appendix E f o r a map  The  d e s i g n scheme and  overall  by a r c h i t e c t u r e f i r m s chosen of False Creek).  Each 'enclave' c o n s i s t s o f a c i r c l e o f d w e l l i n g u n i t s surrounded o u t s i d e by p u b l i c  space  and  l o o k i n g inward  d e s i g n g u i d e l i n e s which s t a t e d requirements of the i n d i v i d u a l e n c l a v e s s p e c i f i e d by the d e v e l o p e r s or p r i v a t e space.  The  the The  imposed on the d e s i g n of each  three types o f open space.  Land owned  or s e m i - p u b l i c space  and  o f the d e s i g n g u i d e l i n e on the demarcation  p u b l i c and s e m i - p u b l i c space c l e a r l y boundary symbols  on  on a s e m i - p r i v a t e c o u r t y a r d .  ' p u b l i c ' space; neighborhood language  by  of  i m p l i e s a c u l t u r a l c o n t e x t that makes  meaningful:  Enclave gateway: A l l p o i n t s o f e n t r y to an e n c l a v e should c l e a r l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e between p u b l i c and neighborhood t e r ritory. I t i s n e c e s s a r y to g i v e a sense o f t e r r i t o r i a l i t y to the e n c l a v e open space, to make i t belong to the r e s i d e n t s . T h i s i s not n e c e s s a r i l y a 'gate' but a s e r i e s o f c l u e s such as paving changes, archways, s t e p s , t r e l l i s e s e t c . t h a t i n d i c a t e a change o f t e r r i t o r y , (p. 46) As F a l s e Creek Development i n c l u d e s a range o f spaces  i t p r o v i d e d an  i d e a l s e t t i n g f o r i n v e s t i g a t i n g c h i l d r e n s c o n c e p t i o n s o f r u l e s and t i o n s g o v e r n i n g access t o p r i v a t e , s e m i - p r i v a t e and p u b l i c  spaces.  conven-  52.  Table I I :  lave  E n c l a v e s by Housing Type and  Sponsor Group**  Sponsor  Type o f Housing  1  66 u n i t s market r e n t a l 66 u n i t s s e n i o r ' s r e n t a l  L i m i t e d D i v i d e n d Program Kiwanis Club  2  83 u n i t s market r e n t a l 46 u n i t s s e n i o r ' s r e n t a l 53 u n i t s market condominiums  L i m i t e d D i v i d e n d Program Bertha 0. C l a r k e S o c i e t y Stanzl Construction  3  30 u n i t s market condominiums 56 u n i t s c o n t r o l l e d l e a s e h o l d market condominiums  Stanzl Construction Creek V i l l a g e  4  48 u n i t s market condominiums  Stanzl  5  82 u n i t s C o - o p e r a t i v e Housing  F a l s e Creek Co-op  6  88 u n i t s C o - o p e r a t i v e Housing  False  7  35 u n i t s market condominiums 24 u n i t s f o r p h y s i c a l l y handicapped 50 u n i t s c o n t r o l l e d l e a s e h o l d condominiums  University Non-Profit (Now c a l l e d Marine Mews)  126 u n i t s n o n - p r o f i t  Netherlands  8  **based on i n f o r m a t i o n r e p o r t e d post-occupancy study.  rentals  Construction  Creek Co-op  Marine Mews  i n the V i s c h e r  Society  Skaburskis  (1980)  53.  IV  Results  4.1  Introduction T h i s chapter i s d i v i d e d i n t o two s e c t i o n s .  focus  In the f i r s t  s e c t i o n the  i s on i d e n t i f y i n g and i l l u s t r a t i n g two components o f c h i l d r e n ' s con-  ceptions  of s p a t i a l appropriation.  structure  These are:  1. c o n c e p t i o n s o f the s o c i a l  (eg. s o c i a l r o l e s and r e l a t i o n s h i p s ) and 2 . c o n c e p t i o n s o f the  s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space (eg.  l o c a t i o n and meaning o f b o u n d a r i e s ) .  Although i t i s assumed that knowledge o f the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e i s embedded i n c o n c e p t i o n s o f the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space, an attempt i s made to look at the two components i n d e p e n d e n t l y . The  a n a l y s i s o f c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e  on t h e i r ideas can  and b e l i e f s about who c o n t r o l s space, and a l t e r n a t e l y , who  g a i n access t o p r i v a t e , s e m i - p r i v a t e  neighborhood, and home. ships  Children's  and p u b l i c spaces i n the s c h o o l ,  c o n c e p t i o n s o f s o c i a l r o l e s and r e l a t i o n  i n c l u d i n g those o f a d u l t s , and c h i l d r e n ; a u t h o r i t y f i g u r e s such as  policemen and t e a c h e r s , The  and j u s t i f i c a t i o n s  appropriation. ceptions  an a n a l y s i s o f the c h i l d r e n spatial  i t was expected that c h i l d r e n ' s con-  o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n would  integrated  and u n d i f f e r e n t i a t e d u n d e r s t a n d i n g , t o a more a b s t r a c t  understanding.  purpose o f t h i s  second s e c t i o n i s t o i l l u s t r a t e  of u n d e r s t a n d i n g as d i s p l a y e d explore  and f r i e n d s are e x p l o r e d .  f o r r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s g o v e r n i n g  As mentioned e a r l i e r ,  range from a c o n c r e t e  The  as w e l l as s t r a n g e r s  second s e c t i o n o f t h i s chapter c o n t a i n s  explanations  and  focusses  the v a r i o u s  i n the c h i l d r e n ' s responses, and by doing so  the s t r u c t u r e o f the scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n used at each  Four l e v e l s o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g were d e f i n e d used t o i l l u s t r a t e each  level.  levels  level.  and the c h i l d r e n ' s responses were  54.  The  first  l e v e l i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by some u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f s o c i a l  roles  w i t h no u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the r u l e s and conventions governing access to space. The  second  l e v e l by a c o n t e x t - s p e c i f i c u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s  w i t h no u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between the s o c i a l and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space. a relatively  simplistic  The t h i r d  structure  l e v e l i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by  and c o n c r e t e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p  between the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o,-f space, w h i l e the f o u r t h l e v e l i s seen as c o n s i s t i n g o f a more a b s t r a c t and d i f f e r e n t i a t e d c o n c e p t i o n o f the r u l e s and conventions d i s p l a y e d by an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f concepts  such as power, s t a t u s and  ownership.  An emphasis i n t h i s s e c t i o n i s on the c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s of s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n i n the neighborhood, or r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing to p r i v a t e , s e m i - p r i v a t e and p u b l i c p r o p e r t y . sis  More s p e c i f i c a l l y ,  i s concerned w i t h the c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f ownership,  ship between r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s and ownership, justifications concepts  f o r that r e l a t i o n s h i p .  access  the a n a l y -  the r e l a t i o n -  and t h e i r e x p l a n a t i o n s and  (As mentioned e a r l i e r ,  although o t h e r  such as " r e n t i n g " were not excluded i n t e n t i o n a l l y , none o f the  c h i l d r e n mentioned r i g h t s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h r e n t i n g as opposed t o owning.) 4.2 Components o f an Understanding 4.2.1  Conceptions i.  of Spatial Appropriation I  o f the S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e  b e l i e f s about  a d u l t s and c h i l d r e n  A l l o f the respondents  except one s i x year o l d were aware o f the r u l e s  and c o n v e n t i o n s governing access to p r i v a t e spaces office  and s t a f f r o o m at s c h o o l , t h e i r own houses,  spaces  such as c o u r t y a r d s and p u b l i c parks.  such as the p r i n c i p a l ' s as w e l l as s e m i - p u b l i c  T h e i r c o n c e p t i o n o f the s o c i a l  r o l e s o f a d u l t s and c h i l d r e n was an e s s e n t i a l element o f t h e i r  understanding  of the r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n .  As c h i l d r e n  55.  act or  w i t h i n an environment c o n t r o l l e d by a d u l t s , whether at s c h o o l a t home >  i n the neighborhood,  i t i s understandable  that t h e i r conceptions of s p a t i a l  a p p r o p r i a t i o n c i r c l e around t h e i r b e l i e f s and i d e a s about the s o c i a l of  a d u l t s and r e c i p r o c a l l y , about themselves  roles  as c h i l d r e n i n r e l a t i o n to  adults. The  c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f a d u l t and c h i l d r o l e s may be best  t r a t e d by t h e i r c o n c e p t i o n s o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s s t a f f r o o m and p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e  i n the s c h o o l .  and t e a c h e r s t o a p p r o p r i a t e space  governing  illus-  access t o the  The a b i l i t y o f the p r i n c i p a l  i n the s c h o o l c o n t r a s t s s h a r p l y w i t h the  l a c k o f a b i l i t y o f students t o a p p r o p r i a t e space w i t h i n t h a t s e t t i n g . c h i l d r e n were aware o f t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n or  justified  The  i n s p a t i a l r i g h t s and o f t e n e x p l a i n e d  the r e l a t e d r u l e s by r e f e r r i n g t o what they b e l i e v e d t o be the  t y p i c a l behavior o f a d u l t s and c h i l d r e n . In to  many cases the c h i l d r e n e x p l a i n e d the f a c t t h a t they weren't  go i n t o the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e or s t a f f r o o m by s t a t i n g t h a t  would behave i n a p p r o p r i a t e l y and thus should be excluded. uses a c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n o f t y p i c a l restricting  allowed  'children'  Angela,  f o r example,  ' c h i l d i s h ' b e h a v i o r to j u s t i f y the r u l e  access to t h a t s e t t i n g .  (Could you go t o the s t a f f r o o m t o e a t your lunch?) You can't (Why not?) Because i f you go up t h e r e you might s p i l l something and a l l the c h i l d r e n s p i l l m i l k up there and t h i n g s . Angela  6 years o l d  " S p i l l i n g m i l k " can be seen as an a c t i o n which, i n common sense awkwardness and l a c k o f s o c i a l s k i l l s . . committed by c h i l d r e n .  I t i s a l s o an a c t i o n which i s o f t e n  Hence Angela, who has p r o b a b l y been s a n c t i o n e d f o r  " s p i l l i n g m i l k " , d i s p l a y s h e r - s o c i a l knowledge by f i r s t action with  terms, d i s p l a y s  associating  ' c h i l d r e n ' and second, u s i n g t h a t u n d e r s t a n d i n g  such  to j u s t i f y  rules  56  governing access to ' p r i v a t e spaces' w i t h i n the s c h o o l . S e v e r a l o f the c h i l d r e n extended of two  t h e i r e x p l a n a t i o n s beyond a d e s c r i p t i o n  the r o l e s o f e i t h e r c h i l d r e n or a d u l t s , roles.  T h e i r comparison  to make a comparison  d i r e c t s a t t e n t i o n toward  s h i p which e x i s t s between c h i l d r e n and a d u l t s . c o n c r e t e i d e a s about c h i l d r e n and has used  the s o c i a l  between the relation-  Sara, f o r example, has some  the d i f f e r e n c e s between the s o c i a l r o l e s o f a d u l t s and those i d e a s to c o n s t r u c t an e x p l a n a t i o n f o r r u l e s  r e g a r d i n g access to the s t a f f r o o m . (Why do you lunch room room?) Cause they aren't b i g  t h i n k a t e a c h e r c o u l d come and eat lunch i n your but you c o u l d n ' t go and eat lunch i n the s t a f f are b i g people and l i t t l e c h i l d r e n c a n ' t cause yet but when they get o l d e r and work ... Sara  Sara e x p l a i n s the d i f f e r e n t  6 years o l d  s p a t i a l r i g h t s o f c h i l d r e n and t e a c h e r s by  to t h e i r p h y s i c a l appearance as w e l l as t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e s o c i a l A c c o r d i n g to Sara  they  ' b i g people' or a d u l t s work and are o l d e r , and  l e g i t i m a t e l y c o n t r o l access to space, w h i l e  'little  referring  roles. thus  can  people' or c h i l d r e n  cannot. ii  the manager  Another  salient role relationship  e x i s t s between themselves  f o r many o f the c h i l d r e n i s that which  and the apartment manager who  c o n v e n t i o n s a p p l y i n g to s e m i - p u b l i c spaces  enforces r u l e s  and  such as the c o u r t y a r d s i n t h e i r  neighborhood. One  s i x year o l d respondent  gave a v e r y c l e a r d e f i n i t i o n o f the  the manager p l a y s i n the enforcement housing  role  o f boundaries w i t h i n a m u l t i p l e f a m i l y  development. (What would happen i f you walked i n t o the c o u r t y a r d and s t a r t e d playing?) I f the manager saw you he would t e l l you to go out, he would ask you why you were i n t h e r e and would ask you i f you were l i v i n g there. Shawn 6 y e a r s o l d  57.  Shawn p o i n t s  t o the r o l e o f the manager i n e n f o r c i n g r u l e s and suggests t h a t  the r u l e s do not apply  to a l l people i n a l l s i t u a t i o n s .  that the r u l e works i n such a way t h a t r e s i d e n c e the  semi-public iii.  and purpose f o r e n t e r i n g  space are taken i n t o account,  strategies  J u s t as c h i l d r e n a c t i v e l y c o n s t r u c t  s o c i a l knowledge, they a l s o a c t i v e l y  develop s t r a t e g i e s f o r d e a l i n g w i t h a d u l t s . s t r a t e g i e s they used f o r a v o i d i n g and  He suggests then  transgressing boundaries.  sanctioning  Many o f the c h i l d r e n by a d u l t s  discussed  f o r breaking  C a r o l , a twelve year o l d respondent,  rules described  how she and a f r i e n d d e a l t w i t h an o l d e r woman who attempted t o s a n c t i o n them f o r t r a n s g r e s s i n g  a boundary.  . . . t h i s was a couple o f days ago we were down i n the pond and you are allowed t o go there but some people t h i n k you a r e n ' t . L i k e t h i s o l d lady she came up and I was p l a y i n g i n my dingy and we f e l l and we s t a r t e d s p l a s h i n g and t h i s lady s t a r t e d y e l l i n g at us. She s t a r t e d t e l l i n g us t o get out and I t o l d h e r we d i d n ' t have t o cause i t wasn't p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y and there wasn't any s i g n saying we had t o get o u t . She s a i d you'd b e t t e r get out except i n bad language, "I'm going t o k i l l y o u . " So I s a i d , "Why don't you come i n a f t e r u s . " and then she j u s t l e f t . She was one o f those o l d crabby l a d i e s w i t h b l a c k h a t s . . . Carol 12 y e a r s o l d The  pond d e s c r i b e d  It was not intended and  f o r swimming, j u d g i n g  the presence o f ducks e t c .  i n d i c a t e t h a t there This it  by C a r o l i s l o c a t e d i n the p u b l i c park (see Appendix E)  i s a formal  There are not, however, any signs which r u l e p r o h i b i t i n g swimming.  segment o f the i n t e r v i e w  provides  from the shallowness o f the water  i s i n t e r e s t i n g f o r two reasons.  a d e s c r i p t i o n o f the respondent's c o n c e p t i o n  t i o n s h i p which e x i s t s between h e r s e l f and the 'old l a d y ' .  First,  o f the s o c i a l According  rela-  to  C a r o l the o l d lady d i d not have the a u t h o r i t y t o s a n c t i o n h e r f o r swimming i n the pond.  Because i t wasn't  'private property  a r i g h t t o access and use o f t h a t  space.  1  C a r o l and h e r f r i e n d had  58.  Second, C a r o l ' s c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n o f the woman as a "crabby o l d lady w i t h a b l a c k h a t " who y e l l s is  one which reminds me o f s i m i l a r c o n c e p t i o n s o f a d u l t s  a child.  'evil'.  to k i l l  them,  I m a i n t a i n e d as  I t c o u l d be t h a t , i n a c h i l d ' s eyes any a d u l t who attempts t o  invoke a n e g a t i v e as  at c h i l d r e n , swears and t h r e a t e n s  s a n c t i o n without the a u t h o r i t y to do so w i l l be c h a r a c t e r i z e d  One way f o r a c h i l d  to j u s t i f y  l a c k o f adherence to the demands  of an a d u l t whether i t i s a manager, or a crabby o l d lady i s to d e s c r e d i t them by c h a r a c t e r i z i n g them as d e v i a n t . lady "threatened  to k i l l  Thus C a r o l ' s  them" can be i n t e r p r e t e d as an attempt t o e m b e l l i s h  the c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n r a t h e r than a statement o f f a c t . d i s p l a y s not o n l y a twelve year o l d s c o n c e p t i o n to p u b l i c p r o p e r t y ,  statement t h a t the o l d  This quotation  o f a r u l e governing  but a l s o the c r i t e r i a used t o d e f i n e  therefore  access  and respond to  authority i n adults. A playfulness in  regarding  the t r a n s g r e s s i o n  o f boundaries was e x h i b i t e d  a number o f the o l d e r c h i l d r e n ' s responses.  In many cases the c h i l d r e n  s t a t e d t h a t they were aware o f the r u l e s r e s t r i c t i n g access t o a p a r t i c u l a r p r i v a t e space but i g n o r e d  them " j u s t f o r the excitement o f g e t t i n g caught".  Here i s such an example. (Is there anywhere i n the s c h o o l where you can't go any time .you l i k e ? ) ... you can't go t o the boy's washroom but we always do. Sometimes we go running through from the back door t o the f r o n t door because they are always unlocked at the back, so we r u n through screaming. Carol  12 years o l d  In t h i s case the taboo s u r r o u n d i n g sex-segregated washrooms p r o b a b l y made the p e n e t r a t i o n  of that  space e s p e c i a l l y t a n t a l i z i n g .  through the washroom was o b v i o u s l y  The game o f running  one which d e l i g h t e d t h i s respondent and  p r o b a b l y the r e s t o f hereSclassmates. T h i s response a l s o emphasizes the d i f f i c u l t y  i n drawing the assumption  59.  t h a t c h i l d r e n t r a n s g r e s s boundaries was i n d i c a t e d  because they don't  i n the l i t e r a t u r e review,  and p l a n n e r s as the j u s t i f i c a t i o n  know they e x i s t .  t h i s assumption  As  i s used by a r c h i t e c t s  f o r b u i l d i n g h i g h e r fences and w a l l s i n  o r d e r t o i n s u r e t h a t c h i l d r e n r e c o g n i z e where boundaries  are l o c a t e d .  These  a r c h i t e c t s should not be s u r p r i s e d when the fences and w a l l s are used as climbing  apparatus  and the boundaries  are t r a n s g r e s s e d more f r e q u e n t l y as  they p r o v i d e a more c h a l l e n g i n g o p p o r t u n i t y f o r the c h i l d r e n to t e s t  their  skills. iv s o c i a l construction of authority Another aspect o f c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f the s o c i a l  s t r u c t u r e was  t h e i r i d e a s and b e l i e f s about the s p a t i a l r i g h t s o f v a r i o u s s o c i a l c a t e g o r i e s of persons  i n c l u d i n g t e a c h e r s , p o l i c e o f f i c e r s and m a i l c a r r i e r s .  c h i l d r e n were asked governing one  questions s p e c i f i c a l l y  The  about the r u l e s and conventions  the s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r o f these s o c i a l c a t e g o r i e s o f persons.  i n d i c a t o r o f ' a u t h o r i t y ' o r 'power' i s the a b i l i t y  As  t o e s t a b l i s h and main-  t a i n c l a i m s t o space, o r at l e a s t g a i n access t o spaces which are f o r o t h e r s i n a c c e s s i b l e , the c h i l d r e n ' s b e l i e f s  about the s p a t i a l r i g h t s o f policemen  as opposed t o mailmen, or t e a c h e r s as opposed t o students can be seen as d i s p l a y i n g some aspects o f t h e i r c o n c e p t i o n s o f a u t h o r i t y . Most o f the c h i l d r e n b e l i e v e d t h a t policemen any time they l i k e d but a mailman c o u l d not.  c o u l d come i n t o t h e i r house  While  the younger c h i l d r e n d i d  b e g i n t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e between the s p a t i a l r i g h t s o f these two s o c i a l c a t e g o r i e s o f persons,  they d i d not i n d i c a t e t h a t the r i g h t s ' t o invade  space were r e l a t e d to the o c c u p a t i o n a l s t a t u s o f the policemen. example j u s t i f i e s  the d i f f e r e n t  s p a t i a l p r i v i l e d g e s as f o l l o w s :  (How about the mailman can he come i n ? ) No (How about the policeman?) Yeah  private  Chris,, .for  60  (Why can the policeman but not the mailman?) Cause he's not a s t r a n g e r (Why does t h a t make a d i f f e r e n c e ? ) Cause he wouldn't s t e a l a n y t h i n g . Chris T h i s exerpt i l l u s t r a t e s a s i x year o l d ' s attempt to account  f o r the r e g u l a r i t i e s  t o c o n s t r u c t an e x p l a n a t i o n  i n b e h a v i o r as posed  u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the s o c i a l r o l e o f the policeman does assume that the policeman  s i x years o l d  i n the q u e s t i o n .  Her  i s l i m i t e d , although she  i s "honest" as he doesn't  steal.  The Vancouver P o l i c e Force has been c a r r y i n g out p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s programs whereby p o l i c e o f f i c e r s this  spend time t a l k i n g  f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h policemen  are "not s t r a n g e r s " . equated  t o s c h o o l c h i l d r e n , and perhaps  l i e s behind C h r i s ' s statement  that  policemen  A l s o , C h r i s , along w i t h most o f the s i x year o l d s  s t r a n g e r s w i t h "bad people".  Thus perhaps  men are "not s t r a n g e r s " simply i m p l i e s t h a t  h e r statement  they are not "bad".  that  police-  T h i s image  would c e r t a i n l y be upheld i n the media (eg. "cop" shows such as " S t a r s k y and Hutch"). A number o f the younger c h i l d r e n d i d , however, r e c o g n i z e t h a t the s p a t i a l r u l e s which apply t o v a r i o u s s o c i a l c a t e g o r i e s o f persons o c c u p a t i o n or s o c i a l r o l e . can e n t e r p r i v a t e spaces robbers".  