NATURE AND FUNCTIONS OF ENVIRONMENT BEHAVIOUR RELATIONSHIP It really should come as no surprise that the term environment lacks specificity. Among others, historians, biologists, architects, sociologists, economists, and psychologists have used the term idiosyncratic in defining variables of interest in their disciplines. Historians have sought the environmental Zeitgeist, biologists the ecological niche, architects the design features and economists the ratio of supply to demand to account for external influences on human behaviour. Whereas the term “environment” lacks specificity, it is possible to be explicit regarding the assumptions that underlie its study. The assumptions that we see as underlying all environmental science, independently of specific orientation, are:

1. The earth is the only suitable habitat we have;
2. The earth’s resources are limited;
3. The earth as a planet has been and continues to be profoundly affected by life;
4. The effects of land use by humans are cumulative;
5. Sustained life on earth is a characteristic of ecosystems and not of individual organisms or populations. Implicit in these assumptions is a call not only for multidisciplinary but also for interdisciplinary strategies, methods, and philosophical perspectives in perceiving, understanding, and maintaining the delicate relationships that exists between humans and their environments.

1. The earth is the only suitable habitat we have, and its resources are limited. Throughout the history of the earth, various forms of life have begun, evolved, prospered, and died out, with the present dominance of humans being a very recent development. But, despite this current domination, we must face two fundamental truths: (a) Humans, too, will succumb to extinction either through geologic, meteorological, or interstellar cataclysm, natural biological processes, internecine quarrels, or because the earth’s resources will no longer support human life in its present form. (b) Although there may be other habitable islands in the cosmic sea, they are spaced at such great distances throughout the universe as to be virtually irrelevant to human survival. Notwithstanding these certainties, the earth is very important to those of us who are now living and to the coming generations. We must learn to live with the opportunities and the limitations the earth affords, with the inexorable fact that it is dynamic. And we must do so in a way that allows for continued human existence. The newly emerging area of environmental psychology holds the promise of providing information that will allow sustained human tenure on earth.
2. The earth as life has profoundly affected the planet. Human contributions to the visual landscape of the planet are everywhere: tall skyscrapers, intricate networks of highways and electrical lines/ engineered lakes/ and the vapour trails of highflying jet planes are constant reminders of human presence. More subtle indicators are the changing quality of the chemical composition of the atmosphere, geologic changes in the earth’s crust engineering changes in hydrologic processes and chemical changes in the waters that cover the planet. Clearing of forests, ploughing of land, black-topping of highways and parking lots not only affect the earth visually but change the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the light reflecting and absorbing characteristics of the earth’s surface and hydrologic drainage patterns. These changes influence the rate of heating and cooling and, therefore, the temperature of the earth and its atmosphere. Humans thus influenced weather and climate. A more thorough understanding of how humans influence the earth’s natural processes will lead to more intelligent and life-preserving behaviours on one’s part. In environmental psychology, the term ‘environment’ is referred to as a tangible and imagined interpretation of the world, which includes both architectural and social surroundings. It also includes natural environments, social settings, and constructed environments as well as considers the learning and informational environment. It is an interdisciplinary field that throws light on human beings and their surroundings. It also deals with one’s ability to adapt both physically and mentally to the various changes that continue to take place in our environment. Further, environmental psychology is a multi-disciplinary paradigm that draws a lot from the knowledge of people from other disciplines. It relies on the findings of geographers, economists, geologists, policymakers, psychologists, sociologists, anthropologists, educators, etc. Environmental psychology is also popular as human factor science or cognitive ergonomics, or environmental social sciences. It explores dissimilar issues which are of great significance. Some issues are listed here:  Common property resource management  The effect of environmental stress on human performance  The characteristics of restorative environments  Human information processing  The promotion of durable conservation behaviour. Environmental psychology believes that we should interpret the environment as a major factor in the development and ongoing conduct of people.
3. Environmental psychology gives more attention to the environment which has focused only on micro-level stimuli and events like people’s homes, neighbourhoods, and work and community settings.
4. Kurt Lewin’s ‘action research’ orientation (1946), sets scientific goals for analysing and explaining people and environmental transactions with the more practical goal of enhancing. It optimises and enhances peoples’ relationships with their environment through effective planning.
5. Environmental psychology is a multidisciplinary approach to the study of environment and behaviour since it focuses on analysing and enhancing the quality of people’s relationships with their physical environments. It also incorporates the perspectives of architecture, urban planning, psychology, anthropology, sociology, geography, and other fields. The ‘fundamental significance of environmental psychology for the design professions lies in its potential capacity to provide a body of knowledge conceptual and empirical for understanding the relationships between human behaviour and experience in the built environment.’(Horayangkura, 2012).

Nature of the environment and its relationship with human behaviour in points

Function of the environment and its relationship with human behaviour in points

Historical Influences Theories have influenced thinking among environmental psychologists both within and outside of the discipline of psychology. Some of these theories are very broad in scope, whereas others are more focused; some are lacking in empirical basis and others are more data-based. We will review several of them to provide the context for a consideration of current theories of environment-behaviour relationships. These perspectives include:Geographical Determinism, Ecological Biology, Behaviourism and Gestalt Psychology. Some historians and some geographers have attempted to account for the rise and fall of entire civilizations based on environmental characteristics. For example, Toynbee (1962) theorized that the environment (specifically, topography, climate, vegetation, availability of water, etc.) presents challenges to its inhabitants. Extreme environmental challenge leads to the destruction of a civilization, whereas too minor challenge leads to stagnation of culture. Thus, Toynbee proposed that an intermediate level of environmental challenge enhances the development of civilizations, and extremely diminished or excessive levels are debilitating. The notion of environmental challenge and behavioural response, although rooted in the thinking of such geographical determinists, appears often in one form or another in various theories in environmental psychology. As one example, Barry, Child, and Bacon (1959) have suggested that agricultural, non-nomadic cultures seem to emphasize responsibility, obedience, and compliance in child-rearing practices, whereas nomadic cultures often emphasize independence and resourcefulness. These differences, they suggest, result from the fact that people who live and work together in organized non-mobile communities require a more structured organization and therefore stress the importance of obedience and compliance. Nomads inculcate independence and resourcefulness in preparation for meeting the changing and unpredictable demands of an environment confronted by “roaming” people. Thus, the argument goes, the environment sets the stage for the development of cultures having the best chance of surviving it. This does not differ from saying that ghetto culture cultivates a set of skills in its inhabitants that are best suited to the ghetto. Someone not skilled in the craft of street fighting, perhaps, is not likely to survive the environment of the streets. We will see later in this Unit that some have carried this argument to the point, and other institutional environments develop in their inhabitants that are ostensibly survival certified to these environments, yet to be maladaptive in the larger environment. The development of ecological theories, theories concerned with biological and sociological interdependence between organisms and their environment, have also significantly influenced thinking in environmental psychology. With the development of ecological science, organisms were no longer viewed to be separate from their environment but were integral to it. This notion of organism-environment reciprocity now appears in many current environment-behaviour theories. The environment and its inhabitants are still often studied as separate components, but no one doubts their interdependency. These various components constitute a total system and interactions between the components are assumed to bring the change.

Make this into points.

Arousal Theories Arousal theories have typically been concerned with the influence of arousal on performance.They maximize performance at intermediate levels of arousal but falls off as arousal is increased or decreased. This relationship sometimes referred to as an inverted-U relationship, has been shown to differ slightly depending on whether performance is measured on simple or complex tasks (see Figure 3.1) and is often referred to as the Yerkes-Dodson law. These relationships are consistent with other findings that humans seek intermediate levels of stimulation (Berlyne, 1974), and are reminiscent of Toynbee’s assertion, referred to earlier, that cultures only develop in environments that provide intermediate environmental challenges. It has also shown performance changes that are very curvilinear with temperature increases. One explanation of these findings is that increase in ambient temperature leads to increase in arousal levels.Initially, the higher arousal leads to performance enhancement, but as it increases further, over-arousal occurs, causing performance decrements. Similarly, it has been shown that personal space invasions lead to increases in arousal (Middlemist, Knowles, & Matter, 1976) and performance decrements (Evans & Howard, 1972; McBride, King, & James; 1965). Increases in noise level have been associated with changes in arousal and performance (Evans & Cohen, 1987). Thus, several variables associated with arousal changes are related to performance changes, and performance has consistently been curvilinear related to arousal. Other theorists using an arousal perspective have featured physiological responses to environmental stimulation. Changes in heart rate, blood pressure, respiration rate, galvanic skin response, and adrenaline secretion, among others, have been shown to occur with changes in the environment.Increased ambient temperature leads to blood vessel dilation, perspiration, increased heart rate, and, in extreme conditions, lowered blood pressure and insufficient oxygen supply to the brain. It has linked personal space invasion to delayed onset and shorter duration of maturation for males. And noise exposure alters blood pressure, heart rhythm, and the flow of gastric juices to the stomach. Neurologists, such as Hebb (1972) have linked arousal with increased activity of the reticular activating system of the brain. Still, other theorists have equated arousal with changes in motor activity or with self-report of arousal. Berlyne (1974) has, for example, characterized arousal as lying on a continuum anchored at one end by sleep and the other by excitement, and Mehrabian and Russell (1974) have identified arousal as a major component in people’s affective responses to their environment. Independent of the orientation taken concerning arousal, several consistencies are apparent:

1. Theassociated changes in arousal with changes in the environment
2. Pleasant as well as unpleasant stimulation increases arousal — that is, room temperatures above100 degrees Fahrenheit and obnoxious noises influence arousal in ways similar to a rollercoasterrides and such other stimulating situations. 3. Changes in arousal lead people to seek information about their internal states (Schacter & Singer, 1962) as well as to seek information from others (Festinger, 1954).
3. People evaluate moderate levels of arousal positively.
4. Often, great expenditures of energy are used by individuals to bring the environment to alevel of moderate stimulation. Performance is predicted to be optimal for both simple and complex tasks at intermediate levels of arousal. Arousal above the level, leads to decrements in performance.

Factors affecting Arousal Level Furthering the point, various researchers have tried to identify the impact of different environmental factors on the arousal level: i. TemperatureAn increase in ambient temperatures leads to increases in arousal levels. Usually, higher arousal leads to performance enhancement, but as it increases, further over-arousal occurs, causing performance decrements.Increased ambient temperature leads to the following physiological changes: blood vessel dilation, pupil dilation, perspiration, increased heart rate. Extreme conditions also lead to lowered blood pressure and insufficient oxygen reaching to the brain. ii. Personal Space InvasionAn increase in personal space invasion leads to an increase in arousal and performance decrements (Middlemist, Knowels& Matter 1976). iii. Noise LevelAn increase in noise level leads to an increase in arousal and performance decrements(Evans & Kohen 1987). It alters blood pressure, heart rhythm, and the flow of gastric juices to the stomach. Arousal and Nervous System It linked arousal to increased activity of the reticular activating system of the brain and the associated changes in arousal with changes in the environment. Pleasant as well as unpleasant stimulation increases arousal, i.e. room temperatures above 100 degrees Fahrenheit. Changes in arousal lead people to seek information about their internal states. People associate moderate levels of arousal positively. Individuals use great expenditure of energy to bring the environment to a moderate level of stimulation.

