Content uploaded by Daniel Stokols
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Daniel Stokols on Nov 15, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Ann. Rev. Psychol. 1978. 29.’253-95
Copyright © 1978 by Annual Reviews Inc. All rights reserved
ENVIRONMENTAL
PSYCHOLOGY
Daniel Stokols
1
Program in Social Ecology, University of California, Irvine, California 92717
~288
At a time when environmentalists and economists are proclaiming that "small is
beautiful" (383, 398), the research literature on human behavior in relation to its
environmental settings continues to expand at a staggering rate. The rapid expan-
sion of environmental psychology can be gauged by the diversity and sheer quantity
of publications that have appeared since Kenneth Craik’s 1973 review of this area
in the present series (92). During the past 5 years (from early 1972 through early
1977), no fewer than ten text books (13, 72, 151,194, 214, 271,306, 307a, 344, 372)
and six edited readers (160, 210, 320, 352, 360, 400) were published, all of which
pertain to the interface between human behavior and the sociophysical environment.
In addition, two multiple volume series designed to communicate significant theo-
retical and methodological advances in the field (15, 16, 41) were established, while
more than 30 "state of the art" monographs and edited volumes on specific topics
within the environment-and-behavior area appeared (5, 18, 33, 39, 42, 82, 89, 96,
102, 115, 116, 135, 157, 172, 176, 179, 212, 259, 264, 276, 304, 305, 307, 315, 318,
324, 388, 389, 408, 415, 426, 433, 443, 453, 490, 494). Also during the same period,
numerous reviews and programmatic analyses of environmental psychology were
published in existing psychological, sociological, and geographical journals (11, 12,
38, 69, 95, 180, 234, 277, 349, 375, 407, 432, 437), as well as in several textbooks
on social psychology (36, 158, 330, 390, 423).
Environmental psychologists have maintained a vigorous level of professional and
interdisciplinary contact as evidenced by the published proceedings of recent Envi-
ronmental Design Research Association (EDRA) meetings (74, 204, 346, 347, 420,
445) and International Architectural Psychology Conferences (71,258). As a fur-
11 would like to thank th.e following persons who offered helpful comments on an earlier
version of this chapter: Irwin Altman, Mark Baldassare, Roger Barker, Sheldon Cohen, Barry
Collins, Kenneth Craik, Joseph DiMento, Gary Evans, Stephen Kaplan, Harold Kelley,
Vladimir Konecfii, Richard Lazarus, Burton Mindick, Lyman Porter, Dru Sherrod, David
Stea, Peter Stringer, Carol Whalen, Allan Wicker, and Jack Wohlwill. Also, thanks are due
Alicia Gomez for her able assistance in the preparation of the manuscript; and a special note
of appreciation to Jeanne Stokols for several constructive readings of the paper and for her
valuable support throughout all phases of this project.
253
0066-4308/78/0201-0253501.00
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
254 STOKOLS
ther indication of the vitality of the field, the existing journal of Environment and
Behavior (470), and newsletters on Man-Environment Systems (133) and Architec-
tural Psychology (270) were supplemented by the founding of a new journal entitled
Environmental Psychology and Nonverbal Behavior (269). Moreover, the American
Psychological Association (APA) established a Task Force on Environment and
Behavior in 1974, which compiled an inventory of environment-behavioral research-
ers2 and prepared a comprehensive report on curriculum and research developments
in the environment-and-behavior field (455). The graduate curriculum chapter
this report, as of January 1977, listed more than 60 universities within Canada, the
United States, and Great Britain which provide either formal or informal graduate
training programs in various subspecialities c.f human-environment studies (137).
And as further testimony to the growing interest among psychologists in environ-
mental research, APA now incorporates a formal division (Division 34) of"Popula-
tion and Environmental Psychology." This group currently publishes a newsletter
(144), and in March 1977 established a journal entitled Population: Behavioral
Social, and Environmentallssues (428), which will provide a new outlet for research
on population and environmental psychology.
Though it is a simple matter to chart the quantitative growth of environmental
psychology over the past 5 years, an assessment of the scientific quality and coher-
ence of this area is considerably more difficult. A major complexity in this regard
is that the boundaries of the field are not easily delimited. The study of human
behavior in relation to the environment, broadly speaking, would seem to encompass
all areas within psychology, let alone most of the behavioral sciences. To what extent
then does environmental psychology comprise a unique domain of scientific inquiry?
The present review assumes that the substantive concerns of environmental psy-
chology are distinguishable from those of other areas of psychological research in
some important respects, and can be framed within a broad interdisciplinary con-
text. First, in contrast to most subareas of ps2¢chology, environmental psychology
(and in particular, ecological psychology) brings an ecological perspective to the
study of environment and behavior. Accordingly, the environment is construed in
multidimensional, molar terms, and the focus of analysis generally is on the interre-
lations among people and their sociophysical milieu (I 1, 30, 212, 233, 350) rather
than on the linkages between discrete stimuli and behavioral responses (167, 402,
446). It should be noted, though, that much of the research in this field has at-
tempted to isolate physical dimensions (e.g. noise, temperature, space) of the
broader milieu in order to assess their specific." effects on behavior.
Second, environmental psychology places greater emphasis on the utilization of
scientific strategies in developing solutions to communityrenvironmental problems
than do most other areas within psychology.
3 This fusion of "basic" and "applied"
2See also the directory of behavior and design researchers published by the Association for
the Study of Man-Environment Relations (47).
3Community psychology (196, 237, 240) is expliciitly concerned with the development and
evaluation of community intervention strategies, but the emphasis of this field is on the
prevention or reduction of psychological and behavioral disorders at the community level,
rather than on the more general assessment of environment-behavioral relationships.
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 255
perspectives, in the Lewinian tradition (278), is reflected in research on topics such
as social impact assessment (480), perceived environmental quality (96), and urban
stress (168). And third, owing to the complexity of the large-scale, sociophysical
environment and the necessity of approaching it from different levels of analysis,
much of the research in environmental psychology is interdisciplinary in both its
scope and implementation.
In view of the above considerations, the research concerns and strategies sub-
sumed under the rubric of "environmental psychology" (see outline of topical areas
presented below) can perhaps be best represented as parts of an emerging interdisci-
plinary field of environment and behavior, or "human-environment relations" (21,
95, 131). This field encompasses several diverse perspectives on environment and
behavior such as human ecology (331,360, 438), environmental and urban sociology
(76, 151,307, 479, 490), architecture (375), planning (19), natural resources
agement (100, 494), and behavioral geography (172, 216, 433, 453). While closely
related to these areas, environmental psychology diverges from them by placing
relatively greater emphasis on basic psychological processes (e.g. cognition, develop-
ment, personality, learning) and on individual and group (vs societal) levels
analysis.
The present discussion emphasizes the study of environment and behavior from
a psychological perspective. Thus areas such as human ecology, environmental
sociology, and behavioral geography are not given systematic coverage in the ensu-
ing discussion.
ORIGINS AND DIRECTIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PSYCHOLOGY
Among psychologists, scientific interest in the effects of the ecological or "geograph-
ical" environment on people was expressed several decades ago by Koffka (246),
Murray (321), Brunswik (61), Tolman (430), and Chein (80). Yet prior
emergence of environmental psychology during the late 1960s and early seventies
(352, 353), the only systematic attempt among psychologists to chart the ecological
environment and its impact on human behavior was undertaken by Roger Barker
and his colleagues (30, 32, 34)4’5 Most other "environmentally oriented" psycholo-
gists directed their attention away from the molar physical environment and toward
either Lewin’s (278) "life space"--the psychological situation as perceived by the
individual (148, 192, 235, 368, 427)--or the microenvironmental "stimuli" of per-
ceptual and operant psychology (167, 402).
During the past decade, the "doomsday" predictions of demographers (128, 303),
the shrinkage of natural resources (including funding opportunities), and the dete-
4Additional historical treatments of environmental psychology are provided by Altman (11),
Canter & Stringer (72), Smith (404), Stokols (415), and Willems
5The development of an ecological perspective within sociology was signaled by the estab-
lishment of human ecology during the mid-1920s by Park & Burgess (331). Although human
ecology and ecological psychology are based on similar theoretical assumptions, these areas
have essentially developed in isolation from each other.
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
256 STOKOLS
rioration of environmental quality promptedl widespread concern about the con-
straints of the ecological environment. Sudde.nly psychologists "rediscovered" the
large-scale physical environmental and, in collaboration with architects and plan-
ners, became increasingly involved in studying its impact on behavior.
As psychologists turned their attention to tlhe study of behavior in relation to the
built and natural environment, they encountered several engaging conceptual and
methodological issues that had been left unresolved by the mainstream of behavioral
science. Some of the more crucial of these iss~ues or "gaps" were (a) the lack of
adequate taxonomy of environments (385) which made it difficult to assess the
comparability of behavioral observations gathered in different situations and to
gauge the ecological validity (62) of both laboratory and field studies; (b) the
of alternative theoretical perspectives from which to approach the complex, dy-
namic transactions between people and their everyday settings (save for Barker’s
ecological psychology); and (c) the restricted range of methodologies available
observing the behavior of individuals and groups within naturally occurring settings
(465). Ongoing attempts by psychologists, design practitioners, and other research-
’ ers to confront these issues largely account for the current vitality and directions
¯ of environmental psychology (though environmentalist and societal concerns con-
tinue to play a role in .shaping the course of research in this field).
At present, several trends can be discerned within environmental psychology and
within the environment-and-behavior field at large. First, the interdisciplinary and
problem-oriented nature of the field has fostered a high degree of methodological
eclecticism (307, 334). A creative blend of observational, self-report, math-model-
ing, and simulation strategies has been employed in studying such issues as environ-
mental cognition (115, 212, 315), environmental assessment (96, 302, 490, 494),
human response to environmental stressors (169, 369).
Second, environment-behavioral research reflects an increasing emphasis on the
assessment of ecological validity, or the extent to which phenomena studied in one
situation are representative of those occurring in other settings (62, 464). Recent
studies of human crowding, for example, have been conducted within diverse labora-
tory and naturalistic settings and have emphasized the situation-specific nature of
human reactions to high density (5, 13, 39, 42, 157, 414, 422).
Third, in their efforts to integrate diverse theoretical perspectives, researchers in
the environment-and-behavior field have increasingly combined existing psychologi-
cal theories of cognitive development, personality, interpersonal processes, and
human learning with the assumptions of systems theory (129, 440). Altman’s (12)
"social-unit" approach to the study of environment and behavior, for instance,
provides a synthesis of social psychological th,.~ory and the concepts of equilibrium,
adaptation, stress, and coping. Other theorists (55, 212, 227, 238, 265a, 266, 291,
339, 429, 444) have called for the development of dynamic, "transactional" models
which emphasize the bidirectional relationship between environment and behavior.
Fourth, increasing attention has been paid to the importance of psychological or
"perceived" control over the environment and behavioral freedom as determinants
of human well-being (23, 168, 227, 263, 272, 388, 485). A growing number
laboratory and naturalistic studies (84, 252, 361, 381,393) suggests the existence
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 257
of a~ pervasive human need for environmental control which plays a crucial role in
determining the quality and intensity of people’s reactions to their milieu. But the
relative importance of different dimensions of control (e.g. perceived vs actual
control, over physical vs social features of the environment), as well as cross-cultural
variations in the salience of these dimensions, remains to be examined in future
research.
Fifth, the concept of "behavior-environment congruence" (220, 307a, 456)
becoming increasingly important as a theoretical and environmental design tool
(255, 259, 305, 394, 415). To the extent that personal and cultural mediators
human response to the environment can be identified, it may be possible to develop
criteria for designing environments that are maximally supportive of users’ goals
and activities.
While the eclectic nature of environmental research has, in many instances,
promoted a creative synthesis of approaches, it also has resulted in widespread
confusion and controversy over what should be the major concerns (e.g. "applied"
vs "basic" issues) and theoretical orientation of the field. Environmental psychology
has been racked by repeated arguments among architects, urban planners, and
behavioral scientists as to whether design-oriented or theoretically focused ap-
proaches should be emphasized (11, 21, 95, 354, 419). And among proponents
the latter approach, heated debates have ensued over whether the environment
should be construed in objective (30, 88, 99, 178, 475) or subjective terms (115, 214,
227, 315, 355), and whether the occupants of behavior settings should be viewed as
passive objects or active modifiers of environmental forces (213, 474).
Currently, environmental psychology is comprised of several diverse research
areas which vary widely in their respective positions along the theoretical vs applied
continuum, their conceptualizations of the environment, and their emphases on
alternative modes of human-environment interchange. The rather formidable task
of the ensuing discussion is to assess the independent status of these research, areas,
as well as their present or potential linkages.
TOPICAL AREAS WITHIN ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY
There are a number of possible approaches that might be adopted in attempting to
represent the diverse areas within environmental psychology. At one extreme, these
areas could be viewed simply as an aggregation of unrelated and loosely defined
research concerns whose only commonality is their joint relevance to the issue of
human-environment relations. At the other extreme, they might be construed as
integrated parts of an over-arching theory of environment and behavior--a scientific
paradigm (257) characterized by a high degree of professional consensus regarding
terminology, theory, methodology, and research priorities.
Environmental psychology at the present time appears to be more than an assort-
ment of loosely defined problem areas but less than a comprehensive, coherent
paradigm. Craik (95), for example, has characterized environmental psychology
an array of multiple scientific paradigms, each of which is organized around a set
of exemplary achievements and an agreed-upon agenda of worthwhile puzzles for
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
258 STOKOLS
future research. Areas such as environmental cognition, environmental assessment,
and ecological psychology are viewed as highly coherent domains by virtue of either
their firm grounding in the traditional paradigms of psychological research (e.g.
cognition, development, personality) or their exemplary and novel contributions
(e. g. Barker’s analysis of behavior settings)..As for the interrelations among these
areas, Craik’s analysis suggests that opportunities for "paradigm-merging" exist,
but that the prospects of developing a comprehensive paradigm of human-environ-
ment relations are remote.
The present review, building upon Craik’s (95), will emphasize those areas within
environmental psychology that have achieved a considerable degree of progress and
agreement regarding definitional, theoretical, and methodological matters. As in-
dicated below, the relative coherence of the areas varies, and not all research in the
field is area-specific. Nonetheless, an emph~sis on the more active and focused
research components should provide a reasonably representative view of the field’s
development and current concerns.
At the same time, an attempt will be made to identify certain conceptual continui-
ties or common themes that are beginning to emerge across areas. These themes
suggest several questions for future research whose eventual resolution may provide
the basis for developing a more integrative per~pective on environment and behavior
than presently exists.
MODES OF HUMAN-ENVIRONMENT TRANSACTION
One theme which appears to underlie much of the research in environmental psy-
chology is that of human-environment optim~,.ation (415). The concept of environ-
mental optimization is based on a cyclical, feedback model of human cognition and
behavior (60, 227, 310, 323) and pertains broadly to human transactions with the
sociophysical environment. The optimization notion assumes that people ideally
strive to achieve "optimal environments," or those that maximize the fulfillment of
their needs and the accomplishment of their goals and plans. In actuality, people
are often forced by situational constraints to accept undesirable environmental
conditions, or at best to "satisfice" (399)~i.e. to achieve less than optimal improve-
ments in their surroundings. Although environmental optimization is never realized
in its ideal form, the concept is heuristically u.,;eful in emphasizing the goal-directed
and cyclical nature of human-environment transactions, and in suggesting certain
processes by which these transactions occur.
6
6A distinction can be drawn between adaptation (117) and optimization. Adaptation refers
to people’s attempts (behavioral, cognitive, physiological) to cope with existing environmental
conditions. Optimization involves a more planful and cyclical process whereby individuals not
only adapt to the existing situation, but also opt to :maintain or modify their milieu in accord
with specified goals. Optimization subsumes adaptation but places an equal emphasis on man’s
reciprocal control over the environment. See also Wohlwill’s (474) discussion of adaptation
and adjustment.
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 259
Specifically, the optimization theme suggests that people orient to the environ-
ment in terms of existing information, goals, and expectations; they operate on the
environment in an effort to achieve their goals and maintain desired levels of
satisfaction; they are directly affected by environmental forces (e.g. situational
supports, constraints); and they evaluate the quality of the environment as a context
for future activity and goal attainment. These processes presumably occur within
individuals, groups, and communities. This discussion places greatest emphasis on
person-environment transactions, but also suggests the relevance of optimization
processes to analyses of group- and community-environment transactions.
The above processes can be characterized in terms of two basic dimensions: 1.
cognitive (or symbolic) vs behavioral (or physical)forms of transaction; and 2. active
vs reactive phases of transaction. These dimensions essentially concern the extent
to which cognitive representations (e.g. beliefs, attitudes, cognitive maps) or physi-
cal and social features of the environment (e.g. material objects, other people, rules)
either influence or are themselves modified by the individual. Taken together, these
dimensions yield four modes of human-environment transaction: 1. interpretive
(active-cognitive); 2. evaluative (reactive-cognitive); 3. operative (active-behavioral);
and 4. responsive (reactive-behavioral). The first mode involves the individual’s
cognitive representation or construction of the environment; the second, his evalu-
ation of the situation against predefined standards of quality; the third, his move-
ment through or direct impact on the environment; and fourth, the environment’s
effects on the individual’s behavior and well-being.
In the ensuing discussion, the various modes of human-environment transaction
will be used as a basis for representing some of the major areas of environmental
psychology in terms of their respective emphases. For instance, ecological psy-
Table 1 Modes of human-environment transaction and related areas of research
FORM OF TRANSACTION
Cognitive
aBehavioral
Active
PHASE OF
TRANSACTION
Reactive
In terpretive
Cognitive representation of
the spatial environment
Personality and the
environment
Evaluative
Environmental attitudes
Environmental assessment
Operative
Experimental analysis of
ecologically relevant
behavior
Human spatial behavior
(Proxemics)
Responsive
Impact of the physical
environment
Ecological psychology
aln the present schema, the term "cognitive" refers to both informational and affective
processes.
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
260 STOKOLS
.chology which emphasizes the impact of behavior-setting for~es on people focuses
most heavily on the responsive mode of human-environment interchange, whereas
research on cognitive mapping places much greater emphasis on the interpretive
mode (see Table 1).
One implication of the proposed representation of the field is that most research
areas typically have focused on a single mode (in some cases two or three, but rarely
all four) of human-environment interchange.7 Consequently, most theoretical orien-
tations tend to overemphasize particular aspects of this interchange while ignoring
or downplaying the possibility that the form and directionality of human-environ-
ment relations shift over time in a dynamic and cyclical pattern. Thus some impor-
tant directions for future research are to link, conceptually and empirically, the
various modes of human-environment transaction and to describe their patterns of
occurrence both within and across different kinds of settings.