are r e l a t e d t o t h e i r  A number o f c h i l d r e n e x p l a i n e d t h a t  policemen  at w i l l because "they save p e o p l e " or "they t r a p  Most o f the s i x year o l d c h i l d r e n b e l i e v e d however t h a t mailmen  can't e n t e r p r i v a t e household so they are s t r a n g e r s " .  space because they are "people we don't know  Even though both the p o l i c e o f f i c e r and the m a i l  c a r r i e r may t e c h n i c a l l y be s t r a n g e r s to the c h i l d ,  the p o l i c e o f f i c e r i s  seen as h a v i n g s p a t i a l r i g h t s which the m a i l c a r r i e r doesn't have. c o n c e p t i o n s about  s p a t i a l r i g h t s are one aspect o f the c h i l d ' s d e v e l o p i n g  u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f a u t h o r i t y as an a t t r i b u t e o f a s o c i a l v.strangers  Perhaps  role.  Another j u s t i f i c a t i o n  f o r s p a t i a l r u l e s and  the p e r c e i v e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of characterized a  stranger  image to e x p l a i n why to  private  'strangers'.  as a 'bad'  conventions  A l l of the  dealt with  s i x year  olds  person, and many o f them used that  there are r u l e s which p r o h i b i t access  of  strangers  property:  (Why do you t h i n k s t r a n g e r s can go i n the park but not on your porch?) ...They might s t e a l something, they might be wearing masks and p r e t e n d i n g they are someone we know and they might make a mask and they get i n a s t e a l t h i n g s . Gunter 6 y e a r s The 'bad  s o c i a l c a t e g o r i e s of  guys' seemed to be an important  judging  conventions.  of non-stranger or f r i e n d and olds.  'good guys' and  distinction  'strangers'  The  d i s t i n c t i o n between the  s t r a n g e r was  less salient  tenants",  "prowlers").  highly differentiated vi.  conceptions  category  f o r the twelve of  down i n t o v a r i o u s sub-groups (eg.  "stranger"  "other  l e v e l of s o c i a l knowledge, and  students  a s u b s t a n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e between the o l d e r and younger c h i l d r e n '  of the s o c i a l r o l e s of t e a c h e r s  and  students.  and  The  older children  b e l i e v e d t h a t the  s p a t i a l r i g h t s of t e a c h e r s  to t h e i r jobs and  thus t h e i r s o c i a l s t a t u s w i t h i n the s c h o o l s e t t i n g .  the p r i n c i p a l were r e l a t e d  younger c h i l d r e n on the other hand, gave much more p e r s o n a l i z e d and explanations  f o r the t e a c h e r ' s  a b i l i t y to a p p r o p r i a t e  space i n the  to the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e to "ask him t h e i r conceptions  something".  These types  The  concrete school.  Many of the younger c h i l d r e n , f o r example b e l i e v e d that they c o u l d  reflect  year  T h i s can be seen as an i n d i c a t i o n of t h e i r more  b e l i e f s about t e a c h e r s  There was  and  social  They d i d not r e f e r as o f t e n to the broad s o c i a l c a t e g o r y  r a t h e r broke that c a t e g o r y  or  f o r the younger c h i l d r e n ,  from the number of times the c h i l d r e n used i t to d e s c r i b e  e x p l a i n r u l e s and  but  ' f r i e n d s ' or  old  go •  of responses  of the s o c i a l i d e n t i t y of the p r i n c i p a l  and  teachers.  Angela,  f o r example, c o n c e i v e s o f the p r i n c i p a l as a b e n e f a c t o r  r a t h e r than as a d i s c i p l i n a r i a n . (Can you go i n t o the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e any time you l i k e ? ) No, o n l y when youi-re s i c k or when you get h u r t , when you're o u t s i d e and f a l l o f f t h i n g s and he comes and gets you and puts you i n h i s o f f i c e and t e l l s you what happened. Angela 6 years o l d The o l d e r c h i l d r e n were more aware of the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r o l e of the p r i n c i p a l w i t h i n the s c h o o l and the r e l a t i o n s h i p between h i s s o c i a l r o l e h i s a b i l i t y to e s t a b l i s h and m a i n t a i n c l a i m s to space. c l e a r l y understands ability  and  C a r o l , f o r example,  the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the p r i n c i p a l ' s r o l e and h i s  to c o n t r o l access to h i s o f f i c e : (Why do you t h i n k the p r i n c i p a l can come to your s c h o o l c l a s s r o o m any time he l i k e s but you can't go i n t o h i s o f f i c e any time you l i k e ? ) Because he's p r e t t y busy and he has got a l o c k on h i s door r n and he has an e x t e n s i o n l i n e that goes out i n t o the h a l l . He s o r t o f shuts people o f f from coming i n i f he wants to and he makes important phone c a l l s to the School Board and he f i n d s out t h i n g s l i k e f i e l d t r i p s and s p e c i a l lunches and t h i n g s . Carol  C a r o l ' s response  r e f l e c t s her more d i f f e r e n t i a t e d  s t a n d i n g o f the s o c i a l  functions. status.  i s responsible for planning various school  She d e s c r i b e s him  i n ways t h a t emphasize h i s s u p e r i o r s o c i a l  For example, he has an e x t e n s i o n l i n e  to the School While  She c o n c e i v e s o f the  who  enables him to c o n t r o l access to h i s o f f i c e , calls  and s o p h i s t i c a t e d under-  s t r u c t u r e w i t h i n the s c h o o l .  p r i n c i p a l as a "busy man"  12 years o l d  and a l o c k on h i s door which  and he makes important phone  Board.  the s i x year o l d s seem to o r i e n t to the r u l e s and  governing access to the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e  i n terms o f "seeking h e l p " , the  o l d e r c h i l d r e n o f t e n s t a t e d that a student had such as an appointment,  conventions  to have a "good reason",  to g a i n access to the p r i n c i p a l ' s  office.  63.  (Is t h e r e anywhere i n the s c h o o l where you can't go any time you l i k e ? ) In the s t a f f r o o m and the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e , the r o o f ... (You s a i d you weren't allowed to go to the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e any time you l i k e . ) No, we have to ask our t e a c h e r s and we aren't allowed to use the phone u n l e s s we have a good reason. Ted The  12 y e a r s o l d  d i f f e r e n c e s i n o r i e n t a t i o n to the r u l e s between the two  be a t t r i b u t e d to the way by the p r i n c i p a l and  the two  teachers.  age groups  groups of c h i l d r e n are a c t u a l l y Rather  may  treated  than simply having a more s o p h i s -  t i c a t e d u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s , the twelve year o l d ' s responses may ren may  accurately r e f l e c t  the e x i s t i n g s i t u a t i o n .  The  older c h i l d -  not be allowed to go i n t o the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e u n l e s s they have  an appointment orea "good reason", whereas access by younger c h i l d r e n be l e s s s t r i c t l y monitored  may  or s a n c t i o n e d .  Based on i n f o r m a l o b s e r v a t i o n s from the o u t e r o f f i c e where I w a i t e d f o r the p r i n c i p a l ,  t h i s e x p l a n a t i o n seems u n l i k e l y , however, g i v e n t h a t  the s e c r e t a r i e s monitored them about  t h e i r purpose  the b e h a v i o r o f both age groups and  f o r e n t e r i n g the o u t e r or "General O f f i c e "  f o r e they got near the p r i n c i p a l ' s Another two  questioned be-  office.  e x p l a n a t i o n f o r the d i f f e r e n c e s between the c o n c e p t i o n s of the  age groups may  be that w h i l e the o l d e r c h i l d r e n d i f f e r e n t i a t e between  the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e and the o u t e r o f f i c e the younger c h i l d r e n d i d not. Here i s one example o f a s i x year o l d ' s e x p l a n a t i o n which c l e a r l y h i s r a t h e r u n d i f f e r e n t i a t e d c o n c e p t i o n o f the two (Why  illustrates  spaces:  can the t e a c h e r s go t o the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e  and  the s e c r e t a r i e s can, but not the k i d s ? ) Because she works there and the p r i n c i p a l he does too. Shawn 6 y e a r s o l d Although  architecturally  speaking the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e and the o u t e r  o f f i c e are segregated by doors  and w a l l s , i n the younger c h i l d r e n ' s  64.  mind the " p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e " i n c l u d e d the as w e l l as the p l a c e where the p r i n c i p a l The  space where the  sat.  younger c h i l d r e n ' s responses i n g e n e r a l  reflect  hand t h e i r r e l a t i v e l y u n d i f f e r e n t i a t e d c o n c e p t i o n other  their personalized  a c t o r s w i t h i n the The  and  concrete  s e c r e t a r i e s sat  conception  t h e r e f o r e , on  of space, and of the  on  one  the  s o c i a l r o l e s of  the  school s e t t i n g .  o l d e r c h i l d r e n i n c o n t r a s t had  a more d i f f e r e n t i a t e d  of both the o r g a n i z a t i o n of space w i t h i n the  s c h o o l , and  understanding  the s o c i a l r o l e s  of the v a r i o u s c a t e g o r i e s o f persons. 4.2.2  Conceptions o f the In the context  defined one  of t h i s  geographical  semi-private  area  and  i s claimed  by one  conversations,  s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space i s  classification  from another.  system used to  differentiate  In North America the s o c i a l  seen as c o n s i s t i n g of a h e i r a r c h y  organiza-  from p r i v a t e to  of t h i s study p r i v a t e space i s d e f i n e d  individual.  and  the  Private dwellings,  'principal's office'  examples of p r i v a t e space. c o n t r o l l e d by  of Space  to p u b l i c space.  In the context  enclaves  study the  as a c u l t u r a l l y - s p e c i f i c  t i o n o f space can be  and  Social Organization  Semi-private  as space which  interpersonal distance  at s c h o o l , can be  seen as  spaces are those which are  a s m a l l group of people.  space d i s c u s s e d  The  of  in this  F i n a l l y , p u b l i c spaces are those which are a c c e s s i b l e to a l l s o c i a l of persons.  defined  C o u r t y a r d s i n the c e n t e r  are the primary type of s e m i - p r i v a t e  in  the  study.  categories  l a r g e p u b l i c park i s the most important type of p u b l i c space  i n the F a l s e Creek Development. Knowledge of the a p p r o p r i a t e and  d e f i n i t i o n and use  p u b l i c space i n v o l v e s 1. knowing who  r e c i p r o c a l l y who  is restricted,  of p r i v a t e ,  c o n t r o l s access  semi-private  to the space  2. knowing where the boundaries  are  and  65.  l o c a t e d and 3. b e i n g aware o f the c o n d i t i o n s upon which access may be obt a i n e d , and the g e s t u r e s such as knocking which are used (Although the knowledge o f who c o n t r o l s access t o space  to request access. i s relevant to  the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space, t h a t i s s u e was d e a l t w i t h i n the f i r s t s e c t i o n and thus w i l l not be focussed on here) . will  be e x p l o r e d i n t h i s  The f i r s t  i s s u e which  s e c t i o n i s c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f some o f the  c o n d i t i o n s upon which access t o p r i v a t e , s e m i - p r i v a t e and p u b l i c space can be  gained. i.  c o n d i t i o n s o f access  Many o f the c h i l d r e n r e c o g n i z e d that the purpose  for entering a private  space was an important c o n d i t i o n under which l e g i t i m a t e access c o u l d be gained or d e n i e d .  In a number o f cases the c h i l d r e n r e p o r t e d t h a t i n  order t o g a i n access to ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ' they would have t o know the occupant  o f that space.  The c h i l d r e n were aware o f an i m p l i c i t  social  rule  which s t a t e s t h a t s t r a n g e r s are g e n e r a l l y not allowed access t o p r i v a t e space.  One s i x year o l d s t a t e d f o r example t h a t anyone who l i v e s i n a  house i s allowed access t o that space. i n t o her house because he " l i v e d  She argued  that her u n c l e c o u l d come  t h e r e " , w h i l e the mailman c o u l d n ' t because  he d i d n ' t l i v e t h e r e . Another  c o n d i t i o n d e s c r i b e d by the c h i l d r e n was the use o f r i t u a l s  such as knocking or  to g a i n access t o p r i v a t e  a s t r a n g e r ' s house.  spaces  such as a f r i e n d ^ s house  As one s i x year o l d c h i l d responded  supposed to walk i n t o people's houses without knocking, Another  "you're not  that's a rule".  s i x year o l d s t a t e d t h a t access to h i s f r i e n d ' s house was c o n t i n -  gent upon t h e i r  invitation:  (Where can you go any time you l i k e i n your neighborhood?) Sometimes my f r i e n d s l e t me and I go t o t h e i r house. Conrad 6 years o l d  66.  Another unique c o n c e p t i o n of the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of space comes from a s i x year o l d who  b e l i e v e d t h a t access to and c o n t r o l of space  be based on r e c i p r o c a l agreement. come i n t o her y a r d then  She  she should be  argued t h a t i f the o t h e r allowed  to go i n t o t h e i r  should  children yards.  (What i f you wanted to p l a y on someone's porch, would t h a t be okay?) No, but i f they came to p l a y there we c o u l d go and p l a y at p l a c e too, we should be a b l e to. Pia  their  6 years o l d  S e v e r a l of the younger c h i l d r e n d i d not b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e were r u l e s p r o h i b i t i n g access  to p r i v a t e space but r a t h e r thought  i n s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r were due When asked lunch one  that r e g u l a r i t i e s  to the ' p e r s o n a l preference'' of the a c t o r s . v  i f the p r i n c i p a l c o u l d eat lunch where they s i x year o l d responded "yeah, no he has  When asked  i f t h e r e was  his office  she r e p l i e d  (the s t u d e n t s )  to stay i n the  a r u l e or some other reason why "he doesn't  he had  ate  office".  to stay i n  have to stay i n the o f f i c e a l l the  time  but he always l i k e s e a t i n g i n the t e a c h e r ' s room". T h i s response  again suggests  between the t e a c h e r s room and  t h a t the respondent  the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e ,  does not and  differentiate  that the  b e h a v i o r c o u l d be e x p l a i n e d by r e f e r r i n g to p e r s o n a l p r e f e r e n c e . another office  s i x year o l d a l s o e x p l a i n e d why  he c o u l d n ' t go to the  Conrad,  principal's  to eat lunch by s t a t i n g t h a t "he never wanted to do t h a t " .  S e v e r a l of the c h i l d r e n b a s e d ' t h e i r e x p l a n a t i o n s f o r r u l e s access t o p p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y on a f a i r l y pragmatic people  principal's  restrict  prohibiting  n o t i o n of p e r s o n a l  access to p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y because i t i s more  preference;  convenient,  l e s s d i s t u r b i n g or simply because they "want t o " . (Why do you t h i n k s t r a n g e r s can p l a y i n the park but not on your porch?) Um because the park i s f o r everybody and people want to have p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y and the porches are p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y cause they wouldn't want to move the p l a n t s or a n y t h i n g .  67.  (So they want to keep t h e i r p l a n t s ? ) Yeah and they don't want t o break the fences or a n y t h i n g Shawn Shawn a l s o uses  the concept  6 years o l d  of p e r s o n a l p r e f e r e n c e as a j u s t i f i c a t i o n  r e s t r i c t i o n o f access to p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y , r a t h e r than the concept ship.  f o r the  o f owner-  He does however q u a l i f y h i s statements w i t h the o b s e r v a t i o n that  people want to p r o t e c t t h e i r response  ' p o s s e s s i o n s ' such as p l a n t s and  fences.  d i s p l a y s h i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the s o c i a l j u s t i f i c a t i o n s  His  for rules  and c o n v e n t i o n s p r o h i b i t i n g access to p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y , ii  s o c i a l d e f i n i t i o n of space  i n conversations  A c c o r d i n g to a number o f a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s and environmental p s y c h o l o g i s t s , i n t e r p e r s o n a l d i s t a n c e i s r e g u l a t e d by i m p l i c i t One  s o c i a l r u l e s and  conventions.  such r u l e r e g a r d i n g i n t e r p e r s o n a l d i s t a n c e i n our c u l t u r e i s that  s t r a n g e r s should m a i n t a i n f u r t h e r d i s t a n c e than f r i e n d s . shown that i n d i v i d u a l s o r i e n t to t h i s r u l e approached  S t u d i e s have  i n so f a r as they back away when  w i t h i n t h r e e f e e t by a s t r a n g e r .  Hence q u e s t i o n s were  r e g a r d i n g the c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s interpersonal distance. first  The  purpose  o f these q u e s t i o n s was  i f the c h i l d r e n c o u l d a r t i c u l a t e  b e h a v i o r and second  asked  governing  to d i s c o v e r  s o c i a l r u l e s governing  proxemic  to see i f t h e i r c o n c e p t i o n s o f these r u l e s was  w i t h the c o n c e p t i o n found  i n the l i t e r a t u r e .  t r a t e s a s i x year o l d s u n d e r s t a n d i n g  Here i s a quote which  consistent illus-  of r u l e s r e g a r d i n g i n t e r p e r s o n a l  dis-  tances i n c o n v e r s a t i o n s . (Suppose somebody was coming to s e l l some r a f f l e t i c k e t s and your mom and dad wanted t o buy some, where would they s i t ? ) They'd t a l k i n the l i v i n g room. (Would they s i t c l o s e t o g e t h e r or f a r a p a r t ? ) My mom and' dad would s i t c l o s e t o g e t h e r and my mom and the s t r a n g e r would s i t f a r . (Why i s t h a t ? ) The s t r a n g e r s we don't know v e r y w e l l . (What i f your f r i e n d came over and you were going to t a l k i n the l i v i n g room, where would you s i t ? )  68.  We would s i t b e s i d e each o t h e r and sometimes a f t e r we get i n t o a f i g h t we hug each other cause she's my best f r i e n d . (What i f somebody you d i d n ' t know came over would you s i t b e s i d e them?) No. (Have you ever r i d d e n on a bus and sat b e s i d e somebody you d i d n ' t know?) Yes. (Why would you s i t b e s i d e someone you d i d n ' t know on a bus but not i n your l i v i n g room?) Cause i f the seats are a l l f i l l e d up and t h a t s the o n l y p l a c e I can s i t you can s i t t h e r e . (Is that OK?) Yeah but I don't t a l k to the s t r a n g e r I j u s t look, but I don't l i k e s i t t i n g w i t h s t r a n g e r s very much, I l i k e s i t t i n g w i t h my father. Linda In t h i s case she  L i n d a i s aware o f r u l e s governing  s t r e s s e s t h a t her mom  6 years o l d  proxemic b e h a v i o r .  Note t h a t  and dad would s i t c l o s e t o g e t h e r but her momiand  the s t r a n g e r would s i t f a r a p a r t .  Her  response d i s p l a y s an i n f o r m a l r u l e  which r e g u l a t e s the p h y s i c a l p r o x i m i t y of unacquainted  males and  females.  As numerous s t u d i e s have demonstrated, same sex p a i r s o f s t r a n g e r s tend maintain (Hall,  c l o s e r i n t e r p e r s o n a l d i s t a n c e than an o p p o s i t e  1966;  Altman, 1975).  Whether or not  sex p a i r of  such a c o n v e n t i o n  of  ' f r i e n d s ' as opposed to  a p p r o p r i a t e to m a i n t a i n  long as she d i d n ' t t a l k . operates  Linda also s t a t e s , with a greater  of an a d u l t , t h a t she doesn't  to a s t r a n g e r and would r a t h e r s i t b e s i d e her  s o c i a l i z e d members of our c u l t u r e are expected  inattention'  (Goffman, 1963)  in a public setting,  as  T h i s seems to be a very s t r o n g s o c i a l r u l e which  degree o f openness than one would expect  fully  L i n d a responded t h a t i t  c l o s e i n t e r p e r s o n a l d i s t a n c e from a s t r a n g e r  i n p u b l i c s e t t i n g s such as buses.  s i t t i n g next  proxemic  'strangers'.  When asked about s e a t i n g arrangements on a bus was  strangers  is salient in  our c u l t u r e , i t i s c l e a r that L i n d a i s aware of r u l e s governing behavior  to  father.  to m a i n t a i n  like  Because  'civil  or appear to be b l i n d to the a c t i o n s of o t h e r s  i t would be  l e s s l i k e l y t h a t an a d u l t would admit  to  69.  b e i n g i n f l u e n c e d p o s i t i v e l y or n e g a t i v e l y by the p r o x i m i t y o f a s t r a n g e r . That  i s , such an admission would c o n s t i t u t e b r e a k i n g a s o c i a l r u l e o f proper  action i n a public setting. iii  s o c i a l v e r s u s a r c h i t e c t u r a l d e f i n i t i o n o f space  It was d i s c o v e r e d d u r i n g the study  t h a t some d i s c r e p a n c y e x i s t e d be-  tween the a r c h i t e c t u r a l d e f i n i t i o n o f the s e m i - p u b l i c space i n the housing enclaves  and the s o c i a l d e f i n i t i o n and use o f those  the respondents,  i n some cases  the boundaries  spaces.  According to  o f the s e m i - p u b l i c  courtyards  were c l e a r l y d e f i n e d and defended by the r e s i d e n t s o f t h a t enclave  while  i n o t h e r cases the c o u r t y a r d s were t r e a t e d as p u b l i c space i n t h a t the boundary was n e i t h e r c l e a r l y d e f i n e d or defended. c o u l d a p p a r e n t l y g a i n access t o and use these The  U n i v e r s i t y N o n - P r o f i t Enclave  Children'from a l l enclaves  courtyards.  (UNP) was one example where the  c o u r t y a r d was d e f i n e d s o c i a l l y as s e m i - p u b l i c space i n s o f a r as the nonr e s i d e n t s , and n o n - r e s i d e n t  c h i l d r e n i n p a r t i c u l a r , were p r o h i b i t e d from  a c c e s s i n g or u s i n g the c o u r t y a r d . Enclaves  The c o u r t y a r d s i i n the F a l s e Creek Co-op  (FC) on the other hand were used c o n s i s t e n t l y by n o n - r e s i d e n t  and c h i l d r e n without Although  adults  s a n c t i o n i n g from r e s i d e n t s .  the d i f f e r e n c e s between the two developments i n terms o f  a r c h i t e c t u r a l d e s i g n o r s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n c o u l d be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the d i f f e r e n c e s i n the s o c i a l d e f i n i t i o n o f space,  t h a t i s s u e w i l l be d e a l t w i t h  o n l y i n so f a r as the c h i l d r e n d i s c u s s i t . Rather, i n the c o n t e x t o f t h i s study,  what i s more  important  i s that the c h i l d r e n were aware o f the s o c i a l  d e f i n i t i o n o f space i n t h e i r r e s i d e n t i a l environment.  In f a c t ,  as a non-  r e s i d e n t and t h e r e f o r e an o u t s i d e r , I was not aware o f any d i s c r e p a n c y between the s o c i a l and a r c h i t e c t u r a l d e f i n i t i o n o f space u n t i l respondents.  informed  by the  A l s o , j u d g i n g from the a r c h i t e c t ' s diagrams o f the e n c l a v e s  70.  they a l s o were not c o g n i z a n t of s e m i - p u b l i c  o f the p o s s i b l e v a r i a t i o n i n s o c i a l  treatment  space.  A l l o f the c h i l d r e n i n d i c a t e d at some p o i n t  that the FC c o u r t y a r d  a c c e s s i b l e t o everyone, w h i l e access t o the UNP c o u r t y a r d for non-residents.  The boundary between the c o u r t y a r d  was  was p r o h i b i t e d  and the p u b l i c  space  o u t s i d e the enclave i n the UNP co-op was p h y s i c a l l y demarkated by signs and fences.  The r e s i d e n t s  According  to the c h i l d r e n the c o u r t y a r d  non-residents  that boundary.  of the FC co-op was a c c e s s i b l e t o  and r e s i d e n t s a l i k e , and there was no s i g n o f a boundary  surrounding that questions  took an a c t i v e r o l e i n e n f o r c i n g  space.  about the two  Here i s an example o f a t y p i c a l response t o courtyards:  (Who can go to the FC c o u r t y a r d ? ) Anybody can go t h e r e . (Who owns the land t h e r e ? ) The People who own F a l s e Creek, but anybody can go anwhere that they,want except the p l a c e s that say PRIVATE PROPERTY KEEP OUT! (Where are they?) They are down t h e r e , there i s a b i g s i g n there by the gates and they say p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y . (Why aren't you allowed to go t h e r e ? ) Because the people who l i v e t h e r e , i f we go there we would be t r e s p a s s i n g on p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y cause you have t o go r i g h t past these p a t i o s and these p a t i o doors. Ted Ted  i n d i c a t e s t h a t the FC c o u r t y a r d  i s s o c i a l l y defined  12 y e a r s o l d  as p u b l i c  space.  He assumes that the r e s i d e n t s o f the co-op do not own the c o u r t y a r d but rather  t h a t the people who own the e n t i r e development a l s o own the c o u r t y a r d  He spontaneously s t a t e s t h a t access t o the p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y tricted  areas i s r e s -  and i n d i c a t e d that on the map o f F a l s e Creek t h a t he was r e f e r r i n g  to the UNP co-op. courtyard. of the other  Ted a c c u r a t e l y d e s c r i b e s  the boundary markers o f the co-o  There are l a r g e p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y enclaves,  term ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y '  gates which e n c l o s e  s i g n s , and i n c o n t r a s t  the c o u r t y a r d  i n his justification  area.  t o most  He used the  f o r the r u l e s p r o h i b i t i n g  access  to the UNP  courtyard.  l e g a l l y have some i n t e r e s t case  it  Although  i n both co-ops a l l of the r e s i d e n t s  i n the c o u r t y a r d space Ted  the c o u r t y a r d was  'private property'  A l s o Ted  that the a r c h i t e c t u r a l f e a t u r e s o f the UNP  suggests  a more ' p r i v a t e ' p l a c e .  cause to g a i n access  He notes  and  assumed t h a t i n one  the o t h e r  that the UNP  the FC co-op the entrances  i n v o l v e s walking  are r a i s e d one  Another respondent, a twelve year apartments i n F a l s e Creek, was s o c i a l d e f i n i t i o n of the two  co-op :make  co-op i s more p r i v a t e be-  to the c o u r t y a r d e n t a i l s w a l k i n g  walk i n t o the c o u r t y a r d o f the UNP  'public property'.  past p a t i o doors.  by p a t i o doors w h i l e i n  l e v e l above the  o l d boy who  To  lived  courtyard. i n the h i g h  rise  a l s o aware o f the d i f f e r e n c e between the courtyards.  (Could you go i n t o the FC c o u r t y a r d ? ) Yeah (How come you can go there but not the UNP courtyard?) W e l l most of my f r i e n d s l i v e over t h e r e , i n the FC co-op. So i f any k i d s go there they know you are f r i e n d s , even i f people go t h e r e cause i t s s o r t of a co-op - you're allowed to go i n t o i t . Jim Jim was  aware of the s o c i a l d i s t i n c t i o n between one  12 years o l d  c o u r t y a r d and  d i d not g i v e an e x p l a n a t i o n to account f o r t h a t d i s t i n c t i o n . i n p r o v i d i n g an e x p l a n a t i o n i s understandable legalities  i n v o l v e d in' c o - o p e r a t i v e  i v d e f i n i t i o n and use The  The  another  but  difficulty  g i v e n the complexity  of  the  ownership.  of s e m i - p u b l i c  space  '  c h i l d r e n ' s p e r c e p t i o n of the d i f f e r e n c e between the U.N.P. enclave  and F a l s e Creek c o u r t y a r d  (enclaves 5 and  6) was  occupancy study completed by V i s c h e r - S k a b u r s k i s researchers  i n t e r v i e w e d approximately  Creek development and various courtyards.  found  supported Consultants  by a r e c e n t (1980).  These  one h a l f of the r e s i d e n t s of F a l s e  that d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t e d i n the use  Some c o u r t y a r d s ,  post-  such as Enclave  of  the  2 which i n c l u d e d  s e n i o r c i t i z e n and market condominiums, were not used by r e s i d e n t s or  non-  residents.  Only 6 7 o o f the r e s i d e n t s o f enclave 2 r e p o r t e d t h a t they  the c o u r t y a r d as compared to  4 3 7 »  o f the r e s i d e n t s o f e n c l a v e  5  and  used 3 2 7 o  of  e n c l a v e 7. Two  f a c t o r s which were i d e n t i f i e d as h a v i n g  some b e a r i n g on t h i s  dif-  f e r e n c e i n use were 1 . the management o f e n c l a v e 2 e n f o r c e d r u l e s which p r o h i b i t e d use o f the c o u r t y a r d s by r e s i d e n t s and n o n - r e s i d e n t s a l i k e , and 2.  the h e a v i l y landscaped  use.  c h a r a c t e r o f the c o u r t y a r d i n enclave 2 p r o h i b i t e d  I t was r e p o r t e d i n the V i s c h e r study  the s p r i n k l e r on anyone who attempted  t h a t the r e s i d e n t manager "turned  t o sunbathe i n the c o u r t y a r d " and  t h a t the " P r i v a t e P r o p e r t y - Do Not E n t e r " s i g n s at the entrance  t o the  c o u r t y a r d had been e r e c t e d by the manager. The through  o n l y other enclave which attempted  to c o n t r o l access to n o n - r e s i d e n t s  t h e use o f ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ' s i g n s was enclave 7 (the UNP e n c l a v e ) .  '(The d e c i s i o n t o put up the s i g n s was made by the C o u n c i l o f R e s i d e n t s ) . A c c o r d i n g to V i s c h e r e t . a l .  ( 1 9 8 0 )  s i g n s because they were "attempting  the r e s i d e n t s o f e n c l a v e 7 put up the t o p r o t e c t the e x c l u s i v i t y o f t h e i r  shared open space, much as they would i n a c o n v e n t i o n a l s t r a t a t i t l e ment, o r they f e l t  t h a t the environmental  d e s i g n had f a i l e d  develop-  to d i s c o u r a g e  access by the g e n e r a l p u b l i c " (p. 2 3 5 ) . However, the s e n s i t i v i t y o f the r e s i d e n t s o f e n c l a v e 7 to i n t r u s i o n by c h i l d r e n was c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e d the V i s c h e r study.  i n some o f the open-ended q u e s t i o n s posed i n  F o r example i t was found t h a t the r e s i d e n t s o f enclave 7  " p e r c e i v e d s t r a n g e r s i n the s e m i - p u b l i c spaces" more o f t e n than r e s i d e n t s of  other enclaves.  Only 8 7 o o f the r e s i d e n t s i n d i c a t e d  were aware o f s t r a n g e r s , as opposed t o 6.  Furthermore,  excluded  4 0 ?  o  i n enclave  a number o f UNP r e s i d e n t s f e l t  from u s i n g the space  t h a t they 5 ,  and  2 5 %  never i n enclave  t h a t c h i l d r e n should be  i n the c o u r t y a r d so t h a t " i t would look n i c e  73.  and  be p e a c e f u l " .  Four o f the r e s i d e n t s  fences or somehow r e s t r i c t  i n d i c a t e d t h a t they wanted to e r e c t  access by other  r e s i d e n t s , and  p a r t i c u l a r l y non-  resident children. In e n c l a v e s 5 and bothered by  strangers  6 ( F a l s e Creek Co-op) most of the r e s i d e n t s were not i n the c o u r t y a r d .  wanted to make the c o u r t y a r d commented on the p e r c e i v e d  F i v e of the r e s i d e n t s  more u s a b l e f o r c h i l d r e n .  i n t r u s i o n of the c o u r t y a r d  i n enclave 5  None of the by  residents  r e s i d e n t or non-  resident children. i v l o c a t i o n and  meaning of boundaries  A t h i r d element of knowledge of the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n l o c a t i o n and the UNP and  meaning o f b o u n d a r i e s .  co-op d e s c r i b e s  how  Bob,  of space i s t t h e  a t h i r t e e n year o l d who  lives  the boundaries of the p r i v a t e space are  in  defined  defended i n h i s e n c l a v e we have p r i v a t e gardens, they have fences around f o u r f e e t h i g h . (So t h a t i s p r i v a t e t h e r e ? ) Yes t h a t s t h e i r very own, and the whole t h i n g i s owned (So can anyone who l i v e s i n your s e c t i o n go i n t o those gardens?) No cause t h a t ' s p r i v a t e l y owned by the i n d i v i d u a l . (What would happen i f somebody d i d n ' t know and walked i n t o t h e i r garden?) Not much i f they d i d n ' t know, they would say s o r r y t h i s i s p r i v a t e property. (Are there r u l e s about that i n your s e c t i o n ? ) There aren't any r u l e s e x a c t l y , none that are posted or anything. Bob Bob  seems to have a c l e a r i d e a about the  s u r r o u n d i n g the p r i v a t e space of the gardens. kate t h a t boundary and  negative  sanctions  by  13 y e a r s o l d  l o c a t i o n and The the  meaning of boundaries  fences are used to demar-  'owners' are used to  enforce  that boundary. The  s o c i a l d e f i n i t i o n of p u b l i c space i s another aspect  conception park was  of s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n .  of c h i l d r e n ' s  A l l of the c h i l d r e n b e l i e v e d t h a t  ' p u b l i c space' i n t h a t access to the park was  not r e s t r i c t e d .  the Most  74.  Table 3 - Enclaves by B u i l d i n g Type and Landscape  Enclave  6*  Landscape  B u i l d i n g Type  -eight s t o r e y apt. b u i l d i n g -three s t o r e y s e n i o r ' s apartment building  l a r g e grass area w i t h path a c r o s s i t  - s i x s t o r e y market r e n t a l apartment -three s t o r e y s e n i o r ' s apartment b l d g . -high r i s e condominium  three landscaped areas, some h e a v i l y p l a n t e d  -nine townhouse condominiums -one h i g h r i s e apartment b u i l d i n g  t r e e d area and grassy open area  -townhouses  s m a l l landscaped area, w i t h t r e e s and shrubs  •townhouses and three s t o r e y apartment b l d g s . at end o f enclave  s m a l l landscaped p l a y area w i t h equipment, road and p a r k i n g area  -townhouses  l a r g e b a l c o n i e s & walkways c h i l d r e n ' s p l a y area, road and p a r k i n g l o t  -townhouses -twenty-four u n i t r e s i d e n c e f o r handicapped  g r a s s y area, playground landscaped area w i t h f o u n t a i n and walkways  -townhouses and three s t o r e y apartments  landscaped area and s m a l l playground  * F a l s e Creek Enclaves  (IC)  '>** U n i v e r s i t y N o n - P r o f i t Enclave  (UNP)  of the younger  c h i l d r e n e i t h e r d i d not know who  t h a t the "manager o f the s c h o o l " owned i t , who  built  'owned' the park, or b e l i e v e d  or the "workmen" or the people  F a l s e Creek owned i t .  T h e i r i d e a s about ownership  can be understood i f we  consider that  the o n l y people they p r o b a b l y observed r e g u l a r l y occupying that were the workmen.  As the s c h o o l i s l o c a t e d r i g h t b e s i d e the park i t i s  a l s o u n d e r s t a n d a b l e t h a t i f a c h i l d assumed t h a t ownership was w i t h occupancy,  space  associated  t h a t the j u r i s d i c t i o n o f the manager o f the s c h o o l should  extend t o the park. Many o f the c h i l d r e n b e l i e v e d t h a t whoever o c c u p i e s a space a l s o access to t h a t one  space.  One  o f the r a m i f i c a t i o n s of such a b e l i e f  should be allowed to permanently  c h i l d r e n b e l i e v e d t h a t temporary  occupy p u b l i c  space.  i s that  no  Although the  o c c u p a t i o n o f the park was  permanent o c c u p a t i o n such as b u i l d i n g a house, was  controls  permissible,  " a g a i n s t the r u l e s " .  (Can anybody go to the park that wants to?) Yeah. (Could I go t h e r e to p l a y ? ) Yeah. (What i f I wanted to b u i l d a house there c o u l d I?) No cause you have to f i n d a house f i r s t and some people are moving, i f you b u i l d a house there people w i l l get mad and i f you make a t e n t t h a t ' s ok at n i g h t . (Why i s i t ok t o have a t e n t at n i g h t ? ) Cause i f you don't l i v e t h e r e and j u s t see how i t l o o k s l i k e w i t h a t e n t e v e r y t h i n g o u t s i d e , people dot'that, I never would do t h a t . (Why don't you t h i n k I c o u l d b u i l d a house on the park?) Because maybe people want to come and s i t and too much people go t h e r e and people go t h e r e on b i k e s and they might run over cause b i k e s are too heavy on the g r a s s . Angela  6 years o l d  Angela d i s p l a y s her knowledge o f the s o c i a l - o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space i n her explanation for rules prohibiting building  a house on p u b l i c p r o p e r t y .  someone b u i l t  She  argues that people "would get mad  if"  a house i n the park and  then suggests t h a t t h e r e wouldn't  be enough room f o r people to " s i t on the  g r a s s " i f a house were b u i l t t h e r e .  She i s aware that the s o c i a l  of the park i s that o f p u b l i c space and t h e r e f o r e of persons should 4.3 L e v e l s 4.3.1  have equal o p p o r t u n i t i e s  that  definition  a l l social  f o r access to t h a t  categories  space.  o f Understanding  Introduction In t h i s  s e c t i o n the c h i l d r e n ' s responses are c a t e g o r i z e d  the proposed model. ranging  The model c o n s i s t s of four l e v e l s  from a r e l a t i v e l y  standing  at the f i r s t  simplistic,  level  of understanding  and u n d i f f e r e n t i a t e d under-  level.  i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by some knowledge o f the s o c i a l  w i t h no knowledge o f the r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing s p a t i a l The second l e v e l c o n s i s t s o f a context  s p e c i f i c u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f r u l e s and between  s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n  level  social  o f space.  The t h i r d  u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p  s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n  t i a t e d u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f each component.  Finally,  It the  should  between the  the f o u r t h l e v e l  differeninvolves  between the s o c i a l  o f space d i s p l a y e d by knowledge o f  concepts such as power, s t a t u s and ownership a c c o r d i n g components are  social  involves  of space w i t h a more  a more a b s t r a c t u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n  structure  appropriation.  c o n v e n t i o n s w i t h no u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p  a r e l a t i v e l y concrete  to  l e v e l , to a more complex, a b s t r a c t , and i n t e g r a t e d  u n d e r s t a n d i n g at the f o u r t h The f i r s t  concrete,  according  to which the two  interrelated. be noted that the proposed model may  age o f s i x and over t h i r t e e n .  It i s l i k e l y  apply  to c h i l d r e n under  that c h i l d r e n at f o u r or  f i v e y e a r s o f age have a l e v e l one u n d e r s t a n d i n g and that c h i l d r e n at one or two y e a r s o f age may have l e s s knowledge o f the s o c i a l social organization  s t r u c t u r e and the  of space, and t h e r e f o r e would have what c o u l d be  called  a l e v e l 0 understanding.  Furthermore  i t may be that c h i l d r e n up t o f i f t e e n  y e a r s o f age o r o l d e r have a l e v e l f o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o r some v a r i a t i o n on that  theme. The  f o u r stages were proposed  o n l y as an e x p l o r a t o r y t o o l t o a l l o w f o r  the a n a l y s i s o f q u a l i t a t i v e d i f f e r e n c e s i n the scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n by c h i l d r e n , w i t h i n and between age groups. based on the assumption  The l e v e l s were c o n s t r u c t e d  that a l l o f the c h i l d r e n ' s responses would be c l a s s i  f i a b l e a c c o r d i n g t o the model, and furthermore few,  used  that t h e r e would be o n l y a  i f any, cases at l e v e l one. As mentioned i n the i n t r o d u c t i o n , the a n a l y s i s i n t h i s s e c t i o n  focus on c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f r u l e s and conventions governing a p p r o p r i a t i o n i n the neighborhood.  Specifically,  will spatial  the focus w i l l be on  1. c h i l d r e n ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing access t o ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ' 2. the r e l a t i o n s h i p between those r u l e s and the concept of ownership, and 3. t h e i r j u s t i f i c a t i o n s and e x p l a n a t i o n s f o r t h a t ship.  Although  relation  some d a t a r e g a r d i n g c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f r u l e s and  c o n v e n t i o n s o p e r a t i n g i n the s c h o o l o r home w i l l be used  t o supplement  this  a n a l y s i s the main concern w i l l be w i t h the c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing access t o p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y . 4.3.2. L e v e l 1 As was expected, most o f the s i x year o l d s and a l l o f the twelve o l d s d i s p l a y e d some knowledge o f the r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s g o v e r n i n g to p r i v a t e ,  s e m i - p r i v a t e and p u b l i c  spaces.  not, however, d i s p l a y i n h e r responses  year access  One o f the s i x year o l d s d i d  that she was aware t h a t t h e r e were  r u l e s which p r o h i b i t e d access t o p r i v a t e household  space.  (Who can come i n t o your house any time they l i k e ? ) Anybody. (What about someone you don't know, c o u l d they come i n any time they l i k e ? )  78.  Yeah i f they were my f r i e n d s or my mom's f r i e n d s or i f I j u s t met them. (What i f they were somebody that nobody knew?) I c o u l d j u s t become f r i e n d s w i t h them and t e l l them they c o u l d come i n . Cindy Cindy d i s p l a y s her c o n f u s i o n about statement  6 years o l d  the r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s i n her  that "anyone" c o u l d come i n t o her house f o l l o w e d by her  t i o n t h a t o n l y people who  are " f r i e n d s " c o u l d come i n .  say t h a t even someone whom she j u s t met  qualified  sugges-  She goes on to  as a f r i e n d , and  thus  c o u l d be " i n v i t e d " i n . Thus, although Cindy seems to r e l a t e the r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s n i n g access to household  space  to c e r t a i n s o c i a l c a t e g o r i e s o f persons  f r i e n d s can come i n , people who confused  about  are not f r i e n d s c a n n o t ) , she appears  the s o c i a l d e f i n i t i o n o f f r i e n d s h i p .  finer distinctions  it  this  does suggest  She  i s u n c e r t a i n about  space.  t h a t not a l l s i x year o l d s n e c e s s a r i l y have gathered the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e to enable them to comprehend  s o c i a l r u l e s and conventions governing access to p r i v a t e , and  4.3.3  to be  i n t e r v i e w o n l y p r o v i d e s a l i m i t e d amount o f i n f o r m a t i o n  enough i n f o r m a t i o n about  private  (e.g.  i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p between v a r i o u s l e v e l s o f i n t i m a c y an  r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing access to p r i v a t e Although  gover-  semi-  space. Level II  E i g h t out o f ten o f the s i x year o l d s , and one. of the twelve y e a r o l d s were c l a s s i f i e d  as h a v i n g a l e v e l two u n d e r s t a n d i n g .  these respondents  had developed  some ideas about  T h i s means that w h i l e  the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e  and  the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of space, they d i d not d i s p l a y an u n d e r s t a n d i n g the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the two The  of  components.  