Stimulus Load Theories Central to stimulus load theories is the notion that humans have a limited capacity to process information. When inputs exceed that capacity, people ignore some inputs and devote more attention to others (Cohen, 1978). These theories account for responses to environmental stimulation in terms of the organism’s momentary capacity to attend to and deal with salient features of its milieu.The stimuli most important to the task are in the focus of attention whereas the others are in the margin.For example, while driving during heavy traffic, we invest attention in the vehicles and road signs around us, and we pay less attention to the commentator on the car radio, people in the back seat, or the clouds in the sky. If the less important stimuli interfere with the task at hand, then ignoring them will enhance performance; for instance, ignoring the children’s fighting will make you a better and safer rush-hour driver. If, however, the less important stimuli are important to the task at hand, then performance will not be optimal; for instance, ignoring the road signs because you are attending to the more important trucks, cars, etc., may lead you thirty miles out of your way in getting home. Sometimes the organism’s capacity to deal with the environment is overtaxed or even depleted. When this occurs, we attend only the most important information, with all other information filtered out.Once attentional capacities have been depleted, even small demands for attention can be draining. Thus, behavioural aftereffects, including errors in judgment, decreased tolerance for frustration, ignoring others in need of help, can be accounted for by these theories. For example, the exhausted rush-hour driver eventually might reach the point where he or she doesn’t notice the traffic light turn from red to green (or worse yet, from green to yellow to red), even though this is a very important stimulus. Decreased tolerance for frustration may lead to “laying on the horn” or “lane hopping” and motorists in the break-down lane may be ignored, if not looked upon with disdain. Stimulus load theories can also account for behavioural effects in stimulus-deprived environments (e.g., certain behaviours occurring aboard submarines and in prisons). This approach suggests that under-stimulation can be just as aversive as overstimulation. So-called cabin fever resulting from monotonous living conditions can also be seen as the result of under-stimulation.

Make it into points.

Behaviour Constraint Theories Behaviour constraint theories focus on the real, or perceived, limitations imposed on the organism by the environment. According to these theories, the environment can prevent, interfere with, or limit the behaviours of its inhabitants (Rodin & Baum, 1978; Stokols, 1978). The development of the behavioural constraint model comes from Brehm’s (1966) reactance theory which states that there is a basic desire among human beings to maintain their behavioural freedom. An environment is constraining when something is limiting or prevents an individual from achieving his intentions.Certain environmental conditions like noise, crowding, temperature, location or specific features such as bad weather, barriers, objective experiences such as control may be perceived as constraining by the individual. In such a situation, the person feels as being out of his/her control. This feeling of not being able to control the situation produces psychological reactance (Brehm, 1966). Wortman and Brehm (1975) suggest that if failures or loss of control persist for a longer period of time without any chances of restoration, the individual will cease to make any instrumental efforts and thus enter into a helplessness state. Allen and Greenberger(1980) worked extensively in this area and suggested that before entering into a state of helplessness, an individual will try to alter his/her physical environment, if the previous effects of modifying the social environment did not prove successful. For instance, while trying to teach in a noisy classroom environment, the teacher first tries to request the children to remain quiet before asking the naughty ones to move out of the class. This modification if expressed in the form of personalization or any other social change will be in a socially approved and benign manner, else could also resort to drastic causes like intentional damage to the environment. Breaking of school furniture, switchboards, vandalizing or looting of public property during riots are certain examples of these negative form of perceived control. It has also been suggested that boundary mechanisms are crucial to an individual and one sets up certain regulatory systems to regain certain amount of control. So for instance, when someone invades our personal space during the course of a conversation, we try to regain it by moving a step further away or displaying some other behaviour like crossing our arms and the like. We may sometimes invent systems to prevent or reduce the chances of invasion. Sitting on one edge of an empty park bench or trying to get the aisle seat while travelling are examples to prevent encroachment. Very few of us will sit in the centre, or even if we do we spread out personal belongings on either side of us. An important aspect of everyday life of an individual is having a sense of controlling the environment which induces a sense of wellbeing. When people perceive control in a noisy situation, like by putting on ear plugs (Glass & Singer, 1972); they are less aggressive (Donnerstein& Wilson, 1976; Moser & Levy-Leboyer, 1985); and they are more often helpful (Sherrod & Doves,1974). On the contrary, the perception of loss of control leads to manifestation of negative consequences on behaviour, wellbeing and health (Barnes, 1981). Averill(1973) has discussed three categories of control: (a) the behavioural control which provides the subject with the opportunity to change the disturbing environmental events, (b) through cognitive control the individual adopts reappraisal technique to perceive the environment as less threatening and (c) the decision control provides the subject with an opportunity to choose the best possible alternative. The behavioural constraint model is very effective in explaining human behaviour in terms of control component. However, this approach alone cannot explain the environment-behaviour relationship in an effective manner.

Adaptation-Level Theories Adaptation level theories assume that each of us has a minimum threshold for a certain level of environmental stimulus. A slight rise or fall in this threshold is a focus of arousal, overload, under load or stress. Variations in behaviour will therefore occur if the stimulus load is outside our experienced adaptation levels.Major proponents of this position include: Helson (1964) and Wohlwill (1974). While all environmental psychologists emphasize the interrelationship of humans to their environment, adaptation-level theorists speak specifically of two processes that make up this relationship-the processes of adaptation and change. Organisms either adapt (i.e., change their response to the environment) or they adjust (i.e., change the environment with which they are interacting). Adaptation to decreases in ambient temperature includes piloerection (hair on the body standing up or what is commonly called getting “goose pimples”), muscle rigidity, increased motor activity, vasoconstriction; adjustments include throwing another log on the fire or turning up the thermostat. Either process brings the organism back to equilibrium with its environment. Wohlwill(1974) distinguished three categories of stimulation: sensory, social and movement; along the three dimensions of intensity, diversity and patterning. Amongst these; optimal or intermediate level of arousal or stimulation is desirable for positive responses and task performance. For instance, if aloofness and gregariousness are the two poles of a social interaction scale then either of them can be desired by a subject at some span of time depending on the level of exposure he/she is facing. The urge to spend some time alone or nowadays known as “My time” either in a quiet resort or in an aloof place by the working young generation of today is probably getting its ideas from this theory only. Another value of this approach is that it recognizes individual differences in adaptation level (i.e., the level of stimulation/arousal that the individual has become accustomed to and expects or desires in an environment). Thus, this approach can explain the different responses of two individuals to the same environment. For example, we may perceive a boisterous party as pleasant to a person high in need for sensation, but as overwhelming for the person who prefers a low level of sensation. By the same token, some people revel in the crowded atmosphere of last-minute festival shopping, while others abhor the inconvenience of having two or more shoppers in the same store with them. These individual differences in adaptation level lead to quite different behaviours. The person high in need for sensation will seek boisterous parties, whereas the person preferring low levels of sensation would avoid them or seek havens of solitude within them. We can ascribe some differences in their behaviours to differences in their adaptation level.In yet another study, it was observed that when concentrating on important tasks, the subjects were perturbed both by the presence of a persisting noise as well as by the complete lack of it. Thus an optimal level of stimulation is desirable for an appreciable task performance. For instance some students like to hear some soothing music or mantras while studying or concentrating on important tasks. However there may be some variations in the optimal level in different individuals depending on their experience and proximity with a given environment. For example: the heat and temperature of a bangle factory can be too overpowering for a person on entering for the first time; while the workers of the place are quite immune to it. Similarly, people of hilly areas when settled in lowlands have a high resistance to cold temperature as compared to the native residents of that place. This variation in optimal level is termed as adaptation. According to Wohlwill(1974), adaptation is a quantitative shift in the distribution of judgmental or affective responses along a stimulus continuum as a function of continued exposure to a stimulus.Dubos(1980) defines adaptation as the process which allows people to adjust to their environment, variations in the perception of the environment and coping mechanisms undertaken to overcome the problems it creates. Adaptation involves physiological as well as psychological processes. The phenomenon of light and dark adaptation accomplished by the human eye is a classic example of physiological adaptation to intense stimuli of light. An individual previously residing in an area close to railway station may perceive his/her new house in the centre of the city as much quieter, is an example for setting a psychological benchmark of adaptation for evaluating new conditions. The process of defensive re-appraisal or defensive re-evaluation can be very useful in dealing with stress emancipating from the extreme environmental stimuli. In this reappraisal, the environmental conditions which were once perceived as overwhelming or threatening ; over a period of time may be re-evaluated as bearable or less threatening. Defensive re-appraisals are self generated; they arise from needs within the person rather than from environmental pressures. In a study conducted on a flock of sheep, it was observed that when the paddock of the sheep was near the highway, initially the sheep used to run hither-thither on the arrival of any motor vehicle. However with the passage of time the approaching vehicles were perceived as less threatening and they used to continue with their grazing. Appraisal focused strategies occur when persons modify the way they think, for example, employing denial or distancing oneself from the problem. People may also alter the way they think about a problem by altering their goals, values such as by seeing humour in a situation. So, defensive reappraisal consists of any effort made to interpret the past more effectively or to deal with present harms and threats by viewing them in a less damaging and threateningway. Sometimes subjects are seen to resort to behavioural adaptations. This kind of adaptation can be defined as the response a person gives to environmental stimulus and a change in that corresponding behaviour. In India, for instance, adjusting to the rituals and customs by the bride (being different from her family) after her marriage. Similarly, when an individual emigrates to a new country, he/she has to cut down on his traditions to follow the traditions of the new country. The theory of adaptation presents an active and dynamic relation of the individual with his/her environment. However, the postulates of this theory cannot be generalized as it does not explain variation in adaptation levels across individuals, so precise prediction of behaviour with respect to environment becomes difficult. Make it into points.

Environmental Stress Theory The environmental stress theory studies the effect of environmental factors on the biological adaptation of an individual. Stress may be defined as a change in the reaction of mind and body to any event that brings about a change. This change could be pleasant, unpleasant or boring. Stress exists when the demands posed by the environment exceeds the coping capacity of an individual. Coping is an attempt to regain control over the stressing or constraining situation. According to the psychological stress model, environmental conditions such as noise, temperature, crowding, daily hassles may provoke physiological, emotional and behavioural reactions which may induce a lot of negative outcomes (Lazarus, 1996). The situation or stimulus in the environment is the stressor and the corresponding behaviour to it is the stress response. Four general types of environmental stressors have been identified: cataclysmic events, stressful life events, daily hassles and ambient stressors (Baum, Singer & Baum, 1982; Campbell, 1983; Lazarus & Cohen, 1977). Cataclysmic events are sudden catastrophes that require major adaptive responses from the victims. Floods, earthquakes, eruptions, war and imprisonments are some examples of cataclysmic stressors. Stressful life events are major incidents in the lives of people that require personal or social adaptive responses. These include change in family status (marriage/ divorce), economic conditions or job changes and like.Daily hassles are the typical life events like interpersonal problems, environmental events (noise, crowding) and the like which may cause frustration, tension or irritation. Ambient stressors are more continuous, relatively stable and intractable conditions of the physical environment that largely go unnoticed unless they interfere directly with some important goal or threaten health (Campbell, 1983). Stress theories emphasize the mediating role of physiology, emotion, and cognition in the organism-environment interaction. Environmental features are impinging, through the senses, on the organism, causing a stress response to occur when environmental features exceed some optimal level. The organism then responds in such a way as to ease the stress. Part of the stress response is automatic. Initially, there is an alarm reaction to the stressor, wherein various physiological processes are altered. Resistance then follows as the organism actively attempts to cope with the stressor. Finally, as coping resources are depleted, a state of exhaustion sets in (Selye, 1956). Increasingly, though, psychologists have concerned themselves with additional aspects of the stress response. Lazarus (1966), for example, has focused on the appraisal process. According to him, people must cognitively appraise the environment as threatening before stress occurs and behaviours are affected. Our harried rush-hour driver of a few pages back would not, by this criterion, be stressed unless this individual appraised the traffic as threatening. Confronted with a potentially stressful situation, the individual appraises the situation. Appraisals involve both assessing the situation (primary appraisal) as well as secondary appraisal i.e. evaluating the possibilities of coping with it. The term coping refers to adaptive or constructive strategies that help reduce the stress level. Adaptation and coping models are very helpful in studying the human behaviour under stressful conditions. If the individual is able to cope with stress in a positive manner then it enhances the performance of an individual. Baum & Paulus, (1987) studied that even in stressful conditions of noise and crowding, positive coping strategies elevated the arousal level of the subjects thereby increasing their task performance. However, if the individual is not able to deal with the stress in a constructive manner, negative consequences such as performance deficits, psychosomatic complaints and psychological or physical breakdown can be seen. On the whole, the environmental stress model helps understand the impact of stress on human performance and behaviour. It also explains the combined and individual impact of environmental stressors on human behaviour in a comprehensive manner.