The proposed categorization of transactional modes is presented simply as a
preliminary, descriptive schema rather than a predictive model. No assumptions are
made about the sequence in which the different modes occur (at times two or more
modes may occur simultaneously) or their relative duration in different situations.
Also, it is recognized that the boundaries between the various modes are not always
clear and distinct (hence the use of dotted rather than solid lines to separate the cells
of the matrix in Table 1). For example, althou~gh attitudes toward the environment
reflect judgments of environmental quality, they also mediate more active cognitive
and behavioral processes. Thus the proposed categorization of research areas is
somewhat arbitrary and at best representative of certain major emphases within
each area.
With these qualifications stated, the following areas of human-environment re-
search will be considered: (a) cognitive representation of the spatial environment
and (b) personality and the environment (interpretive mode); (c) environmental
attitudes and (d) environmental assessment (evaluative mode); (e) experimental
analysis of ecologically relevant behavior and if) human spatial behavior (operative
mode); (g) impact of the physical environment and (h) ecological psychology
sponsive mode). In reviewing each of these areas, an attempt is made to highlight
theoretical and empirical trends, as well as priorities for future research.
Interpretive Mode
COGNITIVE REPRESENTATION OF THE SPATIAL ENVIRONMENT Perhaps
spurred on by the so-called "cognitive revolution" in psychology (107), geography
(172, 432), and other fields, research on human comprehension of the molar environ-
ment has become one of the most active areas within environmental psychology.
Recent work in this area reflects substantial progress in confronting definitional
7Certain research areas within the environment-and-behavior field, such as those represented
by the literature on family planning (145, 326), case studies of the urban planning process (18,
19, 89), and research on the evaluation of social and environmental programs (66, 68, 487)
would seem to encompass all four modes of human-environment transaction as they are
explicitly concerned with successive cycles of environmental optimization.
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 261
issues and in establishing a theoretical context for research. Basic distinctions have
been drawn between environmental cognition, the perceptual, cognitive, and affec-
tive processes by which people come to know the sociophysical environment, and
cognitive mapping (or spatial cognition), a more restrictive category involving those
processes by which people acquire, code, store, recall, and decode information about
the locations and attributes of phenomena within the spatial environment (115, 315).
Also, fundamental spatial cognition (the perception of objects in space) has been
distinguished from macro-spatial cognition (cognitive representation of the molar
environment) (186, 212); and the hypothetical construct "cognitive map" (mental
image of the spatial environment) has been differentiated from more encompassing
"cognitive schemata" (e.g. goals, beliefs, and attitudes) (323, 432),s and from exter-
nalized products or probes of cognitive representations (e.g. sketch maps, repertory
grids, verbal way-finding tasks) (115, 315).
Research on spatial cognition over the past 5 years has become increasingly
anchored in psychological theories of cognitive development and functioning. Hart
& Moore (186) and Siegel & White (397) provided comprehensive analyses of
development of spatial cognition based on the theories of Piaget (342) and Werner
(452), while S. Kaplan (227) presented a conceptualization of cognitive mapping
involving an integration of Darwinian assumptions and Hebb’s (190) neural-net
theory. And in line with the eonstructivist theories of Brunet (60), Kelly (236),
Neisser (323), an increasing emphasis has been placed on the interdependencies
among perceptual and cognitive processes of environmental comprehension (212,
274, 314).
At a methodological level, several important developments can be noted. First,
use of the sketch map as a probe of cognitive processes has been refined in several
respects: (a) techniques for the measurement of relational and locational distortions
in handdrawn maps have been devised (45, 367, 410, 435), though the relative
validity and reliability of these techniques remain to be assessed; (b) control mea-
sures pertaining to graphic ability and spatial aptitude have been added to the
analysis of sketch maps (367); (c) Lynch’s (289) taxonomy of environmental
ments has been elaborated upon as exemplified by recent analyses of landmarks in
terms of their visual and functional salience (2, 110, 146, 201,225, 309); and (d)
progress has been made toward the development of a cartographic mapping lan-
guage (483) and the assessment of its effects on the graphic organization of spatial
knowledge (45). At the same time, the use of sketch maps to assess spatial knowledge
has been supplemented by a wide range of additional techniques including toy
modeling (54, 410), photographic recognition (309), verbal wayfinding tasks (314),
multidimensional and psychophysical scaling of subjective distance estimates, envi-
ronmental ratings and activity patterns (58, 65, 70, 162, 171, 1~84, 251, 327), and
factor analysis of repertory grid and semantic differential responses (185, 205, 418).
8Although aifective processes clearly play a role in spatial cognition, research specifically
pertaining to evaluative dimensions of environmental cognition (e.g. attitudes, preferences)
reviewed in a subsequent section concerning the "Evaluative Mode" of human-environment
transactions.
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
262 STOKOLS
The current literature on spatial cognition reflects a number of substantive em-
phases and some emerging trends. First, the notion that spatial cognition develops
ontogenetically from egocentric to coordinated-reference systems of orientation
(186, 342) has received empirical support in recent studies (2, 146). Second,
microgenetic, or short-term development of spatial cognition has received increasing
research attention, with several studies indicating that heightened familiarity with
an area is associated with more detailed and hierarchically organized sketch maps
(45, 110, 314, 435). An intriguing study by Wolsey, Rierdan & Wapner (472),
however, emphasizes that the microgenesis of cognitive mapping and the form of
successive sketch maps are strongly influenced by significant changes in the individ-
ual’s orientation to the environment (e.g. plans to move to a new area). Third,
variety of personal and cultural variables (sex, socioeconomic level, nationality,
ethnic identity) appear to play an important role in the development and expression
of cognitive mapping abilities (18, 154, 224,, 298, 367, 410), but the possibility
remains that these relationships can be accounted for by underlying covariates such
as mobility patterns (18,489) and relative proximity tO various areas of the environ-
ment (90, 174, 175, 287, 372). And fourth, several studies have combined verbal,
graphic, and behavioral assessments of spatial orientation and generally have found
substantial overlap between these measures (’70, 202, 208, 224, 327, 358).
Priorities for future research include the fu~ther assessment of: (a) sociocultural
factors in spatial cognition (165, 356); (b) the effects of environmental surrogates
and simulation techniques on the development of spatial cognition and behavior
(115, 224, 435); (c) the validity and reliability of verbal, graphic, and behavioral
assessments of environmental orientation (170, 207, 285); and (d) the cognitive
behavioral "spillover effects" (e.g. on creativity, mood, empathy, altruism) of envi-
ronmental simulations and other exercises designed to broaden cognitive mapping
abilities (115). The latter priority suggests the potential design and planning implica-
tions of research on spatial cognition which only recently have been subjected to
empirical assessment (18). Also, the further e~tension of psychological research
various aspects of fundamental spatial cognition, including picture memory (293)
and selective attention (51), to the study of maerospatial cognition remains as
promising avenue for future research.
PERSONALITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT Whereas the study of spatial cogni-
tion emphasizes the processes by which people in general construe the environment,
research on personality and the environment focuses on the unique organization and
expression of these processes within specific individuals. In recent reviews, Craik
(92, 94, 95) noted at least two major thrusts of personality research in environmental
psychology: (a) the conceptualization and measurement of environmental disposi-
tions (personal styles of relating to the everyd~.y physical environment); and (b)
utilization of established personality inventories to predict people’s use and modifi-
cation of the physical environment, as well as its reciprocal impact on them.
Several self-report inventories have been ,developed in recent years to assess
environmental dispositions such as "pastoralism" and "urbanism" (301), "privacy
preference" (296), "thing-person orientation" (282), "sensation-seeking" (496)
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 263
"arousal-seeking" (304, 305) tendencies, and sensitivity to noise (449). In addition,
behavioral and projective measures of "close vs far personal space" have been
employed (6, 91, 114, 118). Some of the findings associated with this research are
that high-arousal seekers react more pleasurably to complex situations than do
low-arousal seekers (305), and that persons who characteristically maintain greater
distance between themselves and others are more likely to experience physiological
stress under conditions of high density (6) and to exhibit task-performance deficits
following exposure to high-density situations (114), than are those who maintain
close distances. While some measures of environmental dispositions have undergone
considerably psychometric evaluation and refinement (296, 301), all of them must
be tested in a wider variety of situations before their predictive and construct validity
can be established.
In attempting to forecast individual behax(ior and experiences with regard to the
environment, environmental psychologists have also utilized more established theo-
ries and measures of personality. For instance, the dimension of internal vs external
(I-E) locus of control (368) has been found to be significantly related to individuals’
engagement in ecologically relevant behavior. Specifically, internals were more
likely to participate in antipollution activities (275, 431) and to implement birth
control methods (3, 290), although at least one recent study failed to find a relation-
ship between I-E and contraceptive success (386). And in a prospective study
Planned Parenthood clinic participants, a measure of future-time perspective (411)
was found to be predictive of individuals’ freedom from unwanted pregnancies
(312).
With regard to the effects of the environment on individual experiences, several
studies indicate that the dimensions of I-E and coronary-prone (Type A) behavior
(497) may mediate the intensity of individuals’ reactions to stressful situations (169,
273), but the reported relationships are highly complex and seem to depend on the
situational context in which they are observed. In short-term laboratory situations,
for example, external individuals as compared to internals required greater interper-
sonal distance between themselves and strangers (118) and were more susceptible
to the experience of "learned helplessness" (388) following exposure to uncontrolla-
ble environmental events (86, 200). However, within longer-term residential situa-
tions, particularly where living conditions were perceived as cramped or
constraining, internals manifested greater interpersonal distance requirements (37)
and lower levels of adjustment and life satisfaction (147) than did externals.
regard to the coronary-prone behavior pattern, preliminary evidence (169, 252)
suggests that Type A (impatient, job-involved, hard-driving) individuals strive
harder to avoid loss of control over the environment, but under conditions of
extreme or prolonged uncontrollability, they tend to relinquish their efforts to
reassert control more readily than their Type B counterparts.
On the whole, the above findings reflect certain gaps in the existing literature and
suggest priorities for future research. First, previous research on personality and the
environment has been guided almost exclusively by trait models of human behavior,
and consequently has failed to consider the situational modifiers of person-environ-
ment relationships (467). A shift of emphasis from trait-centered analyses toward
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
264 STOKOLS
~"interactionist" models (55, 130, 291, 313), in which situational and personal ante-
cedents of behavior are equally emphasized, might provide the basis for a more
adequate understanding of the cross-situational variability in personality-environ-
ment linkages. The crucial dimensions of situations must be identified, however,
before person-by-situation interactions can b~; adequately assessed. The tasks of
dimensionalizing and codifying situations point toward the possible utility of linking
personality-based analyses with other areas of environmental research, such as
ecological psychology, in which attempts have been made to categorize situations
in terms of their behaviorally relevant dimensions (33, 317, 348). In an initial
attempt to link personality and ecological approaches, Eddy & $innett (124) studied
the relationship between assessments of college students’ introversion-extroversion
and their participation in campus behavior settings. Results indicated that students’
selection of settings and preferred activities varied in relation to personal orienta-
tions, with extroverts spending more time in settings offering opportunities for social
contact.
Another priority for future research is the consideration of temporal and develop-
mental mediators of personal orientation toward the environment. The importance
of these factors is suggested by recent evidence that individual preference for envi-
ronmental stimulation (477) and susceptibility to learned helplessness and depres-
sion (241) are related to the complexity and con~rollability of previously experienced
environments; that hospitalization rates among certain clinical groups may be
affected by the "supportiveness" of their home neighborhood (403); and that elderly
persons are more likely to exhibit patterns of "environmental disengagement" (466)
and preferences for lower levels of environmental stimulation (111) than younger
individuals. Further elucidation of the situational and developmental determinants
of personal orientations toward the environment may yield criteria for designing
environments that are congruent with the goals and activities of diverse user groups
(94, 284).
Evaluative Mode
ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDES Evaluation processes, or the ways in which peo-
ple judge the quality of their surroundings, h~tve been examined most directly in
research on environmental attitudes and assessment. Like studies of cognitive map-
ping and personality, those pertaining to environmental attitudes and assessment
have investigated people’s internal (cognitive/affective) representations of the envi-
ronment. But the latter studies have been more explicitly concerned with the evalu-
ative and informational content of environmental perceptions, and with the role that
these perceptions play in prompting behavioral attempts to improve the environ-
ment.
Research on environmental attitudes (i.e. tendencies to respond favorably or
unfavorably to one’s milieu) has focused on two major issues: (a) public attitudes
and knowledge regarding environmental problems (e.g. pollution, depletion of re-
sources); and (b) the degree of consistency among individuals’ attitudes, beliefs,
behavior relevant to the improvement of environmental conditions. Investigations
of the first issue generally have employed survey research methods to assess public
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 265
opinion about the environment and to identify the socioeconomic and demographic
correlates of environmental concern. Maloney, Ward & Braucht (292), for example,
developed and refined a 45-item questionnaire to measure individuals’ ecological
attitudes and knowledge. Other investigators, utilizing data from national opinion
polls, have documented the upsurge of public concern about environmental prob-
lems (especially in the United States) during the mid-1960s (132, 281), and
recently, the increased resistance to environmental reforms voiced by certain seg-
ments of the population (9, 120, 398). The findings from both national and regional
surveys conducted in the United States further suggest that environmental concern
is most pronounced among people who are liberal and activist in their political
orientation (119, 245), highly educated, and affluent (281, 311). Affluent individuals
with vested interests in pollution-causing industries, however, are more likely to
oppose rather than support proenvironmental reforms (10, 281).
During acute energy crises and resource shortages, expressions of environmental
concern have been accompanied by increased conservationist behavior (98, 281).
Nonetheless, most individuals (even those concerned about environmental quality)
have expressed a general unwillingness to maintain reduced levels of resource con-
servation on a permanent basis (98, 281,329). The discrepancy between environ-
mental concern and individuals’ reluctance to curb their consumption of resources
has been attributed by some researchers either to mistaken beliefs or to insufficient
knowledge about environmental problems. Donohue, Olien & Tichenor (113) found
that people are overly optimistic about the ability of government and industry to
solve current environmental problems. And a survey of ecological knowledge con-
ducted in Britain, Hungary, and Yugoslavia (254) revealed that most respondents
were unaware of the causes and health-related effects of atmospheric pollutants.
Also, research conducted by Heberlein (191) suggests that people are more likely
to engage in ecologically responsible behavior when they are knowledgeable about
the human consequences of pollution.
The degree of consistency among environmental attitudes, beliefs, and behavior
has been examined in both correlational and experimental studies, many of which
have been based on social psychological theories of attitude change. For instance,
Crawford (97) and Davidson & Jaccard (103) examined the relationships between
contraceptive attitudes, beliefs, and behavior in terms of Rosenberg’s (363) affective-
cognitive consistency theory and Fishbein’s (153) model of behavioral intentions,
respectively. Generally these studies found that the perceived consequences or
beliefs about birth control were significantly correlated with attitudes toward con-
traception, intentions to engage in contraceptive behavior, and reported contracep-
tive use. A number of quasi-experimental studies also have been conducted in recent
years (22a, 209, 447). In one such study, individuals’ attitudes toward the Sierra
Club were predictive of their willingness to join or support the club five months later
(447). In other investigations, workers’ attitudes toward recycling were predictive
of their behavioral compliance with an experimental waste-paper sorting program
sponsored by their company (209); and an environmental education program was
found to promote conservation behavior among fifth-graders over a 2-year period
(22a).
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
266 STOKOLS
The future development of research in this :area is likely to be facilitated by its
integration with other paradigms and perspectives in environmental psychology.
Attitudinal research has been widely utilized in ~he contexts of environmental design
and assessment (see next section), but the potential linkages of this research with
other approaches, including ecological psychology and operant analyses of proenvi-
ronmental behavior (see relevant sections below), have not been explored. For
example, the combination of behavior-setting (29) and attitudinal surveys would
yield a more comprehensive assessment of the interplay between environmental
attitudes and behavior than would the use of either approach by itself. Also, infor-
mational and persuasive appeals might be effectively combined with reinforcement
strategies to promote ecologically responsible behavior among community members
(87). In the context of transportation planning, "market segmentation" techniques
based on attitudinal surveys have been used to identify automobile commuters who
would be most responsive to incentives for joining car pools (206) or for riding buses
(357). These studies point toward the development of informational and incentive
programs to promote ecological well-being that would be tailored to the needs,
abilities, and preferences of specific community groups. Additional directions for
research include the further analysis of attitude-behavioral consistency in relation
to environmental issues (63, 447), and the development of transactional theories
(238) which emphasize the reciprocal relationship between environmental attitudes
and behavior.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Research on environmental assessment is con-
cerned not only with people’s attitudes toward their present surroundings, but also
with their preferences regarding the shape of future environments. A basic assump-
tion of this research is that people judge the adequacy of existing or potential settings
in terms of predefined standards of environme, ntal quality (96, 415, 427). To the
extent that these standards are made explicit, the design of behaviorally supportive
environments can be facilitated.
The expansion of assessment research in recent years coincides with increased
public concern over environmental deterioration (see preceding section) and with
the passage of legislation in various countries (e.g. the 1969 National Environmental
Policy Act in the United States and the 1971 "]?own and Country Planning Act in
Britain) requiring the evaluation of proposed environmental changes in terms of
their potential community impact. The major thrusts of assessment research can be
grouped according to their respective emphases on physical, social, or sociophysical
dimensions of the environment. Physical assesstnents, for example, have focused on
the perceived quality of buildings (I, 199), landscapes (17, 100, 222, 493, 494),
of air, water and noise (49, 77, 96). Social assessments have focused on the interper-
sonal "climate" within organizational and institutional settings (163, 166, 211, 217,
317, 318). And sociophysical assessments have involved appraisals of neighborhood
and housing quality (64, 89, 294, 307a, 328, 403, 491), as well as forecasting
community impacts resulting from technological and social interventions (52, 75,
478, 480).
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 267
In addition to categorizing and selecting environmental dimensions for study,
assessment researchers have developed and compared various means of presenting
environmental displays (e.g. simulations) and of measuring observers’ evaluative
responses. Also, investigators have begun to examine the complex, interactive effects
of setting properties, measurement techniques, and observer attributes on judgments
of environmental quality (20, 93, 96). Substantial progress has been made in the area
of environmental simulation. McKechnie (302) developed a useful typology
simulations distinguishing among those that are static (e.g. photograph) vs dynamic
(e.g. movie), and concrete (e.g. scale model) vs abstract (e.g. computer modeling
environmental impacts). Much of the research on assessment of buildings and
landscapes has utilized static simulations, such as color photographs, and suggests
that observers’ responses to such displays are moderately predictive of their on-site
reactions (100, 199, 392, 495).
