Towards an integrative model of place identification: Dimensionality and predictors of intrapersonal-level place preferences

By Orestis Droseltis, Vivian L. Vignoles. 2010

233 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Research on place identity has been hampered by confusion in defining the concept and lacks an integrated account of social and motivational processes underlying people's identification with places. We used multilevel modelling (N = 141) to investigate the dimensionality and predictors of intrapersonal variance in place identification, drawing on psychological and anthropological literatures. Confirmatory factor analysis distinguished three dimensions of place identification (attachment/self-extension, environmental fit, and place-self congruity), and each was predicted by a somewhat different combination of needs and motives (e.g., self-esteem, continuity, distinctiveness, belonging, meaning, security, control, aesthetic pleasure) and social/symbolic links to places (e.g., genealogy, economics, loss, narrative, spiritual significance, special events). Satisfaction of needs and motives partially accounted for effects of social/symbolic links.

Subfields: Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/940487875039e11b5ab9090c23196fa62f6ff131

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Place attachment, identification and environment perception: An empirical study (2010, background): “One recent study was focused on needs and motives that predict place identification, but socio-demographic variables were not included (Droseltis & Vignoles, 2009).”
The Influence of Place Attachment, Ad-Evoked Positive Affect, and Motivation on Intention to Visit: Imagination Proclivity as a Moderator (2020, background): “Advancing current knowledge on place attachment, the study found empirical support to the notion that people can develop emotional connection to a place based on narrative links (e.g., Droseltis and Vignoles 2010; Farnum, Hall, and Kruger 2005; Low 1992; Russell 2012).”
Place attachment: How far have we come in the last 40 years? (2011, unknown): “Other attempts to go beyond the concept of place as ‘ resi dence place ’ include other kinds of meaningful places, such as sacred sites (Mazumdar & Mazumdar, 1993), working places (Milligan, 1998), football grounds (Charleston, 2009), and virtual or imagined places (Droseltis & Vignoles, 2010).”
Place Attachment Enhances Psychological Need Satisfaction (2017, background): “However, and in contrast to some previous research linking place attachment to control (e.g., Droseltis & Vignoles, 2010), place attachment visualization did not enhance participants’ sense of control relative to neutral places.”
The role of place identity and place attachment in breaking environmental protection laws (2010, background): “…is an affective-emotional bond with residence places, whereas place identity is a cognitive mechanism, a component of self-concept and/or of personal identity in relation to the place one belongs to (Droseltis & Vignoles, 2010; Hernández, Hidalgo, SalazarLaplace, & Hess, 2007; Lewicka, 2010).”