Ecological Theories Central to the thinking of ecological theorists (Barker, 1963, 1968) is the notion of organism-environment-fit. Environments are designed or grow to accommodate certain behaviours. Behaviour settings, as Barker termed them, are evaluated in terms of the goodness of fit between the interdependent environmental features and the behaviours that take place. Ecological theories explain that there is a symbiotic relationship between a person and their environment i.e., they are dependent on each other. Human behaviour and responses are directly related to the environmental settings and slight alterations or modifications can lead to a change in the characteristics of the former. Ecological perception is described as the process by which people relate to and respond to their environment. It describes organisms and their environment as mutually reciprocal. This concept suggests that the environment merely represents itself and that one’s own perception permits further investigation of the environment (Clayton & Myers, 2009, pg.75). Essentially the approach places the initial human responses to external factors in the category of instinctual responses. It stresses that every child is born with a set of instinctual responses that help it to survive. Theories about people living together in a spatial environment (territoriality, personal space, crowding) are examples of the ecological approach. According to the ecological perspective, behaviour is the function of its physical and social setting. Barker and Wright(1955) exemplified their work on ecological theories to understand human behaviour and focused on behavioural setting. A behavioural setting is a self referenced (internally interdependent and self defined) entity that consists of one or more standing patterns of behaviour such as classroom, library, temple, recreational areas etc. Barker(1951) documented a day in the life of several young children, observing how even without prompting; their modes of expression and outward behaviour seem to change dramatically when their events were varied. It was observed that the children unconsciously manifested different coping strategies and behaviour depending on the type of events they were encountering. For instance, we speak in a soft voice in a library in an automatic manner while our tones are on a higher note when we go for a movie or to a city mall. This has something to do with the quietude architecture of the library and the chaotic arrangement of a multiplex or mall. This theory of ecological perception from James J. Gibson (1979) and Elanor Gibson(1969,1997) states that although two individuals can be simultaneously in a particular environment, their perceptions can be widely different because each experiences a different reaction. Barker argued that there are certain mechanisms that guide adaptive behaviour in settings and help people to predict behaviour in a setting. He named these mechanisms as circuits and divided them into four types: (a) Programme circuits: syllabus, play programme, schedule. (b) Goal circuits: people in a setting have certain goals so they behave in a particular way to achieve that goal. (c) Deviation-countering circuits: these are the behaviours people do or follow to achieve the setting goals. (d) Vetoing circuits. occur when people are excluded from the behaviour setting. Barker’s theory of behavioural setting is molar and contextual in nature. It tries to emphasize on the similarity of behaviours between people in the same setting, and describe the rules that seem to exist. A derivative of the behavioural setting theory is the manning theory which has been used to explain human crowding. According to the theory an individual’s behaviour is determined by the supply and demand of the social roles existing in a setting. An individual will experience more crowding when a setting is overmanned (i.e., when the number of occupants of the setting exceeds that required for the normal functioning of the setting) than when it is undermanned (Hui & Bateson, 1990). Barker (1968, pg. 185) synthesizes the salient aspects of the effects of undermanned settings: in general terms, undermanned behaviour settings in comparison with optimally manned behaviour settings impose more and stronger forces on their inhabitants in more varied functions; the forces are, however, more prevailingly directed inwards and towards other inhabitants. Undermanned behavioural settings have stronger internal interdependence andcohesiveness; they are stronger things vis-à-vis their inhabitants than optimally manned behaviour settings. Manning theory, now known as staffing theory focuses on the idea that when there are fewer people available for a number of behaviour settings, the pressure on an individual to assume responsibilities heightens. Synomorphy which is the degree of fit between a behaviour setting and the individual within it, is an important concept in staffing theory. When a place is high in synomorphy, the number of people and the types of tasks being performed match what the behaviour setting provides, and the individuals can achieve maximum productivity. The Ecological perspective has its share of advantages and disadvantages. The theory has high external validity as it has been tested in real life behavioural settings. However, the number of extraneous variables being very high, it may be difficult to establish a precise causal relationship between various predictions and outcomes. The ecological theory has proved to be very useful in understanding human behaviour and can be applied in assessing the layout and designing of residential areas to avoid congestion and ensure safety.

CRITICAL COMPARISON OF THEORIESOF THE ENVIRONMENT-BEHAVIOUR RELATIONSHIP Each of the theoretical stance has its costs and benefits. The arousal, stimulus load, and adaptation level approaches all share the advantage of the ability to incorporate a wide variety of physical and social environmental characteristics under the rubric of overall stimulation level. Thus, diverse factors such as noise, temperature extremes, room colour, verbal information rate, and crowding can all be conceptualized as contributing to environmental stimulation levels. Further, all three approaches are useful in predicting potential adverse responses when environmental stimulation deviates from some optimal level. The arousal approach is the most general in identifying physiological and affective mediators of the environment-behaviour relationship that is, increases or decreases in stimulation produce corresponding changes in physiological and psychological arousal, written produce predictable variations in behaviours such as task performance and aggression. The stimulus load approach is synaptic, focusing on cognitive in information-processing abilities, and yields predictions regardingthe social/behavioural consequences of over/ unstimulating—excessive attentional demands have differential effects on performing primary versus secondary tasks and the likelihood of attending to various social stimuli. The adaptation level approaches to the most specific, predicting that the consequences of a particular stimulation level depend on the specific level to which an individual has become adapted. The generality-specificity dimension is a theoretical trade-off. The more general theories account for aggregate responses of large numbers of people to the same environmental conditions, but in doing so gloss over some potentially important individual differences in people’s responses to those conditions. For example, while arousal theory might accurately predict worse performance, on average, in noisy compared to quiet settings, there may be some individuals who, because of their adaptation level, might even perform better in the noisy setting. The more specific theories account for some of these individual differences, but are more limited in scope, thus creating difficulties in making inferences about what are optimal environmental conditions for most people. For example, the adaptation-level theory could lead to as many predictions about performance level as there are people at the same level of noise. All three approaches have limitations regarding the reliability and validity of measures of their concepts. Thus, for example, measurements of physiological arousal (e.g., heart rate, galvanic skin response) and psychological arousal (e.g., selfreported emotional state) that are simultaneously got sometimes yield contradictory results. Also, systematic and valid measures of stimulus load and adaptation level are difficult to obtain. As a result, all three approaches have difficulty predicting what optimal stimulation levels are and exactly when these levels deviate significantly from optimum. This limits the ability to predict behavioural responses to various stimulation levels. The stress approach incorporates elements of all the above. We can characterize stress in terms of aim physical and social environmental conditions that deviate from some optimal level (e.g., a noisy and crowded subway) and are thus potentially disruptive to human functioning. We can also conceptualize stress in terms of physiological responses (e.g., arousal and health), affective responses (e.g., subjective discomfort), and cognitive responses (e.g., appraisal) to environmental conditions. This approach is also useful for accounting for the effects of a wide variety of environmental conditions on several important mediators of environment behaviour relationships under the general construct of stress. The approach has a further advantage of predicting behavioural coping and the consequences. Of course, this approach suffers from the same programs of measurement as those discussed above. For example, it is difficult to determine objectively which conditions are stressful, for e.g., heavy metal vs, jazz music, as well as individual differences in response to them, for e.g., adolescents vs. their parents. However, the stress approach has been widely used in environmental psychology. The behavioural constraint approach is the most limited of all in scope, (i.e., it is primarily useful in situations where the perception of loss of control or threats to control is present). However, when such conditions exist, the concepts of reactance and learned helplessness yield useful predictions of behavioural responses to such conditions. The ecological approach has the broadest scope with the concept of behaviour setting and is a useful descriptive approach to understanding the behaviours of large numbers of people in different settings. However, this generality limits the approach’s ability to account for individual differences in the behaviour setting. Another disadvantage is that its reliance on the field observation method does not permit causal inferences regarding the determinants of behaviour.

RESEARCH IN ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY Evans (1996) in his article has recapitulated the current research trends in environmental psychology. He feels that environmental psychology has lost much of its viability as an independent field within psychology over the past decade. Much of the early enthusiasm in North America has been waned and very little collaborative ideas are forthcoming between behavioural scientists, architects and designers. However, the satisfactory aspect is that research generated in environmental psychology has been fully adopted into mainstream psychology. “The popularity of environmental psychology can be inferred from various vantage points. For instance, the subscription rates of three major journals in the field, Environment and Behaviour, Journal of Environmental Psychology, and the Journal of Architectural Planning and Research are at all times high. The courses on environmental psychology in North America are attracting students in large numbers. A number of text-books on environmental psychology have published new editions (Baum, Fischer, Baum & Greene; Gifford); two new texts have been published in the US (McAndrew; Veitch &Arkelin) in 1990s. Furthermore, Bonnes and Secchiaroli text is published in Italy” (Evans, 1996). In India, Tripathi (1997) has published a text-book on environmental psychology in the native Indian language. In India, the undergraduate and post-graduate courses on environmental psychology are offered and are well received by students in major universities and colleges. Books are published in major areas of environmental psychology (Jain, 1987; Nagar, 1998) and articles on environmental psychology are incorporated in many visible volumes on various branches of psychology (Jain and Palsane, 2004; Nagar, 1999; Nagar and Sharma, 2005). However, in theIndian context adding the prefix ‘environment’ is sometimes noticed together with a trend of compiling articles presented in seminars and proceedings in edited volumes on various general themes of environmental psychology (Agarwal & Saxena 2003; Jain, 1997). Nevertheless, all these endeavours considered together are index of the popularity and growing visibility of environmental psychology. The Cambridge and Gower’s Ethnoscape series on environment and behaviour have received overwhelming support from readers and each series are having several volumes in the pipeline (Evans, 1996). The Handbook on Environmental Psychology sold out of press (Altman & Stokols, 1987) and is now been reissued by Krieger Publications. Evans (1996) in his article reported that the handbooks of both social and health psychology, and new handbook of psychophysiology contains chapters on environmental topics. Cognitive mapping has emerged as an important area in cognitive sciences. Various journals devoted on cognition are incorporating more and more articles on spatial memory, way finding, and computational model of environmental cognition. Furthermore, Environmental education is emerging as a major sub-area within educational curriculum. Research studies in the area of child psychology and lifespan development have started focusing on immediate and background setting and its linkages with healthy development. The education of architects includes some exposure to human behaviour and behavioural science. The idea that features of the physical design affect users is more or less accepted by design professionals. While architects who are in practice have not accepted much of the knowledge of behavioural science. However, in some specialized fields like interior designs and landscape architects have shown considerable interest in many aspects of environmental psychology induced knowledge and have collaborated with behavioural scientists. In many countries, the new field of Investigative Psychology is contributing to the criminal justice system. This new field covers major areas of environmental psychology including place theory, territorial behaviour, environmental cognition, prison studies and so forth. In United States and Europe considerable efforts are evident in understanding life in space and developing programmes for housing travellers and workers in outer space (Evans, 1996). In the field of human factor engineering health and safety issues in the workplace is attracting interest and the inputs from environmental psychology are put into use. Indoor air quality and stress in work place are topics, which are generating renewed interest.Human response to various spaces prior to their actual development is attracting researchers. The computer simulation techniques are being used and more practical applications of environmental psychology are analysed. Research on environmental stressors like crowding, noise, pollutants as well as natural and technological disasters are studied and its relationship with health and cognition are examined. During emergency situations the natural behaviour of people have provided valuable insights and leads to emergency planning policies so as to reduce harmful effects. Studies on multiple stressors, cross-situational effects from home to work place and vice-versa are also attracting researchers’ attention. Another important area is to study global environmental issues. Evans (1996) has reported that the human dimensions of global change has emerged as an important priority area in US and several environmental psychologists like Paul Stern and his associates have published a recent monograph in this area. Besides Annual Review of Psychology, the Journal of Environmental Psychology has recently published a special issue on the topic. A number of researchers are focusing their study on the relationship between global environmental changes and psychology. This area derives insights from operant paradigms and motivational theories centred around, explaining how to arrest ecologically destructive behaviours. In the developing countries, people are living in suboptimal conditions. The substantial population is suffering from day-to-day environmental problems including substandard housing and unhygienic living conditions surrounded with dirty, and cramped atmosphere. The focus of research is to connect poverty and poor environmental quality within the framework of environmental psychology. A number of studies are conducted on poverty in the Indian context. However, in most of the studies the role of physical environmental features is either ignored or deemphasized. This gap is realized and some modest attempts are made to study Indian villages taking the physical environmental aspects and examining their relationship with community relationships and health measures (Tripathi, 1993). Furthermore, only meagre attempts and research work on Indian slums are conduced by psychologists (Sandhu, 1987; Nagar &Misra, 2001). For instance, a study was planned to examine the impact of rehabilitation of poor slum inhabitants who were previously exposed to unfavourable environmental conditions. The focus of this study was given on environmental quality, crowding and health (Nagar, 2005). One major result of this study indicated that slum inhabitants who were provided ownership of their slum units by the government exhibited a tendency of improving the environmental quality of their individual and shared dwelling and neighbourhood environment and reported better health relative to their counterparts who were residing in the unauthorized piece of land or were not eligible for ownership of slum units. It seems that feeling of ownership of slum unit is one important factor in protecting and improving the environmental quality of the neighbourhood. Environmental psychologists are encouraged to conduct researches on economic diversitiesand marginalised communities such as tribal villagers etc. How people have responded to process of acculturation and technological advancements introduced in present era is an important line of research. Similarly, some researches are conducted in congested inner-city areas where community groups, crowding, and environmental quality are connected with social support, tolerance and health measures (Nagar & Sharma, 2005). In addition, more systematic studies which incorporates physical environmental features like type of housing, poor environmental quality, scarcity of resource conditions and poverty dimensions particularly in rural areas, developedunderdeveloped villages, tribal-non-tribal and different ethnic groups are needed to enhance our understanding of environment-behaviour relationships in the Indian context. Culturally specific studies are also needed to tap the traditional understanding on managing the environmental problems. For example, in traditional Indian texts have sizeable coverage of the importance of physical environments and required attitudes and behaviour on the part of human beings. In the present times, the individual has ignored such a rich tradition in order to emulate the Western concept of modern development. The popular paradigm of development necessitates the exploitation of environmental resources without any limit. Such exploitation of physical resources has already created an imbalance in the availability of environmental resources and their requirement for human population on this earth. The fact, that the current environmental problems are the result of pursuing the modern paradigm of development. To create a balance between availability of resources and the requirement, a new paradigm for development may be needed. The lifestyle of the human population is now entirely dependent on technology and sophistication but pro-environment behaviour is nonetheless most important. Obviously, this care needs proper attitudes, proper management of the available resources, proper management of the environmental resources, and eco-friendly behaviour even at the cost of little discomfort. Hence, the responsibility of environmental psychologists is to translate the traditional ideas cultural sentiments into scientific methodologies which are both eco-friendly and can be easily adapted by common people.Current studies have emphasized on the interactions between neuroscience and architecture (Karakas &Yildiz, 2020). Developments in science and technology, including bio-informatics, artificial intelligence, virtual realms (Picon and Ponte, 2003), and neuroscience (Eberhard, 2007, Robinson and Pallasmaa, 2015, Zeisel, 2006), and in interdisciplinary collaborations between these fields led to the emergence of new perspectives, data-collecting devices, and measurement techniques, which eventually expanded the knowledge on human–built environment interaction. The above discussionrepresents only a sample of current research trends and future direction of research in environmental psychology. It is important to undertake studies across cultures and across different ethnic lines to understand the similarities and differences in responses to various environmental provisions. The moderators and mediator variables may be identified and more precise test may be undertaken to understand the complexity of environment-behaviour relationships.