Concurrently, dynamic simulations have been developed to study people’s reac-
tions to urban and rural landscapes (1, 20, 26, 228, 435). One such project (20)
equipped with a computer-guided video camera which provides simulated tours (via
TV monitor and videotape) through a scale-model neighborhood. Preliminary data
from this project indicate a high degree of Correspondence between observers’
evaluations of the simulated and actual tours (93, 302). Another study utilized
mm films of beach areas in conjunction with tape recordings of ambient sounds to
simulate an oceanfront setting (26).
The development of dynamic simulation procedures has been accompanied by
additional methodological innovations. First, semantic differential measures of per-
ceived environmental quality (1, 199) have been supplemented by a wide array
behavioral and perceptual techniques, including Q-sort and paired comparison tasks
for the assessment of scenic quality (198, 495), and psychophysical scaling proce-
dures for the judgment of noise, temperature, air quality, and landscape value (26,
49, 77). Also, behavioral-mapping procedures (215) have been used to assess occu-
pants’ reactions to residential environments (44, 203, 491), playgrounds (189)
specialized work settings (197, 488).
A second methodological trend reflected in recent research is the systematic
sampling of different respondent groups. The data from this research suggest, for
example, that inhabitants tend to rate their surroundings more favorably than
visitors (1); that environmental design specialists and nonexpert groups of compara-
ble income and social status are quite similar in their appraisals of landscape quality
(495); and that adolescents and young adults are more critical in their evaluations
of urban beach areas than middle-age people (26).
At present, there appear to be at least two major gaps in environmental assess-
ment research. First, the work in this area has been predominantly atheoretical. As
Weinstein (450) and Wohlwill (473) have noted, there has been an overemphasis
the construction of empirically derived models of preference (i.e. factor analyses,
multiple regression procedures) and too little attention paid to the development of
theory. Exceptions to this trend include Wohlwill’s (473) extension of Berlyne’s (50)
theory of aesthetics to the realm of environmental assessment, and S. Kaplan’s (225)
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
268 STOKOLS
model for the prediction of landscape preference. These theories are useful in that
they suggest critical determinants of environmental preference (e.g. complexity,
coherence, mystery) and may help to explain the observed relationship between
perceived environmental quality and variables such as naturalism (229, 494), land-
use compatibility (198), familiarity, and spaciousness (222). To predict the general-
izability of these relationships across different settings, however, it will be necessary
to extend current models through the development of a theoretically based tax-
onomy of environments.
A second major gap in assessment research is the lack of data concerning the
relative validity of different simulation and measurement procedures (99). Obtaining
validity data will require the incorporation of multiple forms of measurement in
assessment studies (334) and the systematic comparison of alternative displays,
respondents, and response criteria (96, 450, 47!t). Along these lines, a recent experi-
ment (150) found that observers’ perceptions of room size and crowding varied
significantly under three different modes of environmental display (actual room,
video tape, scale model).
As these problems are resolved, environmental assessment strategies should
become increasingly important in the contexl: of community planning. Potential
applications of research in this area include: (a) the incorporation of Perceived
Environmental Quality Indices (PEQIs) as a standard component of environmental
impact analyses (96, 478, 480); (b) the use of social climate scales to gauge
psychological impact of architectural interventions (203, 461); and (c) the use
environmental simulation procedures in prediicting users’ response to alternative
future environments (20, 302). Finally, the unexplored relationships between cogni-
tive mapping processes, personality variables, and environmental preference suggest
several opportunities for "cross-paradigm" re.,;earch.
Operative Mode
EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF ECOLOGICALLY RELEVANT BEHAVIOR
While the above areas of research emphasize interpretive and evaluative processes
in human-environment transactions, the four remaining sections focus on the ways
in which people physically modify or respond to their surroundings. Until recently,
environmental psychologists had given very li~;tle attention to the consequences of
human activity in the environment (e.g. litter, pollution, resource scarcities) or
those behaviors that produce or eliminate such products (88,434). The relative lack
of "product-oriented" studies (88) has been in marked contrast to what some
observers (99) view as an overabundance of research focusing on the role of psycho-
logical processes in mediating environment-behavior relationships. Within the past
few years, efforts to redress this imbalance have yielded one of the newest areas
within environmental psychology, namely, the behavioral analysis of environmen-
tal/ecological problems. The conceptual and methodological underpinnings of this
area are derived primarily from Skinnerian (402) learning theory’and the techniques
of applied behavioral analysis (24), but also reflect the concerns of environmental
assessment research. Further integration of these perspectives may eventually lead
to significant extensions of the operant paradigm in psychology. As a step in that
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 269
direction, Willems’s (462) critique of behavioral technology from an ecological point
of view highlights the pitfalls (e.g. unintended side effects) of behavioral interven-
tions that are too narrowly conceived and illustrates the advantages of linking
operant perspectives with those of ecological psychology and environmental assess-
ment.
Comprehensive reviews of empirical work in this area have been provided by
Cone & Hayes (88) and Tuso & Geller (434). As these authors note, a combination
of within- and between-subjects experimental designs has been used to assess the
behavioral dimensions of two major community problems: environmental degrada-
tion and resource management. Overall, the findings from this research clearly
indicate that environmental problems can be reduced through behavioral modifica-
tion strategies. Littering, for example, has been decreased in various settings through
antilitter prompts [e.g. printed messages on disposable materials (164)] and
providing rewards for the proper disposal of trash (81, 188,247, 345). Also, prompt-
ing and reward strategies have been implemented to promote newspaper recycling
(288, 359), the use of public transportation systems (141-143), and energy conserva-
tion in private households (187, 248, 468, 469).
As for the relative impact of alternative interventions, the provision of cash
rewards or special privileges on a response-contingent basis appears to be the most
potent means of encouraging proenvironmental behavior (141, 187), whereas the
mere dissemination of information (e.g. energy conservation manuals) has been the
least effective strategy (187, 248). Moreover, in the absence of material contingen-
cies, social praise (384) and the provision of verbal or written feedback to families
about their rate of electricity usage (187, 248, 387, 468, 469) have been moderately
effective in reducing levels of energy consumption. The independent effects of re-
ward and feedback on patterns of energy use have been demonstrated both within
self-selected (volunteer) and randomly chosen households (187).
If these and related experimental findings are to be implemented at a community
level, then several practical and theoretical issues must be addressed in future
research. First, unlike short-term demonstration studies, community interventions
must be cost-effective. Possible strategies for developing economically feasible pro-
grams are suggested by (a) the proven impact of social reinforcement and feedback
on conservation behavior; (b) evidence that intermittent levels of reinforcement may
be as effective as continuous schedules in promoting proenvironmental behavior
(108, 247); (c) successful development of automated and remote reinforcement
systems (345); and (d) current efforts to pretest community interventions via simula-
tion procedures (143).
Second, criteria for defining acceptable levels of environmental quality and energy
consumption must be derived largely from nonbehavioral or "reactive" studies (88)
incorporating attitudinal, perceptual, and physiological measures. Also, preinter-
vention assessment of perceived environmental quality (96) might make proposed
programs more congruent with citizens’ needs and ultimately more acceptable to
them. Third, the extension of an ecosystems perspective (419, 462) to the design
behavioral interventions might help to avoid certain desirable outcomes such as the
reinforcement of trash production (78) or the promotion of bus ridership among
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
270 STOKOLS
pedestrians rather than automobile drivers (142). Finally, the effectiveness of small-
scale experimental interventions in promoting environmental quality and resource
conservation suggests the value of approaching other environmental problems, such
as overpopulation (492), from an applied beh,’Lvioral perspective.
HUMAN SPATIAL BEHAVIOR The central concern ofproxemics (181,406) is the
manner in which people use space as a means ~gf regulating social interaction. This
issue has been examined in relation to at least four basic phenomena: (a) privacy,
the control of others’ access to oneself; (b) personal space, the maintenance of an
intrusion-resistant zone around oneself; (c) territoriality, the personalization, own-
ership, and defense of areas and objects; and (d) crowding, the desire for reduced
contact with others arising from spatial and/or social interferences.
9
The quantitative growth of proxemic research is reflected in recent literature
reviews, one of which (13) cites over 200 empi.rical studies of personal space as
1975, while another (422) reviews nearly 100 ,,;tudies of human crowding, most
which were completed during 1974-76. This prodigious research effort has been
accompanied by several conceptual developments. First, attempts have been made
to refine existing proxemic concepts, to develop new ones, and to examine their
interrelationships. For example, the differences between personal space and terri-
tory, and between animal and human territoriality, have been considered (13, 126);
physical density has been distinguished from the experience of crowding (13, 109,
134, 413, 436); and the concept of "group space," an analogue of personal space,
has been developed (243, 244). At the same time, the conceptual linkages between
privacy, territoriality, personal space, and crowding have been emphasized (13, 139,
336). Altman’s (13) model of proxemic behavic,r, for example, views personal space
and territoriality as "boundary-regulation" mechanisms designed to maintain a
balance between desired and achieved levels of privacy, and crowding as an experi-
ence in which desired privacy exceeds achieved privacy.
Second, recent analyses (13, 39, 126, 336, 424) place greater emphasis on the
cognitive, psychological, and social underpinnings of human spatial behavior than
did earlier biologically oriented theories 081). The dimension of "perceived con-
trol" over the environment (23, 168, 272, 388), for instance, has become a central
unifying concept in contemporary formulations of spatial behavior (295, 361,362,
393, 394, 396, 414).
Additional conceptual and methodological developments include greater atten-
tion to the situation-specificity of proxemic p]henomena (230, 336, 414, 481), in-
creased methodological eclecticism in studying these phenomena (13, 39), and
preliminary tests of the design implications of spatial research (42, 104, 109, 136,
9The conceptualization of crowding as a stressfttl experience suggests that this area of
research might have been reviewed more appropriately in the section on environmental stres-
sots (see below). The discussion of crowding in the cc,ntext of proxemics, however, reflects the
shift in emphasis in recent research from the behavioral effects of high density per se to the
development of a comprehensive model of human spatial behavior in which individuals’
attempts to regulate privacy and personal space are of central importance.
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 271
325, 377, 394, 408, 417). Specific developments pertaining to privacy, personal
space, territoriality, and crowding are briefly noted below. More thorough discus-
sions of these trends can be found in the review articles cited under each topic.
Privacy Three major conceptualizations of privacy have been proposed (13, 239,
261). Kelvin’s (239) model defines privacy as the perceived limitation of others’
power over oneself. This is distinguished from isolation, the lack of social relations
imposed upon, rather than chosen by, the individual. The analysis developed by
Laufer, Proshansky & Wolfe (261) emphasizes the psychological functions of pri-
vacy as they emerge throughout the life cycle and are affected by situational factors.
Research derived from this model indicates age-related shifts in people’s ability to
define privacy (482) and the impact of institutionalization on children’s privacy
experiences (481). Altman’s (13) boundary-regulation model focuses on behavioral
strategies used to maintain desired levels of privacy. The relationship between
privacy-regulation capabilities and the well-being of institutionalized elderly persons
has been examined by Pastalan (333), while individual differences in preferences for
privacy have been assessed by Marshall (296). Additional developments in this area
are reviewed by Margulis (295).
Territoriality Recent analyses have emphasized the cognitive and social-organiza-
tional functions of human territoriality rather than its biological (reproductive and
survival-related) aspects (13, 126, 324, 425). A classification of territories based
their association with primary, secondary, and reference group functions was devel-
oped (13). Empirical findings indicate a positive correlation between occupants’ use
of territorial markers and their degree of attachment to an area (125, 183), reduced
fear of crime (335), and respect of proprietary rights by outsiders (46). Other studies
have examined the situationally determined relationship between social dominance
and territorial behavior (106, 424). Design principles have been derived from theo-
ries of territoriality (13, 325) but have received only preliminary empirical assess-
ment (104, 324). [See (13, 126) for detailed reviews.]
Personal space According to Argyle & Dean’s (22) equilibrium theory, desired
levels of involvement with others are maintained through a delicate interplay of
verbal and nonverbal behaviors. Given a comfortable level of intimacy, changes in
one behavioral component (e.g. eye contact) will prompt compensatory changes
along other dimensions (e.g. interpersonal distance). While some studies have found
evidence of compensation (337, 382), others have observed either reciprocal (57)
equivocal relationships (4, 73, 371) between eye contact and distance. Recently
Patterson (336) proposed that the behavioral consequences of increased intimacy are
mediated by arousal and emotional labeling. Thus the occurrence of either compen-
satory or reciprocal responses may depend on the perceived meaning of the ap-
proacher’s behavior. "Inappropriate" proximity with strangers, for example, has
been found to induce both physiological (308) and self-reported (127) arousal.
Hall’s (181) theory of spatial zones and his emphasis on cultural antecedents
personal space have received substantial empirical support (14, 182). Ethnicity,
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
272 STOKOLS
however, has been found to interact with such variables as age, gender, and family
income in predicting spatial behavior (218). A variety of other individual, interper-
sonal, and situational determinants of personz, l space (e.g. physical attractiveness,
degree of acquaintance, standing vs sitting) have been examined (14), but the influ-
ence of architectural factors on personal space (376) has received little empirical
attention. [See (140, 280, 339, 424) for additional reviews.]
Crowding Substantial progress has been made in refining terminology and in devel-
oping preliminary theoretical analyses of crowding. The distinction between physi-
cal density and the experience of crowding, mentioned above, as well as analyses
of density in terms of its spatial, social, and perceptual components (25, 37, 40, 54a,
161,283, 355, 373, 378, 439) exemplify definitiional refinements. Recent theoretical
analyses reflect both physicalistic and psychological conceptions of crowding. Ac-
cording to the "density-intensity" model (157), density serves merely to intensify the
prevailing quality of social situations. Alternatively, psychological theories posit
that high density can at times independently impair the quality of situations by
promoting behavioral constraints (351, 380, 412, 421), stimulation overload (42,
109, 134, 373), reduced privacy (13), overmanning (457, 458), and negatively
belled arousal resulting from personal space violation (138, 336, 484). The assump-
tion that crowding involves a reduction of personal control over the environment
is central in psychological analyses (361,362, 393, 414), but the conditions under
which reduced spatial or social control are most salient have not been identified. A
recent typology suggests that crowding experiences will be most intense and difficult
to resolve in primary (psychologically important) vs secondary environments and
in the context of perceived threat to persona]l security (413, 414). The predictive
utility and design implications of the above theories, however, remain to be estab-
lished empirically.
Significant empirical developments include the findings that short-term exposure
to high density (with group size held constant) can heighten physiological arousal
(6, 7, 138, 308) and can induce both immediate and delayed task-performance
deficits (114, 138, 195, 338, 374, 393, 484). Negative effects of prolonged residential
density on health and behavior have also been observed, particularly among
confined or low-status groups (8, 37, 42, 54a, 101,105, 299, 361
). In addition, recent
studies suggest that sex differences in reactions to crowding may be mediated by
temporal and social factors, with females responding more positively to proximity
with strangers in short-term situations (159, 2;64, 416) and more negatively under
conditions of prolonged residential density (8), though normative factors may
more critical than duration of exposure in mediating these differences (231). Also,
the relationship between personality and crowding sensitivity appears to be time-
dependent (37). [See (39, 84, 152, 262, 380, 4.22) for additional reviews.]
Responsive Mode
HUMAN RESPONSE TO THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT Research in this area
has focused on the behavioral and health consequences of (a) environmental stres-
sors (e.g. noise, heat, pollution, high density), (b) the built environment (e.g.
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 273
housing, urban design), and (c) the natural environment (e.g. climate, topography).
Theoretical and empirical work on stress has been most extensive and therefore
receives greatest emphasis in this section.
Environmental stressors Environmental conditions operate as stressors to the ex-
tent that they tax or exceed the individual’s adaptive resources (265, 389). Several
studies have documented the direct effects of stressors such as noise (84, 168),
extreme temperature (35, 177, 369), air pollution (319, 340, 370, 441), and
density (see preceding section) on human physiology and behavior. Noise, for
example, has been found to be associated with elevated blood pressure (219), adrena-
lin secretion (155), skin conductance (59, 168, 256), and impaired task performance
(168, 396, 448).
The major thrust of recent research has been to identify cognitive and psychologi-
cal factors that mediate the impact of stressors on people. The research of Glass &
Singer (168) has been particularly important in identifying the role of predictability
and perceived control as determinants of response to stressors. Specifically, their
research indicates that although people are able to adapt (physiologically and behav-
iorally) to high-intensity noise in the short run, they frequently exhibit post-noise
"aftereffects" such as decreased tolerance for frustration and impaired task perfor-
mance. Furthermore, when noise is predictable (periodic) or perceived as controlla-
ble, its negative aftereffects are reduced.
The differential effects of controllable and uncontrollable stressors have been
documented in numerous laboratory and field investigations (23, 84, 272, 388).
lab settings, uncontrollable noise has been found to produce greater aggression
(112), less helping behavior (395), and lower tolerance for frustration (168,
than controllable noise. Similarly, exposure to high density resulted in fewer nega-
tive aftereffects when subjects believed that they were free (vs not free) to leave
crowded room if they so desired (393). Also, the detrimental impact of prolonged
exposure to environmental stressors has been demonstrated in field investigations
of the relationship between highway noise and reading ability in children (85),
railroad commuting and physiological stress among urban workers (401), and the
controllability of individuals’ life events and their susceptibility to coronary heart
disease (169).
Several theories have been proposed to account for the relationship between
perceived control and response to stressors (23, 83, 168, 297, 388, 396). Cohen’s (83)
theory of attentional overload assumes that individuals’ capacity for attention is
limited (see also 221) and that uncontrollable or unpredictable stimuli require more
extensive monitoring (due to their novelty, complexity) than controllable events.
The former stimuli are, therefore, more likely to deplete attentional resources and
to result in impaired task performance and interpersonal relations. Consistent with
this theory, Wohlwill & Heft (476) found children from noisy homes to be less
proficient on a selective attention task and less sensitive to auditory distraction than
children from quieter homes. And in two related studies, pedestrians in noisy areas
were observed to be less helpful to strangers than those in quieter areas (250, 297).
These findings, while subject to arousal-based (122) as well as cognitive interpreta-
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
274 STOKOLS
tions, are at least consistent with the notion that excessive environmental inputs
result in decreased attentiveness to others’ needs.
Seligman’s (388) theory of learned helplessness provides an alternative explan
a-
tion for the beneficial effects of perceived control. Helplessness involves a syndrome
of cognitive, motivational, and emotional di~turbances stemming from repeated
encounters with uncontrollable events. Throu~=,h exposure to such events, the indi-
vidual comes to believe that personal outcome.,~ are independent of his behavior and
consequently reduces his attempts to influence the environment. Experimental stud-
ies indicate that personal expectancies for control (200, 485) and the extent to which
one attributes lack of control to either task difficulty or insufficient effort (121, 24 I,
486) are crucial determinants of susceptibility to learned helplessness. Moreover, the
amount of exposure to uncontrollable events (252, 361, 365), the aversiveness
these events (48), and the psychological importance of the situation (365, 485)
been identified as important mediators of helplessness effects. Two recent studies of
the institutionalized aged (260, 381) further .,;uggest that helplessness may be re-
duced and possibly reversed by providing persons greater control over various
aspects of their environment (e.g. the predictability of visitors).