a n a l y s i s f o c u s s e s on the c h i l d r e n ' s j u s t i f i c a t i o n s  c o n v e n t i o n s governing use and access to " p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y " .  for rules  and  79.  In North America,  a property-owner  i s one c a t e g o r y o f person who has the  l e g a l r i g h t t o c o n t r o l access t o and use o f space. have the l e g a l r i g h t  to r e s t r i c t  (Although " r e n t e r s " a l s o  access to t h e i r d w e l l i n g w h i l e they a r e a  tenant!, the r e l a t i o n s h i p between " r e n t i n g " and r i g h t s t o c o n t r o l access i s very complex and w i l l not be d e a l t w i t h here.) justification  T h u s , i n common sense (  terms  f o r r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s p r o h i b i t i n g access t o ' p r i v a t e pro-  p e r t y ' would be based on the p r i n c i p l e o f ownership. N i n e t y p e r c e n t or 9 out o f 10 o f the s i x year o l d c h i l d r e n i n the f i n a l study d i d not have a c l e a r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p between r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s and ownership.  T h e i r e x p l a n a t i o n s and j u s t i f i c a t i o n s f o r  the r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s d i s p l a y t h e i r attempt interpretation  from which t o understand  t o c o n s t r u c t a scheme o f  spatial appropriation.  When asked where they weren't allowed t o go i n t h e i r neighborhood replied  "we're not allowed to go t o the ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y houses'",  'only f r i e n d s and f a m i l y can e n t e r our house without knocking",  they  that  and "anyone  i s allowed t o p l a y i n the park but o n l y people we know can p l a y on our porch". When asked why t h i s was the case they e i t h e r s t a t e d they d i d n ' t know o r r e f e r r e d t o the s o c i a l or p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the s e t t i n g . As was d i s c u s s e d i n the f i r s t  s e c t i o n o f the a n a l y s i s , a common e x p l a -  n a t i o n f o r r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing access t o p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y d e a l t w i t h the s o c i a l r o l e o f the a c t o r or the p h y s i c a l arrangement o f the e n v i r o n ment.  Many o f the c h i l d r e n b e l i e v e d that  s t r a n g e r s weren't allowed  access  to t h e i r house because "they might s t e a l t h i n g s " , and t h a t they weren't allowed t o go i n t o the neighbour's  house a t w i l l because the "door was  always l o c k e d " or because the "fence was t o o h i g h " . The  f o l l o w i n g segment o f an i n t e r v i e w i l l u s t r a t e s  by many o f the younger respondents,  about  the c o n f u s i o n e x p e r i e n c e d  the r e l a t i o n s h i p between r u l e s and  80.  c o n v e n t i o n s and ownership.  Although L i n d a i s aware of the r u l e s and  con-  v e n t i o n s g o v e r n i n g access to p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y i n her neighborhood,  and  some u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the concept o f ownership,  integrating  she has d i f f i c u l t y  these components i n order to c o n s t r u c t an i n t e r n a l l y c o n s i s t e n t  has  scheme o f  interpretation. (Who  owns the  park?)  The person who b u i l t i t , the whole t h i n g belongs to them. (So can j u s t those workmentplay t h e r e or can anybody p l a y t h e r e ? ) Anybody. (Why do you t h i n k i t i s OK f o r s t r a n g e r s to p l a y i n the park but not on your porch?) Because i t s somebody's porch and the park belongs to anybody (Why does t h a t make a d i f f e r e n c e ? ) Its somebody's house and you have to ask b e f o r e you can p l a y on o t h e r people's houses, t h e r e might be something d e l i c a t e and i f you t i p i t over i t might break (Could the workmen or whoever owns the park t e l l people to get out?) No, they never say t h i n g s l i k e t h a t , they l e t anybody p l a y i n the park, j u s t anybody. (Why can the p r i n c i p a l t e l l people they can't come i n t o h i s o f f i c e but the workmentdon't ever t e l l people not to come i n t o the park?) Cause the p r i n c i p a l owns h i s o f f i c e and the people don't own the park, the people t h a t p l a y t h e r e don't own the park. Linda T h i s p e r s o n a l i z e d and c o n c r e t e c o n c e p t i o n o f ownership many o f the younger c h i l d r e n ' s responses. seemed t o base her i d e a s about ownership o c c u p i e d that  space.  I t c o u l d be t h a t  6 years o l d was  common throughout  L i k e many o f the c h i l d r e n , L i n d a on her o b s e r v a t i o n o f who  she had never observed any  regularly particular  person r e g u l a r l y occupying the park b e s i d e s the workmen^ and thus she assumed t h a t they must  'own' i t .  L i n d a ' s c o n f u s i o n seems to o r i g i n a t e w i t h the l a c k o f c o n s i s t e n c y between what she has observed and what she knows about t h a t s t r a n g e r s cannot park at w i l l .  'ownership'.  She  i s aware  f r e e l y e n t e r p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y , w h i l e they can use  the  She has observed that the p r i n c i p a l r e s t r i c t s access t o h i s  o f f i c e , w h i l e the workmen never s a n c t i o n people f o r e n t e r i n g the park. a l s o b e l i e v e s that ownership  i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h occupancy  and thus the  She principal  81.  must the  'own'  h i s o f f i c e and the workmen must own  the park.  Although each o f  components o f her scheme i s l o g i c a l l y based and i n t e r n a l l y  when f o r c e d to i n t e g r a t e the elements  consistent  i n h e r e x p l a n a t i o n , she comes up  a g a i n s t the i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s and becomes c o n f u s e d . A number o f f e a t u r e s o f Linda's response were t y p i c a l o f many o f the c h i l d r e n ' s responses.  The  f i r s t common f e a t u r e was  c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n o f ownership. anyone who s h i p was that  the c o n c r e t e n e s s o f the  Some o f the c h i l d r e n b e l i e v e d  "grew the g r a s s " owned t h a t  that  space, w h i l e o t h e r s argued t h a t owner-  c o n t i n g e n t upon l i v i n g next to a p i e c e o f land or h a b i t u a l l y u s i n g  space. Most o f the c h i l d r e n ' s concept o f p u b l i c ownership  c e n t e r e d around  n o t i o n t h a t nobody owned that space, or "anybody" owned i t . these c h i l d r e n understood much more about  They may  I t c o u l d be  that  the s o c i a l d e f i n i t i o n of p u b l i c  space but were unable to a r t i c u l a t e t h e i r i d e a s due skills.  the  to t h e i r  limited  verbal  have used words such as "nobody" and "anybody" i n s t e a d o f  more a b s t r a c t concepts such as "the p u b l i c " . Another of  s i x y e a r o l d respondent had a somewhat c l e a r e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g  the concept o f ownership  between the term  but d i d not appear to understand the r e l a t i o n s h i p  ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ' and  ownership.  (Who owns the g r a s s i n the middle of your p l a c e , the c o u r t y a r d ? ) Everybody who l i v e s h e r e . (What i f somebody from another e n c l a v e wanted to p l a y t h e r e ? ) They c o u l d n ' t cause i t s p r i v a t e . (What does " p r i v a t e " mean?) I t ' s ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ' and the manager l i v e s r i g h t here, i f he sees you, you a r e n ' t allowed t o f o o l around w i t h the hose. (Why i s i t that nobody can come i n i f i t s p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ? ) W e l l l i k e you know t h a t k i n d o f l i t t l e t h i n g w i t h a clowns head and you t u r n the hose, w e l l you can't do t h a t . (So o t h e r people can't come i n because...) They can't come i n cause some people might want to s i t t h e r e , t h e r e i s a l i t t l e entrance here and a gate r i g h t here and ... (What's the d i f f e r e n c e between the c o u r t y a r d and the park?) The whole t h i n g here i s p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y and park i s n ' t  82.  (What i s the park then?) J u s t a p l a c e where you p l a y at r e c e s s (Can anybody go to the park?) Yeah. Frank  6 years o l d  Based on t h i s segment o f the i n t e r v i e w i t i s c l e a r t h a t Frank i s d e v e l o p i n g an u n d e r s t a n d i n g  of the concept  of 'ownership , of r u l e s and conventions  o f the meaning of the term' ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ' . a l l o f the r e s i d e n t s of the enclave own and conventions  which p r o h i b i t  Although  1  He knows f o r example t h a t  the c o u r t y a r d , t h a t there are r u l e s  access o f n o n - r e s i d e n t s  that anyone can go to the park. 'private property  and  1  to the c o u r t y a r d ,  and  He a l s o b e l i e v e s t h a t the c o u r t y a r d i s  w h i l e the park i s c a l l e d  Frank seems to have developed  components, he has not yet d i s c o v e r e d how  something  different.  an u n d e r s t a n d i n g  of the v a r i o u s He,  for  example does not appear to r e c o g n i z e t h a t the term ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y '  has  a n y t h i n g to do w i t h ownership.  The  l a b e l to i n d i c a t e p l a c e s where he  they a l l f i t t o g e t h e r .  term ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ' i s used as a  and o t h e r s are not allowed  that the c o u r t y a r d i s ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ' and  to go.  to p l a y w i t h .  of a c o n t e x t - s p e c i f i c r u l e which p r o h i b i t s access  i s able to use  d e s c r i b e p l a c e s to which access  He  i s aware  to the c o u r t y a r d , but  not appear to be aware of a more g e n e r a l s o c i a l r u l e governing Thus, he  access  i s r e s t r i c t e d but does not understand  f r o n t y a r d because i t was  to  that  term  access  to t h e i r  ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ' , although  c o u l d not g i v e an e x p l a n a t i o n f o r that b e l i e f . responses  1  ownership.  Many of the c h i l d r e n argued t h a t they c o u l d p r o h i b i t porch o r t h e i r  does  to •  the term ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y  t h e r e i s a r e l a t i o n s h i p between r u l e s and ownership, or between the p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y and  states  then goes on to d e s c r i b e a hose  i n the c o u r t y a r d which c h i l d r e n are not allowed  s e m i - p u b l i c space.  He  I t was  t h a t they d i d not have a f u l l u n d e r s t a n d i n g  they  c l e a r from t h e i r of the concept  of  83.  ownership.  They d i d not understand  v a t e l y owned l a n d , and second to  first  ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ' was p r i -  that i n d i v i d u a l s and groups have a l e g a l  c o n t r o l access t o l a n d which they own.  interview with a s i x year o l d i l l u s t r a t e s of  that  right  The f o l l o w i n g segment o f an these two gaps i n h e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g  spatial appropriation. (Why can k i d s you don't know p l a y on your porch?) They c a n ' t . I t ' s not t h e i r p r o p e r t y . (Why would i t make a d i f f e r e n c e i f i t wasn't t h e i r p r o p e r t y ? ) I don't know. (How do you know i t s not t h e i r p r o p e r t y ? ) Cause they l i v e somewhere e l s e . (How do you know where your p r o p e r t y i s ? ) Cause they l i v e t h e r e and I l i v e on my own p r o p e r t y , i f they move from t h e i r p r o p e r t y then i t s t h e i r own p r o p e r t y . Sara 6 years o l d  Here Sara argues justify  that she can c o n t r o l access t o h e r ' p r o p e r t y ' but does not  those r i g h t s i n terms o f ownership.  attempts  L a t e r i n the i n t e r v i e w she again  to j u s t i f y h e r r i g h t t o c o n t r o l access t o h e r back y a r d and we get  a c l e a r e r i d e a o f h e r c o n c e p t i o n o f ownership ownership  and the r e l a t i o n s h i p between  and r i g h t s t o c o n t r o l a c c e s s . (At  your house do you have any g r a s s ? )  I t ' s i n the back. (Whose p r o p e r t y i s t h a t ? ) I t ' s our p r o p e r t y . (What i f some k i d s you d i d n ' t know wanted t o p l a y t h e r e , would i t be a l r i g h t ? ) They c o u l d step on i t . (You c o u l d n ' t t e l l them to go away?) No cause I d i d n ' t grow the g r a s s . Sara 6  years o l d  One element i n t h i s response which i s t y p i c a l o f many o f the o t h e r responses  i s t h a t c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s , and the  r e l a t i o n s h i p between r u l e s and conventions  and ownership,  w i t h r e s p e c t t o space c l o s e r t o the d w e l l i n g . more c e r t a i n about  is^much c l e a r e r  The respondents  seemed much  r u l e s g o v e r n i n g access t o t h e i r house than r u l e s and  c o n v e n t i o n s g o v e r n i n g access t o the porch o r the c o u r t y a r d .  Furthermore,  84.  they b e l i e v e d , as Sara d i d , t h a t the occupant of a d w e l l i n g has c o n t r o l access surrounding  a right  to a porch but not n e c e s s a r i l y the back y a r d or the  the d w e l l i n g .  r u l e s and conventions  s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n becomes more  the f u r t h e r she moves from the d w e l l i n g . range of e x p e r i e n c e  property  Thus, i t c o u l d be t h a t a c h i l d ' s c o n c e p t i o n  governing  T h i s would be expected  o r i g i n a t e s i n the d w e l l i n g and w i t h age  to  of  confused  as  children  expands outward.  Thus, younger c h i l d r e n should be much more f a m i l i a r w i t h the r u l e s and v e n t i o n s a p p l y i n g to household  space than space i n the neighborhood.  c o n s i d e r i n g the d e s i g n o f m u l t i p l e f a m i l y housing, boundaries  and  the ambiguity  s e p a r a t i n g s e m i - p u b l i c from p u b l i c and p r i v a t e space,  s u r p r i s i n g t h a t the c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s  of boundaries  conAlso,  of  i t i s not  becomes more con-  fused w i t h g r e a t e r d i s t a n c e from the d w e l l i n g . Only  one  o f the twelve year o l d respondents  indicated e x p l i c i t l y  that  he d i d not know i f t h e r e was  any r e l a t i o n s h i p between the term ' p r i v a t e  p r o p e r t y ' and ownership.  s t a t e d t h a t he was  He  p l a c e s which were " p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y " .  not allowed  However, when asked how  t i a t e d p r i v a t e from n o n - p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y , he r e p l i e d t h a t say " P r i v a t e  P r o p e r t y - Keep  to go i n any  t h a t he  he  differen-  looked f o r s i g n  Out".  (What does the word p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y mean?) I don't know, i f you take a simple word l i k e p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y you can't t h i n k of anything t h a t means t h a t . (Does i t have a n y t h i n g to do w i t h ownership?) I don't know, t h a t ' s a tough problem. (How do people know what i s p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y and what i s n ' t ? ) U s u a l l y t h e r e i s s i g n s up s a y i n g p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y and i f you see something t h a t says "park" t h e r e ' s a s i g n so you know you can go there. Jim 12 y e a r s o l d In other s e c t i o n s of the i n t e r v i e w Jim suggested the park,  i n d i v i d u a l s own  the c o o p e r a t i v e s own to the park.  t h a t the government owns  each townhouse o r d w e l l i n g and  the c o u r t y a r d s .  t h a t members of  He a l s o b e l i e v e d t h a t anyone c o u l d  He d i d not however understand  t h a t there i s a r e l a t i o n s h i p  go  85.  between ownership classified 4.3.4  as a l e v e l two  response  o f one  of the s i x y e a r o l d s and one  into t h i s category.  between the s o c i a l  is  was  understanding.  At t h i s  o f the o l d e r c h i l d r e n  l e v e l of u n d e r s t a n d i n g  a r e l a t i v e l y c o n c r e t e and s i m p l i s t i c  this  thus h i s response  Level III The  fall  and t h e r r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s and  the c h i l d r e n have  u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the  relationship  s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space.  l e v e l t h a t a g e n e r a l i z a b l e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f s o c i a l r u l e s and  I t i s at conventions  f i r s t displayed. L i z , one o f the s i x year o l d s had  pretation.  She  believes,  a well-integrated  f o r example, that people own  i n , t h a t a l l the people who  l i v e i n the enclave own  'everybody'  She was  owns the park.  scheme o f  inter-  houses that they l i v e  the c o u r t y a r d , and  that  a l s o aware that t h e r e are r u l e s which  p r o h i b i t access to ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y , t h a t people are o n l y allowed t o go 1  i n the c o u r t y a r d o f the UNP  co-op i f they know someone who  that p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y i s land that i s owned. p r o p e r t y owner has the l e g a l r i g h t  Finally,  l i v e s t h e r e , and  she i s aware that a  to e n f o r c e r u l e s and thereby c o n t r o l  access  to p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y . (Where a r e n ' t you allowed t o go i n your  neighborhood?)  In the ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ' houses, you're not allowed to go t h e r e only i f you're v i s i t i n g someone who l i v e s t h e r e . (Is t h a t a r u l e ? ) Yes. (Who made up that r u l e ? ) The people that own the houses. (What does t h a t mean p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ? ) It means t h a t i t i s owned, p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y , you can't go on i t u n l e s s we say you can. (Why do you t h i n k s t r a n g e r s can go to the park but they can't come and p l a y on your porch?) Because everybody owns the park, but not everybody owns the porch. (Is t h e r e any reason why people make up r u l e s l i k e t h a t ? ) For people's s a f e t y , cause the person who comes on your porch might want to s t a r t a f i r e or something. L i z 6 years o l d  8 6 .  T h i s response  is classified  as a l e v e l t h r e e u n d e r s t a n d i n g because L i z f i r s t  d i s t i n g u i s h e s between owners and non-owners, i n terms o f t h e i r a b i l i t y t o e s t a b l i s h and m a i n t a i n c l a i m s t o space;  second  she d i s t i n g u i s h e s between p r i v a t e ,  s e m i - p r i v a t e and p u b l i c p r o p e r t y i n terms o f r u l e s r e g a r d i n g a c c e s s , and third  she r e c o g n i z e s that ownership  underlies  the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between  the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n She understands  o f space.  t h a t i t i s because an i n d i v i d u a l owns a space  that she  i s able t o e n f o r c e r u l e s and thereby e s t a b l i s h and m a i n t a i n c o n t r o l over space.  Although  L i z does have some u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p  between the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space, understanding  that  appears  t o be c o n c r e t e and s i m p l i s t i c .  that  When p r e s s e d to j u s t i f y  her b e l i e f that r u l e s and conventions p r o h i b i t access t o p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y , L i z r e v e r t s t o h e r c o n c e p t i o n o f the p e r s o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f She  argues  that r u l e s and conventions are e s t a b l i s h e d  r a t h e r than f o r any s o c i a l  f o r people's  safety  purpose.  A l e v e l three understanding  i s one i n which the respondent  i n the c o n t e x t o f r u l e s governing access t o p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y , underlies  'strangers'.  i s aware t h a t , ownership  the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between s o c i a l and s p a t i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n .  e x t e n s i v e n e s s o f t h e i r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p between and r u l e s and conventions of u n d e r s t a n d i n g .  i s what d i s t i n g u i s h e s a t h i r d  At a t h i r d  level,  the respondent  l e g i t i m i z e s c o n t r o l over space. people own a space  ownership  from a f o u r t h  level  may j u s t i f y r u l e s p r o h i b i t i n g  access t o p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y by r e f e r r i n g to the f a c t t h a t people those p l a c e s " however they are unable  The  t o e x p l a i n why ownership  "don't  own  i n our s o c i e t y  For example, although C a r o l i n d i c a t e d t h a t  and thus c o n t r o l access to t h a t space her j u s t i f i c a t i o n  d i d not have a n y t h i n g t o do w i t h a l e g a l r i g h t t o do so. (Are the apartments  private  property?)  87.  Yeah because i t s people's p r o p e r t y , i f you were to go up the s t a i r s everybody i n the whole b u i l d i n g owns those s t a i r s and you are o n l y allowed to go up t h e r e i f people say you can. (Why i s t h a t ? ) Because some people own the top f l o o r and somebody owns the r o o f and people downstairs own the bottom f l o o r . Carol 12 y e a r s o l d T h i s segment o f the i n t e r v i e w suggests t h a t a l t h o u g h C a r o l may developed  some c o n c r e t e u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between  have ownership  and r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s , her u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the s o c i a l b a s i s and of t h a t r e l a t i o n s h i p  is s t i l l  function  somewhat u n c l e a r .  