Cognitive Maps A cognitive map is a mental representation of the spatial environment along with representation of key elements of the environment, relative locations etc. which help any individual navigate the space. According to the American Psychological Association, cognitive maps are “a mental understanding of an environment, formed through trial and error as well as observation. The concept is based on the assumption that an individual seeks and collects contextual clues, such as environmental relationships, rather than acting as a passive receptor of information needed to achieve a goal. Human beings and other animals have well-developed cognitive maps that contain spatial information enabling them to orient themselves and find their way in the real world; symbolism and meaning are also contained in such maps.” 4.3.1.1 History of Cognitive Mapping Edward Tolman (1948) is famous for introducing the concept of “cognitive map” in Psychology. With this concept he challenged the stimulus-response approach or physical-perceptual approach to space that was prevalent until then. Although not a psychologist Kevin Lynch (1981) has had a huge impact on developments in environmental psychology particularly his sketch map method, and his work on structural elements of the city. The concepts of ‘legibility’ and’ imageability’ developed by Lynch have important implications for environmental psychology and urban planning given that humans tend to feel comforted when they are able to form clear cognitive maps and they are frightened when they feel lost. Another watershed event in the history of cognitive mapping was publication of an edited book called Image & Environment: Cognitive Mapping and Spatial Behaviour (1973) by Downs and Stea which is a classic text consulted by researchers even today. Two theorists who extended Lynch’s work on cognitive mapping in environmental psychology were Kaplan (1978) and Donald Appleyard (1969). Kaplan and Kaplan (1978) developed a model of environmental preference in which they tried to explain why different people perceive and map the same physical environment differently. They identified four aspects of the environment which are related to emotional experience thus: coherence, legibility, complexity and mystery. According to Kaplan, elements in the environment related to coherence and legibility facilitate the observer in orienting themselves whereas elements in the environment related to complexity and mystery influence the extent to which actors feel involved with the environment. Donald Appleyard (1969) explained that the imageability of a city is a product of two different group perceptions of ordinary planners and the planner-citizens. According to Appleyard, mental maps need to be updated or reconstructed according to changes that happen on the face of the city. For instance, if a certain landmark which forms an anchor in people’s cognitive map changes or disappears due to some natural calamity or destruction, then people’s mental maps lose details of spatial knowledge built over so many years in the past, and the maps themselves become imprecise and vague. Appleyard (1970, 1976) linked cognitive maps to travel and showed that travellers who drove cars possessed more coherent cognitive maps than did those who took the bus. Some of these findings have had a bearing on later developments in cognitive mapping especially post cognitive neuroscience.

make it into points.

Methods of Studying Cognitive Mapping With rapid developments in technology and visualisation techniques, many new methods have been developed to study cognitive mapping. Kevin Lynch’s sketch map method is one of the most popular methods that has survived the test of time. Some of the other methods that have been employed are giving distance estimates, listing elements in a particular spatial field, navigating through an environment, etc.Some of the newer methods used to study cognitive mapping are discussed here: 4.3.1.2.1 Brain Imaging Techniques Brain imaging techniques like electroencephalogram (EEG), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and positron emission tomography (PET)scans are used to investigate the neural correlates of cognitive mapping and wayfinding.In research using MRI scans, Head & Isom (2010), and Etchamendy&Bohbot (2007) confirmed the finding of earlier brain lesion studies that the hippocampus is implicated in wayfinding whereas the caudate nucleus is associated with route learning. Later research, for example, Morris &Parslow (2004) demonstrated the role of extra-hippocampus structures such as the parahippocampus in Wayfinding. In an interesting study design employing PET scans Maguire et al., (1997) asked experienced taxi drivers in London to describe the shortest route from a given point A to point B. The assumption was that spatial behaviour in very familiar environments involves semantic memory. The results of the study showed that the hippocampus is involved in the processing of spatial layouts established over long time courses. Janzen and Jansen (2010) studied the brain’s ability to differentiate useful from redundant or ambiguous wayfinding information in a virtual maze using fMRI readings. This study showed that the parahippocampal gyrus has an important role in responding to navigationally relevant objects even if briefly viewed.In a recent study Sharma, Kaushal, Chandra, Singh, Mittal and Dutt (2017) used EEG techniques to study brain regions and processes that are utilised when people make use of landmarks in wayfinding in maze-like environments. They found that the left-hemispheric region, especially the parietal cortex, is involved in the integration of sensory cues and memory to encode contextual information of landmarks. 4.3.1.2.2 Virtual Reality Immersive virtual reality (VR) is often considered as representative of actual environments and virtual reality may be used to study wayfinding behaviour in simulated environments to reduce design errors. Ewart and Johnson (2021) from the University of Reading asked research participants to complete a wayfinding task in a familiar real environment and VR of the same building. The study showed a quantitative improvement in the route and time taken to complete the task. In another wayfinding study using VR Irshad, Perkis& Azam (2021) investigated the perceived experiences of users in an immersive VR environment. Participants in the control condition were exposed to the VR with no wayfinding cues, and participants in the experimental groups were exposed to VR with static and dynamic wayfinding cues. Results showed that wayfinding cues reduced tension, produced positive affect in the experimental group as compared to the control group having to navigate VR without any wayfinding cues; heart rate was significantly high in the control group. The applications of the study are that training people in high-risk emergency scenarios in immersive VR environments may improve their likelihood of survival in actual risky environments. 4.3.1.2.3 Space Syntax This method was developed in the University College London in the 1980s by Bill Hillier and his team (Hillier and Hanson 1984; Hillier et al. 1987). It links geometric attributes like line of sight, visual perception etc. with human behaviour such as movement and occupation to generate a graphical representation of space. These graphical representations can then be quantitatively analysed to determine the role of each spatial element in the configuration of the system as a whole or in its parts.Using space syntax analysis environmental psychologists study the social antecedents and consequences of physical space like integration, migration, ghettoization etc.. Haq (2003) carried out research in which volunteers performed ‘open searches’, in large urban hospitals to become familiar. The hospitals were analysed using space syntax measures. It was found that the depth of an entrance has an effect on wayfinding, and in the way the building is explored. Also, it was found that wayfinding and exploration was affected by lines of sight and by connectivity among spaces all of which enhance the space intelligibility. This study demonstrates the use of space syntax techniques to understand the use of cognitive maps in wayfinding and configurational analysis. 4.3.1.2.4 Geographic Information System A geographic information system (GIS) is a computer system for tagging, coding spatial information, visually representing such data and analysing them to understand patterns and their relationships. Any position on the earth’s surface that has a location identifier in terms of latitude, longitude, PIN code, ZIP code or address can be fed into the GIS and may be used to later to analyse, compare and contrast different geographical locations and the sociodemographic characteristics of people inhabiting such locations. Borst et al. (2009) found using the GIS that elderly individuals are encouraged to walk by front gardens in streets and discouraged by litter, stairs or slopes along the way. Such information obviously has relevance for designing urban spaces as well as for geriatric psychology. Specifically with respect to wayfinding Chen, Sato and Zheng (2021) investigated understanding of environmental information and wayfinding performance among travellers. They found that foreign travellers as compared to local travellers are more likely to use identifiable roads. Also, participants using paper maps were more likely to use obvious buildings as landmarks as compared to those using electronic maps. Familiarity with the navigation tool - paper/ electronic map- resulted in lower walking time.