The existing literature, while documenting 1:he importance of cognitive and psy-
chological determinants of stress, reveals several conceptual and empirical gaps.
First, most studies have been guided by a single theoretical perspective and have not
been designed to assess the relative validity of alternative models [see (396) for
notable exception]. Because the predictions of certain theories are quite similar, it
becomes difficult to isolate rival explanatory mechanisms, especially when some
studies focus on attentional measures, others emphasize motivational indices, and
still others rely on measures of affect and arousal. The use of multiple levels of
measurement and the comparative assessmenl; of alternative theories in future re-
search are prerequisites for developing a more comprehensive understanding of
human stress than presently exists.
Second, the persistence and generalizability of stress responses across situations
have not been adequately examined. The use of postexperimental assessments in
field settings would be crucial in studies attempting to distinguish learned helpless-
ness from temporary states of hyperarousal or attentional fatigue. Longitudinal
research designs also would permit an assessment of broader theoretical issues that
have been virtually ignored in previous research. For instance, what are the potential
costs of perceived and actual control (e.g. frustration arising from disconfirmed
expectancies for control; premature depletion of adaptive resources in the quest for
too much control)? Also, what are the long-term benefits of temporary exposure to
unpredictable or uncontrollable situations? In this regard, transactional theories of
stress (265a, 266) and of human development (444, 452, 454) emphasize the positive
relationship between environmental challenge and personal growth.
Impact of the built environment Several studies have examined the impact of
residential environments on interpersonal relations. The influence of spatial proxim-
ity on friendship patterns, observed earlier by Festinger, Schachter & Back (149),
was corroborated in two recent investigations. In one study, the degree of similarity
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 275
among friends was inversely related to the proximity of their apartments (322).
the other, residential proximity was predictive of both friendly and unfriendly
relations among neighbors (123).
Studies of university housing have assessed the behavioral effects of high- and
low-rise dormitories on students (193). In at least two investigations, high-rise
dorms were associated with less favorable evaluations of social climate (461) and
with lower levels of altruistic behavior (53) than were smaller dorms. Within urban
housing projects, Newman (324) found the size and height of buildings to be jointly
predictive of crime rates. These data were attributed to the limited opportunities for
establishing defensible space in high-rise apartment buildings, although alternative
interpretations of the findings have been offered (334). And on a more positive note,
Weckerle (451) observed high levels of neighboring and residential satisfaction
among the inhabitants of a high-rise singles complex, presumably due to their age
similarity and shared preference for establishing social contact with neighbors.
The impact of interior design on building occupants also has been demonstrated
in several studies (42, 104, 203, 242, 436). Valins & Baum (436) found that
residents of corridor-design dorms were more likely to complain about crowding
and forced interaction than were those living in suite-design dorms, presumably
because the former design provides less shielding from unwanted social contacts.
Other investigations have examined the effects of architectural renovations on resi-
dents of rehabilitative institutions (203, 242). In one study (203), the provision
increased opportunities for privacy through physical remodeling of a psychiatric
ward resulted in decreased passivity and more positive social interactions among
residents.
Additional areas of research include the analysis of environments from a human
factors perspective (332), the effects of traditional and "open" learning environ-
ments on children (79, 82, 253, 255, 366), the effects of housing quality on health
(232), and the impact of residential relocation on the elderly (333, 379).
additional reviews, see (27, 72, 214, 249, 375).]
Impact of the natural environment While much research has been conducted on
landscape assessment (see preceding section on Environmental Assessment), the
behavioral consequences of exposure to elements of the natural environment have
received very little attention. Preliminary evidence suggests that involvement in the
care-taking of plants may be associated with unique psychological and behavioral
benefits (223, 260, 279). In one study (279), the implementation of gardening
grams in low-income housing projects was associated with reduced vandalism and
increased social contact among residents. In another investigation (260), nursing
home residents who were assigned personal responsibility for the care-taking of a
plant exhibited increased alertness and participation in social activities relative to
those who did not assume this responsibility.
Researchers have begun to assess the effects of meteorological variables on behav-
ior, but the findings from this work are quite preliminary and inconsistent (66, 319,
320). Behavioral geographers have examined motivational aspects of outdoor recre-
ation (306a) as well as the impact of perceived natural hazards on human migration
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
276 STOKOLS
patterns (372, 453). Also, the emotional impact of natural and built environments
was conceptualized by Mehrabian & Russell (305) in terms of three basic dimen-
sions: pleasure, arousal, and dominance.
Relative to other areas of the field, research on human response to the natural
environment has been sparse. The development of a theoretical framework for
empirical work in this area, and the derivation of planning criteria from such
research, remain as important priorities for the future.
ECOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY The basic unit of analysis in ecological psychology
is the behavior setting, a recurring pattern of human activity that takes place within
specific time and space boundaries (e.g. colloquium, concert, baseball game).
comparison with other areas of environmental psychology, ecological psychology
places considerably greater emphasis on setting-specific rather than person-specific
determinants of people’s reactions to the environment. The groundbreaking efforts
of Roger Barker and his colleagues (29-32, 34) identified the major features
behavior settings (e.g. action patterns, personnel requirements, physical milieu) and
traced the behavioral and psychological consequences of undermanning, a condi-
tion in which available participants are fewer than the number typically required
to maintain the setting at an optimal level (e.g. three rather than five persons per
team in a basketball game). An important finding of this research was that students
attending small schools (assumed to be more undermanned than large schools) were
more likely to perform leadership and supportive roles in extracurricular activities
and to experience feelings of responsibility and importance than were those enrolled
in larger schools (32).
The conceptualization and measurement of behavior settings have undergone
considerable refinement in recent years. The concepts of "setting capacity" and
"maintenance minimum," proposed by Wicker, McGrath & Armstrong (460) pro-
vide criteria for specifying conditions of under, adequate, and overmanning within
settings, irrespective of the size of the institutions (e.g. schools, churches, hospitals)
in which these settings occur. Also, the distinction between "performer" and "non-
performer" (or staff vs client) roles has permitted an assessment of manning levels
for different groups within the same setting (458, 460). And at a community level
of analysis, Barker & Schoggen (33) developed several innovative measures for
assessing the extent, variety, and productivity of human habitats. One of these
measures, the "urb," is based on the number, occurrence, and duration of a town’s
behavior settings and reflects the range of behavioral opportunities available or "at
hand" to members of a community each year. Another measure, the "productivity
index" of a community, reflects the "person hours" of participation required to
operate and maintain community settings for a one-year period, and the extent to
which inhabitants are engaged in crucial roles (i.e. "claim operations") within those
settings. These and other theoretical refinements evolved from a comprehensive
comparison of an English and an American town involving two year-long behavior
setting surveys, conducted at each locale during 1954-55 and 1963-64.
Recent research in ecological psychology reflects significant empirical and meth-
odological advances. First, the effects of under and overmanning on participants’
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 277
behavior and experiences have been examined experimentally (183a, 341,459). The
findings from this research indicate that members of overmanned groups feel less
needed, less important, and less helpful to their group than do those of undermanned
or adequately manned groups, and that these effects occur with group size held
constant. Second, the influence of manning levels previously observed within schools
and churches has also been found in more recent investigations of hospitals and
rehabilitation centers (409), shopping areas (286), temporary environments in
regions (44), and a national park (458). Third, progress has been made toward
empirical classification of environments based on analyses of data obtained through
community-wide behavior setting surveys (33, 348). Barker & Schoggen (33),
example, suggest that behavior settings and whole communities might be catego-
rized in terms Of the major action patterns or behavioral "genotypes" (e.g. profes-
sional, educational, recreational) found within them.
An important trend reflected in recent studies is the use of behavior setting
surveys in developing habitability criteria, as well as social or physical interventions
designed to improve behavior-environment fit. For instance, Lozar (286) attempted
to increase the number of responsible staff roles within a grocery store to reduce
pilferage and to increase levels of customer-staff interaction. Willems (463) mea-
sured levels of behavioral "independence" and "complexity" among paraplegic
patients to assess their rehabilitative progress and the effectiveness of the therapeutic
setting. Also, Wicker & Kirmeyer (458) installed a queing device at tram stops
Yosemite National Park for the purpose of reducing overmanning and stress among
park visitors. Thus, while earlier conceptualizations of the behavior setting (29, 30)
emphasized the natural "synomorphy" or congruence among its physical and be-
havioral components, more recent analyses have attempted to identify conditions of
inadequate fit between people and their environments, and to develop strategies for
enhancing behavior-milieu synomorphy.
The expanding interface between ecological psychology and environmental design
suggests several intriguing directions for future policy-oriented research, including
(a) the use of manning theory to resolve problems of crowding and congestion
situations where population size cannot be reduced (457); (b) the intentional under-
manning of organizations and institutions to increase their efficiency and productiv-
ity (43, 409); and (c) the enhancement of desired manning levels through
architectural interventions [e.g. the establishment of legible territorial boundaries
and accessible nodes of interaction within settings; see (267, 268, 286)]. Before the
design relevance of ecological concepts and methods can be fully realized, however,
major theoretical questions must be addressed. For example: (a) Under what condi-
tions are settings established, modified, or terminated by their occupants? (b)
the effects of manning conditions vary in relation to personality and cultural factors
(404, 459)? (c) Are the effects of manning mediated by population size, architectural
features, and specific action patterns (286, 341,458)? The resolution of these and
related questions most likely will require a more complete integration of ecological
theory with cognitive and motivational constructs (300, 458), as well as more
extensive laboratory and field experimentation. In addition, the development of a
taxonomy of settings based not only on their modal action patterns, but also on their
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
278 STOKOLS
relative psychological salience for different individuals and groups, would provide
a more adequate basis for designing and evaluating environments than is now
available [See also (405) for an extensive bibliography of research in this area.]
CONCLUSIONS
Research developments over the past 5 years ,demonstrate that environmental psy-
chology is no mere fad of the 1960s--a short-lived product of environmentalist and
political activism. Instead, this field has taken hold both conceptually and empiri-
cally and is now comprised of several active and focused research domains. Each
of these domains is oriented not only to the resolution of environmental problems
but also to the development of a more adequate conceptualization of human-envi-
ronment interchange than presently exists.
The scientific vitality of environmental psychology is reflected in the substantial
theoretical and empirical progress that has been made within many of its major
subareas. Conceptual developments are especially evident in the literature on spatial
cognition, proxemics, stress, and ecological ps,ychology. Research in these areas has
moved beyond simple application of established psychological theories (e.g. of cog-
nitive development, information processing) to the derivation of new concepts and
models pertaining to environment and behavior (e.g. fundamental vs macrospatial
cognition, boundary-regulation processes, the: crowding construct, under vs over-
manning). Furthermore, empirical advances l~tave been made in these areas as well
as in the measurement of environmental dispositions and attitudes, the assessment
of environmental quality, and the analysis of ,ecologically relevant behavior. To be
sure, most of these developments await further validation and refinement. Also,
preliminary research on certain issues (e.g. the impact of the natural environment
on behavior) has been particularly sparse. But on the whole, engaging scientific
questions have been discovered within the major areas of environmental psychology,
and these have prompted considerable theoretical and empirical progress in recent
years.
Though the major research areas of the field are rooted in diverse theoretical
traditions and emphasize different modes of human-environment transaction, a
number of linkages among these areas have been drawn. Such linkages are evident
in the combination of behavior setting analysis with the concerns of environmental
assessment; the analysis of personality variables as they mediate proxemic behavior
and the intensity of stress reactions; and the combined use of cognitive and behav-
ioral mapping strategies in studies of human response to the physical environment.
As for the future, several of the most exciting and promising opportunities for
research can be found at the interface of the major substantive areas of the field (e.g.
the further integration of ecological and operant perspectives on the analysis of
environmentally relevant behavior).
The major research domains of environmental psychology reflect certain common
assumptions or themes which eventually may provide the foundation for a general
theory of environment and behavior. One such theme is the transactional or bidirec-
tional nature of human-enviromnent relations (13, 130, 212, 266, 313, 415). Trans-
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 279
actional views suggest that any attempt to conceptualize the relationship between
environment and behavior must account not only for the effects of the environment
on people, but also for the reciprocal impact of people on their milieu. The related
theme of human-environment optimization suggests that the various modes of
transaction between people and their surroundings (i.e. interpretive, evaluative,
operative, and responsive modes) are organized in relation to prioritized goals and
plans. The optimization theme emphasizes the attempts of individuals and groups
to create environments that are maximally supportive of their goals and activities.
The concepts of transactionalism and optimization are relevant to one of the
major tasks currently facing the behavioral sciences: namely, the development of a
taxonomy of environments (130, 266, 313, 385, 415). Specifically, the personal and
group goals underlying human-environment transactions offer a basis for defining
environments in terms of (a) their salience, or the extent to which they are asso-
ciated with psychologically important goals and plans; and (b) their congruence, or
the extent to which they permit behavioral opportunities for realizing salient goals
/
and plans [see also Michelson’s (307a) notion of intersystem congruence]. In combi-
nation, these dimensions predict environmental quality, an index of the proportion
of salient goals and plans that are supported by a particular environment. For
instance, residential settings are typically highly salient environments that can vary
widely in terms of their congruence and desirability (e.g. high-income housing vs
slum dwelling or prison cell).
The above dimensions of environments are "transactional terms" (265a, 266)
the sense that they reflect the interplay of human and environmental forces. The
salience dimension, for example, emphasizes the range and importance of cognitive
representations associated with a particular setting, whereas the congruence notion
rdtects what Chein (80) referred to as environmental "supports" or "constraints."
The description of settings in transactional terms may extend earlier attempts to
categorize environments either in terms of their behavioral (33, 156, 348) or percep-
tual dimensions (211, 305, 317). By considering the behavioral (or functional)
features of settings in conjunction with their psychological salience, it becomes
possible to move from purely descriptive to predictive taxonomies. For example, the
impact of environmental stressors on people is likely to depend on both the impor-
tance (salience) and controllability (congruence) of the setting in which these stres-
sors occur (see preceding sections on crowding and environmental stressors). ~° And
at a more general level, predicting the generalizability of research findings from one
setting to another may be facilitated by knowing the extent to which the settings
are of comparable salience and congruence.
Future refinement and operationalization of environmental dimensions such as
salience, congruence, and quality may be advantageous at the practical level as well.
Several areas of environment-behavioral research, including urban planning (19,
316), environmental design (82, 264, 375), environmental decision-making (28,
~°In general, it is assumed that environmental conditions will exert greatest impact on people
where situational constraints are inflexible (i.e. where the operative mode of transaction is
restricted) and/or where occupants are of low competence (263, 414, 471).
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
280 STOKOLS
391), and population psychology (145, 326) are explicitly concerned with the cre-
ation of environments that are congruent with occupants’ goals and activities. The
specification and measurement of salient goals; at the community level are prerequi-
sites for designing behaviorally supportive environments and for deriving criteria of
environmental quality (96, 415).
The conceptualization of community planning as a goal-oriented optimization
process raises several questions for future research. For instance: (a) On what
dimensions do people attempt to optimize their environments? (b) Do the salient
dimensions of environmental optimization vary systematirally in relation to the type
of setting considered? (c) What kinds of assessment criteria are appropriate for
measuring optimization processes and their outcomes at individual, group, and
community levels of analysis (66, 68, 442)? (d) What are the appropriate
intervals for assessing optimization cycles within individuals, groups, communities
(68)? (e) To what extent can competing goals be optimized both within and between
systems (56, 343)? 0’) In what ways can empirical information concerning human-
environment optimization be translated into guidelines for environmental design?
Analysis of these issues will require an integration of the concepts and tools of
environmental assessment with those from other areas of the field. Thus future
research in environmental psychology is likely to reflect a consolidation of theory
and data within its major substantive areas, as well as the further development of
cross-paradigm research (95) as a basis for community planning and design.
Literature Cited
1. Acking, C.-A., Kuller, R. 1973. Presen-
tation and judgment of planned envi-
ronment and the hypothesis of arousal.
See Ref. 346, pp.72-83
2. Acredolo, L. P., Pick, H. L., Olsen, M.
G. 1975. Environmental differentiation
and familiarity as determinants of chil-
dren’s memory for spatial location. Dev.
Psychol. 11:495-501
3. Adler, N. E. 1974. Factors affecting con-
traceptive use. Presented at 82nd Ann.
Cony. APA, New Orleans
4. Aiello, J. R. 1977. A further look at
equilibrium theory: Visual interaction
as a function of interpersonal distance.
Environ. Psychol. Nonverb. Behav. 1:
122-40
5. Aiello, J. R., Baum, A., eds. 1978 Resi-
dential Crowding and Design. New
York: Plenum. In press
6. Aiello, J. R., DeRisi, D. T., Epstein, Y.
M., Karlin, R. A. 1977. Crowding and
the role of interpersonal distance prefer-
ence. Sociometry 40. In press
7. Aiello, J. R., Epstein, Y. M., Karlin, R.
A. 1975. Effects of crowding on elec-
trodermal activity. Sociol. Symp. 14:
43-58
8. Aiello, J. R., Epstein, Y. M., Karlin, R.
A. 1977 Field experimental research on
crowding. Presented at Ann. Conv.
EPA, New York
9. Albrecht, S. L. 1976. Legacy of the
environmental movement. Environ.
Behav. 8:147-68
10. Althoff, P., Grieg, W. H. 1974. Envi-
ronmental pollution control policy-
making: An analysis of elite perceptions
and preferences. Environ. Behav. 6:
259-88
1I.. Altman, I. 1973. Some perspectives on
the study of man-environment phenom-
ena. Rep. Res. Soc. Psychol. 4:109-26
12. Altman, I. 1976. Environmental psy-
chology and social psychology. Pers.
Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2:96-113
13. Altman, I. 1975. The Environment and
Social Behavior. Monterey, Calif:
Brooks-Cole. 256 pp.
14. Altman, I., Vinset, A. M. 1977. Per-
sonal space: An analysis of E. T. Hall’s
proxemics framework. See Ref. 16. In
press
15. Altman, I., Wohlwill, J., eds. 1976. Hu-
man Behavior and Environment." Ad-
vances in Theory and Research, Vol. I.
New York: Plenum. 301 pp.
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 281
16. Altman, I., Wohlwill, J., eds. 1977. Hu-
man Behavior and Environment: Ad-
vances in Theory and Research, Vol. 2.
New York: Plenum. In press
17. Anderson, T. W., Zube, E. H., Mac-
Connell, W. P. 1976. Predicting scenic
resource values. In Studies in Land-
scape Perception, Publ. No. R-76-L ed.