Although c h i l d r e n d i s p l a y i n g t h i s a f u l l y developed u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f how  l e v e l o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g d i d not have ownership  u n d e r l i e s the  interrelation-  ship between the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space, a number of them d i d r e f e r to the concept of ' p r i v a c y ' to e x p l a i n or r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s .  For example, i n s t e a d o f a r g u i n g t h a t the r i g h t  c o n t r o l access to space i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h ownership, i n d i v i d u a l s can r e s t r i c t their  justify  access to p r i v a t e  they argued  to  that  and s e m i - p r i v a t e spaces to p r e s e r v e  'privacy'. Using the concept o f  privacy  to j u s t i f y r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing  access to ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ' i s not i n a c c u r a t e but r a t h e r d i s p l a y s aspect of knowledge which i s p a r t of a c u l t u r a l  scheme o f  another  interpretation.  But, i n the c o n t e x t o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing access to p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y or spaces over which the i n h a b i t a n t has  some l e g a l j u r i s d i c t i o n ,  use o f the concept o f p r i v a c y to j u s t i f y the occupant's a b i l i t y  the  to e s t a b l i s h  and m a i n t a i n c l a i m s to that space, i s l e s s a c c u r a t e than the use o f the concept of  ownership. The  f o l l o w i n g quote  suggests t h a t the concept o f ownership  would have had  more e x p l a n a t o r y power than p r i v a c y i n the c o n t e x t of s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n i n the  neighborhood:  88.  (Can people go on anybody e l s e ' s porch any time they want t o ? ) They can go on anybody's s t a i r s but not on anybody e l s e ' s porch. (What's the d i f f e r e n c e between the s t a i r s and the porch?) The s t a i r s l e a d up to the porch and you can j u s t s i t on the s t a i r s but you can't e x a c t l y climb up and s i t on the top s t a i r and go hee hee. (Why not?) Cause i t s p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y and you might d i s t u r b people who are i n s i d e and i f you stood i n the middle i t would be OK. C a r o l 12 y e a r s o l d T h i s respondent  b e l i e v e s that the r u l e s governing access to p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y  are r e l a t e d to the e s t a b l i s h m e n t and maintenance o f ' p r i v a c y ' .  She  argues  t h a t she i s allowed to s i t on the s t a i r s but not on the porch because would d i s t u r b people. d e f i n i t i o n o f space  While  she may  have a f a i r l y  i n her p a r t i c u l a r neighborhood  that  a c c u r a t e view o f the or e n c l a v e , t h i s  social  under-  s t a n d i n g would not n e c e s s a r i l y a l l o w her t o g e n e r a l i z e to o t h e r setting.where r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing access to p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y were  strictly  enforced. Had  she i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e r e were both l e g a l d e f i n i t i o n s o f space  s o c i a l d e f i n i t i o n s , which o f t e n time d i d not c o r r e s p o n d , then the would have been c l a s s i f i e d 4.3.5  as l e v e l  and  response  four.  L e v e l IV Four o f the o l d e r respondents d i s p l a y e d a l e v e l f o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f  spatial appropriation. to the a b i l i t y ownership  They understood not o n l y t h a t ownership  related  t o e s t a b l i s h and m a i n t a i n c o n t r o l over space, but a l s o  gave an i n d i v i d u a l the l e g a l l y and s o c i a l l y  c o n t r o l access to space.  that  sanctioned r i g h t  To q u a l i f y as a l e v e l four response  i n c l u d e d i n t h e i r j u s t i f i c a t i o n r e f e r e n c e to the l e g a l r i g h t s with  was  to  they must have associated  ownership. A l s o , at t h i s  l e v e l many o f the respondents  social justifications  d i s t i n g u i s h e d between the  f o r c o n t r o l over access to ' p r i v a t e space' and  the  89.  legal justifications  f o r c o n t r o l over access to ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ' .  r e c o g n i z e d t h a t the r i g h t o f the p r i n c i p a l i n the s c h o o l was  r e l a t e d to h i s s o c i a l r o l e w i t h i n t h a t  the a p p r o p r i a t i o n o f p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y was equivelent Two  to a p p r o p r i a t e ' p r i v a t e  They space'  s e t t i n g , whereas  r e l a t e d t o 'ownership'  or the  forms o f tenure.  o f the o l d e r respondents  gave v e r y s u s c i n c t j u s t i f i c a t i o n s  for rules  and c o n v e n t i o n s governing access to p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y . (Do you t h i n k t h e r e are any r u l e s about p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ? ) No, i t s your own t h i n g , l i k e i f you're i n charge, l i k e i f you owned your house i f somebody came i n , or your back y a r d , you have the l e g a l r i g h t to t e l l them t o l e a v e . Ted 12 y e a r s o l d (What i f some k i d s you don't know wanted to come and p l a y i n your f r o n t y a r d would t h a t be OK?) I'd say no, because i t s p r i v a t e l y owned, they c o u l d go i n there but i t s s o r t o f l i k e b r e a k i n g a law, s o r t o f but not as bad here. (What i f they asked you why they c o u l d n ' t go t h e r e , what would you say?) I'd say because i t s not y o u r s , i t s o u r s , we bought i t and we have a l l o f the r i g h t s t o i t . Bob These two  13 y e a r s o l d  segments d i s p l a y the i n c r e a s i n g c o m p l e x i t y and g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y o f  a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .  Although  t h a t they are allowed to e v i c t  the respondents  may  argue  initially  s t r a n g e r s from t h e i r back y a r d because i t i s  ' p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y ' , they a l s o can s t a t e , when p r e s s e d , t h a t t h e i r would be l e g i t i m a t e because ownership c o n t r o l access to  action  i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h l e g a l r i g h t s to  space.  Thus, i t appears  t h a t a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o r i g i n a t e s w i t h  knowledge o f s o c i a l r o l e s and develops r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s .  i n t o a catalogue of s i t u a t i o n  limited specific  With age and e x p e r i e n c e the c h i l d ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g  of  the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space becomes more differentiated  and e v e n t u a l l y the c h i l d begins to r e c o g n i z e and  the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between the s o c i a l and  spatial structures.  understand I t may  be  90.  at t h i s p o i n t t h a t the  scheme of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n can be used to  from a f a m i l i a r s e t t i n g to an u n f a m i l i a r The however.  one.  c o n s t r u c t i o n of a scheme of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n does not Rather what seems to be  generalize  the case i s t h a t d u r i n g  stop  at t h i s  adolescence  point  and  perhaps i n t o adulthood, an i n d i v i d u a l develops a much more comprehensive and  complex system of b e l i e f s ,  Not  only w i l l  the  adolescent  a t t i t u d e s and  become aware of the  ownership v i s a v i s the e s t a b l i s h m e n t but he  or she w i l l  and  illustrate  appropriation.  l e g a l r a m i f i c a t i o n s of  a l s o have developed a whole set of ideas  f o l l o w i n g response w i l l  b e l i e f s and  about s p a t i a l  maintenance of s p a t i a l  j u s t i f y the general:: r e l a t i o n s h i p between the The  ideas  s o c i a l and  and  spatial  claims, beliefs  to  structure.  the b e g i n n i n g o f some of those  ideas.  (What do you t h i n k are some of the d i f f e r e n c e s between the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e and your back y a r d ? ) I guess h i s o f f i c e , he doesn't own i t , but he i s g i v e n i t to use so I guess he's an owner f o r p a r t time, and our back yard f o r i n s t a n c e i t s people t h a t stay there t h a t own i t and they own i t u n t i l they have to s e l l i t . (Well why does the p r i n c i p a l t e l l people to get out o f h i s o f f i c e ? ) Oh because he's the p r i n c i p a l of the s c h o o l and u s u a l l y the principal i s in control. Tom In some sense Tom and  the  granted.  takes the  i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between the  s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space i n the He  i s b e g i n n i n g to a s s o c i a t e  m a i n t a i n c o n t r o l over space.  knowledge and  u n d e r s t a n d i n g of a p e r v a s i v e and  and  social  structure  neighborhood f o r  s o c i a l s t a t u s w i t h the a b i l i t y  e s t a b l i s h and  appropriation,  school  13 y e a r s o l d  T h i s response d i s p l a y s h i s c u l t u r a l r u l e governing  spatial  foreshadows a scheme of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n which the  l a t i o n s h i p between the  social  s t r u c t u r e and  to  the  social organization  i s seen as a ' n a t u r a l ' or u n i v e r s a l human c o n d i t i o n .  re-  of space  91.  T a b l e IV.  L e v e l s o f Understanding by Age Groups  Age Groups  L e v e l s o f Understanding I  II  III  IV  6 year o l d s  1  8  1  0  10  12 & 13 year o l d s  0  1  1  3  5  Totals  1  9  2  3  n=15  CHAPTER FIVE: 5.1  DISCUSSION AND  Components o f a Scheme o f The  purpose  CONCLUSIONS Interpretation  o f t h i s study was  to e x p l o r e the form and c o n t e n t o f c h i l d r e n  c o n c e p t i o n s of r u l e s and conventions which govern appropriation. illustrating  More s p e c i f i c a l l y ,  the study was  the process o f  spatial  aimed at 1. i d e n t i f y i n g  two components o f a scheme of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n used by  children  to comprehend and a c t a c c o r d i n g t o those r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s , and v e l o p and t e s t a model of such a scheme of An i n i t i a l  2. to de-  interpretation.  review o f the s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r l i t e r a t u r e r e v e a l e d t h a t  s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n was environment  relations.  a common, i f p o o r l y - u n d e r s t o o d f e a t u r e o f human-  Although t h e r e were s e v e r a l s t u d i e s which d e a l t w i t h  the process by which c l a i m s t o space were e s t a b l i s h e d and m a i n t a i n e d , i n f o r m a t i o n was  a v a i l a b l e r e g a r d i n g how  o f s o c i a l r u l e s and conventions which governed  that process.  theory o f ' j o i n t a c t i o n ' , and i n p a r t i c u l a r h i s concept  system  G. H. Mead's  o f a 'scheme of  served as a t h e o r e t i c a l s t a r t i n g p o i n t i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n  o f a model o f c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f the r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s spatial appropriation.  A scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n was  of i d e a s and b e l i e f s about how  space  As the study i n v o l v e d c h i l d r e n , was  little  i n d i v i d u a l s , and i n p a r t i c u l a r  c h i l d r e n , were a b l e t o comprehend and act a c c o r d i n g to the complex  interpretation'  and  then c o n s u l t e d .  I t was  i s or should be  governing  d e f i n e d as a  system  used.  the developmental  psychology  literature  found t h a t the s o c i a l c o g n i t i o n s t u d i e s were  c o n s i s t e n t w i t h Mead's t h e o r e t i c a l framework.  In both l i t e r a t u r e s i t was  agreed t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s c o n s t r u c t schemes of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n r a t h e r than highly differentiated  ' c a t a l o g u e s ' o f c o n t e x t - s p e c i f i c r u l e s and  to d e a l w i t h the.complex p r o c e s s e s o f s o c i a l The  s o c i a l c o g n i t i o n s t u d i e s suggested  conventions,  interaction. that c h i l d r e n ' s conceptions of  93.  s o c i a l r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s become age.  Although c h i l d r e n may  more  initially  g e n e r a l i z a b l e and a b s t r a c t w i t h  learn context-specific  social  rules  and c o n v e n t i o n s , the s t u d i e s i n d i c a t e that w i t h age they c o n s t r u c t w e l l o r g a n i z e d and i n t e r n a l l y c o n s i s t e n t  schemes o f  interpretation.  Thus, the s o c i a l c o g n i t i o n l i t e r a t u r e was  used  to develop  the model o f  c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s g o v e r n i n g s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n . A pilot 15 was  study i n v o l v i n g i n t e r v i e w s w i t h 15 c h i l d r e n between the ages o f 5 and used t o r e f i n e the model.  And,  finally,  the f i n a l  f i f t e e n interviews  w i t h 10 s i x y e a r o l d s and 5 twelve and t h i r t e e n year o l d s served as an tial  ini-  t e s t o f the model. The  final  interviews i n d i c a t e d that c h i l d r e n ' s conceptions of r u l e s  and  c o n v e n t i o n s g o v e r n i n g s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n c o u l d be a n a l y z e d i n terms o f i d e a s about the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and  the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space.  was  a much more u n d i f f e r e n t i a t e d and  found t h a t the s i x year o l d s had  c r e t e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e . r o l e s and r e l a t i o n s h i p s ranged  Their understanding of  from the a b i l i t y  s p a t i a l r i g h t s and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h those  was,  consocial  to d i s t i n g u i s h between  s o c i a l c a t e g o r i e s o f persons, to an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f s o c i a l r o l e s ,  The  It  including  roles.  twelve and t h i r t e e n year o l d s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the s o c i a l  on the o t h e r hand, more a b s t r a c t , d i f f e r e n t i a t e d  two  structure  and p r i n c i p l e - g o v e r n e d .  They had c o n s t r u c t e d an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f s o c i a l r o l e s and r e l a t i o n s h i p s had begun t o understand u n d e r l i e the s o c i a l  and  p r i n c i p l e s such as power, s t a t u s and a u t h o r i t y which  structure.  Both age groups had c o n s t r u c t e d a f a i r l y s o p h i s t i c a t e d u n d e r s t a n d i n g the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space.  Most of the respondents were aware o f the  r u l e s and conventions governing the use of space w i t h i n the neighborhood, access to t h e i r  of  f r o n t y a r d to the r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing access  from and  94.  use  of the c o u r t y a r d s The  and  the p u b l i c parks.  respondents a l s o were aware of d i f f e r e n c e s between the a r c h i t e c t u r a l  s o c i a l d e f i n i t i o n o f semi-public  most c a s e s , had  and  spaces i n t h e i r neighborhood.  t h e i r "home range" i n c l u d e d  discovered  were d e f i n e d  which c o u r t y a r d s  as p u b l i c space.  in  the e n t i r e housing development, they  were d e f i n e d To  As,  as s e m i - p u b l i c  spaces and  an o u t s i d e r , or perhaps even an  which  adult  r e s i d e n t o f the housing development, these d i s t i n c t i o n s would perhaps  be  overlooked.  and  Thus, the  analysis did confirm  that c o n c e p t i o n s o f r u l e s  c o n v e n t i o n s governing s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n c o n s i s t of two knowledge of the of  s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and  knowledge of the  components,  social  organization  space. Beyond simply  confirming  t h i s aspect  o f the model, the  children's  responses a l s o documented the dynamic process of t h e i r c o n s t r u c t i o n of  social  knowledge.  the  r u l e s and  Most of the c h i l d r e n were i n the process of l e a r n i n g about c o n v e n t i o n s which govern the  t i o n s which are The  invoked by  adults  c h i l d r e n were c o n s t r u c t i n g  a c t i o n s of c h i l d r e n , and  f o r breaking  ideas  those r u l e s and  about " a u t h o r i t y " i n the  were b e g i n n i n g to d i s c r i m i n a t e between a d u l t s who s o c i a l r u l e s and the  those who  a u t h o r i t y of v a r i o u s  developing adults.  c o u l d not.  In c o n j u n c t i o n  s o c i a l categories  i d e a s of t h e i r own  w i t h a d u l t s , both i n c o - o p e r a t i v e  and  the  sense t h a t  a very  l e g i t i m a t e l y invoke  w i t h these ideas  o  and  b e l i e f s about the  about  to  s t r a t e g i e s they used f o r d e a l i n g  antagonistic situations. c o n v e n t i o n s governing  potent aspect  of s o c i a l knowledge.  c h i l d r e n ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the process of s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n t h e i r ideas  they  of a d u l t s , the c h i l d r e n were a l s o  Thus, c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s of r u l e s and appears to be  sanc-  conventions.  about t h e i r power as c h i l d r e n i n r e l a t i o n  Many o f the c h i l d r e n d i s c u s s e d  appropriation  could  o f the  s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and  the  social  spatial As  i s based  on  organization  95.  o f space,  i t p r o v i d e s a u s e f u l avenue f o r e x p l o r i n g t h e i r c o n c e p t i o n s o f  their social  world.  5.2 L e v e l s of, Understanding The c h i l d r e n ' s responses were c l a s s i f i e d of u n d e r s t a n d i n g p o s i t e d i n the model.  a c c o r d i n g t o the f o u r l e v e l s  Only one o f the s i x year o l d s was  found t o have a l e v e l one scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w h i l e o n l y three o f the o l d e r respondents  were found t o have a l e v e l f o u r scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .  Although most o f the respondents were aware o f c o n t e x t - s p e c i f i c r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s , most had not developed  an a b s t r a c t and i n t e g r a t e d scheme o f  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n which they c o u l d use t o make sense o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n a c r o s s c o n t e x t s . In t h e i r attempts correspondence  t o c o n s t r u c t an e x p l a n a t i o n or j u s t i f i c a t i o n  f o r the  between the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f  space, most o f the younger respondents  r e f e r e d t o e i t h e r the p h y s i c a l o r  a r c h i t e c t u r a l d e s i g n o f the s e t t i n g or t o the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the s o c i a l organization.  In g e n e r a l t h e i r e x p l a n a t i o n s r e f l e c t e d  make sense o f the s o c i a l and p h y s i c a l environments In many c a s e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y  t h e i r attempts t o  i n which they  operated.  at l e v e l s two and t h r e e , the respondents had  c o n s t r u c t e d i d e a s about v a r i o u s aspects o f the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space, but had not y e t i n t e g r a t e d them i n t o a c o n s i s t e n t scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . some i d e a s about  For example, many o f the younger respondents had  the meaning o f ownership  s e m i - p r i v a t e and p u b l i c  and the l o c a t i o n o f p r i v a t e ,  spaces, along w i t h some awareness o f the r u l e s and  c o n v e n t i o n s g o v e r n i n g access to those p l a c e s . developed  They had not, y e t , however,  an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the concept  o f owner-  ship and the r u l e s and conventions g o v e r n i n g access to p r i v a t e , s e m i - p r i v a t e and p u b l i c  spaces.  They d i d not understand  t h a t the r u l e s c o u l d be  96.  e x p l a i n e d or j u s t i f i e d on the b a s i s o f At the t h i r d  l e v e l the respondents  ownership. understood  that ownership  was  re-  l a t e d to the a b i l i t y to e s t a b l i s h and m a i n t a i n c l a i m s to space, however i t was  not u n t i l  l e v e l f o u r that they were aware that ownership  gave an  v i d u a l the s o c i a l l y s a n c t i o n e d r i g h t s to c o n t r o l access and use o f Thus the model o f c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s  indi-  space. governing  s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n p r o v i d e s a framework f o r e x p l o r i n g the form and of c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s of t h e i r s o c i o - s p a t i a l 5.3  I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r Future  content  environment.  Research  The r e s u l t s o f t h i s study suggest  t h a t the model o f c h i l d r e n ' s  concep-  t i o n s o f s o c i a l r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n may be a u s e f u l took f o r e x p l o r i n g a system of b e l i e f s and and  i d e a s about  space,  furthermore o f a n a l y z i n g the s t r u c t u r e i n h e r e n t i n such a c o n c e p t u a l  scheme . The model p r o v i d e s f o r example, a means o f comparing and c o n t r a s t i n g " c o n t e n t " o f the scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n used by members o f d i f f e r e n t worlds.  