Errors in Cognitive Mapping The concept of cognitive mapping or mental representation of the external environment is flawed (Tversky, 1993) because cognitive maps do not work on the same principle as cartographic maps. When people are asked to construct a mental map, they draw upon disparate sets of information about a place or route which has been acquired by a person over a period of time. The diverse pieces of information may not all be in visual format, they may be based on actual experience or upon stories heard about the place, and like all constructed material are dependent upon the vagaries of memory. Several distortions may creep into the cognitive mapping process because of the mental shortcuts or heuristics used by people. Tversky lists some of the following errors in cognitive mapping which may occur in isolation or in various combinations: First, the cognitive representation of space in memory is hierarchical whereas the representation of the environment in maps is horizontal or two-dimensional. This introduces errors in cognitive mapping. In this respect, Tversky cited a study conducted by Hirtle and Jonides (1985) in which participants were asked to form subjective groupings of buildings in town in terms of whether they were for commercial or educational purposes. Subjects were then asked to judge the distance between pairs of buildings. It was found that the distance between commercial versus educational buildings were overestimated relative to distances within the two functional groupings. This study thus provided evidence for the hierarchical structuring of cognitive maps which leads to errors. Second, cognitive perspective or distances between nearby landmarks appear relatively larger than distances between faraway landmarks, though it is difficult to make adequate compensation for that. A similar phenomenon occurs in making distance judgments from memory. Third, the cognitive reference points humans have in mind when asked for direction, address etc. is usually not an exact geographical reference point. Rather people describe spatial environments in terms of places they think the audience may know. For example, if you were to ask someone of her postal address, she might say that she lives next to IGNOU campus (Delhi), whereas if any foreigner were to ask the same thing, she might give them a complex set of directions with the Saket mall or Saket metro station as the landmark reference point. This process of describing lesser-known places in terms of their distance from landmarks introduces the error of asymmetric distance in mapping. Fourth, when two or many locations on a map are remembered relative to one another there is a heuristic tendency to align them with one another leading to errors. If superordinate units on a map (example, continents) are remembered as aligned, then the relative location of subordinate units (example, cities) will also be remembered as shifted. Fifth, cognitive mapping may suffer from rotation errors. When the orientation of a reference frame and an object are conflicted, there is a tendency to rotate the axis of the object towards the axis of the reference frame. This leads to rotation errors. There may be mistakes in cognitive maps because of incomplete information available for coding. A person may have no information coded for that part of the city where they have never been. Similarly idiosyncratic experiences may lead to some parts of the city to be highlighted more than others. When individual cognitive mappers use incomplete information systematic distortions may be seen on aggregate cognitive maps too. In cognitive mapping, all irregular geographic features may be smoothened. Turns and angles may be regularised to right angles. Distance judgments are usually not based on actual measurements; approximations of distance lead to distortions creeping in. Distance is usually judged to be longer when there are barriers, turns or nodes or even clutter along the road - anything which gives more intermediate information as compared to subjective judgements of equidistant locations with less information between them (Byrne, 1979). The rule of thumb used is that routes must be longer if they have many locations along them. Other factors such as socioeconomic status and number of years of experience living in a city, mobility etc. have implications for distortions that creep in cognitive mapping. Golledge and Spector (1978) studied cognitive maps of Columbus, Ohio using a multidimensional scaling procedure and concluded that the amount of time people had lived in the city and their familiarity with specific locations were related to distortions on their cognitive maps.

Wayfinding Wayfinding is an application of cognitive mapping and spatial cognition. According to Passini (1996) wayfinding “includes all the mental processes which are involved in purposeful mobility”. It involves moving intentionally from point A to point B, knowing when one has reached one’s destination, and also being able to retrace one’s way back to point A. Although wayfinding and navigation are used interchangeably, they are not the same. Navigation of a google map for example, involves updating the actor’s location and rate of travel (depending upon whether one is walking, cycling, using a two-wheeler or a four-wheeler) as the actor moves along a pathway towards a destination. Wayfinding, in contrast, involves selection of a particular path from among an existing network of routes, drawing up a relationship among the several paths as one travels, and choosing the best route depending upon one’s objective/goal. According to Darken and Peterson (2002), wayfinding is “the cognitive element of navigation”; wayfinding does not involve movement whereas navigation is the combination of motion and cognitive wayfinding

Characteristics of Wayfinding Wayfinding is an interdisciplinary area where cognitive psychology, graphic design, landscape architecture, urban planning, organisational behaviour and many other fields converge and have contributed since the inception of the discipline. Behavioural elements involved in wayfinding that are of interest to environmental psychologists include skills, experiences, aptitude of people, as well as perceptual and cognitive processes. Behavioural skills relevant for wayfinding may be ability to read and follow signs, longterm and working memory, asking for directions, reading maps, forming a coherent sense of spatial layout etc. Both individual level variables and situational factors may come into play in wayfinding. Weisman (1982) has suggested four wayfinding strategies or styles that are based on behavioural perceptual-cognitive elements: First, one may visually locate one’s destination and trace one’s way towards it steadily. This is especially useful for outside, medium to large spaces. Second, one may follow a “cue” towards a destination which may not be in one’s visual field. For example, colour-coded footprints on the floor of metro stations may help us find our way to the desired platform. This strategy is useful for medium to large complex spaces like railway stations, hospitals etc. as having too many cues may lead to sensory overload. Third, one may consult signages, landmarks along the way which provide direction and help the actor decide which path may lead to the desired destination, and which path may better be foregone. Lastly, a mental representation or cognitive map of the environment may be used. Design elements also have a very important role in ease or difficulty involved in wayfinding. For example, if the interior design elements do not have enough differentiation, it is difficult for people to tell where they are, and hence they may feel lost. Artworks, landmarks may serve as anchor points and help people find their way back. Similarly, signages, landmarks, and decision points when well lit, contribute to wayfinding ease.

Characteristics of Wayfinding Wayfinding is an interdisciplinary area where cognitive psychology, graphic design, landscape architecture, urban planning, organisational behaviour and many other fields converge and have contributed since the inception of the discipline. Behavioural elements involved in wayfinding that are of interest to environmental psychologists include skills, experiences, aptitude of people, as well as perceptual and cognitive processes. Behavioural skills relevant for wayfinding may be ability to read and follow signs, longterm and working memory, asking for directions, reading maps, forming a coherent sense of spatial layout etc. Both individual level variables and situational factors may come into play in wayfinding. Weisman (1982) has suggested four wayfinding strategies or styles that are based on behavioural perceptual-cognitive elements: First, one may visually locate one’s destination and trace one’s way towards it steadily. This is especially useful for outside, medium to large spaces. Second, one may follow a “cue” towards a destination which may not be in one’s visual field. For example, colour-coded footprints on the floor of metro stations may help us find our way to the desired platform. This strategy is useful for medium to large complex spaces like railway stations, hospitals etc. as having too many cues may lead to sensory overload. Third, one may consult signages, landmarks along the way which provide direction and help the actor decide which path may lead to the desired destination, and which path may better be foregone. Lastly, a mental representation or cognitive map of the environment may be used. Design elements also have a very important role in ease or difficulty involved in wayfinding. For example, if the interior design elements do not have enough differentiation, it is difficult for people to tell where they are, and hence they may feel lost. Artworks, landmarks may serve as anchor points and help people find their way back. Similarly, signages, landmarks, and decision points when well lit, contribute to wayfinding ease. what are the characteristics?

Equipment used in Wayfinding The earliest assistance humans received in wayfinding was probably by asking and receiving directions. The use of formal aids in wayfinding is traced to 300 - 200 BCE to the Chinese Han dynasty who used paper maps and naturally magnetised lodestone for wayfinding. Geographical paper map was first created by William Smith in the eighteenth century (Winchester 2001), and it is only in 1960 and 1976 that the geographic information system (GIS) and the Global Positioning Systems (GPS) which revolutionised wayfinding were respectively developed. Wayfinding technology has evolved very rapidly since then, and today we have smartphones, auditory feedback devices, optical technologies and smart environments - all of which aid wayfinding behaviour. Some of the contemporary equipments used in wayfinding are: 4.3.2.2.1 Maps Despite advances in technology, paper maps continue to be popular methods of wayfinding. It is not uncommon for travellers to get a hold of city maps in order to navigate cities they are visiting. However, with advances in digital visualisation techniques, online maps have also become extremely popular in everyday wayfinding. Online maps allow the mapmaker and the map-reader to interact with maps actively and deal with large amounts of data. 4.3.2.2.2 Smartphones Are probably the most popular wayfinding equipment used in everyday life these days. Smartphones enable GPS-tracking, offer three-dimensional (3-D) street views virtually, and are also accompanied by ratings of different destinations by previous visitors. Smartphones may nudge the user to visit specific places by picking up information about past preferences. All of these are helpful in making wayfinding decisions. It may not be uncommon, for example, for your voice guided smartphone to suddenly say ‘Bahai Temple within the next 100 metres; you may like to visit’ when you may be trying to find your way towards your destination. 4.3.2.2.3 Smart environments Objects in the environment like signs, art pieces, hoardings etc are fitted with software processors which are not visible to the naked eyes unless carefully observed. These processors are used to capture and process positioning information of people in the environment. 4.3.2.2.4 Dynamic traffic information services It makes use of advanced sensing technologies using which vehicle density on road at any particular time can be detected. Vehicles travelling at slow or high speed may be identified to predict the number of vehicles which may be present at any place at any given time - all helping in recording traffic flow, identifying possible road congestion etc. GPS, Smartphones, mobile apps, Google maps may be used to induct people in this informational network and also to supply real time data that helps in wayfinding related decisions. In India a roadmap for dynamic traffic management based on real time data was developed by Kothari,Jain and Parakh (2021) in the city of Indore. The system can be clubbed with the existing traffic control system to manage traffic conditions in a better way. 4.3.2.2.5 Pedestrian Navigation Applications (PNAs) and Vehicle Navigation Systems (VNSs) These are mainly GPS enabled mobile devices used in outdoor environments. PNAs facilitate wayfinding by providing assistance in space recognition, self-localization, etc. On an online map the shortest/best pedestrian route is highlighted and audio instructions or text-based instructions guide pedestrians in reaching their destination. Additional attractions that lie alongside the route are also sometimes highlighted. For example, the attention of the pedestrian may be drawn to restaurants, rest rooms etc. by the PNA. PNAs function in a similar way like in-vehicle navigation systems but they focus more on landmarks, provide more details apart from lanes and bylanes, and provide information on larger scales - all of which are relevant to walking but not to driving. In-vehicle navigation systems are more constrained by the network of main roads, and tend to ignore peripheral information. 4.3.2.2.6 Ubiquitous computing Promotes real-time context awareness facilitated by the presence of computers in larger and larger radii of space. It facilitates human activities by way of automatic identification of real-world objects, places, and situations using digital codes. Diverse activities like monitoring of pets, operation of appliances, keeping track of books and vehicles may be carried out using this method. In India, CDAC (Hyderabad, Chennai and Bangalore) is the implementing agency for the ubiquitous computing programme with the support of institutions of academic eminence. IIM Kolkata, for example, has developed a pollution Monitoring system, Amrita University has developed a Wireless Sensor Network for Real-Time Landslide monitoring, and a weather forecasting project is being implemented in Noida by C-DAC, Pune. All of these have implications for wayfinding decisions to be made by humans. 4.3.2.2.7 Equipment for people with sensory impairment Smart devices are sometimes tailor-made for people with impairments who may find it difficult to use smart phones, consult signages and generally pick up information from the environment. The “talking laser cane” for example may be used by people with visual impairment. Using signals emitted from retroreflective signs this device provides auditory feedback, instructional or corrective guidance about the presence of objects that may obstruct the path from up to 10 m away, and help visually impaired people in wayfinding (as cited in Giudice and Legge, 2008). Tactile grading may be used to help blind and people with low vision in wayfinding. The Delhi Metro Rail Corporation makes use of this facility. One question that remains is how wayfinding aids have affected cognitive mapping skills of humans. Although we do not have enough research evidence to arrive at any conclusions yet, research generally seems to show that technologically enabled wayfinding equipment have not led to any significant improvements. Ishikawa et. al. (2008) for example, found that paper maps are more efficient as compared to GPSdevices. Those who used a GPS device or relied upon direct experience stopped more times and travelled greater distances relative to individuals who used a paper map. However, driving behaviour was significantly improved when using smartphone GPS than when using maps (Lee & Cheng, 2008) or on-board GPS systems (Lee &Cheng, 2010). Also, overall, the effect of technological developments on cognitive functioning remains to be seen.

DEFINITION AND CONCEPT OF TERRITORIALITY Territoriality is an extremely widespread as well as a universal phenomenon. Indicators of human territoriality can be seen everywhere: books spread out on a library table to save a place, nameplates, fences, locks, barriers etc. Despite its pervasiveness, territoriality has not received the amount of study it deserves. Julian Edney (1974) observes that territoriality involves physical space, possession, defense, exclusiveness of use, markers, personalisation, identity, dominance, conflict, security, claim staking, arousal, and vigilance. Territoriality can he defined as a pattern of behaviour and attitudes held by un individual or group that is based on perceived, attempted, or actual control of a definable physical space, object or idea that may involve habitual occupation, defense, personalisation and marking of it. Marking means placing an object or substance in a space to indicate one’s territorial intentions. For example, cafeteria diners leave coats or books on a chair or table. Personalisation means marking in a manner that indicates one’s identity. For example, employees decorate their work spaces with pictures and mementos.