E. H. Zube, pp. 6-69. Amherst Mass:
Inst. Man Environ. 169 pp.
18. Appleyard, D. 1976. Planning a Plural-
ist City." Conflicting Realities in Ciudad
Guayana. Cambridge, Mass: MIT
Press. 312 pp.
19. Apple:card, D. 1977. A planner’s guide
to environmental psychology: A review
essay. J.. Am. lnst. Plann. 43:184-89
20. Appleyard, D., Craik, K. H. 1974. The
Berkeley Environmental Simulation
Project: Its use in environmental impact
assessment. In Environmental Impact
Assessment." Guidelines and Commen-
tary, ed. T. G. Dickert, K. R. Domeny,
pp. 121-26. Berkeley: Univ. California
Extension
21. Archea, J. 1975. Establishing an inter-
disciplinary commitment. See Ref. 204,
pp. 285-302
22. Argyle, M., Dean, J. 1965. Eye-contact,
distance, and atfiliation. Sociometry
28:289-304
22a. Asch, J., Shore, B. M. 1975. Conserva-
tion behavior as the outcome of envi-
ronmental education. J. Environ. Educ.
6:25-33
23. Averill, J. R. 1973. Personal control
over aversive stimuli and its relation-
ship to stress. Psychol. Bull. 80:286-303
24. Baer, D. M., Wolf, M. M., Risley, T. R.
1968. Some current dimensions of ap-
plied behavior analysis. J.. Appl. Behav.
Anal. 1:91-97
25. Baldassare, M. 1976. Residentialcrowd-
ing in urban America. PhD thesis.
Univ. California, Berkeley, Calif.
260 pp.
26. Banerjee, T., Gollub, J. 1976. The pub-
lic view of the coast: Toward aesthetic
indicators for coastal planning and
management. See Ref. 445, pp. 115-22
27. Barbey, G., Gelber, C. 1973. The rela-
tionship between the built environment
and human behavior." A survey and anal-
ysis of the existing literature. Lausanne,
Switzerland: Fed. Inst. Technol. 410 pp.
28. Barker, M. L. 1974. Information and
complexity: The conceptualization of
air pollution by specialist groups. Envi-
ron. Behav. 6:346-77
29. Barker, R. G. 1968. Ecological Psy-
chology: Concepts and Methods for
Studying the Environment of Human
Behavior. Stanford, Calif: Stanford
Univ. Press. 242 pp.
30. Barker, R. G. 1960. Ecology and moti-
vation. Nebr. Syrup. Motiv. 8:1-48
31. Barker, R. G. 1963. On the nature of
the environment. J. Soc. lssues 19:
17-34
32. Barker, R. G., Gump, P. V. 1964 Big
School, Small School Stanford, Calif:
Stanford Univ. Press. 250 pp.
33. Barker, R. G., Schoggen, P. 1973. Qual-
ities of Community Life. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass. 562 pp.
34. Barker, R. G., Wright, H. F. 1955. Mid-
west and its Children. Evanston, Ill:
Row Peterson. 532 pp.
35. Baron, R. A., Bell, P. A. 1976. Aggres-
sion and heat: The influence of ambient
temperature, negative affect, and a cool-
ing drink on physical aggression. J.
Pers. Soc. Psychol. 33:245-55
36. Baron, R. A., Byrne, D. 1977. Social
Psychology." Understanding Human In-
teraction. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. 656
pp. 2nd ed.
37. Baron, R. M., Mandel, D. R., Adams,
C. A., Griffen, L. M. 1976. Effects of
social density in university residential
environments. J. Pers. Soc. PsychoL 34:
434-46
38. Bass, B. M., Bass, R. 1976. Concern for
the environment: Implications for in-
dustrial and organizational psychology.
Am. Psychol. 31:158-66
39. Baum, A., Epstein, Y., eds. 1978. Hu-
man Response to Crowding. Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum. In press
40. Baum, A., Korman, S. 1976. Differen-
tial response to anticipated crowding:
Psychological effects of social and spa-
tial density. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 34:
526-36
41. Baum, A., Singer, J. E., Valins, S., eds.
1978. Advances in Environmental Psy-
chology. New York: Erlbaum. In press
42. Baum, A., Valins, S. 1977. The Social
Psychology of Crowding." Studies of the
Effects of Residential Group Size. Hills-
dale, NJ: Erlbaum. In press
43. Bechtel, R. B. 1975. The undermanned
future. See Ref. 204, pp. 269-76
44. Bechtel, R. B., Ledbetter, C. B. 1976.
The temporary environment." Cold re-
gions habitability. U.S. Army Corps Eng.
Tech. Rep. 76--10, U.S. Army Cold Re-
gions Res. Eng. Lab., Hanover, N. H.
45. Beck, R., Wood, D. 1976. Comparative
developmental analysis of individual
and aggregated cognitive maps of Lon-
don. See Ref. 315, pp. 173-84
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
282 STOKOLS
46. Becker, F. D. 1973. Study of spatial
markers, d. Pers. Soc. PsychoL 26:
439-45
47. Beckman, R., Conway, D., Esser, A.
H., Preiser, W., eds. 1974. International
Directory of Behavior and Design Re-
searchers. Orangeburg, NY: Assoc.
Study Man-Environ. Relat. 100 pp.
48. Benson, J. S., Kennelly, K. J. 1976.
Learned helplessness: The result of un-
controllable reinforcements or uncon-
trollable aversive stimuli? J. Pers. Soc.
Psychol. 34:138-45
49. Berglund, B. 1977. Quantitative ap-
proaches in environmental studies. Int.
J. Psychol. 12. In press
50. Berlyne, D. E. 1971. Aesthetics and Psy-
chobiology. New York: Appleton-Cen-
tury-Crofts. 336 pp.
51. Berlyne, D. E., Ditkofsky, J. 1976.
Effects of novelty and oddity on visual
selective attention. Br. £ Psychol. 67:
175-80
52. Bharucha-Reid, R. P. 1975. Environ-
mental psychology, NEPA, and the chal-
lenge of the real world. Presented at
83rd Ann. Conv. APA, Chicago
53. Bickman, L., Teger, A., Gabrielle, T.,
McLaughlin, C., Berger, M., Sunaday,
E. 1973. Dormitory density and helping
behavior. Environ. Behav. 5:465-89
54. Blaut, J. M., Stea, D. 1974. Mapping at
the age of three. J. Geogr. 73:5-9
54a. Booth, A. 1976 Urban Crowding and
lts Consequences. New York: Praeger.
139 pp.
55. Bowers, K. S. 1973. Situationism in psy-
chology: An analysis and a critique.
Psychol. Rev. 80:307-36
56. Brechner, K. C. 1978. An experimental
analysis of social traps. J. Exp. Soc. Psy-
chol. In press
57. Breed, G. 1972. The effect of intimacy:
Reciprocity or retreat? Br. J. Soc. Clin.
PsychoL 11:135-42
58. Briggs, R. 1976. Methodologies for the
measurement of cognitive distance. See
Ref. 315, pp. 325-34
59. Broadbent, D. E. 1971. Decision and
Stress. New York: Academic. 522 pp.
60. Bruner, J. S. 1957. On perceptual readi-
ness. Psychol. Rev. 64:123-52
61. Brunswik, E. 1943. Organismic
achievement and environmental proba-
bility. PsychoL Rev. 50:255-72
62. Brunswik, E. 1956. Perception and the
Representative Design of Experiments.
Berkeley: Univ. California Press.
154 pp.
63. Bruvold, W. H. 1973. Belief and behav-
ior as determinants of environmental at-
titudes. Environ. Behav. 5:202-18
64. Burby, R. J., Weiss, S. F. 1976. New
Communities, U.S.A. Lexington, Mass:
Heath. 593 pp.
65. Cadwallader, M.T. 1976. Cognitive dis-
tance in intra-urban space. See Ref. 315,
316-24
66. Campbell, D. E. 1976. Evaluation of the
built environment: Lessons from pro-
gram evaluation. See Ref. 445, 227-34
67. Campbell, D. E., Beets, J. L. 1977.
Meterorological variables and behavior:
An annotated bibliography. JSAS Cat.
Sel. Doc. Psychol. In press
68. Campbell, D. T. 1969. Reforms as ex-
periments. Am. Psychol. 24:409-29
6’9. Canter, D. 1974. Empirical research in
environmental psychology: A brief re-
view. Bull, Br. PsychoL Soc. 27:31-37
7,3. Canter, D. 1975. Behavioral maps or
cognitive maps: A comparison for chil-
dren’s hospital ward ecology. Surrey,
England: Univ. Surrey
71. Canter, D., Lee, T. R., eds. 1974. Psy-
chology and the Built Environment.
New York: Halstead. 213 pp.
72. Canter, D., Stringer, P. 1975. Environ-
mental Interaction. New York: Int.
Univ. Press. 374 pp.
73. Carr, S. J., Dabbs, J. M. Jr. 1974. The
effects of lighting, distance and intimacy
of topic on verbal and visual behavior.
Sociometry 37:592-600
7.¢. Carson, D. H., ed. 1974. Man-Environ-
ment Interactions: Evaluations and Ap-
plications, Vols. 1-12. Proc. 5th lnt. En-
viron. Design Res. Assoc. Conf. Wash-
ington DC: Environ. Design Res.
Assoc.
7.5. Catalano, R., Simmons, S., Stokols, D.
1975. Adding social science knowledge
to environmental decision making. Nat.
Res. Lawyer 8:41-59
7~5.Catton, W., Dunlap, R. E. 1978. Envi-
ronmental sociology. Ann. Rev. Sociol.
In press
7"7. Cermak, G. W., Cornillion, P. C. 1976.
Multidimensional analyses of judg-
ments about traffic noise. J. Acoust. Soc.
Am. 59:1412-20
7:L Chapman, C., Risley, T. R. 1974. Anti-
litter procedures in an urban high den-
sity area. J. AppL Behav. Anal. 7:377-83
79. Chase, R. A. 1974. Information ecology
and the design of learning environ-
ments. See Ref. 82, pp. 282-96
81). Chein, I. 1954. The environment as a
determinant of behavior. J. Soc. Psy-
chol. 39:115-27
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 283
81. Clark, R. N., Burgess, R. L., Hendee, J.
C. 1972. The development of anti-litter
behavior in a forest campground. J.
Appl. Behav. Anal. 5:1-5
82. Coates, G. J., ed. 1974. Alternative
Learning Environments. Stroudsburg,
Pa: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross.
387 pp.
83. Cohen, S. 1978. Environmental load
and the allocation of attention. See Ref.
41. In press
84. Cohen, S., Glass, D. C., Phillips, S.
1977. Environment and health. Hand-
book of Medical Sociology, ed. H. E.
Freeman, S. Levine, L. G. Reeder. En-
glewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. In
press
85. Cohen, S., Glass, D. C., Singer, J. E.
1973. Apartment noise, auditory dis-
crimination, and reading ability in chil-
dren. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 9:407-22
86. Cohen, S., Rothbart, M., Phillips, S.
1976. Locus of control and the general-
ity of learned helplessness in humans.
J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 34:1049-56
87. Cone, J. D., Hayes, S. C. 1977. Applied
behavior analysis and the solution of en-
vironmental problems. See Ref. 16. In
press
88. Cone, J. D., Hayes, S. C. 1976. Thesub-
merged discipline of environmental psy-
chology. Presented at Ann. Conv. Mid-
west. Assoc. Behav. Anal., Chicago
89. Cooper, C. 1975. Easter Hill Village."
Some Social Implications of Design.
New York: Free Press. 337 pp.
90. Coren, S., Porac, C. 1976. Distance
makes the heart grow fonder: Attributes
and metrics in cognitive macromaps.
See Ref. 445, pp. 81-85
91. Cozby, P. C. 1973. Effects of density,
activity, and personality on environ-
mental preferences. J. Res. Pers. 4:
45-60
92. Craik, K. H. 1973. Environmental psy-
chology. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 24:403-22
93. Craik, K. H. 1975. Individual varia-
tions in landscape description. See Ref.
494, pp. 130-50
94. Craik, K. H. 1976. The personality re-
search paradigm in environmental psy-
chology. See Ref. 443, pp. 55-79
95. Craik, K. H. 1977. Multiple scientific
paradigms in environmental psychol-
ogy. Int. J. Psychol. 12. In press
96. Craik, K. H., Zube, E. H., eds. 1976.
Perceiving Environmental Quality. New
York: Plenum. 310 pp.
97. Crawford, T. J. 1973. Beliefs about
birth control: A consistency theory
analysis. Represent. Res. Soc. Psychol.
4:53-65
98. Curtin, R. T. 1975. Consumer adapta-
tion to energy shortages. Presented at
83rd Ann. Conv. APA, Chicago
99. Danford, S., Willems, E. P. 1975. Sub-
jective responses to architectural dis-
plays: A question of validity. Environ.
Behav. 7:486-516
100. Daniel, T. C., Boster, R. S. 1976. Mea-
suring landscape esthetics: The scenic
beauty estimation method. USDA For.
Serv. Res. Pap. RM-167, Rocky Mt.
Forest Range Exp. Sta., Ft. Collins,
Colorado. 66 pp.
101. D’Atri, D. A. 1975. Psychophysiologi-
cal responses to crowding. Environ.
Behav. 7:237-52
102. David, T., Wright, B., eds. 1974. Learn-
ing Environments. Chicago, Ilh Univ.
Chicago Press. 233 pp.
103. Davidson, A. R., Jaccard, J. J. 1975.
Population psychology: A new look at
an old problem. J. Pets. Soc. Psychol.
31:1073-82
104. Davis, G., Altman, I. 1976. Territories
at the work-place: Theory into design
guidelines. Man-Environ. Syst. 6:46-53
105. Dean, L. M., Pugh, W. M., Gunderson,
E. 1975. Spatial and perceptual compo-
nents of crowding: Effects on health and
satisfaction. Environ. Behav. 7:225-36
106. DeLong, A. J. 1973. Territorial stability
and hierarchical formation. Small
Group Behav. 4:56-63
107. Dember, W. N. 1974. Motivation and
the cognitive revolution. Am. Psychol.
29:161-68
108. Deslauries, B. C., Everett, P. B. 1978.
The effects of intermittent and continu-
ous token reinforcement on bus rider-
ship. J. App. Psychol. In press
109. Desor, J. 1972. Toward a psychological
theory of crowding. J. Pers. Soc. Psy-
chol. 21:79-82
110. Devlin, A. S. 1976. The "small town"
cognitive map: Adjusting to a new envi-
ronment. See Ref. 315, pp. 58-70
111. Dibner, A. S. 1973. Behavioral corre-
lates of preference for complexity in
aged Presented at Ann. Conv. Geron-
tol. Soc., Miami
112. Donnerstein, E., Wilson, D. W. 1976.
Effects of noise and perceived control
on ongoing and subsequent aggressive
behavior. Z Pers~ Soc. Psychol. 34:
774-81
113. Donohue, G. A., Olien, C. N., Ti-
chenor, P. J. 1974. Communities, pollu-
tion, and the light for survival. J. Envi-
ron. Educ. 6:29-37
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
284 STOKOLS
114. Dooley, B. 1974. Crowding stress: The
effects of social density on men with
"close" or "far" personal space. PhD
thesis. Univ. California, Los Angeles,
Calif. 146 pp.
115. Downs, R. M., Stea, D. 1973. Cognitive
maps and spatial behavior: Process and
products. In linage and Environment,
ed. R. M. Downs, D. Stea, pp. 8-26.
Chicago: Aldine. 439 pp.
116. Downs, R. M., Stea, D. 1977. Maps in
Minds. Reflections on Cognitive Map-
ping. New York: Harper & Row.
284 pp.
117. Dubos, R. 1965. Man Adapting. New
Haven, Conn: Yale Univ. Press. 527 pp.
118. Duke, M. P., Nowicki, S. 1972. A new
measure and social-learning model for
interpersonal distance. J.. Exp. Rex
Pers. 6:119-32
119. Dunlap, R. E. 1975. The impact of po-
litical orientation on environmental at-
titudes and actions. Environ. Behav.
7:428-54
120. Dunlap, R. E., Dillman, D. A. 1976.
Decline in public support for environ-
mental protection: Evidence from a
1970-74 panel study. Rural Sociol.
41:382-90
121. Dweck, C. S., Reppucci, N. D. 1973.
Learned helplessness and reinforcement
responsibility in children. J. Pers. Soc.
Psychol. 25:109-16
122. Easterbrook, J. A. 1959. The effect of
emotion on cue utilization and the orga-
nization ~ of behavior. Psychol. Rev.
66:183-201
123. Ebbesen, E. B., Kjos, G. L., Konecni,
V. J. 1976. Spatial ecology: Its effects on
the choice of friends and enemies. J.
Exp. Soc. Psychol. 12:505-18
124. Eddy, G. L., Sinnett, E. R. 1973. Behav-
ior setting utilization by emotionally
disturbed college students. J. Consult.
Clin. Psychol. 40:210-16
125. Edney, J. J. 1972. Property, possession,
and permanence: A field study in hu-
man territoriality. Z Appl. Soc. Psychol.
2:275-82
126. Edney, J. J. 1974. Human territoriality.
Psychol. Bull. 81:959-75
127. Efran, M. G., Cheyne, J. A. 1974.
Affective concomitants of the invasion
of shared space: Behavioral, physiologi-
cal, and verbal indicators. J. Pers. Soc.
Psychol. 29:219-26
128. Ehrlich, P. R. 1968. The Population
Bomb. New York: Ballantine. 223 pp.
129. Emery, F. E., ed. 1969. Systems Think-
ing. Hardmondsworth, England: Pen-
guin. 398 pp.
130. Endler, N. S., Magnusson, D., eds.
1976. lnteractional Psychology and Per-
sonality. Washington DC: Hemisphere.
663 pp.
13L Epstein, Y. M. 1976. Comment on envi-
ronmental psychology and social psy-
chology. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull 2:
346-49
132. Erskine, H. 1972. The polls: Pollution
and its costs. Public Opin. Q. 36:120-35
133. Esser, A. H., ed. 1969-present. Man-
Environment Systems. Orangeburg,
NY: Assoc. Study Man-Environ. Relat.
134. Esser, A. H. 1973. Experiences of crow-
ding: Illustration of a paradigm for
man-environment relations. Represent.
Res. Soc. Psychol. 4:207-18
135. Esser, A. H., Greenbie, B. B., eds. 1978
Design for Communality and Privacy.
New York: Plenum. In press
136. Evans, G. W. 1978. Design implications
of spatial research. See Ref. 5. In press
137. Evans, G. W. 1978. Graduate programs
in environment and behavior. See Ref.
455. In press
138. Evans, G. M. 1978. Human spatial be-
havior: The arousal model. See Ref. 39.