The  s m a l l number o f i n t e r v i e w s completed  a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n may  be developed  s o c i a l group,  i n t h i s study suggest  The  children in this  seem to have c o n s t r u c t e d a p a r t i c u l a r  Other  scheme o f  inter-  a unique  envi-  s o c i a l groups i n c l u d i n g f o r example a  l o c a l p o l i c e f o r c e , a ' r a t e p a y e r s ' a s s o c i a t i o n , or a s t r e e t gang may develop  that  study,  p r e t a t i o n f o r making sense o f and d e a l i n g w i t h the s o c i a l and p h y s i c a l ronment i n which they l i v e .  social  and m a i n t a i n e d by s m a l l groups  of i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h i n a l a r g e r c u l t u r a l group. as one  the  s e t o f i d e a s and b e l i e f s  about  see a l s o Furby, 1978; Beaglehole, 1932; p s y c h o l o g i c a l a s p e c t s o f b e l i e f s about possessions.  also  the d e f i n i t i o n and use o f  S u l l i e , 1935; f o r a d i s c u s s i o n of p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y and o t h e r  space i n t h e i r l o c a l According  area.  t o the model developed i n t h i s study, such a scheme would  i n c l u d e knowledge and b e l i e f s about the l o c a t i o n and meaning o f p a r t i c u l a r boundaries i n the neighborhood, about the p e r s o n a l  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and  a t t r i b u t e s o f members o f the community, and about the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space and the s o c i a l particular  community.  Further economic  research  could therefore  or e t h n i c backgrounds.  s t r u c t u r e and s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n classified  according  be gained r e g a r d i n g  i n v o l v e c h i l d r e n from d i f f e r e n t .socio-  The c h i l d r e n ' s b e l i e f s  socio-spatial  to the model and then compared. the s i m i l a r i t i e s  a l s o be used to e x p l o r e  i n d i v i d u a l ' s ideas and b e l i e f s about space may  and  would  beliefs  and meaning o f the  cross-cultural differences i n Although i n other  cultures  be based on a d i f f e r e n t s e t  or r e l i g i o u s p r i n c i p l e s , the model c o u l d be used as an  initial  system.  Although the " c o n t e n t " o f a scheme of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n may c u l t u r e s , there may example,  be  Thus, i n f o r m a t i o n  and d i f f e r e n c e s i n the ideas  form o f c o n t e n t o f a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .  classification  social  environment.  The model c o u l d  of cosmological  about the  of space i n t h e i r neighborhood c o u l d  h e l d by d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l groups about the o r g a n i z a t i o n  the  structure of that  be c o n s i s t e n c i e s  i n North America  vary  across  i n the "form" of such a scheme.  For  'ownership' i s one p r i n c i p l e which u n d e r l i e s  the  r e l a t i o n s h i p between the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e arid the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space?.  Property  owners, (or a f a c s i m i l i e  such as " r e n t e r s " )  f o r a d i s c u s s i o n o f the h i s t o r i c a l development o f ideas p r o p e r t y ' see S c o t t , 1977 and McPherson, 1978.  are one  about  social  'private  98.  c a t e g o r y o f persons who  can l e g i t i m a t e l y a p p r o p r i a t e space.  however, a scheme o f s p a t i a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n would be based .other than p r i v a t e ownership.  In o t h e r c u l t u r e s , on  principles  For example, i n c u l t u r e s where land i s n e i t h e r  bought nor s o l d , but r a t h e r "use" of the space  i s r e l e g a t e d t o c e r t a i n mem-  bers o f the s o c i e t y i n accordance w i t h k i n s h i p , r e l i g i o u s or c o s m o l o g i c a l principles,  a scheme o f s p a t i a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n would be based on an under-  s t a n d i n g of those p r i n c i p l e s  (see Rappoport, 1972,  Thus s t u d i e s i n v o l v i n g members o f two be undertaken. b e l i e f s about  The  Pennock, 1971,  Westin,  d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l groups c o u l d  q u e s t i o n s would focus on c u l t u r a l l y - s p e c i f i c  ideas and  the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e , the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space  the r e l a t i o n s between them. p r e t a t i o n may  Although  vary cross c u l t u r a l l y ,  those schemes.  1970).  the " c o n t e n t " o f a scheme o f there may  Thus the model c o u l d be used  be s i m i l a r i t i e s  and  inter-  i n the form o f  to compare and c o n t r a s t the  form and content o f a scheme o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n used by members o f d i f f e r e n t cultures. T h i s study a l s o p r o v i d e s a source of i n f o r m a t i o n about c e p t i o n s o f another  aspect o f t h e i r s o c i a l w o r l d .  children's  con-  The model p r o v i d e s a  means o f c a t e g o r i z i n g and comparing those i d e a s and b e l i e f s a c r o s s a range of age  levels.  L i k e r e c e n t s o c i a l c o g n i t i o n s t u d i e s which have d e a l t w i t h  c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s of r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s , s o c i a l s o c i a l systems,  the r e s u l t s o f t h i s study suggest  as c h i l d r e n get o l d e r they c o n s t r u c t a "system  institutions,  and  t h a t g e n e r a l l y speaking,  of r e l a t i o n s "  (Youniss,  or a more i n t e g r a t e d scheme f o r i n t e r p r e t i n g s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s In t h i s case, most o f the s i x year o l d c h i l d r e n had  and  1978)  events.  some c o n c r e t e and c o n t e x t -  s p e c i f i c u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the r u l e s and conventions g o v e r n i n g the  definition  and use o f space, w h i l e most o f the o l d e r c h i l d r e n had c o n s t r u c t e d a more a b s t r a c t and  integrated understanding  of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the  social  99.  s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space. the o l d e r respondents  T h i s knowledge would a l l o w  to make sense o f the r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s o p e r a t i n g  in diverse contexts. However, i n c o n t r a s t to f i n d i n g s i n a number o f the s o c i a l  cognition  and c o g n i t i v e development s t u d i e s , t h e r e were s u b s t a n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e s w i t h i n each age group  as to the l e v e l o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g or r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s .  Some  of  the s i x year o l d s were found to have the same l e v e l o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g as some  of  the twelve year o l d s . Thus, although the d i f f e r e n c e s between the two  p o s s i b l e areas o f developmental of  age groups  suggests  change (eg., i n c r e a s i n g l y i n t e g r a t e d knowledge  r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s ) , the d i f f e r e n c e s w i t h i n each age group  that a s t r i c t  developmental  suggests  or age r e l a t e d e x p l a n a t i o n should be used w i t h  caution. While the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the f i n d i n g s suggests that c h i l d r e n do not merely  i n t e r n a l i z e knowledge o f a ' c a t a l o g u e ' of r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s , but  r a t h e r c o n s t r u c t a more a b s t r a c t  scheme of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , more d e t a i l e d  r e s e a r c h i s needed b e f o r e any developmental hypotheses  can be t e s t e d .  Such  r e s e a r c h s h o u l d i n c l u d e a l a r g e r sample of c h i l d r e n a c r o s s a wider age Finally,  the r e s u l t s o f the study c a l l  range.  i n t o q u e s t i o n the assumption  c h i l d r e n t r a n s g r e s s boundaries simply because  they don't know they  that  exist.  Most o f the s i x year o l d c h i l d r e n i n t e r v i e w e d i n t h i s study were aware o f r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing access to p r i v a t e , in  the neighborhood,  home, and s c h o o l .  Furthermore,  c h i l d r e n were aware o f s u b t l e d i s t i n c t i o n s of  two  s e m i - p r i v a t e , and p u b l i c both age groups  spaces of  i n the s o c i a l d e f i n i t i o n and  use  semi-private courtyards.  Most o f the c h i l d r e n had c o n s t r u c t e d a d e t a i l e d u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e and the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f space w i t h i n t h e i r  residential  100.  environment. boundaries. and  Based on t h a t u n d e r s t a n d i n g  they chose  Some o f the c h i l d r e n r e p o r t e d t h a t they t r a n s g r e s s e d boundaries  invaded p r i v a t e or s e m i - p r i v a t e outdoor  as an attempt  t o antagonize  space  f o r the "excitement" o r  adults.  Thus, w h i l e more d e t a i l e d suggest  t o i g n o r e o r adhere to  study i s needed, the r e s u l t s o f the study  t h a t c h i l d r e n may have a more s o p h i s t i c a t e d and d e t a i l e d  understanding  of s o c i a l r u l e s and c o n v e n t i o n s governing s p a t i a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n than many a d u l t s g i v e them c r e d i t  for.  T h e r e f o r e , t h e c o n f l i c t between a d u l t s and  c h i l d r e n i n m u l t i p l e f a m i l y housing environments  may not be l e s s e n e d simply  by i n c r e a s i n g the l e g i b i l i t y o f boundaries, but r a t h e r through a b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s o f the s o c i o - s p a t i a l  environment.  101  REFERENCES  A c r e d o l o , L.P.  Frames o f r e f e r e n c e used by c h i l d r e n f o r o r i e n t a t i o n i n  u n f a m i l i a r spaces. T h e o r i e s , Research Hutchington  In G. Moore and R. and Methods.  and Ross,  the sense o f community.  Aiello,  4:  Stroudsburg,  and Jones,  S o c i a l Psychology. Altman, I. The  J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and  S. F i e l d  study on the proxemic  S o c i a l Behavior:  Monterey, C a l i f o r n i a :  Altman, I., T e r r i t o r i a l  Home range  and  P r i v a c y , P e r s o n a l Space Pub.,  1975.  In L. P a s t a l a n and D. Carson  Ann  Arbor, M i c h i g a n :  (eds.)  Univ. o f Michigan  and urban knowledge o f s c h o o l aged c h i l d r e n .  •p. Environment and B e h a v i o r . The T e r r i t o r i a l  Aries, Phillipe. York:  4:  Knopf,  Imperative.  73-86.  New  York:  Atheneum,  1966.  A S o c i a l H i s t o r y o f Family  Life.  1962.  Human s p a t i a l b e h a v i o r .  American Review o f S o c i o l o g y ,  29-56.  Microecology:  B o b b s - M e r r i l Pub., Bandura, A.L.  5_ (1) 1973,  Centuries of Childhood:  B a l d a s s a r e , Mark.  D.  b e h a v i o r o f young  1970.  Andrews, H.F.  Ball,  Psychology,  J o u r n a l of P e r s o n a l i t y  Brooks-Cole  b e h a v i o r i n humans.  S p a t i a l Behavior o f Older People.  1978,  Social  19: 351-356.  Environment and  and Crowding.  New  Dowden,  Growth o f p o l i t i c a l i d e a s i n adolescence:  s c h o o l c h i l d r e n i n t h r e e s u b c u l t u r a l groups.  Ardrey, R.  Penn.:  Knowing:  295-306.  J.R.,  Press,  Environmental  1976.  Adelson, J . , and O ' N e i l , R.P.  1966,  Golledge.  S o c i a l S i t u a t i o n s and  Intimate Space.  1969.  York:  1973.  P r i n c i p l e s o f Behavior M o d i f i c a t i o n .  and Winston,  New  New  York:  Holt, Reinhart  102.  Barash, D.P.  Human e t h o l o g y :  Behavior, 5 ( 1 ) , 1973, Barker, R.  P e r s o n a l space r e i t e r a t e d .  and  67-73.  E c o l o g i c a l Psychology.  Press,  Environment  Stanford, C a l i f . :  Stanford U n i v e r s i t y  1968.  Barker, R.  The Mid-West and i t s C h i l d r e n :  American  Town.  New  Beaglehole, Ernest.  York:  Row  Property:  School o f Economics  The P s y c h o l o g i c a l Ecology of an  Peterson,  1955.  A Study i n S o c i a l Psychology.  and P o l i t i c a l  Science.  Study #1.  London:  New  York:  MacMillan,  1932. Beck, R.M.,  and T e a s d a l e , P.  D w e l l i n g Housing:  User Generated Program f o r Lowrise M u l t i p l e  a Summary of a Research P r o j e c t . C.M.H.C., U n i v e r s i t y  of M o n t r e a l , Centre de Recherches Becker, F.  Children's play i n m u l t i p l e family housing.  Behavior, 8 ( 4 ) , 1976, Blumer, H e r b e r t .  The  The American  1962, Cavan, S.  Caimbridge, Mass.:  Laws o f Form.  London:  by  A l l e n and Unwin,  1979.  1969.  Scientific  American,  139-48.  The e t i q u e t t e of youth.  In G.  S o c i a l Psychology through Symbolic Ginn-Blaisdell, Chandler, M.  Experiments  Harvard U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s ,  P o p u l a t i o n d e n s i t y and s o c i a l p a t h o l o g y . 206:  Mead.  535-544.  The Ecology o f Human Development:  Nature and Design.  Calhoun, J .  and  545-574.  J o u r n a l o f S o c i o l o g y , March 1966,  Spencer.  Environment  s o c i o l o g i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s of the thought o f G.H.  Bronfenbrenner, U r i e .  Brown, G.  et d ' I n n o v a t i o n U r b a i n e s , 1977?  Yearbook, New  Interactionism.  Walthan,  (eds). Mass.:  1970.  Social cognition:  H. F u r t h , W.  Stone and H. Farberman  a s e l e c t i v e review o f c u r r e n t r e s e a r c h .  Overton, and J . G a l l a g h e r ( e d s . ) , The York:  Plenum,  1976.  F i r s t Annual  In  Piagetian  103.  C h r i s t i a n , J . , F l y g e r , V., and D a v i s , D. a herd o f S i t k a deer.  Chesapeake S c i e n c e , 1960, 1:  Coates, G., and B r u s s a r d , E.  Cooper,  C,  Cooper,  Stroudsburg. Pa.:  Man-Environment  Proceedings o f the 5 t h Dowden, Hutchinson, and  1974.  Day, N., and L e v i n e , B.  Family Housing. of  In D. H. Carson.  E v a l u a t i o n and A p p l i c a t i o n .  Annual Conference, EDRA. Ross Inc.  79-95.  Patterns of c h i l d r e n ' s s p a t i a l behavior i n a  moderate d e n s i t y h o u s i n g development. Interactions:  F a c t o r s i n the mass m o r t a l i t y o f  Resident D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n i n M u l t i p l e  I n s t i t u t e o f Urban and R e g i o n a l Development,  University  C a l i f o r n i a , Working Paper #160, March 1972. C.  York:  Easter H i l l  Village:  Some S o c i a l I m p l i c a t i o n s o f Design.  New  The Free P r e s s , 1975.  Cooper-Marcus,  C.  Landscape, Damon, W i l l i a m .  C h i l d r e n i n c l u s t e r housing:  October, 1974:  some recommendations.  152-157.  The S o c i a l World  o f the C h i l d .  San F r a n s i s c o :  Jossey-Bass  Pub., 1977. Danzinger, K. (ed.) Readings  i n Child  Socialization.  Oxford:  Pergamon  Press 19700 Edney, J .  Human T e r r i t o r y .  E l k i n d , David.  C h i l d r e n and A d o l e s c e n t s .  F e l i p e , N. , and Sommer, R. 14:  Psychological Bulletin.  206-214.  F l a v e l l , John, H.  New York:  81 (12), 959-975. Oxford Univ. Press,. 1970.  Invasions o f p e r s o n a l space.  Social  Problems.  1966. C o g n i t i v e Development.  Englewood C l i f f s ,  New J e r s e y :  P r e n t i c e - H a l l Inc., 1977. Flavell,  John, H.  N.J.:  The Developmental  Psychology o f Jean P i a g e t .  D. Van Nostrand, 1973.  Freedman, J . , Klevansky, S., and E h r l i c h , P. human t a s k performance. 1:  Princeton,  7-25.  The e f f e c t o f crowding on  Journal of Applied  S o c i a l Psychology, 1971,  104.  F r y , A.M.,  and W i l l i s ,  F.N.  Invasions o f p e r s o n a l space  the age of the i n v a d e r . Furby,  L.  Possessions:  F u r t h , H.,  In P.B. New  Baur, M. , and  institutions: G a l l e , O.R.,  J.E.  designers.  i n Public Places.  behavior  setting:  Stanford, C a l i f . : Hidden Dimension.  H a l l , E.T.  The  S i l e n t Language.  Span Development 1978.  York:  A promising u n i t  York:  The for  (eds).  N a t i o n a l Press Books, New  social  S c i e n c e , 1972,  New  and  19:351-374.  176i23-30.  Free P r e s s ,  1963.  environmental  Issues i n S o c i a l 1974.  Doubleday,  Grenwich, Conn.:  social  1966.  Fawcett P u b l i c a t i o n s  1961.  Hart, Roger. Hart, R.A.,  C h i l d r e n ' s . E x p e r i e n c e of P l a c e . and Moore, G.T.  In R.M.  Downs and D.  Mapping and H e i d i g e r , H.  and V a i z e y , M.  Jahoda, G.  Nature,  The  The  Stea ( e d s ) .  York:  Halsted Press,  Image and Environment:  Chicago:  in Captivity  New  Aldine, York:  1966,  209:  a review.  1973.  Dover,  1964. social  1371-1372.  c o n s t r u c t i o n o f economic r e a l i t y by some Glaswegian  Mechanisms of c o g n i t i v e and Human Development,  1979.  Cognitive  D i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t s of group d e n s i t y on  European J o u r n a l of S o c i a l Psychology,  or two?  New  development of s p a t i a l c o g n i t i o n :  S p a t i a l Behavior.  Wild Animals  behavior.  Kuhn, D.  f u n c t i o n through-  P o p u l a t i o n d e n s i t y and  In R u l t o l f Moos and Paul I n s e l  The  Hutt, C ,  385-389.  Human Development, 1976,  and McPherson, J.M.  H a l l , E.T.  Inc.,  21:  C h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e p t i o n s of  a P i a g e t i a n framework.  Behavior  The  Ecology.  Academic P r e s s ,  What are the r e l a t i o n s f o r man?  Goffman, E r v i n g . Gump, Paul V.  Baltes (ed.), L i f e  York:  Smith,  Gove, W.R.,  pathology:  1971,  toward a theory o f t h e i r meaning and  out the l i f e c y c l e . Behavior, V o l , 1.  P s y c h o l o g i c a l Record,  as a f u n c t i o n of  V o l . 9,  115-127  s o c i a l development:  1978,  21: 92-118.  One  children.  (1979). psychology  105.  Leibman, M.  The e f f e c t s o f sex and r a c e norms on p e r s o n a l space.  Environment  and Behavior, 1970, 2: 208-246. Lewin, K u r t .  The P r i n c i p l e s o f T o p o g r a p h i c a l Psychology.  New York:  McGraw-  H i l l , 1936. MacPherson, C.B. (ed.) P r o p e r t y :  Mainstream  and C r i t i c a l P o s i t i o n s ,  Toronto:  U n i v e r s i t y o f Toronto P r e s s , 1978. McGurk, H a r r y ( e d . ) .  E c o l o g i c a l F a c t o r s i n Human Development.  Amsterdam:  North H o l l a n d Pub:,, 1977. Mead, G.H.  Mind, S e l f and S o c i e t y .  Moore, G., and G o l l e d g e , R. ( e d s ) . and Methods.  Chicago:  Environmental Knowing:  Stroudsburg, Pa.,:  P a s t a l a n , L.A., and Carson, D.H. Arbor M i c h i g a n :  U n i v e r s i t y o f Chicago P r e s s , 1944. T h e o r i e s , Research  Dowden, Hutchinson, and Ross I n c .  S p a t i a l Behavior o f O l d e r People.  1976.  Ann  I n s t i t u t e o f Gerontology, U n i v e r s i t y o f Michigan P r e s s ,  1970. Pennock, J.P., and Chapman, J.W.  Privacy.  P i a g e t , Jean.  Structuralism.  P i a g e t , Jean.  The C h i l d ' s Conceptions o f Space,  P i a g e t , Jean.  The C h i l d ' s Conception o f the World.  Brace and World Prosser, William. Rand, G.  New York:  New York:  Trespassing children.  C h i l d r e n ' s images o f houses:  r e s e a r c h and p r a c t i s e . Stroudsburg, Pa.: A.  Mitchell  New York:  Norton, 1967.  New York:  Harcourt,  C a l i f o r n i a Law Review. A prolegma  In W.J. M i t c h e l l  August, 1959.  t o the study o f why people  ( e d . ) , Environmental d e s i g n :  Proceedings o f the 3rd Annual EDRA Conference.  Dowden, Hutchinson, and Ross Inc., 1972.  A u s t r a l i a n A b o r i g i n i e s and the d e f i n i t i o n o f p l a c e .  In W.J.  (ed.) Environmental d e s i g n :  Proceedings  of the 3rd Annual EDRA Conference. • and Ross,  Harper, 1970.  Inc., 1929.  s t i l l want p i t c h e d r o o f s .  Rapoport,  A'therton P r e s s , 1971.  Inc.,  1972.  r e s e a r c h and p r a c t i s e : Stroudsburg, Pa.:  Dowden, Hutchinson,  106.  Schmidt,  R.C.  D e n s i t y , d e l i n q u e n c y , and crime i n H o n o l u l u .  S o c i a l Research, S c o t t , W.B.  1957, 41:  274-276.  In P u r s u i t o f Happiness:  the 17th t o 20th Century.  S o c i o l o g y and  American  Bloomington,  Conceptions o f P r o p e r t y from  Indiana:  Indiana U n i v e r s i t y  P r e s s , 1977. Sommer, R. N.J.:  P e r s o n a l Space:  territory,  and L. R i v l i n Setting.  and h'jiman movements.  (eds).  New York:  In H. Proshansky, W.  Environmental Psychology:  Cliffs,  Man and h i s P h y s i c a l  Belmont, C a l i f o r n i a :  Brooks-Cole, 1978.  Toward an i n t e r p e r s o n a l model o f crowding.  Symposium.  Ittelson,  H o l t , R e i n h a r t and Winston, 1970.  Human Crowding.  Sundstrom, E.  S u t t l e s , G.  Englewood  P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1969.  Stea, D. Space,  S t o k o l s , D.  The B e h a v i o r a l B a s i s o f Design.  Sociological  1975, 14: 129-144.  The S o c i a l Order o f the Slum.  Chicago, 111.:  University of  Chicago P r e s s , 1968. Thornberg, J .  A c h i l d ' s conceptions o f places to l i v e  (ed.) Environmental d e s i g n r e s e a r c h : Conference. T u r i e l , E.  Stroudsburg, Pa.:  The development  Dowden, Hutchinson, and Ross,  New York:  U n i t e d Way o f G r e a t e r Vancouver. Vischer-Skaburskis Planners. E v a l u a t i o n , F i n a l Report.  Werner, H. 1947.  Comparative  Preiser  Inc.  1973.  In D. DePalma, and J . F o l e y  Lawrence, Erlbaum and A s s o c i a t e s , 1975.  The Housing Game:  Consumer P r e f e r e n c e s , 1972.  F a l s e Creek Area 6 Phase I Post Occupancy C.M.H.C., March 1980.  Webster's E n c y c l o p e d i c D i c t i o n a r y o f the E n g l i s h Language. (ed.) Chicago, 111.:  In W.F.  Proceedings o f the 4 t h Annual EDRA  o f s o c i a l concepts.  (eds.) Moral Development.  in.  Thatcher, V i r g i n i a  C o n s o l i d a t e d Book P u b l i s h e r s , 1973.  