CLASSIFICATION OF TERRITORIALITY Classification of territoriality has been done in terms of a number of systems which are given below in detail. 5.2.1 The Altman System Irwin Altman (1975) categorized territories into 3 types. Altman’s typology is the degree of privacy, affiliation, or accessibility allowed by each type: Primary territories: These are spaces owned by individuals or primary groups, controlled on a relatively permanent basis by them, and central to their daily lives. Examples include one’s bedroom or a family’s dwelling. The psychological importance of a primary territory to its occupant(s) is always high. Secondary territories: They are less important to us than primary territories, but they do possess moderate significance to their occupants. For example, a person’s desk at work, favorite restaurant, locker in the gym etc. Control of these territories is less essential to the current occupant and is more likely to change, rotate, or be shared with strangers. Public territories: They are areas open to anyone in good standing with the community. Beaches, sidewalks, hotel lobbies, trains, stores etc. are public territories. Occasionally, because of discrimination or unacceptable behaviour, public territories are closed to certain individuals. In contrast to primary territories, which generally are closed to outsiders, public territories are open to all outsiders who are not specifically excluded. Altman describes two other types of territories, although they are not universally recognized territories: Objects: They meet some of the criteria for territories - we mark, personalize, defend and control our books, coats, bicycles, and calculators. Ideas: They are also territories in a certain manner. We defend them through patents and copyrights. We have rules against plagiarism. Software authors try to protect ownership of their programs. 5.2.2 The Lyman and Scott System Lyman and Scott (1976)categorised territories into the following types - i) Interactional territories: They are areas temporarily controlled by a group of interacting individuals. For example, include a classroom, a family’s picnic area etc. Little overt marking of these territories may occur, yet entry into them is perceived as interference, rudeness, or “crashing”. ii) Body territories: This is not the same as personal space because the boundary is at one’s skin rather than some distance away from it. Bodies may be entered with permission (as in surgery) or without permission (as in a knife attack), but individuals mark and personalise their bodies with makeup, jewelry, tattoos, and clothing and they certainly defend and try to control access to their bodies. iii) Public Territory:is an area that is used and can be entered by anyone but he must comply with existing norms. It has low ownership cognition, control is very difficult and residents can only see but cannot be owned and controlled exclusively by individuals or groups. iv) Home territory:areas where the regular participants have a relative freedom of behavior and sense of intimacy and control over the area. Hussein El-Sharkawy (1979) in Lang (1987), shows four types of territoriality that are useful in environmental design namely;

1. Attached territory, is a personal space that is owned by someone
2. Central territory, is the house, building with ownership
3. Supporting territory; semi-private and semi-public zones such as corridors, swimming pools, front gardens, back gardens
4. Peripheral territory; is a public space such as a shared sports field, and a city park. Brower (1976) distinguishes territories into four types:
5. Personal territory: Personal territory is controlled individually or in groups. Group members are members who have a very close relationship such as a relationship due to marriage or relationships due to blood ties.
6. Community territory: Community territory is controlled by groups whose members sometimes change, but each member has gone through a screening process and sometimes an inauguration ceremony is held in accepting the member. This is done is to clarify the differences between group members and people outside the group.
7. Society territory: This territory is controlled by the general public and is open to the public, including public places such as a highway, and also places that are not public property such as waiting rooms in terminals, performance halls in theaters and so on. Prohibition and control are less free than previous types of ownership. This is done through rules or norms that come from the community, these regulations can be based on gender differences, age differences, or racial differences.
8. Free territory: This territory has no permanent residents, and the subject’s existence is not under the prohibition or control of certain parties. The rules that guide behavior are self-determined or based on natural forces or because of moral norms. This territory is characterized by the absence of territorial signs and therefore restrictions or controls that arise are more due to the exploration and imagination of its inhabitants. Types of Infringement Research and experience indicates that there are several ways that a territory may be infringed upon: Invasion: An outsider physically enters the territory, usually with the intention of taking control of it from its current owner. For example, a spouse taking over a sewing room to install the family’s new computer. Violation: It is a more temporary incursion into someone’s territory. Usually, the goal is not ownership but annoyance or harm. Vandalism, hit-and-run attacks, and burglary full into this category. Contamination: The infringer fouls someone else’s territory by putting something awful in the territory. For example, a large chemical company leaving poisonous waste in the ground. Types of Defense Just as there are a variety of ways to infringe on territories, there are various ways to defend them. However, it should be remembered that territories are not always infringed and even when they are infringed, they are not always defended. Mark Knapp(1978) divides defenses into three general types: Prevention defenses: Markers such as coats, towels, signs, and fences are preventive defenses. One anticipates infringement and acts to stop it before it occurs. Reaction defenses: They are responses to an infringement after it actually happens. For examples of slamming doors and physically striking out at the infringer etc. Social Boundary defense: The social boundary defense consists of a ritual engaged in by hosts and visitors. For example, Bushmen groups in Africa who meet at a border exchange certain greetings before they allow outsiders into their territories. Social boundary defenses serve to separate wanted visitors from unwanted ones through social interaction.

MEASUREMENT OF TERRITORIALITY Territoriality can be measured through certain techniques which are as follows: 5.3.1 Field Studies and Field Experiments Field experiments are attempts to exercise experimental control and random assignment of subjects in real world settings. Field experiments require unusual creativity and perseverance to design and carry out.A study conducted by Simone, Barile and Calabrese (2018) is a rare example of territoriality and decision making. The purpose of this study was to discover whether being in one’s own territory gives a person greater influence than a visitor on the outcome of a mutual decision. In addition, the researchers wanted to find out whether dominance (as a personality trait) influenced the process. They asked groups of three students to meet in a room in which one student was the resident and the other two were visitors. The group was asked to discuss a budget problem and reach a consensus. Dominance did not affect decision making much. Instead, the final consensus reflected the territory owner’s point of view in the debate much more than it reflected the visitors’ point of view. The results suggest that if you want decisions to go your way you should try to get others to discuss the decision at your place. This strategy, it appears, works whether or not you have a dominating personality. Field studies, also performed in real world settings, focus on naturally occurring correlations or differences between variables because the researcher cannot randomly assign subjects or exercise control over the variables.In a typical field study, several variables are measured but not controlled by the researcher, and there is no random assignment to the experimental conditions or settings. For example, Jason, Reichler and Rucker (1981)investigated territoriality on beaches. Sunbathers tend to mark off territories using radios, towels, and umbrellas. The results showed that females claim smaller territories than males, and those mixed sex groups and larger groups claim less space (per person) than do same sex groups and smaller groups. 5.3.2 Surveys and Interviews Another way to study territoriality is to ask individuals about their behaviour and experiences. Self-report methods such as surveys and interviews have the disadvantage that respondents may not be able or willing to report their behaviour accurately. However, these methods usually have two advantages: The researcher’s resources can be stretched to include a much larger number of individuals in the study, and the opinions, beliefs, feelings and other cognitions of respondents can be studied. A good example of the interview approach is a study by Ali and Kodmany (2012) conducted on 185 residents of highrise buildings in Israel. Every member of 45 families, including children over age 5, was asked about his/her actual territory relevant behaviours and cognitions. For example, residents were asked, i) where they chose to engage in specific activities in the apartment (a behaviour question), and ii) who, in their opinion, owned various places within the apartment (a cognition question). 5.3.3 Naturalistic Observation and Unobtrusive Measures Another strategy for studying human territoriality is to observe ongoing territoriality behaviour in a careful, structured way. For instance, the researcher may watch how children occupy and defend certain areas of a school playground. When unobtrusive measures are employed, the researcher may count the number and location of items that individuals deploy to control a space. For instance, a university’s cafeteria is generally so heavily used that experienced students going to lunch first locate a vacant seat, where they deposit their books on the table and their coat on the back of the chair, then go to the food lines. Two typical unobtrusive measures of territoriality are marking and personalisation. If you wished to discover whether some ethnic groups express territoriality differentially, you could unobtrusively compare the amount they personalise their front yards. Berger et al. (2016) mentions that inner city Slavic Americans personalised their yards more than their non-Slavic neighbors. The Slavs landscaped their yards more, maintained their houses better, and placed more potted plants in view.

FACTORS AFFECTING TERRITORIALITY There are many factors that affect territoriality and they are as follows: 5.4.1 Personal Factors i. Sex: Territoriality varies with such personal characteristics as sex, age, and personality. It has been observed that males claim larger territories than females. Men still hold high status occupations more often than women, and thereby claim larger spaces at work more often. Men are also more territorial, even before they acquire higher status, that is, when both men and women are still in the student phase of their lives. ii. Personality and Intelligence: More intelligent residents of both sexes usually mark of larger areas for themselves, residents of both sexes who come from larger homes mark off more space for themselves, and males who are more apprehensive mark off larger territories. Females who are more self- assured but less dominant mark off larger territories. The results depict that gender and personality play an intertwined role in territoriality. iii. Competence: One’s level of competence also affects territorial functioning to a great extent. Residents who require less help to get around reported being more territorial not only in public territories but also in their primary territories. Residents who were more mentally alert were more territorial in their primary territories, but those who were less mentally alert were more territorial in public territories. 5.4.2 Social Factors i. Social Climate: The social climate of a neighbourhood appears to influence territoriality. A study conducted by Taylor, Gottfredson and Brower (1981) on 12 Baltimore districts found that congenial social climates were associated with improved territorial functioning. In more congenial neighbourhoods, residents were better able to distinguish neighbours fromintruders, experienced fewer problems of territorial control, and felt more responsibility for neighbourhood space. ii. Social Class: Territoriality varies with the socio-economic level of a neighbourhood and its residents. In lower class neighbourhoods, a person’s house serves as a primary territory, but ownership and control often end at the front door. Just beyond that door, outside the house, unwanted activities may occur. The resident often feels that control over the space outside the house is impossible and ceases attempts to control it. In middleclass neighbourhoods, a sense of territory more often extends to the yard outside and, to some extent, up and down the neighbourhood street. In upper class neighbourhoods, territorial functioning sometimes extends to the whole neighbourhood. iii. Competition for Resources: One more prominent factor in territoriality is competition for resources. You might expect more territorial behaviour when individuals struggle with others for resources. Everyday experience suggests that when cafeteria chairs, space in the library or any other resource is in short supply, individuals will begin to mark, personalise, claim and defend territories to preserve their share of the resource.Elizabeth Cashdan (1980) has supplied some reasoning and evidence, from her study of African Bushmen. In her view, territoriality occurs when there is competition for resources.However, different forms of defense are used when the resources are abundant than when they are scarce. Humans control their territories through social boundary defense mechanisms in which ownergroups focus on reciprocal access to territories by members of competing ownergroups.The boundary itself is no longer so important; instead, visitors to a territory must go through various permission rituals to enter an owner’s territory. Once they “pay their dues,” they are welcome to share in the resources of the territory. iv. Legal Ownership: Another social factor in territoriality is legal ownership. Both the tenant and the homeowner control residential territory in the sense we have defined territoriality, but legal ownership appears to increase the home owner’s territorial behaviour. Specifically, homeowners engage in more personalisation than tenants, given the greater commitment of resources made by homeowners. v. Task: When we are in a public territory but engaged in a specific task, we may defend that territory more than if we are not doing anything particular. A study of callers at public telephones found that people continued their calls longer when someone was waiting for the phone than when no one was waiting for it (Ruback, Pape & Doriot, 1989). 5.4.3 Physical Factors In the essay, Approach to Safety and Securuty in Urban Neighbourhoods and City Centres, Jane Jacobs in 1961 and forwarded by Oscar Newman in 1973 argued for defensible space theory to explain the physical factors that influence territoriality. They opined that residential crime and fear of crime are the two phenomena related to territorial invasion. The theory proposes that certain design features-such as real or symbolic barriers to separate public territory from private territory and opportunities for territory owners to observe suspicious activity in their spaces (surveillance), will increase residents’ sense of security and decrease crime in the territory. For example, one would suspect more crime in areas that offer fewer opportunities for surveillance and do not appear to be controlled by anyone. A study by Sommer (1987) reportedlocations with minimum surveillance had more stripped-down cars. Another study of crime in university residence halls showed that halls with defensible space features (e.g., more areas that residents could control and more surveillability) suffered less crime than halls on the same campus without such features (Sommer, 1987). 5.4.4 Cultural and Ethnic Factors Territoriality is merely expressed differently in different cultures. One investigation of territoriality on French and German beaches was closely patterned on an earlier U.S. study, so that the beach territoriality of Germans, French, and Americans could be contrasted. The three cultures were similar in some respects(Smith, 1981). For example, i) in all three cultures, larger groups claim smaller per person spaces ii) groups composed of males and females claim smaller per person spaces. iii) females claim less space than males In other respects, however, the cultures differ. The French seem less territorial. They had some difficulty with the very concept of territoriality, often saying that “the beach is for everyone.”The Germans engaged in much more marking. They frequently erected sand castle barriers, signs declaring that “their” areas of the beach were “reserved” between two particular dates, and signs indicating that certain areas were reserved for certain groups. Finally, territorial sizes were quite different among the three cultures, but the shapes of the territories were quite similar.The Germans more often claimed very large territories, but in all three cultures, individuals marked out more elliptical territories and groups marked out more circular territories.