In press
139. Evans, G. W., Eichelman, W. 1976.
Preliminary models of conceptual link-
ages among proxemic variables. Envi-
ron. Behav. 8:87-116
14(I. Evans, G. W., Howard, R. 1973. Per-
sonal space. Psychol. Bull. 80:334-44
141..Everett, P. B., Deslauries, B. C., New-
som, T. J., Anderson, V. B. 1978. In-
creasing the effectiveness of free transit.
Transit J. In press
142. Everett, P. B., Hayward, S. C., Meyers,
A. W. 1974. The effects of a token rein-
forcement procedure on bus ridership.
Z Appl. Behav. Anal. 7:1-10
142;.Everett, P. B., Studer, R. G., Douglas,
T. J. 1978. Gaming simulation to pre-
test operant-based community interven-
tions: An urban transportation exam-
ple. Am. Z Community Psychol. In
Dress
144..~Falbo, T., ed. 1976-present. Population
and Environmental Psychology Newslet-
ter. Washington DC: Div. 34, APA
145. Fawcett, J. T., ed. 1973. Psychological
Perspectives on Population. New York:
Basic Books. 522 pp.
146. Fehr, L. A., Fishbein, H. D. 1976. The
effects of an explicit landmark on spatial
judgments. See Ref. 445, pp. 86-93
147. Felton, B., Kahana, E. 1974. Adjust-
ment and situationally-bound locus of
control among institutionalized aged. J.
Gerontol. 29:295-301
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 285
148. Festinger, L. 1975. A Theory of Cogni-
tive Dissonance. Stanford, Califi Stan-
ford Univ. Press. 291 pp.
149. Festinger, L., Schachter, S., Back, K.
1950. Social Pressures in lnformal
Groups. Stanford, Calif: Stanford Univ.
Press. 197 pp.
150. Firestone, I. J., Karuza, J., Greenberg,
C., Kingman, K. 1977. The perception
of crowding: Modality, perspective, and
feedback effects. Presented at 8th Ann.
Conv. Environ. Des. Res. Assoc.,
Champaign, IlL
151. Fischer, C. S. 1976. The Urban Experi-
ence. New York: Harcourt, Brace,
Jovanovich. 309 pp.
152. Fischer, C. S., Baldassare, M., Ofshe, R.
J. 1975. Crowding studies and urban
life: A critical review. J.. Am. Inst.
Plann. 41:406-18
153. Fishbein, M. 1967. Attitude and the
prediction of behavior. In Readings in
Attitude Theory and Measurement, ed.
M. Fishbein, pp. 477-92. New York:
Wiley. 499 pp.
154. Francescato, D., Mebane, W. 1973.
How citizens view two great cities: Mi-
lan and Rome. See Ref. 115, pp. 131-47
155. Frankenhaeuser, M., Lundberg, U.
1977. The influence of cognitive set on
performance and arousal under differ-
ent noise loads. Motiv. Emotion. In
press
156. Frederickson, N. 1972. Toward a tax-
onomy of situations. Am. Psychol. 27:
114-23
157. Freedman, J. L. 1975. Crowding and
Behavior. San Francisco: Freeman.
177 pp.
158. Freedman, J. L., Carlsmith, J. M.,
Sears, D. O. 1974. Social Psychology.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
526 pp. 2nd ed.
159. Freedman, J. L., Levy, A. S., Buchanan,
R. W., Price, J. 1972. Crowding and
human aggressiveness. J. Exp. Soc. Psy-
chol. 8:528-48
160. Friedman, S., Juhasz, J. B., eds. 1974.
Environments." Notes and Selections on
Objects, .Sfl.aces, and Behavior. Mon-
terey, Cahf: Brooks-Cole. 275 pp.
161. Galle, O. R., Gove, W. R., McPherson,
J. M. 1972. Population density and pa-
thology: What are the relations for
man? Science 176:23-30
162. Giirling, T. 1976. The structural analy-
sis of environmental perception and
cognition: A multidimensional scaling
approach. Eviron. Behav. 8:385-415
163. Gavin, J. F., Howe, J. G. 1975. Psycho-
logical climate: Some theoretical and
empirical considerations. Behav. Sci.
20:228-40
164. Geller, E. S., Witmer, J. F., Orebaugh,
A. L. 1976. Instructions as a determi-
nant ofpaper-disposal behaviors. Envi-
ron. Behav. 8:417-39
165. Gerson, E. M., Gerson, M. S. 1976. The
social framework of place perspectives.
See Ref. 315, pp. 196-205
166. Gerst, M. S., Moos, R. H. 1974. Univer-
sity Residence Environment Scale, Form
R. Palo Alto, Calif: Consult. Psychol.
Press
167. Gibson, J. J. 1960. The concept of the
stimulus in psychology. Am. Psychol.
15:694-703
168. Glass, D. C., Singer, J. E. 1972. Urban
Stress. New York: Academic. 182 pp.
169. Glass, D. C., Singer, J. E., Pennebaker,
J. W. 1977. Behavioral and physiologi-
cal effects of uncontrollable environ-
mental events. See Ref. 415, pp. 131-51
170. Golledge, R. G. 1976. Methods and
methodological issues in environmental
cognition research. See Ref. 315, pp.
300-13
171. Golledge, R. G. 1977. Multidimen-
sional analysis in the study of environ-
m6ntal behavior and environmental de-
sign. See Ref. 16. In press
172. Golledge, R. G., Rushton, G., eds.
1976. Spatial Choice and Spatial Behav-
ior." Geographic Essays on the Analysis of
Preference and Perceptions. Columbus:
Ohio State Univ. Press. 320 pp.
173. Goodey, B. 1973. The state of the art
and a review of Rterature on the percep-
tion of environmental quality." Working
paper No. 3. Center for Urban and Re-
gional Studies, Univ. Birmingham, En-
gland. 23 pp.
174. Gould, P. R. 1973. The black boxes of
jonkoping: Spatial information and
preference. See Ref. 115, pp. 235-45
175. Gould, P. R., White, R. 1974. Mental
Maps. Middlesex, England: Penguin.
204 pp.
176. Greenbie, B. B. 1976. Design ForDiver-
sity. New York: Elsevier. 209 pp.
177. Gritfiths, I. D. 1976. The thermal envi-
ronment. See Ref. 72, pp. 21-52
178. Gump, P. V. 1975. Environmental psy-
chology and the behavior setting. See
Ref. 204, pp. 152-63
179. Gutman, R., ed. 1972. People and
Buildings. New York: Basic Books.
471 pp.
180. Gutman, R. 1975. Architecture and so-
ciology. Am. Sociol. 10:219-28
181. Hall, E:-T. 1966. The Hidden Dimen-
sion. New York: Doubleday. 217 ,pp.
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
286 STOKOLS
182. Hall, E. T. 1974. Handbook for Prox-
emic Research. Washington DC: Soc.
Anthropol. Visual Commun. 124 pp.
183. Hansen, W. B., Altman, I. 1976. Deco-
rating personal places: A descriptive
analysis. Environ. Behav. 8:491-504
183a. Hanson, L., Wicker, A. W. 1973.
Effects of overmanning on group experi-
ence and task performance. Presented
at Ann. Cony. West. Psychol. Assoc.,
Anaheim
184. Harman, E. J., Betak, J. F. 1976. Behav-
ioral geography, multidimensional scal-
ing, and the mind. See Ref. 172, pp.
3-20
185. Harrison, J., Sarre, P. 1976. Personal
construct theory, the repertory grid,
and environmental cognition. See Ref.
315, pp. 375-84
186. Hart, R. A., Moore, G. T. 1973. The
development of spatial cognition. See
Ref. 115, pp. 246-88
187. Hayes, S. C., Cone, J. D. 1978. Reduc-
ing residential electrical energy use:
Payments, information, and feedback.
J..4ppL Behav..4hal In ,press
188. Hayes, S. C., Johnson, V. a., Cone, J. D.
1975. The marked item technique: A
practical procedure for litter control. J.
AppL Behav. Anal, 8:381-86
189. Hayward, D. G., Rothenberg, M., Beas-
ley, R. R. 1974. Childrens’ play and ur-
ban playground environments: A com-
parison of traditional, contemporary,
and adventure playground types. Envi-
ron. Behav. 6:131-68
190. Hebb, D. O. 1949. The Organization of
Behavior." A Neuropsychological Theory.
New York: Wiley. 319 pp.
191. Heberlein, T. A. 1975. Social norms and
environmental quality. Presented at
Ann. Conv. Am. Assoc. Adv. Sci., New
York
192. Heider, F. 1958. The Psychology of In-
terpersonal Relations. New York: Wi-
ley. 322 pp.
193. Heilweil, M. 1973. The influence of dor-
mitory architecture on resident behav-
ior. Environ. Behav. 5:377-412
194. Heimstra, N. W., McFarling, L. H.
1974. Environmental Psychology. Mon-
terey, Calif: Brooks-Cole. 210 pp.
195. Heller, J. F., Groff, B. D., Solomon, S.
H. 1977. Toward an understanding of
crowding: The role of physical interac-
tion. J. Pets. Soc. PsychoL 35:183-90
196. Heller, K., Monahan, J. 1977. Psy-
chology and Community Change.
Homewood, Ill: Dorsey. 433 pp.
197. Helmreich, R. 1974. Evaluation of en-
vironments: Behavioral observations in
an undersea habitat. See Ref. 259, pp.
274-85
198. Hendrix, W. G., Fabos, J. G. 1975. Vi-
sual land use compatibility as a signifi-
cant contributor to visual resource qual-
ity. lnt. £ Environ. Stud. 8:21-28
199. Hershberger, R. G., Cass, R. C. 1974.
Predicting user responses to buildings.
See Ref. 74, 4:117-34
200. Hiroto, D. 1974. Locus of control and
learned helplessness. J. Exp. Psychol.
102:187-93
2011.Hochberg, J., Gellman, L. 1977. The
effect of landmark features on mental
rotation times. Mem. Cognit. 5:23-26
202. Holahan, C. J., Dobrowolny, M. B.
1978. Cognitive and behavioral corre-
lates of the spatial environment: An in-
teractional analysis. Environ. Behav. In
press
203. Holahan, C. J., Saegert, S. 1973. Behav-
ioral and attitudinal effects of large-
scale variation in the physical environ-
ment of psychiatric wards. £ Abnorm.
Psychol. 82:454-62
204. Honikman, B. 1975. Responding to so-
cial change. Proc. 6th lnt. Environ. De-
sign Res. Assoc. Conf. Stroudsburg, Pa:
Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross. 311 pp.
205. Honikman, B. 1976. Personal construct
theory and environmental meaning. See
Ref. 315, pp. 88-98
206. Horowitz, A. D., Sheth, J. N. 1976.
Ridesharing to work: A psychosocial
analysis. Presented at 84th Ann. Conv.
APA, Washington DC
207. Howard, R. B., Chase, S. D., Rothman,
M. 1973. An analysis of four measures
of cognitive maps. See Ref. 346, pp.
254-64
208. Hudson, R. 1974. Consumer spatial be-
havior: A conceptual model and empiri-
cal investigation. PhD thesis. Univ.
Bristol, Bristol, England
209. Humphrey, C. R., Bord, R. J., Ham-
mond, M. M., Mann, S. H. 1977. Atti-
tudes and conditions for cooperation in
a paper recycling program. Environ.
Behav. 9:107-24
210. Insel, P. M., Moos, R. H., eds. 1974.
Health and the Social Environment.
Lexington, Mass: Heath. 460 pp.
211. Insel, P. M., Moos, R. H. 1974. Psycho-
logical environments: Expanding the
scope of human ecology. Am. PsychoL
29:179-88
212. Ittelson, W. H. 1973. Environment per-
ception and contemporary perceptual
theory. In Environment and Cognition,
ed. W. H. Ittelson, pp. 1-19. New York:
Seminar. 187 pp.
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 287
213. Ittelson, W. H. 1974. Some issues facing
a theory of environment and behavior.
See Ref. 352, pp. 51-59
214. Ittelson, W. H., Proshansky, H. M.,
Rivlin, L. G., Winkel, G. 1974. ,4n In-
troduction to Environmental Psychology.
New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
406 pp.
215. Ittelson, W. H., Rivlin, L. G., Pro-
shansky, H. M. 1976. The use of behav-
ioral maps in environmental psy-
chology. See Ref. 352, pp. 340-51
216. Jackle, J. A., Brunn, S., Roseman, C.
1976. Human Spatial Behavior: A Social
Geography. North Scituate, Mass: Dux-
bury. 315 pp.
217. James, L. R., Jones, A. P. 1974. Orga-
nizational climate: A review of theory
and research. Psychol. Bull. 81:1096-
1112
218. Jones, S. E., Aiello, J. R. 1973. Prox-
emic behavior of black and white first,
third, and fifth grade children. J. Pers.
Soc. Psychol. 25:21-27
219. Jonsson, A., Hansson, L. 1977. Pro-
longed exposure to a stressful stimulus
(noise) as a cause of raised blood pres-
sure in man. Lancet 1:86-87
220. Kahana, E. 1975. A congruence model
of person-environment interaction. See
Ref. 467, pp. 181-214
221. Kahneman, D. 1973. Attention and
Effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-
Hall. 246 pp.
222. Kaplan, R. 1977. Preference and every-
day nature: Method and application.
See Ref. 415, pp. 235-50
223. Kaplan, R. 1973. Some psychological
benefits of gardening. Environ. Behav.
5:145-62
224. Kaplan, R. 1976. Way-finding in the
natural environment. See Ref. 315, pp.
46-57
225. Kaplan, S. 1976. Adaptation, structure,
and knowledge. See Ref. 315, pp. 32-45
226. Kaplan, S. 1975. An informal model for
the prediction of preference. See Ref.
494, pp. 92-101
227. Kaplan, S. 1973. Cognitive maps in per-
ception and thought. See Ref. 115, pp.
63-78
228. Kaplan, S. 1977. Participation in the
design process: A cognitive approach.
See Ref. 415, pp. 221-33
229. Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R., Wendt, J. S.
1972. Rated preference and complexity
for natural and urban visual material.
Percept. Psychophys. 12:354-56
230. Karlin, R. A., Epstein, Y. M., Aiello, J.
R. 1977. A setting specific analysis of
crowding. See Ref. 39. In press
231. Karlin, R. A., McFarland, D., Aiello, J.
R., Epstein, Y. M. 1976. Normative me-
diation of reactions to crowding. Envi-
ron. Psychol. Nonverb. Behav. 1:30-40
232. Kasl, S. V. 1974. Effects of housing on
mental and physical health. Man-Envi-
ron. Syst. 4:207-26
233. Kates, R. W., Wohlwill, J. F., eds. 1966.
Man’s Response to the Physical Environ-
ment. Special issue of J. Soc. lssues
22:1-140
234. Kaye, S. M. 1975. Psychology in rela-
tion to design: An overview. Can. Psy-
chol. Rev. 16:104-10
235. Kelley, H. H. 1973. The processes of
causal attribution. Am. Psychol. 28:
107-28
236. Kelly, G. 1955. The Psychology of Per-
sonal Constructs, 2 vols. New York:
Norton. 1218 pp.
237. Kelly, J. G., Snowden, L. R., Mufioz,
R. F. 1977. Social and community inter-
ventions. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 28:303-61
238. Kelman, H. C. 1974. Attitudes are alive
and well and gainfully employed in the
sphere of action. Am. Psychol. 29:
310-24
239. Kelvin, P. 1973. A social-psychological
examination of privacy. Br. J. Soc. Clin.
Psychol. 12:248-61
240. Kessler, M., Albee, G. W. 1975. Pri-
mary prevention. Ann. Rev. Psychol.
26:557-91
241. Klein, D. C., Fencil-Morse, E., Selig-
man, M. E. P. 1976. Learned helpless-
ness, depression, and the attribution of
failure. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 33:508-16
242. Knight, R. C., Zimring, C. M., Weitzer,
W. H., Wheeler, H. C. 1977. Social de-
velopment and normalized institutional
settings: A preliminary research report.
Amherst: Univ. Mass. Inst. Man Envi-
ron. 102 pp.
243. Knowles, E. S. 1973. Boundaries
around g.roup interaction: The effects of
group size and member status on
boundary permeability. J. Pers. Soc.
Psychol. 26:327-31
244. Knowles, E. S. 1978. The gravity of
crowding: Application of social physics
to the effects of others. See Ref. 39. In
press
245. Koenig, D. J. 1975. Additional research
on environmental activism. Environ.
Behav. 7:472-85
246. Kotika, J. 1935. Principles of Gestalt
Psychology." New York: Harcourt,
Brace & World. 720 pp.
247. Kohlenberg, R., Phillips, T. 1973. Rein-
forcement and rate of litter depositing.
J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 6:391-96
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
288 STOKOLS
248. Kohlenberg, R., Phillips, T., Proctor,
W. 1976. A behavioral analysis of peak-
ing in residential electrical energy con-
sumers. J. ,4ppL Behav. Anal. 9:13-18
249. Korte, C. 1978. Helpfulness in the ur-
ban environment. See Ref. 41. In press
250. Korte, C., Ypma, I., Toppen, A. 1975.
Helpfulness in Dutch society as a func-
tion of urbanization and environmental
input level. £ Pets. Soc. Psychol. 32:
996-1003
251. Kosslyn, S. M., Pick, H. L., Fariello, (3.
R. 1974. Cognitive maps in children
and men. Child Dev. 45:707-16
252. Krantz, D. S., Glass, D. C., Snyder, M.
L. 1974. Helplessness, stress level and
the coronary-prone behavior pattern. J.
Exp. Soc. Psychol. 10:284-300
253. Krasner, L., Krasner, M. 1973. Token
economies and other planned environ-
ments. In Seventy-second Yearbook of
the National Societyfor the Study of Ed-
ucation, pp. 351-84
254. Kromm, D. E., Probald, F., Wall, G.
1973. An international comparison of
response to air pollution. J. Environ.
Man 1:363-75
255. Krovetz, M. L. 1977. Who needs what
when: Design of pluralistic learning en-
vironments. See Ref. 415, pp. 251-72
256. Kryter, K. D. 1970 The Effects of Noise
on Man. New York: Academic. 639 pp.
257. Kuhn, T. 1962. The Structure of Scien-
tific Revolutions. Chicago: Chicago
Press. 210 pp. 2nd ed.
258. Kuller, R. ed. 1973. Architectural Psy-
chology: Proc. Conf. Lund, Sweden.
Stroudsburg, Pa: Dowden, Hutchinson
& Ross. 450 pp.
259. Lang, J., Burnette, C., Moles~i, W., Va-
chon, D., eds. 1974. Designing for Hu-
man Behavior." Architecture and the Be-
havioral Sciences. Stroudsburg, Pa:
Dowden, Hutchison & Ross. 353 pp.
260. Langer, E. J., Rodin, J. 1976. The
effects of choice and enhanced personal
responsibility for the aged: A field ex-
periment in an institutional setting. J.
