In this paper, the neighbourhood’s morphology has been evaluated according to socio-behavioural aspects and sense of place. It seems that place attachment, social bonding, and total time residents spent in local spaces are highly determined by neighbourhood’s socio-behavioural dimensions, and in turn, neighbourhood’s morphological attributes have a great impact on socio-behavioural dimensions.
To verify the hypothesis, 843 participants have been selected through Neyman allocation modelling from 5 morphologically representative neighbourhoods. The built-environment attributes were gathered through an objective method (GIS). Sense of place, meantime residents, spent in public spaces, socio-behavioural indicators, and a number of socio-demographic characteristics were collected by self-administered questionnaires.
According to our analysis, high and middle-rise neighbourhoods, with low coverage massing, by providing plenty of wide, non-hierarchical, and inter-connected spaces, could ensure personal privacy, anonymity, and consequently autonomy, genuineness, and tendency to use neighbourhood spaces. In contrast, historic organic neighbourhoods with narrow hierarchical pathways and massing alongside them increase the level of social monitoring and conformity. Thus, policies that support mixed-use, connected street networks, plenty of shared open spaces, non- hierarchical network patterns, and smaller block sizes can be used by urban designers to promote neighbourhoods supporting residents’ psycho-social preferences.
• Surveillance, conformity, and self-disclosure are neglected neighbourhood-based social issues.
• Residents’ social behaviours are affected by the neighbourhood’s morphological attributes (Such as hierarchy, density, coverage, and interconnectivity).
• Total time residents spend in local spaces, their place attachment, and social bonding are described by socio-behavioural phenomena.
• Historic organic neighbourhoods could not guarantee residents’ personal privacy, anonymity autonomy, and genuineness