THEORIES OF TERRITORIALITY Some of the important theoretical perspectives are as follows: 5.5.1 The Role of Genes and Evolution Ralph Taylor(1988) in his seminal work Human Territorial Functioning. An Empirical, Evolutionary Perspective on Individual and Small GroupTerritorial Cognitions, Behaviours and Cognitions, has elucidated comprehensively the evolutionary and genetic bases for human territoriality. He opined that territorial functioning is a product of our evolutionary heritage. Our ancient history as bands of hunters roaming the African savannah shaped the general nature of our present territoriality. According to Taylor, because territoriality developed in a small group context, even today it applies only to individual and small groups, not to large aggregates such as nations.Taylor maintains that the behaviour processes involved in our present territorial functioning are similar in form to those evolved long ago, even if they no longer serve quite the same purpose or have the same consequences. Finally, Taylor asserts that the evolutionary basis of territoriality does not mean that it is “hardwired” into our genes. 5.5.2 An Interaction Organiser Julian Edney (1972) emanates that human territoriality serves to organise human behaviour so that violence, aggression, and overt domination are unnecessary. When an individual or group controls a setting, many aspects of behaviour become ordered, including choice of activities, access to resources, and behavioural customs. Many individuals who have been employed by others, dream of owning a business themselves, partly for financial reasons, but also so they can organise and control the policies and physical aspects of their workplace: For example, children want their own rooms so that their activities and decorations do not have to be negotiated with a sibling. Thus, one motivation for seeking territory is to have the opportunity to obtain these organising prerogatives. 5.5.3 Behaviour Setting Theory Ecological psychologists view territorial behaviour from a behaviour-setting perspective. The organising function of territoriality is quite similar to concepts from the work of Roger Barker, the father of ecological psychology. In ecological psychology a program is “a prescribed sequence of interactions between people and object in the setting.” Other concepts from ecological psychology explicitly incorporate the notion of control. For example, sensing mechanisms and executive mechanisms (usually a person in control, but sometimes a serve mechanism such as a thermostat) examine the setting for incorrect conditions and correct them.

CONCEPT OF COMMUNITY DESIGN The origins of “community design”, a term originally coined for the involvement of local people in planning and design decision-making processes that dates back to 1960s, a period of awakening and acknowledging human rights in the world (1). Community participation in planning and design, in this respect, appears to contemporary planners, designers and scholars as an extension of the ideals and systems of thought that were in the mainstream four decades ago (Sanoff, 2000). Since the start of the movement, however, the understanding of the practice of community design and the meaning behind fundamental terms such as “community design” and “participation” have shifted. While such a shift has multiple implications for practitioners of community design, the shift itself can be characterized as one from an ideological base to a pragmatic base. Landmark studies such as Arnstein’s (1969) and Wulz’s (1986) exemplify this shift from late 60s to 80s, and more recent studies confirm a continuation of this trend (Toker, in press). Since 1990s, however, the shift towards a pragmatic understanding has also led the way to surprising mutations of the idea of people’s involvement in planning and design decision-making. The very use of the term “participation” by popular planners / designers in the mainstream to provide leverage to the creation and promotion of new styles exemplifies this trend (Duany and PlaterZyberk, 1992). The shift from an ideological base to a pragmatic one has contributed to the increasing popularity of community design in several ways. First, broad preference of the mild character of the pragmatic approach with its collaborative decision-making focus over the antagonistic attitudes of the 1960s (Alinsky, 1972) has made community design movement more accessible in its pragmatic era. Second, the eventual realization by many practitioners, of the significantly positive outcomes of public participation in design and planning decision-making processes has become more probable with the increasing focus on the pragmatic aspects of community design. Increasing popularity in this context - for either reason - however, left the practice of community design open to be used as a tool in creating leverage to mutated lines of thought in planning and design. Such approaches (e.g. new urbanism) conceptualize community design in a way that turns communities into physical entities (Harvey, 1997) and focuses on design as it relates to the building facades and layouts (Sorkin, 1998). This kind of overemphasis on spatial aspects in especially new urbanism echoes spatial determinism, which overestimates the power of architecture in shaping social dynamics (Sorkin, 1998; Talen, 1999; Hayden, 2003; Torre, 1999). Idealist or pragmatist, community design has always been about building communities and designing for communities (Sanoff, 2000), and always at odds with the proponents of spatial determinism. Therefore, community design in the context of new urbanism can only be construed as an example of pseudo-participation, which seems to be the outcome of increasing popularity of community design. As Sanoff (2000) distinguishes genuine participation from pseudo participation he claims that as long as the decision-making power is not in the hands of the participants, and they are to be presented what is planned for them, it cannot be genuine participation. For it to be genuine, the participatory process has to place participants in control of the decisions and actions taken. Today, the picture of community design reveals two main areas of practice, a picture characterized by the terms genuine participation and pseudo participation (Sanoff, 2000).

TERRITORIALITY AND COMMUNITY DESIGN When applied to particular design situations, territoriality should be facilitated in the plans wherever it appears to serve the needs of clients. That is, based on our list of human behaviour patterns that are linked to territoriality, designs for territoriality should attempt to reduce aggression, increase control, and promote a sense of order and security. A rather bold conclusion, supported by some research and refuted by none so far reported is this: The more a design can provide primary territories for every person at home, school, and work, the better. Of course, one important restriction on the supply of primary territories is money; space costs can be high. A second restriction is the policies of some organisations, which require that employees be under the direct surveillance of a supervisor. A third restriction is that some jobs, by their very nature, require that other employees or the general public have access to the individual holding the job. The only refuges of frontline employees are the staff room and the coffee break. On many jobs, groups must work together in close communication most of the day. Individuals in such jobs may not perform best if each one is located in a separate primary territory. However, territories may be occupied by groups. Such work groups should have their own collective primary territory. In many home, work, and institutional settings, more could be done to provide primary or secondary territories for individuals and groups. Very often, no one has seriously considered how the lives of affected individuals would be improved by access to an owned space. This section will examine some suggestions for territorialisingneighbourhoods and hospitals. The design recommendations were developed for these specific settings, but with a little imagination, we can conceive of design for other settings using the same principles. Changes in the design of larger settings (such as neighbourhoods) are more difficult to implement than changes in small settings (such as our own homes). Nevertheless, whole neighbourhoods have been territorialised to varying degrees. 5.7.1 Neighbourhoods Cities are often asked to block off streets in order to restrict traffic flow through the neighbourhood when residents believe too much traffic flows through their streets. Commuters, of course, believe the streets are there to help them get to and from work efficiently. Concerns about children’s safety and traffic noise are the neighbourhood residents’ explicit reasons for the barriers, but the move to territorialise the neighbourhood may have less obvious benefits, Blocking off streets serves to give residents a sense of control and identity. The cars that now move through the streets are owned by neighbours. Because there are fewer cars, residents have a better chance of recognising strange one.This may serve to reduce crime because “different” cars are noticed by residents. Burglars who have several neighbourhoods to choose from would be better off selecting a more anonymous neighbourhood. Defensible space theory would support neighbourhood design changes that increase the residents’ sense of ownership, eliminate spaceabout which no one in particular feels vigilant, and increase space that is easily watched by residents. Changing whole neighbourhoods, unfortunately, is politically difficult. Trafficbarriers, for example, are opposed not only by commuters who are inconveniencedbut also by residents of neighbourhoods that will experience increased trafficas a result of the new barriers. Smaller-scale changes-to individual houses, forexample-are much easier politically, but some of them cost that individual homeowner more. Of course, the problem sometimes can be solved by creating a different streetpattern either when the neighbourhood originally designed or by rearranging the street pattern in a block. One study demonstrated that residents of cul-de-sac believe that they have exclusive use of their street, can better distinguish neighbours from strangers, and have safer and better-maintained streets thanresidents of through streets. 5.7.2 Hospitals No one likes to be hospitalised. Besides the obvious reason (that being in a hospital means illness or injury), another reason we may not enjoy our stay is the way space is managed in hospitals. Unavoidably, we go to a setting where we have no pre-established territory. Immediately, this affects our sense of control and security. Even if we are given a private room or our own bed, we are compelled to perform behaviours (such as sleeping, grooming and discussing private matters) in a secondary territory that we are used to performing in our own primary territories. If we have no lockable cupboard, for example, our usual sense that we can control our possessions is compromised. The answer is to allow patients personalisation and control wherever possible. Lockable cupboards, viewable bulletin boards, and more table space to display photographs, books, and other meaningful possessions are some suggesteddesign changes. An even simpler rule may be to ask staff to respect the way patients arrange small objects within their reach. Some evidence that the creation of primary territories does have a beneficial effect comes from a study in aNursinghomeconducted by Walivaara et al. (2013). In double occupancy rooms, visible markers that divided the roominto two separate spaces increased residents’ self-esteem and sense of adequacy. As in most situations, however, there are strong pressures against some of these design changes. Some staff members complain that tables are cumbersome,cupboards take up valuable space, and bulletin boards are expensive. Somestaff objects to the inefficiency caused by idiosyncratic arrangements of furniture and personal possession. The issue is whether institutions primarily exist for the welfare of the patients or the staff. Surprisingly often, judging by the arrangements of hospitals and other institutions, the answer is that staff needs come first. Staff needs, of course, are legitimate. However, too often, patient needs are undeserved because their illness, injury, and temporary status reduce their abilityto voice their needs in an effective way. Yet, although each patient is temporary, a permanent stream of similar patients with similar needs flows through the hospital. The best solutions to the staff versus patient design dilemma will be reached when designers carefully examine both group’s needs and base architectural changes on the costs and benefits to both groups. More changes favouring patientprivacy and territoriality over staff efficiency are needed because, to this point, staff needs usually have prevailed. Spatial arrangements despite some existing barriers could be improved considerably so that everyone in a building is better off. Environmental designs that creatively include territoriality can significantly improve quality of life.