Pets. Soc. Psychol. 34:191-98
261. Laufer, R. S., Proshansky, H. M.,
Wolfe, M. 1973. Some analytic dimen-
sions of privacy. See Ref. 258, pp.
353-72
262. Lawrence, J. E. 1974. Science and sen-
timent: Overview of research on crowd-
ing and human behavior. Psychol. Bull.
81:712-20
263. Lawton, M. P. 1975. Competence, envi-
ronmental press, and the adaptation of
older people. See Ref. 467, pp. 13-83
264. Lawton, M. P., Newcomer, R. J., By-
erts, T. O., eds. 1976. Community Plan-
ning for an Aging Society. Stroudsburg,
Pa: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross.
340 pp.
265. Lazarus, R. S. 1966. Psychological
Stress and the Coping Process. New
York: McGraw-Hill. 466 pp.
265a. Lazarus, R. S., Cohen, J. B. 1977. En-
vironmental stress. See Ref. 16. In press
266. Lazarus, R. S., Launier, R. 1978. Stress-
related transactions between person and
environment. In lnternal and External
Determinants of Behavior, ed. L. A.
Pervin, M. Lewis. New York: Plenum.
In press
267. LeCompte, W. F. 1974. Behavior set-
tings as data-generating units for the en-
vironmental planner and architect. See
Ref. 259, pp. 183-93
Ledbetter, C. B. 1974. Undermanning
and architectural accessibility. See Ref.
74, 8:281-88
Lee, R. M., ed. 1976-present. Environ-
mental Psychology and Nonverbal Be-
havior. New York: Human Sci. Press
Lee, S. A., ed. 1969-present. Architec-
tural Psychology Newsletter. Surrey,
England: Kingston Polytechnic
Lee, T. R. 1976. Psychology and the En-
vironment. London: Methuen. 143 pp.
Lefcourt, H. M. 1973. The function of
the illusions of control and freedom.
Am. Psychol. 28:417-25
Lefcourt, H. M. 1976. Locus of control
and the response to aversive events.
Can. Psychol. Rev. 17:202-9
Left, H. L., Gordon, L. R., Ferguson, J.
G. 1974. Cognitive set and environmen-
tal awareness. Environ. Behav. 6:395-
447
Levenson, H. 1974. Activism and pow-
erful others: Distinctions within the
concept of internal-external control. J.
Pets. Assess. 38:377-83
Levi, L., Anderson, L. 1975. Psychoso-
cial Stress." Population, Environment
and Quality of Life. New York: Spec-
trum. 142 pp.
Levy-Leboyer, C. 1976. La psychologie
de l’environnement recherches actuelles
aux Etats-Unis. Rev. Psychol. Appl. 26:
609-16
Lewin, K. 1936. Principles of Topologi-
cal Psychology. Transl. F. and G.
Heider. New, York: McGraw-Hill.
231 pp.
Lewis, C. A. 1976. People/plant prox-
emits: A concept for human design. See
¯ Ref. 445, pp. 102-7
268.
269.
270.
271.
272.
273.
274.
275.
276.
277.
278.
279.
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 289
280. Linder, D. E. 1974. Personal Space.
Morristown, NJ: General Learn. Press
Modular Stud. 23 pp.
281. Lipsey, M. W. 1977. Attitudes toward
the environment and pollution. See Ref.
330, pp. 360-79
282. Little, B. R. 1976. Specialization and
the varieties of environmental experi-
ence. See Ref. 443, pp. 81-116
283. Loo, C. 1977. Beyond the effects of
crowding: Situational and individual
differences. See Ref. 415, pp. 153-68
284. Lounsburg, J. W. 1974. Patterns and
correlates of environmental design pref-
erence. See Ref. 74, 9:69-76
285. Lowenthal, D. 1972. Research in envi-
ronmental perception and behavior:
Perspectives on current problems. Envi-
ron. Behav. 4:333-42
286. Lozar, C. C. 1974. Application of be-
havior.,setting analysis and underman,,
ning tla~ory to supermarket design. See
~
Ref. 74, 8:271-79
287. Lundberg, U. 1973. Emotional and geo-
graphical phenomena in psychophysical
research. See Ref. 115, pp. 322-37
288. Luyben, P. D., Bailey, J. S. 1975. News-
paper recycling behaviors: The effects of
reinforcement versus proximity of con-
tainers. Presented at Ann. Conv. Mid-
west. Assoc. Behav. Anal., Chicago
289. Lynch, K. 1960. The lmage of the City.
Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. 194 pp.
290. MacDonald, A. P. 1970. Internal-exter-
nal locus of control and the practice of
birth control. Psychol. Rep. 27:206
291. Magnusson, D., Endler, N. S. 1977. In-
teractional psychology: Present status
and future prospects. In Personality at
the Crossroads." Current lssues in ln-
teractional Psychology, ed. D. Magnus-
son, N. S. Endler. Hillsdale, NJ: Erl-
baum. In press
292. Maloney, M. P., Ward, M. P., Braucht,
G. N. 1975. A revised scale for the mea-
surement of ecological attitudes and
knowledge. Am. Psychol. 30:787-90
293. Mandler, J. M., Parker, R. E. 1976.
Memory for descriptive and spatial in-
formation in complex pictures. J. Exp.
Psychol." Hum. Learn. Mere. 2:38-48
294. Marans, R. W. 1976. Perceived quality
of residential environments: Some
methodological issues. See Ref. 96, pp.
123-47
295. Margulis, S. T. 1974. Privacy as a be-
havioral phenomenon. See Ref. 74,
6:101-23
296. Marshall, N. J. 1974. Dimensions of
privacy preferences. Multivar. Behav.
Res. 9:255-72
297. Mathews, K. E., Canon, L. K. 1975.
Environmental noise level as a determi-
nant of helping behavior, d. Pers. Soc.
Psycho1. 32:571-77
298. Maurer, M., Baxter, J. C. 1972. Images
of the neighborhood and city among
Black, Anglo, and Mexican-American
children. Environ. Behav. 4:351-88
299. McCain, G., Cox, V. C., Paulus, P. B.
1976. The relationship between illness
complaints and degree of crowding in a
prison environment. Environ. Behav.
8:283-90
300. McGrath, J. E. 1976. Stress and behav-
ior in organizations. In Handbook of In-
dustrial and Organizational Psychology,
ed. M. D. Dunnette, pp. 1351-95.
Chicago: Rand-McNally. 1740 pp.
301. McKechnie, G. E. 1974. Manual for the
Environmental Response Inventory.
Palo Alto, Calif: Consult. Psychol.
Press. 26 pp.
302. McKechnie, G. E. 1977. Simulation
techniques in environmental psy-
chology. See Ref. 415, pp. 169-89
303. Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L.,
Randers, J., Behrens, W. W. 1972. The
Limits to Growth. New York: Universe
Books. 205 pp.
304. Mehrabian, A. 1976. Public Places and
Private Spaces: The Psychology of Work,
Play, and Living Environments. New
York: Basic Books. 354 pp.
305. Mehrabian, A., Russell, J. A. 1974. An
Approach to Environmental Psychology.
Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. 266 pp.
306. Mercer, C. 1975. Living in Cities. Har-
mondsworth, England: Penguin
306a. Mercer, D. C. 1976. Motivational and
social aspects of recreational behavior.
See Ref. 15, pp. 123-61
307. Michelson, W., ed. 1975. BehavioralRe-
search Methods in Environmental De-
sign. Stroudsburg, Pa: Dowden, Hutch-
inson & Ross. 307 pp.
307a. Michelson, W. 1976. Man andHis Ur-
ban Environment." A Sociological Ap-
proach. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wes-
ley. 273 pp. 2nd ed.
308. Middlemlst, R. D., Knowles, E. S.,
Matter, C. F. 1976. Personal space inva-
sions in the lavatory: Suggestive evi-
dence for arousal. £ Pets. Soc. Psychol.
33:541-46
309. Milgram, S., Jodelet, D. 1976. Psycho-
logical maps of Paris. See Ref. 352, pp.
104-24
310. Miller, G. A., Galanter, E., Pribram, K.
H. 1960. Plans and the Structure of Be-
havior. New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Winston. 226 pp.
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
290 STOKOLS
311. Mindick, B. 1977. Attitudes toward
population issues. See Ref. 330, pp.
380-403
312. Mindick, B., Oskamp, S. 1975. Popula-
tion, planfulness, and the environment.
Man-Enviror~ Syst. 5:311-12
313. Mischel, W. 1977. On the future of per-
sonality measurement. Am. Psychol.
32:246-54
314. Moore, G. T. 1976. Theory and re-
search on the development of environ-
mental knowing. See Ref. 315, pp.
138-64
315. Moore, G. T., Golledge, R. G. 1976.
Environmental knowing: Concepts and
theories. In Environmental Knowing."
Theories, Reseamh, and Methods, ed.
G. T. Moore, R. G. Golledge, pp. 3-24.
Stroudsburg, Pa: Dowden, Hutchinson
& Ross. 441 pp.
316. Moore, R. C. 1974. Childhood city:
Some orientations and foci. See Ref. 74,
pp. 103-6
317. Moos, R. H. 1973. Conceptualizations
of human environments. Am. PsychoL
28:652-65
318. Moos, R. H. 1975. Evaluating Correc-
tional and Community Setting~ New
York: Wiley. 377 pp.
319. Moos, R. H. 1976. TheHuman Context.
New York: Wiley. 444 pp.
320. Moos, R. H., Insel, P. M., eds. 1974.
lssues in Social Ecology." Human Mi-
lieus. Palo Alto, Calif: National Press.
616 pp.
321. Murray, H. A. 1938. Explorations in
Personality. New York: Oxford. 761 pp.
322. Nahemow, L., Lawton, M. P. 1975.
Similarity and propinquity in friendship
formation. J. Pers. Soc. PsychoL 32:
205-13
323. Neisser, U. 1976. Cognition and Reality."
Principles and Implications of Cognitive
Psychology. San Francisco: Freeman.
230 pp.
324. Newman, O. 1973. Defensible Space.
New York: MacMillan. 264 pp.
325. Newman, O. 1975. Design Guidelines
for Creating Defensible Space. Wash-
~ngton DC: GPO. 213 pp.
326. Newman, S., Thompson, V. D., eds.
1976. Population Psychology." Research
and Educational Issues. Washington
DC: Center for Population Research,
Dep. HEW. 234 pp.
327. Olshavsky, R. W., MacKay, D. B., Sen-
tell, G. 1975. Perceptual maps of super-
market locations. £ Appl. Psychol.
60:80-86
328. Onibokun, A. G. 1974. Evaluating con-
sumers’ satisfaction with housing: An
application of a systems approach. J.
Am. Inst. Plann. 40:189-200
329. O’Riordan, T. 1976. Attitudes, behav-
ior, and environmental policy issues.
See Ref. 15, pp. 1-36
330. Oskamp, S. 1977. Attitudes and Opin-
ions. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall. 466 pp.
331. Park, R., Burgess, E., eds. 1925. The
City. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press.
239 pp.
332. Parsons, H. M. 1974. Why human fac-
tors research in environmental design?
See Ref. 74, pp. 1-13
333. Pastalan, L. A. 1974. Privacy prefer-
ences among relocated institutionalized
elderly. See Ref. 74, 6:73-82
334. Patterson, A. H. 1977. Methodological
developments in environment-behav-
ioral research. See Ref. 415, pp. 325-44
335. Patterson, A. H. 1978. Territorial be-
havior and fear of crime in the elderly.
Hum. Ecol. In press
336. Patterson, M. L. 1976. An arousal
model of intimacy. Psychol. Rev. 83:
235-45
337. Patterson, M. L. 1973. Compensation
and nonverbal immediacy behaviors: A
review. Sociometry 36:237-53
338. Paulus, P. B., Annis, A. B., Seta, J. J.,
Schkade, J. K., Matthews, R. W. 1976.
Density does affect task performance. J.
Pets. Soc. Psychol. 34:248-53
339.. Pedersen, D. M., Shears, L. M. 1973. A
review of personal space research in the
framework of general system theory.
Psychol. Bull. 80:367-88
340.. Peterson, R. L. 1975. Air pollution and
attendance in recreation behavior set-
tings in the Los Angeles Basin. Pre-
sented at 83rd Ann. Conv. APA,
Chicago
341. Petty, R. M. 1974. Experimental inves-
tigation of undermanning theory. See
Ref. 74, 8:259-69
342. Piaget, J., Inhelder, B. 1967. The
Child’s Conception of Space. New York:
Norton. 490 pp.
343. Platt, J. 1973. Social traps. Am. Psychol.
28:641-51
344. Porteous, J. D. 1977. Environment and
Behavior." Planning and Everyday Urban
Life. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley.
446 pp.
345. Powers, R. B., Osborne, J. G., Ander-
son, E. G. 1973. Positive reinforcement
of litter removal in the natural environ-
ment. J. Appl. Behav. Anal 6:579-86
346. Preiser, W. F. E., ed. 1973. Environ-
mental Design Research: VoL L Selected
Papers. Proc. 4th Int. Environ. Design
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 291
Res. Assoc. Conf. Stroudsburg, Pa:
Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross. 557 pp.
347. Preiser, W. F. E., ed. 1973. Environ-
mental Design Research: k’ol. 2, Sym-
posia and Workshops. Proc. 4th lnt. En-
viron. Design Res. Assoc. Conf. Strouds-
burg, Pa: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross.
545 pp.
348. Price, R., Blashfield, R. K. 1975. Explo-
rations in the taxonomy of behavior set-
tings: Analysis of dimensions and classi-
fication of settings. Am. £ Community
Psychol. 3:335-51
349. Proshansky, H. M. 1976. Comment on
environmental and social psychology.
Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2:359-63
350. Proshansky, H. M. 1976. Environmen-
tal psychology and the real world. Am.
PsychoL 31:303-10
351. Proshansky, H. M., Ittelson, W. H.,
Rivlin, L. G. 1970. Freedom of choice
and behavior in a physical setting. See
Ref. 352, pp. 170-81
352. Proshansky, H. M., Ittelson, W. H.,
Rivlin, L. G., eds. 1976. Environmental
Psychology: People and their Physical
Settings. New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Winston. 632 pp. 2nd ed.
353. Proshansky, H. M., O’Hanlon, T. 1977.
Environmental psychology: Origins and
development. See Ref. 415, pp. 101-29
354. Rapoport, A. 1973. An approach to the
construction of man-environment the-
ory. See Ref. 347, pp. 124-35
355. Rapoport, A. 1975. Toward a redefini-
tion of density. Environ. Behav. 7:
133-58
356. Rapoport, A. 1976. Environmental cog-
nition in cross-cultural perspective. See
Ref. 315, pp. 220-34
357. Recker, W. W., Golub, T. F. 1976. An
attitudinal modal choice model. Transp.
Res. 10:299-310
358. Regnier, V. A. 1974. Matching older
persons’ cognition with their use of
neighborhood areas. See Ref. 74, 11:
19-40
359. Reid, D. H., Luyben, P. D., Rawers, R.
J., Bailey, J. S. 1976. Newspaper recy-
cling behavior: The effects of prompting
and proximity of containers. Environ.
Behav. 8:471-82
360. Richerson, P. J., McEvoy, J., eds. 1976.
Human Ecology: An Environmental Ap-
proach. North Scituate, Mass: Dux-
bury. 370 pp.
361. Rodin, J. 1976. Density, perceived
choice, and response to controllable and
uncontrollable outcomes. J. Exp. Soc.
Psychol. 12:564-78
362. Rodin, J., Baum, A. 1977. Crowding
and helplessness: Potential conse-
quences of density and loss of control.
See Ref. 39. In press
363. Rosenberg, M. J. 1956. Cognitive struc-
ture and attitudinal affect. J.. Abnorm.
Soc. Psychol. 53:367-72
364. Ross, M., Layton, B., Erickson, B.,
Schopler, J. 1973. Affect, facial regard,
and reactions to crowding. J. Pets. Soc.
PsychoL 28:69-76
365. Roth, S., Kubal, L. 1975. Effects of non-
contingent reinforcement on tasks of
differing importance: Facilitation and
learned helplessness. J. Pets. Soc. Psy-
chol. 32:680-91
366. Rothenberg, M., Rivlin, L. G. 1975. An
ecological approach to the study of open
classrooms. Presented at Conf. Int. Soc.
Study Behav. Dev., Surrey, England
367. Rothwell, D. 1976. Cognitive mapping
of the home environment. See Ref. 445,
pp. 71-74
368. Rotter, J. B., Chance, J., Phares, E.
1972. Applications of a Social Learning
Theory of Personality. New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston. 624 pp.
369. Rule, B. G., Nesdale, A. R. 1976. Envi-
ronmental stressors, emotional arousal,
and aggression. In Stress and Anxiety,
ed. I. G. Sarason, C. D. Spielberger,
3:87-103. Washington DC: Hemi-
sphere. 365 pp.
370. Russell, R. W. 1978. Behavioral adjust-
ment and the physical environment, lnt.
J. Psychol. In press
371. Russo, N. F. 1975. Eye contact, inter-
personal distance, and the equilibrium
theory. ,L. Pets. Soc. Psychol. 31:497-
502
372. Saarinen, T. 1976. Environmental Plan-
ning: Perception and Behavior. Boston:
Houghton-Mifflin. 262 pp.
373. Saegert, S. 1973. Crowding: Cognitive
overload and behavioral constraint. See
Ref. 347, pp. 254-60
374. Saegert, S., Mackintosh, E., West, S.
1975. Two studies of crowding in urban
public spaces. Environ. Behav. 7:159-84
375. Sanoff, H. 1974. Integrating human
needs in environmental design. CRC
Crit. Rev. Environ. Control 4:507-34
376. Savinar, J. 1975. The effect of ceiling
height on personal space. Man-Environ.
Syst. 5:321-24
377. Schiffenbauer, A. I., Brown, J. E.,
Perry, P. L., Shulack, L. K., Zanzola,
A. M. 1977. The relationship between
density and crowding: Some architec-
tural modifiers. Environ. Behav. 9:3-14
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
292 STOKOLS
378. Schmidt, D. E., Goldman, R. D.,
Feimer, N. R. 1976. Physical and psy-
chological factors associated with per-
ceptions of crowding: An analysis of
subcultural differences. J.. Appl. Psychol.
61:279-89
379. Schooler, K. K. 1976. Environmental
change and the elderly. See Ref. 15, pp.
265-98
380. Schopler, J., Stokols, D. 1976. ,~psycho-
logical approach to human crowding.
Morristown, NJ: Gen. Learn. Press
Modular Stud. 26 pp.