Psychology o f Mental Development. Chicago:  Follett,  107.  Westin, A. Whyte, W.F.  P r i v a c y and Freedom.  New York:  S t r e e t Corner S o c i e t y .  Athenum P r e s s , 1970.  Chicago, 111.: U n i v e r s i t y o f Chicago  P r e s s , 1955. Wolfe, M. , and L a u f e r , R.  The concept o f p r i v a c y i n c h i l d h o o d and a d o l e s c e n c e .  In D.H. Carson (ed.) Man-Environment I n t e r a c t i o n s : 5th  Annual EDRA Conference, Stroudsburg, Pa.:  Proceedings o f the  Dowden, Hutchinson, and  Ross Inc. 1974. Youniss, J .  Dialectical  Development.  theory and P i a g e t on s o c i a l knowledge.  1978, 21: 234-247.  Human  APPENDIX A INTERVIEW SCHEDULE  109.  I School 1) Can you t e l l me about where you p l a y at school? 2) Can you t e l l me a l l o f p l a c e s i n s i d e the s c h o o l where you are allowed to go any time y o u ' l i k e ? Probe: c l a s s r o o m s , h a l l s , bathrooms. 3) Can you t e l l me a l l o f the p l a c e s where you can't go i n s i d e the s c h o o l any time you l i k e ? Probe: p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e ; staffroom. 4) Why c a n ' t you go t o the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e any time you l i k e ? Probe: are there r u l e s or any o t h e r reason; how d i d you f i n d out that you weren't allowed t o go there any time; why are there r u l e s l i k e that. 5) Who can go to the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e any time they l i k e ? Probe: t e a c h e r s , the p r i n c i p a l , s e c r e t a r i e s . 6) Why can Probe:  go and not ? but the p r i n c i p a l can come t o your c l a s s r o o m any time s/he likes.  7) Why c a n ' t you go t o the s t a f f r o o m any time you l i k e ? Probe: same as i n #4 8) Who can go i n the s t a f f r o o m any time they l i k e ? Probe: teachers, p r i n c i p a l , s e c r e t a r i e s 9) Why can the p r i n c i p a l go t h e r e and not t h e r s t u d e n t s ? Probe:  but the t e a c h e r ' s can come to your lunchroom.  I I Home L e t ' s t a l k about the house you l i v e i n now 10) Can everyone who wants t o come i n t o your house? Probe: who i s allowed t o come i n any time they l i k e policeman, mailman, aunts and u n c l e s )  (friends, a  11) Who c a n ' t come i n t o your house any time they l i k e ? Probe: are there r u l e s or any o t h e r reason why; how d i d you f i n d out about t h a t . 12) Why can Probe:'  come i n t o your house and not a f r i e n d , r e l a t i v e v s . someone you don't know.  13) Can you t e l l me about the l i v i n g room i n your house? What do you u s u a l l y do t h e r e ? 14) In your l i v i n g room, where do you u s u a l l y s i t when you are doing ? Probe: where does your mother, f a t h e r , s i b l i n g s i t , do they u s u a l l y s i t i n the same p l a c e , a r e there r u l e s or any o t h e r reason why, what happens i f you s i t i n your 's s e a t , why does that happen?  110.  15) Suppose someone was coming t o s e l l something to your mom and dad and they wanted t o buy i t , where would they go to t a l k ? Probe: where would they s i t ( d i s t a n c e ) 16) What i f good f r i e n d s o f yours came over t o v i s i t and your f r i e n d s i t to t a l k ?  you, where would you  17) Why would the s a l e s p e r s o n s i t here and not where your f r i e n d Probe: but on a bus a s t r a n g e r s i t s r i g h t b e s i d e you. Ill  sat?  Neighborhood i  18) Can you t e l l me where you p l a y i n your  neighborhood?  19) Can you t e l l me a l l o f the p l a c e s where you can go i n your neighborhood any time you l i k e ? Probe: t o your own house, to a f r i e n d ' s house, the park, another enclave. 20) Can you t e l l me a l l o f the p l a c e s i n your neighborhood where you can't go any time you l i k e ? Probe: i n s i d e someone's house you don't know, your neighbor's house, someone e l s e ' s porch, f r o n t y a r d . 21) Are t h e r e any r u l e s or any o t h e r reason why you can't go t o those p l a c e s any time you l i k e ? Probe: how d i d you f i n d out that i t wasn't a l r i g h t t o go there any time you l i k e d , why are t h e r e r u l e s l i k e t h a t ? 22) How do people know where they can go and where they can't go? Prob'Probe: where does your p r o p e r t y end, how do you know t h a t . 23) Who owns the p r o p e r t y i n the i n s i d e o f the enclave? Probe: who can/can't p l a y t h e r e , what about some k i d s you d i d n ' t know from another e n c l a v e / o u t s i d e F a l s e Creek. 24) What about the park, who can p l a y there? Probe: what about your f r i e n d s / s t r a n g e r s .  Why?  25) Why can s t r a n g e r s p l a y i n the park and not on your porch? Probe: i s t h a t a good i d e a , why?  APPENDIX B SAMPLE INTERVIEW (13 YEAR OLD)  112.  Can  you t e l l me f i r s t  where you l i k e t o hang around the s c h o o l , o r p l a y ?  W e l l b a s i c a l l y under the covered area where a l l o f the k i d s hang around, and j u s t up on the s t e p s , and on the f i e l d a l o t . Do you hang around there at lunch time o r do you go other p l a c e s ? At lunch time sometimes I'm a t home and but a l o t o f the time Can you t e l l me a l l o f the p l a c e s i n s i d e go any time you l i k e ? Any  time  the s c h o o l where you're  I'm out t h e r e . allowed to  I like?  Uh huh. W e l l i t s d i f f e r e n t when i t s r e c e s s , e s p e c i a l l y cause at r e c e s s no students are allowed i n except f o r the washrooms d o w n s t a i r s . No you're r e a l l y not allowed much p l a c e s , you are allowed the washrooms the l i b r a r y but you have t h i s system where you have a t a g and um you're allowed, l i k e I can p r e t t y w e l l get anywhere, I'm not s a y i n g t h a t I'm r e a l l y allowed here but... J u s t t e l l me the p l a c e s where you're  allowed t o go.  You're r e a l l y not allowed t o go anywhere because i t s work time. So when you're  going p l a c e s where you're not allowed t o you're...  W e l l the o n l y excuses are uh b e s i d e s lunch and r e c e s s are l i b r a r y t h a t s i f you're c o l l e c t i n g s p e c i f i c i n f o r m a t i o n or something, gym and washrooms. So what happens when your  somewhere you're  not supposed to go?  W e l l I r e a l l y haven't had t h a t e x p e r i e n c e but I don't know. You'd p r o b a b l y get i n t o t r o u b l e . They'd g i v e you a t a l k I guess and the second time you'd do i t you'd get, I don't know e x a c t l y what would happen. It would p r o b a b l y be, I do know that some people g o t t e n i n t r o u b l e , not e x a c t l y the same i d e a , where they had taken out equipment without perm i s s i o n and so they aren't allowed to take out equipment f o r the r e s t of the y e a r . Oh I see. Ok.  So can you go to the p r i n c i p a l ' s  o f f i c e any time you l i k e ?  B a s i c a l l y yes. Can you go t h e r e t o eat your No,  lunch?  (Ha Ha)  How come you can't go there to eat your The p r i n c i p a l ' s not allowed.  lunch?  o f f i c e , because t h a t i s the s t a f f room and t h a t s j u s t  113.  Oh w e l l why Well  don't you  t h i n k i t s allowed?  t h a t ' s t h e i r rooms.  Those are the teachers  What about the s t a f f room can you  go  I guess and  a l l that.  there?  The s t a f f room, no t h a t ' s connected to the o f f i c e you have to go to the o f f i c e , t h a t ' s where they eat a c t u a l l y and no you're not allowed there either. The o n l y p l a c e i n s i d e the s c h o o l where you're allowed to eat i s i n the lunch room which they u s u a l l y p u l l out t a b l e s i n the gym. W e l l , why do you k i d s c o u l d n ' t go Because ponsible p u l l out j u s t the OK How liked?  t h i n k t h a t the p r i n c i p a l can go to the gym to the s t a f f r o o m to eat?  to eat but  the  I have a f e e l i n g t h a t I guess t h a t k i d s can be a l i t t l e i r r e s and l i k e goof around or make garbage or something l i k e that or f r i s b e e s or something and s t a r t throwing them around or i t s f a c t that they don't have as much power as the .. I don't know.  d i d you  f i n d out  that you weren't allowed  to go  there any  time  you  I'd say b a s i c a l l y the hard way. Because I was coming back from Toronto the very f i r s t day of s c h o o l and t h a t s when they show everybody the schoo and t e l l them whats good so I b a s i c a l l y found out t h a t the hard way by a c t u a l l y I had done my work. In the f o y e r of the gym and the k i d s were p l a y i n g f r i s b e e i n the gym and we were a l l c a l l e d i n t o the o f f i c e and g i v e n a t a l k i n g to and i f we're caught doing t h a t again, even i f we were working t h e r e , we'd get i n t r o u b l e something was going to happen, I forget. L e t s see who  do you  t h i n k can go  i n the  s t a f f room any  time they  like?  Anybody that happens to be not a student, everybody except students and b a s i c a l l y I would say the parents or v i s i t o r s or they'd walk i n . But t h i i s what I c o u l d do. I c o u l d go up to the o f f i c e , I c o u l d go i n t o the s t a f f r o o m and I c o u l d t a l k to somebody but I j u s t c o u l d n ' t plop down and s t a r t e a t i n g my lunch or something nor c o u l d a v i s i t o r or something l i k e t h a t , anybody e l s e who works here. OK l e t ' s t a l k a l i t t l e Creek?  b i t about where you  l i v e now.  Do you  l i v e i n False  Yes. Do you  l i v e i n the co-ops, apartments  I l i v e about, c o n s i d e r i n g t h a t the doors of the s c h o o l face n o r t h I l i v e at about southwest of the s c h o o l and i t s the wood b u i l d i n g s , they're c a l l e d the U n i v e r s i t y N o n - P r o f i t O r g a n i z a t i o n .  114.  Oh yeah, r i g h t  I've got a map here.  I l i v e r i g h t t h e r e , the top f l o o r . Oh r i g h t ,  t h a t s neat, t h e y ' r e co-ops  They're not co-ops,  then?  t h a t ' s n o t a co-op, i t s the U n i v e r s i t y N o n - P r o f i t .  Oh I see so people a c t u a l l y own t h e i r  houses?  What we d i d was we got t o g e t h e r , u n i v e r s i t y people, who work i n the u n i v e r s i t y and they b u i l t i t . But my mother has some r e a l l y good f r i e n d s who are judges or whatever at the u n i v e r s i t y , she managed to get i t . Oh yeah. And then they had t o p i c k who had t o get each h o u s e , r i g h t , so what they d i d was say took f i f t y two cards f o r f i f t y two houses they s h u f f l e d them handed a c a r d out t o everybody and they s h u f f l e d another deck and p l a c e d i t down p i c k e d up a c a r d and whoevers c a r d came up f i r s t i t was t h e i r c h o i c e f i r s t and my mothers was the ace o f spades and I f o r g e t what the f i r s t c a r d was but the second was an Ace o f spades so she got what she wanted too. W e l l she got the second c h o i c e o f what she wanted but now she's even h a p p i e r cause a f t e r choosing the houses the government made some more changes and a l l o f the houses that were going to be b u i l t so. So that worked out w e l l .  Who can come to your house any time they  like?  J u s t walk r i g h t i n ? Uh huh I'd say my mother's f r i e n d s , not my s i s t e r ' s or my f r i e n d s because i t s j u s t not r i g h t , you know ' k i d s ' . My mothers f r i e n d s , but they always knock. They b a s i c a l l y come any time they l i k e . And the f a m i l y they can come i n any time they l i k e . Not c o u n t i n g my dad, he'd knock because my dad and my mother don't l i v e t o g e t h e r any more, my dad's m a r r i e d a g a i n . So he would knock. Yeah, he doesn't come i n though. OK  Who's not allowed to come i n any time they Any  time?  like?  Would they have t o knock?  Yes, who c o u l d n ' t j u s t  s o r t o f knock and then come r i g h t i n ?  Oh, I'd say people we don't know r e a l l y . Our f r i e n d s are p r e t t y t r u s t w o r t h y our f r i e n d s don't they always knock but I would say a l o t o f the s e l l e r s , or whatever, s t r a n g e r s b a s i c a l l y .  115.  Yeah r i g h t . I doubt  How about a policeman c o u l d he walk i n any time he l i k e s ? it.  He'd knock and then w a i t .  And how about the mailman?  o r mailwoman?  No, he j u s t puts the m a i l through the s l o t . R i g h t , w e l l why do y'ounthihknthen people i n your f a m i l y can j u s t walk r i g h t in? and a mailman can't? W e l l , you don't know the mailman. I t h i n k i t s because you happen t o know the o t h e r people and j u s t knowing them you know whether they are t r u s t w o r t h y or n o t . I f they are t r u s t w o r t h y then they can be allowed to j u s t walk i n , t h a t must be i t . Ok good. Do you t h i n k t h a t t h e r e ' s r u l e s about s t u f f l i k e t h a t , about people coming t h a t you know? Do you t h i n k i n g e n e r a l t h a t people f o l l o w those k i n d s of r u l e s ? Yes, why n o t . Cause you do the same t h i n g when you go to your f r i e n d ' s p l a c e too I guess. Although I have had a s l i p up when I t h i n k i t s my house and I j u s t r i g h t i n , what happens i s that I walk i n and oops I'm s o r r y . All  walked  right They've done i t t o our house t o o , i t s an a c c i d e n t .  Can you t e l l me about couches.  the l i v i n g room at your house,  do you have c h a i r s and  Our l i v i n g room i s I'd say about f i f t e e n f e e t wide and about t h i r t y f e e t long and i t s a d i n i n g room and l i v i n g room so about twenty f e e t i s l i v i n g room and the o t h e r t e n o r so i s the d i n i n g space. We have a b i g d i n i n g t a b l e t h a t f i t s s i x people. I t ' s round and i t s got wood c h a i r s and they've got p i g s k i n , and we have a b i g b u f f e t t h a t matches i t and some p i c t u r e s my mother got g i v e n a b e a u t i f u l p i c t u r e about e i g h t f e e t square and i t s up on the w a l l and we've got a b i g couch t h a t s got a Chinese look i t doesn't have Chinese symbols on i t but a l l these, i t ' s got a couch and another attachment, s o r t o f a couch w i t h o u t arms on the s i d e but j u s t a back so you can a t t a c h i t , and we have a g l a s s t a b l e w i t h pyramids going down on the bottom and we have brown shag c a r p e t . Do you have a s p e c i a l c h a i r i n the l i v i n g room? Not one i n p a r t i c u l a r Do you watch TV i n your l i v i n g room? No, r i g h t b e s i d e our l i v i n g room i s another room, r i g h t t h e r e i s a t e l e v i s i o n i n the back s e t w a l l , and we have a s m a l l l o v e seat and a  116.  wooden c h a i r and t h e r e not s p e c i a l c h a i r s although the one c h a i r i s mother's f a v o r i t e I guess she always s i t s on i t . Do you  singular  sometimes s i t on i t ?  Her  f a v o r i t e i s her c h e s t e r f i e l d ,  Thats where she s i t s  i t s always her  favorite.  usually?  Yeah What i f you  s i t there.  U s u a l l y , uh i t c o s t s a l o t she says and i t s , we u s u a l l y s i t on the arm r e s t s so you can look out the window and she's a f r a i d t h a t i t w i l l break, she seems r e a l l y a f r a i d o f the d i r t y pants. W e l l , what i f someone was coming to s e l l some r a f f l e t a c k e t s or a vacum where do you t h i n k t h a t your mom would s i t and t a l k to them. She would p r o b a b l y stand f i r s t at the door and t a l k through the door, have the door open, and t a l k about i t and i t depends how i n t e r e s t e d she gets i n i t and i f she got r e a l l y i n t o i t she would l i k e an i n t e r v i e w l i k e we had something l i k e t h i s , w i t h the lady who came over and she comes r i g h t i n and she s i t s r i g h t on the c h e s t e r f i e l d and she makes some c o f f e e and they d r i n k c o f f e e and i f i t s a good f r i e n d , s o c i a l , i t s wine or m a r t i n i or whatever and they s i t down and t a l k . I f i t was a good f r i e n d would they s i t i n a d i f f e r e n t p l a c e than i f i t was someone they d i d n ' t know. Not r e a l l y , the c h e s t e r f i e l d , i s t h e r e i s no p a r t i c u l a r seat on~ i t t h a t she has, but I suppose i f they weren't as much they would p r o b a b l y p u l l up a c h a i r or j u s t t a l k s t a n d i n g up or p u l l up a c h a i r i n the k i t c h e n which i s a n i c e t a b l e , but one t h i n g about our l i v i n g room i t doesn't have a f l a t r o o f . L e t ' s t a l k about the neighborhood now. where you can go any time you l i k e ?  Just  The whole F a l s e  Creek?  s t a r t w i t h your  section.  Can you t e l l me  a l l o f the p l a c e s  OK i n our s e c t i o n we have a playground and we have g r a s s a r e a where they j u s t r e c e n t l y c u t up a l l o f our grass to r e - d e s i g n the playground under the g r a s s and Is t h a t  i n the c e n t e r p a r t ?  Yeah get the map and I', 11 show you. So i n that s e c t i o n t h e r e i s a playground r i g h t t h e r e , what they a r e t r y i n g to do i s l e v e l i t o f f . Thats the grass cause i t was at a bad t i l t  117.  and i n s t e a d they are p u t t i n g i n more p l a n t s i n our s e c t i o n so w e ' l l have l e s s g r a s s and t h e r e i s a l o t o f k i d s there and I have a f e e l i n g , i t s j u s t t e r r i b l e cause i t s going t o get wrecked up. Why?  . ' K i d s , and we don't have any gates t o l o c k up out people,who don't l i v e i n our s e c t i o n so they can come i n f r e e l y and they r i d e t h e i r b i k e s over the p l a n t s and that i t s not too good.  Oh I see, yeah. and we have a S t r a t a C o u n c i l which i s the bosses and t h e r e i s a man who q u i t i t but he used t o be bad and we d i d n ' t have a n y t h i n g we c o u l d n ' t p l a y i n the p l a n t s and they d i d n ' t l i k e us to p l a y ontthe grass w e l l what we wanted to do was put water on i t you know and make a s l i d e , we're going t o do that t h i s summer i t s the o n l y water f u n you can keep yours e l f c o o l w i t h , but um they s a i d that we c o u l d n ' t put on our sandbox, t h a t was the k i d s sandbox, and we should have been allowed t o you know to f l o o d i t and make a l l r i v e r s and dams and t h a t . Why d i d they say t h a t ? T h i s was a couple o f y e a r s ago though t r i e d that t h i s year I t h i n k i t was not too long ago... I'm too o l d now but i t was fun. I don't know why, I mean where do we get t o go to p l a y i n our s e c t i o n ? W e l l what i s t h a t space  f o r i n the middle?  I t s l i k e a back y a r d t h a t s what i t i s , the back. W e l l then how come k i d s aren't allowed to p l a y there? I t s , you might c a l l the guy a grouch. W e l l so now when they p l a n t t h i n g s t h e r e Yeah i t s going t o be even worse, they are a l l j u s t going t o get wrecked. So p l a n t s are p l a c e s where ... they would have designed i t b e t t e r , they should have designed i t so that the k i d s would have a you know so t h a t they can be t h e r e , and another p a r t they j u s t r i p p e d o f f a chunk o f sidewalk which because people i n t h i s house don't need that chunk o f sidewalk to get over i n t o t h e r e , and I always walked up t h e r e to the bus or whatever now I wouldn't walk a l l the way, l i k e i f they s a i d t h a t I would have t o walk a l l the way around the o t h e r houses to get out, but now they are going to put p l a n t s r i g h t t h e r e t h a t s j u s t going to get trampled. W e l l whose p r o p e r t y i s t h a t ? T h i s i s the whole s e c t i o n ' s p r o p e r t y .  118.  Is  that r i g h t  t h a t they can do that?  Apparently  so, a m a j o r i t y .  Oh I see, w e l l i s there v e r y many k i d s there where you l i v e ? W e l l a c t u a l l y the d e s i g n they d i d n ' t d e s i g n i t , t h a t they wanted a new d e s i g n o f t h i n g s .  the m a j o r i t y d e c i d e d  W e l l why d i d they decide t h a t do you t h i n k ? W e l l the p l a n t s and the grass were designed p o o r l y they had had q u i t e a few too many p l a n t s a l l around that d i d n ' t grow r i g h t at c e r t a i n spots where they wanted i t t o and the d e s i g n i t wasron h i l l s and e v e r y t h i n g the the l a s t two t h a t s why the grass was a l r e a d y long grown i n t o t h e r e or something I don't know but t h i s was t e r r i b l e f o r water drainage be= cause the water would f l o o d and k i l l grass on one area and because i t was on a h i l l and a l l o f the water from the grass on the top would d r a i n away so they would d i e o f l a c k o f water and d i e o r drowning, so i t wasn't designed r i g h t so they are going to d e s i g n i t l e v e l but they are p u t t i n g e x t r a p l a n t s now. Can you t e l l me about any o t h e r p l a c e s where you can't go i n F a l s e Creek i n general? In  the marinas.  How come you can't go there? It has a l l o f these s i g n s o f " P r i v a t e P r o p e r t y " o r something sometimes i t makes me mad sometimes i t doesn't. W e l l how do you know t h a t you're  not allowed t o go there?  W e l l they have gates up and e v e r y t h i n g and they have push b u t t o n alarm. Oh, you can't get down t h e r e . you l i k e ?  special  Can you go i n your neighbors houses any time  Nope, u n l e s s i t s l i k e , I don't walk i n any time but i f I'im r u s h i n g home and i f I wanted t o go an grab something from my house and b r i n g i t over q u i c k l y I u s u a l l y walk r i g h t i n t o the house and the same w i t h him What about t o the park, can you go t h e r e any time you l i k e ? I can go any time yeah. Is  the park p r i v a t e  property?  Um, no i t s Park's  Board.  119.  So, can anybody go there that wants to? Yeah b a s i c a l l y ,  a c t u a l l y anyone i t s p u b l i c .  What's the d i f f e r e n c e between t h i s park and where you  live  here?  W e l l t h i s i s p r i v a t e t h i s i s owned or co-op owned or something t h a t but t h i s i s Parks Board owned.  