381. Schulz, R. 1976. Effects of control and
predictability on the physical and psy-
chological well-being of the institution-
alized aged. d. Pets. Soc. PsychoL
33:563-73
382. Schulz, R., Barefoot, J. 1974. Non-ver-
bal responses and at~liative conflict the-
ory. Br. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 13:237-43
383. Schumacher, E. F. 1973. Small is
Beautiful." Economics, as if People Mat-
tered. New York: Harper & Row.
305 pp.
384. Seaver, W. B., Patterson, A. H. 1976.
Decreasing fuel-oil consumption
through feedback and social commen-
dation, d. AppL Behav. Anal 9:147-52
385. Secord, P. F. 1977. Social psychology in
search of a paradigm. Pets. Soc. Psychol.
Bull. 3:41-51
386. Seeley, O. F. 1976. Field dependence-
independence, internal-external locus of
control, and implementation of family-
planning goals. PsychoL Rep, 38:
1216-18
387. Seligman, C., Darley, J. M. 1978. Feed-
back as a means of decreasing energy
consumption. J. AppL PsychoL In press
388. Seligman, M. P. 1975. Helplessness." On
Depression, Development, and Death.
San Francisco: Freeman. 250 pp,
389. Selye, H. 1976. Stress in Health and Dis-
ease. Woburn, Mass: Butterworths.
1500 pp.
390. Severy, L. J., Brigham, J. C., Schlenker,
B, R. 1976. A Contemporary Introduc-
tion to Social Psychology. New York:
McGraw-Hill. 462 pp.
391. Sewell, W. R. D. 1974. The role of per-
ceptions of professionals in environ-
mental decision-making. In Environ-
mental Quality, ed. J. T. Coppock, C.
B. Wilson, pp. 109-31. Edinburgh:
Scottish Academic Press
392. Shafer, E. L., Richards, T. A. 1974. A
comparison of viewed reactions to out-
door scenes and photographs of those
scenes. See Ref. 71, pp. 71-79
393. Sherrod, D. R. 1974. Crowding, per-
ceived control, and behavioral af-
tereffects. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 4:
171-86
394. Sherrod, D. R., Cohen, S. 1978. Den-
sity, personal control, and design. See
Ref. 5. In press
395. Sherrod, D. R., Downs, R. 1974. Envi-
ronmental determinants of altruism:
The effect of stimulus overload and per-
ceived control on helping. J. Exp. Soc.
PsychoL 10:468-79
396. Sherrod, D. R., Hage, J. N., Halpern, P.
L., Moore, B. S. 1977. Effects of per-
sonal causation and perceived control
on responses to an adversive environ-
ment: The more control, the better. ,L
Exp. Soc. PsychoL 13:14-27
397. Siegel, A. W., White, S. H. 1975. The
development of spatial representations
of large-scale environments. Adv. Child
Dev. Behav. 10:9-55
398. Sills, D. L. 1975. The environmental
movement and its critics, Hum. EcoL
3:1-41
399, Simon, H. A. 1957. Models of Man: Ex-
plorations in the Western Educational
Tradition. New York: Wiley. 470 pp.
400, Sims, J. H., Baumann, D. D., eds. 1974.
Human Behavior and the Environment.
Chicago: Maaroufa. 354 pp.
401, Singer, J. E., Lundberg, U., Franken-
haeuser, M. 1978. Stress on the train:
A study of urban commuting. See Ref.
41. In press
402. Skinner, B. F. 1953. Science and Hu-
man Behavior New York: Macmillan.
461 pp.
403. Smith, C. J. 1976. Residential neighbor-
hoods as humane environments. Envi-
ron. Plann. A 8:311-26
404. Smith, M. B. 1977. Some problems of
strategy in environmental psychology.
See Ref. 415, pp. 289-301
405. Sobal, J. 1976. Ecological p.sychology:
An introduction and b~bliography.
Man-Environ. Syst. 6:201-7
406. Sommer, R. 1969. Personal Space. En-
glewood Cliffs, N J: Prentice-Hall.
177 pp.
407. Sommer, R. 1973. Evaluation yes, re-
search maybe. Represent. Res. Soc. Psy-
chol. 4:127-33
408. Sommer, R. 1974. Tight Spaces." Hard
Architecture and How to Humanize lt.
Englewood Cliffs, N J: Prentice Hall.
150 pp.
409. Srivastava, R. K. 1974. Undermanning
theory in the context of mental health
care environments. See Ref. 74, 8:
245-58
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 293
410. Stea, D., Taphanel, S. 1974. Theory and
experiment on the relation between en-
vironmental modeling (’Toy Play’) and
environmental cognition. See Ref. 71,
pp. 170-78
411. Stein, K. B., Sarbin, T. R., Kulik, J. A.
1968. Future time perspective. Z Con-
sult. Clin. Psychol. 32:257-64
412. Stokols, D. 1972. On the distinction be-
tween density and crowding: Some im-
plications for future research. Psychol.
Rev. 79:275-77
413. Stokols, D. 1975. Toward a psychologi-
cal theory of alienation. Psychol. Rev.
82:26-44
414. Stokols, D. 1976. The experience of
crowding in primary and secondary en-
vironments. Environ. Behav. 8:49-86
415. Stokols, D. 1977. Origins and directions
of environment-behavioral research. In
Perspectives On Environment and Be-
havior." Theory, Research, and Applica-
tions, ed. D. Stokols, pp. 5-36. New
York: Plenum. 360 pp.
416. Stokols, D., Rail, M., Pinner, B., Scho-
pier, J. 1973. Physical, social, and per-
sonal determinants of the perception of
crowding. Environ. Behav. 5:87-115
417. Stokols, D., Smith, T. E., Prostor, J. J.
1975. Partitioning and perceived
crowding in a public space. Am. Behav.
Sei. 18:792-814
418. Stringer, P. 1976. Repertory grids in the
study of environmental perception. In
The Measurement of Intrapersonal
Space by Grid Technique, Volume 1: Ex-
plorations of lntrapersonal Space, ed. P.
Slater, pp. 183-208. New York: Wiley.
258 pp.
419. Studer, R. G. 1973. Man-environment
relations: Discovery or design? See Ref.
347, pp. 136-51
420. Suedfeld, P., Russell, J. A., Ward, L.
M., Szigeti, F., Davis, G., eds. 1977.
Book 2." lnvited Addresses Symposia,
and Workshops. In The Behavioral
Basis of Design; Proc. 7th Int. Environ.
Design Res. Assoc. Conf, ed. P. Sued-
feld, J. A. Russell. Stroudsburg, Pa:
Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross. In press
421. Sundstrom, E. 1975. An experimental
study of crowding: Effects of room size,
intrusion, and goal-blocking on nonver-
bal behavior, self-disclosure and self-
reported stress. J. Pers. Soc. PsychoL
32:645-54
422. Sundstrom, E. 1977. Crowding as a se-
quential process: Review of research on
the effects of population density on hu-
mans. See Ref. 39. In press.
423. Sundstrom, E. 1977. Interpersonal be-
havior and the physical environment. In
Social Psychology, ed. L. Wrightsman,
pp. 511~19. Monterey, Calif: Brooks-
Cole. 767 pp. 2rid ed.
424. Sundstrom, E., Altman, I. 1976. Inter-
personal relationships and personal
space: Research review and theoretical
model. Hum. Ecol. 4:47-67
425. Suttles, G. D. 1972. The Social Con-
struction of Communities. Chicago:
Univ. Chicago Press. 278 pp.
426. Swan, J., Stapp, W., eds. 1974. Environ-
mental Education: Strategies Toward a
More Livable Future. New York: Wi-
ley. 349 pp.
427. Thibaut, J. W., Kelley, H. H. 1959. The
Social Psychology of Groups. New York:
Wiley. 313 pp.
428. Thompson, V. D., ed. 1977-present.
Population: Behavioral, Social, and En-
vironmental lssues. New York: Human
Sciences Press
429. Tibbetts, P., Esser, A. H. 1973. Trans-
actional structures in man-environment
relations. Man-Environ. Syst. 3:441-68
430. Tolman, E. C. 1948. Cognitive maps in
rats and men. Psychol. Rev. 55:189-208
43 I. Trigg, L. J., Perlman, D., Perry, R. P.,
Janisse, M. P. 1976. Antipollution be-
havior: A function of perceived out-
come and locus of control. Environ.
Behav. 8:307-13
432. Tuan, Y. F. 1975. Images and mental
maps. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 65:
205-13
433. Tuan, Y. F. 1974. Topophilia: A Study
of Environmental Perception, Attitudes,
and Values. Englewood Cliffs, N J:
Prentice-Hall. 260 pp.
434. Tuso, M. A., Geller, E. S. 1978. Behav-
ior analysis applied to environmental/
ecological problems: A review. J. Appl.
Behav. Anal. In press
435. Tzamir, Y. 1978. Internal representa-
tion of the spatial structure of simulated
urban networks. Environ. Behav. In
press
436. Valins, S., Baum, A. 1973. Residential
group size, social interaction, and
crowding. Environ. Behav. 5:421-39
437. Valsiner, J., Heidmets, M. 1976. Den-
sity and spatial behavior: On some
problems olenvironmental psychology
(Parts 1 and 2). Est. Nat. I9:33-37,
89-95
438. Vayda, A. P., ed. 1972-present. Human
Ecology. New York: Plenum
439. Verbrugge, L. M., Taylor, R. B. 1976.
Consequences of population density:
Testing new hypotheses. Presented at
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
294 STOKOLS
84th Ann. Conv. APA, Washington
DC
440. Von Bertalanffy, L. 1950. The theory of
open systems in physics and biology.
Science 1 t 1:23-29
441. Waldbott, G. L. 1973. Health Effects of
Environmental Pollutants. St. Louis:
Mosby. 316 pp.
442. Wandersman, A. 1976. Applying hu-
manism, behaviorism, and a broader so-
cial developmental view to under-
standing and researching the design
process. See Ref. 445, pp. 9-20
443. Wapner, S., Cohen, S. B., Kaplan, B.,
eds. 1976. Experiencing the Environ-
ment. New York: Plenum. 244 pp.
444. Wapner, S., Kaplan, B., Cohen, S. B.
1973. An organismic-developmental
perspective for understanding transac-
tions of men in environments. Environ.
Behav. 5:255-89
445. Ward, L. M., Coren, S., Gruft, A., Col-
lins, J. B., eds. 1976. Book 1: Selected
Papers, EDRA 7. In The Behavioral
Basis of Design: Proc. 7th lnt. Environ.
Design Res. Assoc. Conf., ed. P. Sued-
feld, J. A. Russell. Stroudsburg, Pa:
Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross. 381 pp.
446. Watson, J. B. 1913. Psychology as the
behaviorist views it. Psychol. Rev. 20:
159-77
447. Weigel, R. H., Vernon, D. T., Tognacci,
L. N. 1974. Specificity of the attitude as
a determinant of attitude-behavior con-
gruence. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 30:
724-28
448. Weinstein, N. D. 1974. Effect of noise
on intellectual performance. J. Appl.
Psychol. 59:548-54
449. Weinstein, N. D. 1977. Individual
differences in reactions to noise." A lon-
gitudinal investigation. Presented at
Ann. Conv. East. Psychol. Assoc., New
York
450. Weinstein, N. D. 1976. The statistical
prediction of environmental preferen-
ces: Problems of validity and applica-
tion. Environ. Behav. 8:611-26
451. Wekerle, G. R. 1976. Vertical village:
Social contacts in a singles highnse
complex. Sociol. Focus 9:299-315
452. Werner, H. 1957. The concept of devel-
opment from a comparative and organ-
ismic point of view. In The Concept of
Development, ed. D. B. Harris, pp. 125-
48. Minneapolis: Univ. Minnesota
Press. 287 pp.
453. White, G. F. 1974. NaturalHazard:Lo-
cal, National, and Global. New York:
Oxford Univ. Press. 288 pp.
454. White, R. W. 1959. Motivation recon-
sidered: The concept of competence.
Psychol. Rev. 66:297-333
455. White, W. P., ed. 1978. Resources in
Environment and Behavior. Washing-
ton DC: APA. In press
456. Wicker, A. W. 1972. Processes which
mediate behavior-environment congru-
ence. Behav. Sci. 17:265-77
457. Wicker, A. W. 1973. Undermanning
theory and research: Implications for
the study of psychological and behav-
ioral effects of excess populations. Rep-
resent. Res. Soc. Psychol. 4:185-206
458. Wicker, A. W., Kirmeyer, S. L. 1976.
From church to laboratory to national
park: A program of research on excess
and insufficient populations in behavior
settings. See Ref. 443, pp. 157-85
459. Wicker, A. W., Kirmeyer, S. L., Han-
son, L., Alexander, D. 1976. Effects of
manning levels on subjective experi-
ences, performance, and verbal interac-
tion in groups. Organ. Behav. Hum.
Perform. 17:251-74
460. Wicker, A. W., McGrath, J. E., Arm-
strong, G. E., 1972. Organization size
and behavior setting capacity as deter-
minants of member participation.
Behav. Sc~ 17:499-513
461. Wilcox, B. L., Holahan, C. J. 1976. So-
cial ecology of the megadorm in univer-
sity student housing. J. Educ. Psychol.
68:453-58
462. Willems, E. P. 1974. Behavioral tech-
nology and behavioral ecology. J. Appl.
Behav. Anal. 7:151-64
463. Willems, E. P. 1976. Behavioral
ecology, health status and health care:
Applications to the rehabilitation set-
ting. See Ref. 15, pp. 211-63
464. Willems, E. P. 1977. Behavioral
ecology. See Ref. 415, pp. 39-68
465. Willems, E. P., Raush, H. L., eds. 1969.
Naturalistic l~iewpoints in Psychological
Research. New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Winston. 294 pp.
466. Windley, P. G. 1973. Measuring envi-
ronmental dispositions of elderly fe-
males. See Ref. 346, pp. 217-28
467. Windley, P. G. 1975. Environmental
dispositions: A theoretical and method-
ological alternative. In Theory Develop-
ment in Environment and Aging, ed. P.
G. Windley, T. O. Byerts, F. G. Ernst,
pp. 127-41. Washington DC: Gerontol.
Soc. 294 pp.
468. Winett, R. A., Kaiser, S., Haberkorn,
G. 1977. The effects of monetary rebates
and daily feedback on electricity conser-
vation. J. Environ. Syst. 6:327-39
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 295
469. Winett, R. A., Nietzel, M. T. 1975. Be-
havioral ecology: Contingency manage-
ment of consumer energy use. Am. J.
Community Psychol. 3:123-33
470. Winkel, G. H., ed. 1969-present. Envi-
ronment and Behavior. Beverly Hills,
Calif: Sage
471. Winkel, G. H. 1977. Some human di-
mensions of urban design. In On Streets,
ed. S. Anderson. Cambridge, Mass:
MIT Press. In press
472. Wofsey, L., Rierdan, J., Wapner, S.
1978. Changes in representation of the
currently inhabited environment as a
function of planning to move to a new
environment. Environ. Behav. In press
473. Wohlwill, J. F. 1976. Environmental
aesthetics: The environment as a source
of affect. See Ref. 14, pp. 37-86
474. Wohlwill, J. F. 1974. Human adapta-
tion to levels of environmental stimula-
tion. Hum. Ecol. 2:127-47
475. Wohlwill, J. F. 1973. The environment
is not in the head. See Ref. 347, pp.
166-81
476. Wohlwill, J. F., Heft, H. 1978. Environ-
ments fit for the developing child. In
Ecological Factors in Human Develop-
ment, ed. H. McGurk. Amsterdam:
North Holland. In press
477. Wohlwill, J. F., Kohn, I. 1976. Dimen-
sionalizing the environmental manifold.
See Ref. 443, pp. 19-45
478. Wolf, C. P. 1974. Social impact assess-
ment: The state of the art. See Ref. 74,
2:1-44
479. Wolf, C. P., ed. 1974-1977. Environ-
mental Sociology Newsletter. Washing-
ton DC: Am. Sociol. Assoc.
480. Wolf, C. P., ed. 1975. Special issue on
social impact assessment. Environ.
Behav. 7:259-404
481. Wolfe, M., Golan, M. B. 1977. Privacy
and institutionalization. See Ref. 420.
In press
482. Wolfe, M., Laufer, R. 1974. The con-
cept of privacy in childhood and adoles-
cence. See Ref. 74, 6:29-54
483. Wood, D., Beck, R. 1976. Talking with
environmental A, an experimental map-
ping language. See Ref. 315, pp. 351-61
484. Worchel, S., Teddlie, C. 1976. The ex-
perience of crowding: a two-factor the-
ory. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 34:30-40
485. Wortman, C. B., Brehm, J. W. 1975.
Responses to uncontrollable outcomes:
An mtegration of reactance theory and
the learned helplessness model. Adv.
Exp. Soc. Psychol. 8:277-336
486. Wortman, C. B., Panciera, L., Shuster-
man, L., Hibscher, J. 1976. Attributions
of causality and reactions to uncontrol-
lable outcomes. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.
12:301-16
487. Wortman, P. M. 1975. Evaluation re-
search: A psychological perspective.
Am. Psychol. 30:562-75
488. Wortz, E. C., Nowlis, D. P. 1975. The
design of habitable environments. Man-
Environ. Syst. 5:280-88
489. Zannaras, G. 1976. The relationship be-
tween cognitive structure and urban
form. See Ref. 315, pp. 336-50
490. Zeisel, J. 1975. Sociology and Architec-
tural Design. New York: Sage. 57 pp.
491. Zeisel, J., Gritfen, M. 1975. Charlesview
Housing: A Diagnostic Evaluation.
Cambridge, Mass: Harvard Grad. Sch.
Design. 131 pp.
492. Zifferblatt, S. M., Hendricks, C. G.
1974. Applied behavioral analysis of so-
cietal problems: Population change, a
case in point. Am. Psychol. 29:750-61
493. Zube, E. H. 1976. Perception of land-
scape and land use. See Ref. 15, pp. 87-
121
494. Zube, E. H., Brush, R. O., Fabos, J. G.,
eds. 1975. Landscape Assessment: Val-
ues, Perceptions, and Resources.
Stroudsburg, Pa: Dowden, Hutchinson
& Ross. 367 pp.
495. Zube, E. H., Pitt, D. G., Anderson, T.
W. 1975. Perception and prediction of
scenic resource values of the Northeast.
See Ref. 494, pp. 151-67
496. Zuckerman, M., Bone, R. N., Neary,
R., Mangelsdortf, D., Brustman, B.
1972. What is the sensation seeker? Per-
sonality trait and experience correlates
of the sensation-seeking scales. J. Con-
sult. Clin. Psychol. 39:308-21
497. Zyzanski, S. J., Jenkins, C. D. 1970. Ba-
sic dimensions within the coronary-
prone behavior pattern. Z Chronic Dis.
22:781-95
www.annualreviews.org/aronline
Annual Reviews
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1978.29:253-295. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by University of California - Irvine on 12/26/06. For personal use only.