like  Are a l l o f the e n t r a n c e s here b l o c k e d o f f ? No. W e l l how do people know t h a t they can't come there? i n your co-op say.  People who  don't  live  W e l l those are co-op owned so they don't have p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y s i g n s a l l we have i s l i t t l e p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y s i g n s s a y i n g " P r i v a t e P r o p e r t y " I see whatsttihe d i f f e r e n c e then between the co-ops here and the land here i n the c e n t e r o f yours? T h e i r s , I don't r e a l l y understand t h i s but ours was U n i v e r s i t y N o n - P r o f i t they j u s t designed i t t h a t way and t h e i r s was the c o n s t r u c t i o n , l i k e we b u i l t our houses and we bought t h i s l a n d a l l t o g e t h e r and we b u i l t i t and we bought, so we own our own houses but a l o t o f us d i d n ' t have enough money l i k e my mother to j u s t b u i l d i t so what they d i d was they had the U n i v e r s i t y guys b u i l d i t and now she pays monthly r a t e s and the co-op was b u i l t by a company l i k e or whatever and they grow the g r a s s they buy the the ground they d e s i g n the i n s i d e and when people buy i t then they buy the separate house a whole bunch o f them don't go out and buy i t . They, each one o f them buys s e p a r a t e l y so l i k e i t s i n d i v i d u a l so they don't have p i e c e s o f p r o p e r t y b e s i d e s t h e i r own gardens. Oh  I see, so t h i s i s b a s i c a l l y its  i s owned by the whole...  (UNP)  private  So r e a l l y the land t h e r e i s owned by everybody j u s t own t h e i r houses so every so everybody  l i v e s t h e r e buy here  they  i s welcome  I see, t h a t s i n t e r e s t i n g . Not r e a l l y  who  So, do you ever go i n here to p l a y then'  to p l a y but I have gone i n t h e r e l o t s o f times.  W e l l I've been i n t h e r e too and i t was s o r t o f funny because I saw those l i t t l e f e n c e s , but i t seems that t h e r e ' s not too c l e a r a d i v i d i n g l i n e between people's p r o p e r t y and the space that anybody can go i n , what do you think? In t h a t s e c t i o n they r e a l l y don't have t h e i r own s e c t i o n does though.  p r i v a t e gardens,  our  120.  Oh, where are your p r i v a t e  gardens?  Our p r i v a t e garden, you mean each person, the upper l e v e l s don't have them, o n l y the lower l e v e l s and they j u s t have fences around them about four feet high. Oh,  so t h a t s p r i v a t e t h e r e ? Yes, t h a t s t h e i r v e r y own  So can anyone who  and the whole t h i n g i s owned.  l i v e s i n that s e c t i o n there go i n t o the gardens?  No, cause t h a t ' s p r i v a t e l y owned by the  individual  OK w e l l t h a t s the p l a c e I walked i n t o because I remember i t wasn't too c l e a r where o t h e r people's p r o p e r t y s t a r t e d and where the c e n t e r p a r t was. How do you t e l l ? It s t a r t s from, t h e r e ' s a s e c t i o n r i g h t i n here and another one along here. There's a s e c t i o n r i g h t by the garage and t h e r e ' s t h a t s e c t i o n and another s e c t i o n and i n s i d e a l l around i n t h e r e . What about the gardens? The p r i v a t e ones?  How  do you t e l l where they s t a r t ?  the i n s i d e ?  they have b i g fences f o u r f e e t h i g h .  A l l o f them have fences? Yeah except some people have them e i g h t  feet high.  Well what would happen i f somebody d i d n ' t know and went i n t h e i r Not much i f they d i d n ' t know, i f somebody was t h i s i s private property. W e l l are there r u l e s about s t u f f l i k e that  i n your  t h e r e would  garden?  say s o r r y  section?  There aren't e x a c t l y r u l e s there aren't posted r u l e s or a n y t h i n g I guess. Except f o r the s i g n s . Yeah, there c o u l d be improvements What do you mean, how  c o u l d there be  though. improvements?  E s p e c i a l l y i n the garage they have an open garage and t h i s i s where people can j u s t walk r i g h t i n and out, but they have doors b l o c k i n g o f f a l l o f the r e s t so you have to have a key to get i n and you can j u s t down the e n t r a n c e and get i n , and we've had a l o t o f v a n d a l i s m down there w i t h mom's c a r s but we had p a i n t dumped a l l over our enamel hubcaps swiped and gas syphoned out. Oh dear.  121.  another t h i n g would be a m i r r o r because coming out o f that garage I'm s u r p r i s e d t h a t nobody has g o t t e n k i l l e d or h u r t y e t but people j u s t ride t h e i r bikes Ok you know these b i g apartments over here, are they p r i v a t e too? i n t o the lobby t h e r e any time you l i k e ? I found out t h a t they have a key t o get i n t o  Can you go  the lobby.  So why would they have a key. I don't know, something about the e l e v a t o r s I guess cause e l e v a t o r t h e r e , I don't know much about t h a t . Whats the d i f f e r e n c e then between the p r i n c i p a l ' s office?  they have an  o f f i c e and, does he own h i s  That i s j u s t h i s o f f i c e y e s , I t s h i s o f f i c e , does he own i t ? You mean the ownership? I t i s the s c h o o l board's I guess. I t s just h i s to work i n j u s t l i k e the desk t h a t I have was mine and my work i s mine but I don't r i g h t f u l l y own i t i f the School Board were t o take i t away from me. So what does t h a t mean i n terms o f your desk and h i s o f f i c e . Thats h i s , i t s h i s p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y but he doesn't have the ownership. So does that make any d i f f e r e n c e ? I mean can you do d i f f e r e n t land that you own as compared to land l i k e h i s o f f i c e ?  things with  Your allowed t o do t h i n g s w i t h i t your allowed to change the appearance, r a t h e r as w i t h a r e n t e d p l a c e same s o r t o f t h i n g as the o f f i c e he's s o r t of r e n t i n g i t o n l y he doesn't pay gets p a i d , but the r e n t a l s my f r i e n d Glen who has l i v e s ... put a w a l l up but i t i s designed o n l y w i t h p r e s s u r e so that when they have t o move out they j u s t have t o knock the w a l l out and i t hasn't been n a i l e d i n or a n y t h i n g , you c a n ' t n a i l i t i n because i t s not owned by them. Say your desk t h a t s here, why i s i t y o u r s , I mean what can you do w i t h i t because i t s yours, what does t h a t mean? W e l l I can keep my s t u f f i n i t , I can't draw a l l over i t or a n y t h i n g . Why do you have a desk? Because the taxes i s p a i d f o r i t i s used as a t o o l f o r e d u c a t i o n I guess. Why doesn't everybody In elementary  just  share a l l o f the desks?  s c h o o l , I went to a s c h o o l where t h a t happened at an  1 2 2 .  elementary s c h o o l I guess i t s because the k i d s j u s t be q u i t e as organi z e d as the h i g h s c h o o l where you can j u s t c a r r y the s t u f f around, i t s j u s t much e a s i e r f o r the k i d s t o have i t a l l i n one desk OK w e l l what i f some k i d s from over here you didnJit know wanted t o come and p l a y i n your f r o n t y a r d , would t h a t be a l r i g h t ? You  mean i n the c e n t e r  No i n the fenced  part.  part.  I'd say no, but t h e r e ' s not much room to p l a y . I'd say no because t h a t ' s p r i v a t e l y owned they c o u l d go i n there sure but i t s l i k e b r e a k i n g a law s o r t o f not as bad but here anyway. Say they s a i d we r e a l l y want t o go and p l a y i n your y a r d No and they s a i d why not? what would you say then?  can we?  I'd say i t r e a l l y i s n ' t up to me but i t s my mother's y a r d can't come i n and p l a y any time you f e e l l i k e i t . and  and you s a i d  and you j u s t  they s a i d but why not? because i t s not yours i t s ours we bought i t and we have a l l o f the r i g h t s to i t .  OK w e l l t h a t s sounds l i k e a good e x p l a n a t i o n . g e n e r a l l y know where they can and can't go?  So how do you t h i n k t h a t  people  They l e a r n the h a r d way because there r e a l l y aren't r u l e s posted or anything l i k e that and t o my knowledge I don't know o f any paper t h a t comes out which says these r u l e s besides w i t h i n S t r a t a Co-op or c o u n c i l w i t h i n t h e i r l e t t e r s , so I don't r e a l l y know but I don't t h i n k t h a t theres much they j u s t l e a r n the hard way except f o r law they have books and a l l t h a t most k i d s l e a r n the hard way. L i k e I know a l o t about law but t h e r e s s t i l l a l o t o f t h i n g s l i k e you might t h i n k that your doing r i g h t because by law i t s allowed but you c o u l d be wrong and I don't know what would happen i f you go on the Court Board or something l i k e that you can't e x p l a i n i t i f you d i d n ' t know. Maybe you c o u l d p l e a d  ignorance o f the law.  APPENDIX C SAMPLE INTERVIEW ( 6 YEAR OLD)  124.  Can you  t e l l me where you p l a y at  I p l a y i n the playground the s l i d e . Have you  and  school? I p l a y sometimes i n the t r o l l e y , I l i k e  l i v e d here a long time?  I moved here a long time ago, i t s not an apartment. Does i t have a back y a r d and No  are k i n d of houses stuck  together,  yard?  i t s on Foundry Quay.  Where abouts i n s i d e I'm How  front  they  allowed  the s c h o o l are you  allowed  to go the a c t i v i t y , to the  about the h a l l s and  to go any  time you  like?  library,  classrooms.  Yeah. What about the p r i n c i p a l ' s I've Can you  office?  o n l y been there once.  go there any  time you  like?  No. How  about the s t a f f r o o m can you  go t h e r e any  time you  like?  No. Why  do you  t h i n k you can't  go to the p r i n c i p a l ' s  o f f i c e any  time you  like?  I don't know. Is t h e r e a r u l e or any  other reason why  you can't go t h e r e any  time you  like?  / No. How  do you I'm  know that you  o n l y allowed  In the p r i n c i p a l s  aren't allowed  to go  to go there i n lunch and  there? s t u f f and  recess.  office?  Yeah. How  come you  can go there at  lunch?  I can o n l y go there when I have t r o u b l e s and t e l l him.  somebody h u r t me  I could  125.  How about the s t a f f r o o m can you go t h e r e f o r the same  reasons?  Yeah I c o u l d go there t o f i n d a t e a c h e r . Could you go t o the s t a f f r o o m t o eat your You mean am I allowed  lunch?  t o go there any time  I like?  Yeah t o eat your lunch or something l i k e t h a t . No. Why can you go t o the p r i n c i p a l ' s t h a t but not to eat your lunch?  o f f i c e t o phone your mom or something  like  Cause he's busy a l l o f the time. How about the s t a f f r o o m how come you can't  go t h e r e any time you l i k e ?  Cause sometimes i t s busy and I don't know, sometimes people t h e r e working o r doing t h e i r a r t l e s s o n s . OK Who can go i n the s t a f f r o o m any time  they  like?  I don't know. Can  the t e a c h e r s go there any time they  like?  Yeah. Principal? Yeah. How about the s e c r e t a r y ? Yeah. W e l l then why can the s e c r e t a r y go t h e r e but you can't go there? Cause they are o l d e r than me. Does t h a t make a d i f f e r e n c e ? I don't know. Where abouts do you eat lunch? I eat i t i n the gym w i t h my  friends.  So can the p r i n c i p a l come andeat lunch i n the gym? Yeah, no he has to s t a y i n the o f f i c e .  are down  126.  Is t h e r e a r u l e or something  l i k e that that  He doesn't have to stay i n the o f f i c e e a t i n g i n the t e a c h e r s room.  says he has t o stay i n the o f f i c e ? a l l o f the time but he always  likes  I see, so i f I was a new person i n the s c h o o l how would I know I c o u l d n ' t go i n the p r i n c i p a l ' s o f f i c e ? Do you t h i n k someone would t e l l me, or I would see a sign? I t h i n k someone would h e l p you o u t . Can anyone who wants to come i n your house any time they l i k e ? No, o n l y i f my mommy i s i n a good mood or something in.  i f she l e t s my  friends  Who can come i n your house any time they l i k e ? ,my b r o t h e r , me, my u n c l e s and aunts and my f a t h e r and mother. Who do you t h i n k can't come i n your house any time they my  like?  friends,  How about a mailman? and the postman c a n ' t , and an a i r p l a n e can't How about o t h e r people, s t r a n g e r s , can they come i n any time? No, I wouldn't l e t them i n a t a l l and I wouldn't even t a l k t o one, once when I was going t o the s t o r e a long time ago she s a i d I c o u l d go t o the s t o r e by myself I d i d n ' t mean to and t h e r e was a s t r a n g e r and s a i d you shouldn't be going t o the s t o r e by y o u r s e l f and I s a i d I know where i s i s so she took me t o the s t o r e and when I was going t o pay f o r the s t u f f she grabbed the money and f o l l o w e d me home and came i n my house and my mom got mad and c a l l e d the p o l i c e . Why do you t h i n k t h a t f r i e n d s could?  s t r a n g e r s can come i n t o your house?  but your mom's  Because um s t r a n g e r s don't know you v e r y w e l l your f r i e n d s do. What about somebody who was a s t r a n g e r who was s e l l i n g come t o your door?  something, do they ever  No. What about your f r i e n d come f i g h t i n ? She  knocks.  when she comes to your house does she knock o r  127.  Why  does she do t h a t ? Cause i t s not p o l i t e to walk i n to somebody e l s e ' s house i f somebody's not there and you walk i n and do m i s c h i e f t h a t s not good and I know a joke ...  Can you t e l l me about the l i v i n g room at your house? I have l o t s o f p l a n t s and a n i c e b i g couch and c u s h i o n s . Where do you u s u a l l y s i t when your i n the l i v i n g room? On the couch but sometimes on the c h a i r . Where does your mom  usually  sit?  She u s u a l l y s i t s i n her f a v o r i t e  chair.  Whats i t l i k e ? i  I t s n i c e and sometimes she l e t s me s i t i n i t and my moustache and he looks d i f f e r e n t Does your dad have a s p e c i a l  f a t h e r shaved h i s  chair?  Yeah... What happens when you s i t i n your moms s p e c i a l I s i t i n i t and f e e l  chair?  comfortable.  Do you have t o move i f she wants to s i t i n i t ? No she goes and s i t s i n another one. How  about your dad's s p e c i a l  chair?  He does and s i t s somewhere e l s e . Suppose somebody was coming to s e l l some r a f f l e wanted to buy some where would they s i t ?  t i c k e t s and your mom  and dad  They'd t a l k i n the l i v i n g room. Would they s i t c l o s e t o g e t h e r or f a r apart? My mom and dad would s i t c l o s e t o g e t h e r and my mom would s i t f a r . How  come i s that? The s t r a n g e r s we don't know v e r y w e l l .  and the s t r a n g e r  128.  What i f eame over and you were going t o t a l k i n the l i v i n g room, where would you s i t ? Me and ... would s i t b e s i d e each other and sometimes a f t e r we get i n t o a f i g h t we hug each other cause she's my best f r i e n d . What i f somebody you d i d n ' t know came over would you s i t b e s i d e them? No. Have you ever r i d d e n onna bus, and s a t b e s i d e somebody you d i d n ' t know? W e l l why would you s i t b e s i d e someone you d i d n ' t know on a bus but not i n your l i v i n g room? Cause i f the seats are a l l f i l l e d up and t h a t s the o n l y p l a c e I can s i t You s i t t h e r e . Is  t h a t OK? Yeah but I don't t a l k t o the s t r a n g e r I j u s t look, but I dontt l i k e s i t t i n g w i t h s t r a n g e r s v e r y much I l i k e s i t t i n g w i t h my f a t h e r .  Lets t a l k a b i t about your neighborhood then? there.  So where abouts do you p l a y  I p l a y i n the s a n d p i l e . So you p l a y i n the park mainly, grass do you p l a y there? You  mean the c i r c l e ,  you know i n the middle  p a r t where there i s  yeah.  Can you t e l l me a l l o f the p l a c e s where you can't go i n your neighborhood? W e l l I'm not allowed t o step over the s e a w a l l and go way down t o the water or e l s e I ' l l f a l l i n , t h e r e ' s t h i s c a r e t a k e r but my f a t h e r l e t s me go but t h i s c a r e t a k e r always screams at me when I go and he's r e a l l y mean man and he doesn't l e t me go i n the p a r k i n g l o t t h i n g cause he t h i n k s I ' l l get r u n over but when I go on my bike and I might go r e a l l y f a s t and t h e r e ' s no c a r s so he t e l l s me to get out cause he t h i n k s t h a t i t s dangerous. Thats  interesting.  Can you go t o  house any time you l i k e ?  No. How come? Cause sometimes shes out and sometimes she's s i c k and sometimes she's e a t i n g h e r supper and h a v i n g a n i c e t a l k w i t h h e r mother. How about.to you l i k e ?  somebody's house you d i d n ' t know c o u l d you go there any time  129.  No cause i f I don't know anybody they'd say get o u t . How come t h e y ' l l say get out? Cause they don't know me v e r y w e l l . Why does t h a t make a d i f f e r e n c e ? Cause they are s t r a n g e r s . How does t h a t make a d i f f e r e n c e i f they are s t r a n g e r s ? I don't know. Say I j u s t walked up t o somebody's house I d i d n ' t know and I j u s t how would they e x p l a i n t o me that I wasn't supposed t o be t h e r e ?  walked,in,  They'd say you shouldn't walk i n t o , people's houses i f you don't know them without knocking because you have t o knock b e f o r e you walk i n i f you have a house,,and o f course everybody has a house, you're allowed to walk i n your own house. Arid what i f I s a i d why do I have t o knock? Because you're n o t supposed cause t h a t s a r u l e . And  t o walk i n t o people's houses without  i f I s a i d w e l l who made up t h a t  knocking  rule?  I don't know. OK How d i d you f i n d out where you c o u l d go and where you c o u l d n ' t go? My mom. How do you know where your house i s ? Cause when I f i r s t moved i n my mommy showed me. Do you have a porch at your house? Yeah. Do you have any g r a s s , where do you s i t o u t s i d e ? My mommy always  spreads a b l a n k e t .  Is i t cement t h e r e o r i s i t grass? Concrete w i t h p r e t t y l i t t l e r o c k s . You know the p l a c e where we were t a l k i n g about b e f o r e , the c i r c l e or c o n c r e t e ?  i s i t grass  130.  Yeah. So who owns t h a t p r o p e r t y , the grass  part?  I don't know. Can  anybody go t h e r e , say k i d s from another  circle?  Yeah, anybody can g o . i n any c i r c l e . So what happens i f somebody who doesn't play? Its Is  live  i n F a l s e Creek comes t h e r e to  okay.  t h e r e a manager there? Yes he l i v e d  near the p a r k i n g l o t , he's a very e v i l man though  Do you t h i n k he would t e l l the other k i d s they c o u l d n ' t p l a y No he doesn't  belong  to i t , i t i s n ' t  h i s property.  Whose p r o p e r t y i s i t then, the people who l i v e It's Is  the people who l i v e t h e r e ' s  i t the people who l i v e Its  there?  there?  property.  i n a l l o f the c i r c l e s  property?  j u s t the one c i r c l e  So why i s i t ok f o r another i t s not t h e i r p r o p e r t y ?  k i d from another  circle  t o come there to p l a y i f  Because um, ... i t s a c i r c l e made f o r everybody, i t s p r o p e r t y t h a t belongs t o people but somebody can come onto i t . What does t h a t mean t h a t i t s t h e i r  property?  I don't know. How do you know which i s your p r o p e r t y and which i s somebody e l s e ' s p r o p e r t y ? Cause i t s near somebody's house i t s t h e i r  property.  What about the park who owns the park? The  person who b u i l t  i t the whole t h i n g i t belongs  t o them.  So can j u s t those workmen come and p l a y t h e r e or can anybody p l a y  there?  Anybody. Why do you t h i n k i t s ok f o r s t r a n g e r s t o p l a y i n the park but not on the p a t i o ?  131.  Because i t s somebody's p a t i o and the park belongs t o anybody. I see, w e l l why does t h a t make a d i f f e r e n c e do you t h i n k ? W e l l i t s somebody's house and you have t o ask b e f o r e you can p l a y on the p a t i o because t h e r e might be something d e l i c a t e and i f you t i p i t over i t might break. So i s t h a t any d i f f e r e n t The p r i n c i p a l s  from the p r i n c i p a l ' s  o f f i c e , i s that h i s property?  o f f i c e i s h i s property? yes.  How owns t h a t p r o p e r t y ? Yes. So can he t e l l  people t o come i n or not to come i n ?  Yes. Why i s t h a t d i f f e r e n t  from the park f o r i n s t a n c e ?  Cause i t s h i s o f f i c e and sometimes he's busy or i n a bad mood he says get out or something l i k e t h a t . Could the workmen of.owhoever owns the park t e l l people t o get out? No. But they s t i l l  own t h a t ?  I know but they never say t h i n g s l i k e that they l e t anybody p l a y i n the park j u s t anybody. Why can the p r i n c i p a l t e l l people they can't come i n but the people at the park why don't they ever t e l l people not t o come i n ? Um... cause the p r i n c i p a l owns h i s o f f i c e and the people don't own the park the people t h a t p l a y there don't own the park. I see w e l l t h e r e must be somebody who owns the park? the workmen. OK so the workmen don't  t e l l people they c a n ' t come i n .  No they c a n ' t . So what I'm wondering i s why they don't? can't play there i f i t s t h e i r property.  Why they don't  tell  the k i d s they  Um i t s h a r d . Yeah i t s a r e a l l y h a r d q u e s t i o n , I don't know the answer t o t h a t  either.  APPENDIX D CONSENT LETTER  APPENDIX E MAP OF FALSE CREEK  DEVELOPMENT  LEGEND: J 1 •3  4 5  Market C o n d d m l n i u me Morkol Rtntel Klwania C l u b senior c i t i z e n s housing B o r t h a O. C l a r t t s Society senior c i t i z e n s housing M o t h e r l a n d s A s s a c i s t i o n non-profit r e n t a l  A  Falee  7  Creek  Croak  0 9  Marina Mews (University H a n d l e appad  Village  CooparQtiwa Condominiums Non-Proilt)  • Condominiumo  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0095466/manifest

Comment

Related Items