Territorial Demarcation, Personalization, and Behaviour Territoriality is expressed through marking and often involve personalization. According to Cassidy (1997) fences. boundaries, and other indications that territory belongs to someone, without identifying who the person or group is, are markers. Markers with the identity of the person such as name plates or which distinguish the territory in unique way (eg. house name or number) reflects attempt to personalize the territory. Public territories are self-consciously marked to reserve space. People often mark territories in public domain (e.g. seat in the library or space in the beach) so as to prevent intrusion and distress. Often when the territory in the public domain is invaded, people move their occupancy to other places. However, the invasion generates certain physiological arousal and anger (Cassidy, 1997). In contrast, it is less likely that the primary territory (e.g. home, garden) is invaded. The effectiveness of public territory markers is dependent on many factors including duration of absence of the owner, the availability of alternative space, and the desirability of the territory (Brown & Altman, 1983). When sufficient space is available the territorial markers are effective and intrusion is prevented. However, when the alternative space decreases with increase in the population the territorial markers lose its significance and effectiveness (Sommer & Backer, 1969) Similarly the effectiveness of a marker (e.g. school newspaper on snack bar table), is reduced, if it is mistakenly perceived by the potential intruder as Litter (Arenson, 1977). However, markers such as college notebooks are not disregarded completely. Some studies have reported that a half-empty beer mug is a more effective deterrent to intrusion of a table at a bar than a more personal marker such as sport jacket (Hoppe, Greene & Kenny, 1972). In a review Brown and Altman (1983) reasoned that prospective customers realize that patrons may forget their jacket when leaving the bar but they rarely leave half empty beer mugs in the bar because the prospective customers assume that the bartender expects the patron to return. Thus, personal markers provide more protection from intrusion than impersonal markers. 5.8.2 Territoriality,Behaviour and Aggression Depending upon a number of situational factors, territory may serve either as instigator of aggression or as a stabilizer of aggression. The status of a particular territory affects the relationship between territoriality and aggression. When territory is unestablished or disputed, aggression is more likely. The study of Lev and Cybriwsky (1974) reveal that street gangs engaged in more inter-gang violence when territorial boundaries were ambiguous than when they were wellestablished. Furthermore, evidence exist that welldemarked territorial boundaries lend stability and reduces the probability of violence and aggression. Other studies reported that after the introduction of identifiable territories a drop in the level of aggression in the group of retarded boys was seen. Thus, it seems that well-established territories are less likely to be intruded and thus the chances of aggression are less (Aiello, 1987). 5.8.3 Architectural Features and Territorial Behaviour In public spaces certain architectural features appear to encourage the development of territorial claims. The study of Sommer (1967) reports that students are more likely to maketerritorial claims for library seats that are close to the wall, facing away from the distractions of the main entrance, and towards the rear of the room. Passerby is more likely to use water fountain if it is shielded from the spatial proximity of others by a physical barrier (Aiello, 1987). It is commonly observed that much of the criminal activities are centred in areas around public spaces. The offenders are more likely to position themselves in street corners or pathways in open spaces and try to avoid front garden spaces. The concept of defensive space focuses on various aspects of public space organization that helps in promoting sense of ownership to its residents (Newman, 1972). Newman (1972) conducted a study on two housing projects in New York, occupied by equal number of residents. The Brownsville project was organized in smaller blocks having residential units for five to six families and was built around courtyard.The Van Dyke project was high-rise with residential blocks, separated by large parks. The design features of the Brownsville project provided defensive space to the residents. The design features facilitated sense of community and social interaction between neighbours in Brownsville housing, which promoted security and reduced the criminal mishappenings. In contrast, the crime rate was 50 per cent higher in Van Dyke housing relative to Brownsville because the probability of social interaction was inhibited by the residential design. Thus, it seems that the strength of territorial ownership and defense seems to vary according to the characteristics of the setting, the features of architectural design, gender, cultural background and group size.

PERSONAL SPACING 5.9.1 Concept of Personal Spacing One of the most sacred rules of social behaviour is ‘Never transgress into your neighbour’s personal space’. To put it simply, we all need a private space to just sit, think, study, sleep or relax... a special place, just to be alone, to spend some ‘me time’ in the privacy of our thoughts. Personal space is that region surrounding a person which psychologically they regard as ‘their turf’. Most people value their personal space and feel discomfort, if a stranger comes too close to you while striking a conversation; anger, or anxiety when their personal space is invaded. Personal space thus refers to the distance you will automatically take a step backwards to restore the distance needed between people when they interact. It is the amount of room that is needed to feel safe and comfortable. It is the immediate region which surrounds us and is seen as our psychological property. If people try to enter that space, one starts feeling closed in, uncomfortable and anxious. In 1960’s Edward Hall coined the term ‘Proxemics’ to refer to ways in which people use physical space to regulate social interaction. His book The Hidden Dimension is a landmark in the field of personal space. Katz (1937) and Sommer (1969) are some other seminal researchers in the field. According to them, personal space is the invisible physical boundary that we draw in between us and other people. It decides how close we will go to that person or allow him to come close to us. So, perhaps the better term to use could be ‘interpersonal distance because it only becomes relevant when we are interacting with others. We only become aware of it when somebody invades it. The personal space is often an indicator of the kind of relationship we share with the person, our society and culture. For example, an affectionate hug from a closefriend will be perfectly alright for an individual but a hug from a stranger will be not only be uncomfortable but even offending for most. Hence, just as body movements and facial expressions can communicate a great deal of nonverbal information, so can this physical space between individuals. Edward Hall (1966) identified four zones of personal space. He then subdivided each one of them into two subcategories, ‘near’ and ‘far’. i. Intimate Distance: This is the smallest zone and it tends to be about 18 inches apart. As the name suggests, this space is open only for those who are very close to us. This distance often shows great comfort level and closeness that we share with the person. So, only our life-partners, children, close family members, dear friends and pets can enter this space without bothering us. Displays of affection and comforting are commonly conducted within this space. The only fluke strangers an individual typically accepts within this intimate space are health care professionals or in situations like playing a wrestling match. Hall describes’ near’ situations like when we have body contact, for example, hugging and “far’ when we are close but not really touching like when we whisper. If a stranger tries to enter in this reserved space, we feel very uncomfortable. ii. Personal Distance: This physical distance too is for close friends and family members. The closer we can be to the person indicates how close we are to him/her emotionally. It begins about an arm’s length away. It extends from 18 inches to 4 feet. This space is used in conversations with friends, to chat with associates, and in group discussions. Such informal conversations and with friends, acquaintances are held in this space. Strangers are prohibited in this space too. The ‘near’ is for the couples or close friends while far’ is for the acquaintances in a social setting. iii. Social Distance: This distance ranges from 4 to 12 feet and is usually used for formal social interactions with known people, new acquaintances or even strangers. The range of distance changes according to the situation. For example, in an informal business meeting with your co-worker, you can be more physically closer than a formal business meeting with a client whom you are meeting for the first time. iv. Public Distance: The space beyond social space is open to all and is known as public space. This space, which extends more than 12 feet, is essentially used for public speaking situations for large audiences like, speeches, lectures, presentations, performances etc. The “far’ phase of this distance can be seen when a high-profile leader is addressing the gathering. The distance between him and the audience tends to be much greater. Sometimes, such categories are criticized as being too rigid but they do explain the ways in which they influence behaviour. The term is used literally or symbolically in our layman conversations. For example, if we share a good relationship with someone, we talk about being ‘close”; if we no longer get along, we say, let us keep distance. Being in touch or being distant is actually talking about ‘personal space’. There are two theories to explain the concept too. Argyle and Dean (1965) tried to explain the concept of personal space by suggesting, affiliative-conflict theory. It is like the classic approach avoidance conflict that we face. We want to be close to others but at the same time, we want to keep some distance too! The idea of personal space helps us to reach a compromise so that a balance is maintained. Same can be explained with a slightly different angle by the social constructionist perspective. According to this, invasion of personal space produces physiological arousal and it also leads to the cognitive appraisal of the situation. On the basis of our evaluations, close to us, the physical proximity may turn to passion or display or affection but if he is a stranger, we may become very angry. So, the stress caused by the invasion of personal space is dependent on the context and our appraisal.

Privacy Privacy, personal space, and territorial behavior affect the people’s perception of environmental comfort and quality. The need for privacy, personal space, and territory is universal.These three concepts (privacy, territorial behavior,and personal space) are closely linked. Privacy refersto the management ofinformation orthe regulation of social interaction with one’s surrounding (Laufer, et al, 1973 & Sundstrom 1986). It is an intentional retreat from unwanted observation, audition, distraction or interruption. There are many factors affecting privacy, such as:  Mechanism of the senses: All 5 senses affect the way human beings perceive their surroundings and the mechanism by which they control privacy.  Individuality: Sense of individuality, self-evaluation and identity(personal values, beliefs, opinion and expression), Selective and interpersonal communication (in different context) and level of interaction.  Space distance: A set of distances (proxemic patterns) that people use to control their relationships with others. These distances change in different societies and from a culture to another.  Architectural elements of a space: Architectural elements act as regulators of privacy, visually, acoustically and spatially. These elements are: o Furniture o Walls o Fences o Doors o Furnishings o Tinted glass o Windows  Culture: Culture affects the boundary of what is regarded as private. The level and degree of privacy is culturally determined in different geographies of the world. Privacy was explained as mechanisms of control interaction with others. Due to the culture North Americans leave more space between each other during interaction than the Arabic men. There are several kinds of privacy, each of which serves a different purpose. Westin (1970) identifies four types: i. Solitude: In this type of privacy, person is alone and free from observation by others and, assuch s/he is in the most extreme condition of privacy. ii. Intimacy: The second privacy state occurs when small group –for example a couple separate themselves from outsiders in order to be alone. iii. Anonymity: This type of privacy occurs when a person acts freely without being recognized by the others in a crowded, public place. iv. Reserve: This type of privacy occurs when a person develops psychological barrier against unwanted intrusions while being engaged an ongoing activity. It is a state of privacy in which we are psychologically separated from some other people.

Determinants of Personal Spacing How do we develop this sense of interpersonal distance? Are there any physiological factors too or is it only a psycho-social phenomenon? Which psycho-social factors determine our personal space? Let us try to find out: i. Physiological Factor: According to Adolphs et al. (2009), we start acquiring our individual sense of personal space by 3 or 4 years and it is fully developed by our adolescence. In the journalNature, 2009, he mentioned that this peculiar sense is constructed and monitored by the amygdala, a brain region involved in experiencing fear. It generates repulsive forces when our space is invaded. It kind of rings a warning bell if somebody comes too close, thus, it helps us to keep a minimum distance from others. But if this part of brain is damaged, then the space invasion is not registered in the brain. This was confirmed by a rare patient who had a damaged amygdala. She had no sense of personal space and was comfortable no matter how close others got to her. The same result was found when the experiment was conducted on monkeys(Amaral et al., 2003). He added that people with autism, often find it difficult to maintain normalsocial behaviour and could stay in close proximity without any emotional problem (Amaral et al., 2003). ii. Cultural Factor: All cultures use personal space to communicate but Hall (1959) emphasized that the size of personal space that is needed to guard our comfort zone is different in different cultures. He calls some cultures as, ‘Contact cultures’, and for example middle eastern or Latin countries. They generally show physical intimacy, stand close to each other and thus they require less personal spacce. But if we belong to ‘Non-contact culture’ then we will not be touching or standing close to others while communicating. We will prefer to stand apart. Such people will naturally need more personal space between them and others. People from North America, Europe can be seen as those belonging to non-contact cultures.Hall attributed these differences to cultural norms regarding sensory modalities that are considered appropriate for communication between people. Distinct norms are there for informal talking, business, greeting etc. It is important to know them if we want to send the correct signal through our personal space. In case, we donot adhere to these norms, we may be in trouble or give the other person a culture shock. For example,the public display of affection like kissing is a common gesture of greeting in West European countries. However, this maybe not be a part of many Eastern cultures. Thus, different cultures have different concept of the ‘right distance’. We must be aware of that boundary line to avoid unpleasant ‘social accidents’ as seen in this example. iii. Population Density of the Place: Personal space is a highly variable concept. Just as our culture influences it, similarly, our experiences also shape it. If we live in a densely populated region like Mumbai or Japan, then we cannot afford to have a larger personal space. Increasing population cannot and has not given that luxury ever to most of its citizens, hence they have adapted to having lesser personal space around. The people from Mongolia or Canada, where lot of space is available, are used to having a larger space around them so they start needing the same to feel secure. They will be highly uncomfortable in a crowded Mumbai train while a typical Mumbai citizen may even continue reading a book! iv. Individual factors: Age, sex, social status, anxiety, abnormality, even within a culture or a country, there would be variation in the amount of personal space that we need to feel safe. Some of the factors that may play a role are: (a) Gender: It is found that two males need more interpersonal distance between them than two females. Gifford (1982) adds that though females prefer greater personal space, it also depends on the situation, relationship etc. (b) Age: Our need for space grows as we grow older. Hayduk, (1983), points out that in case of children, we donot mind proximity. As the concept of sexuality is unknown to them, so no threat is perceived or registered. But as we mature, we interpret our sex roles and our need for larger personal space develops. (c) Status: The need for personal space is also guided by our status in the society. The more affluent and financially sound we are, the more is our need for personal space. Powerful, rich people want more privacy and exclusive space. A person, who is used to travelling in a chauffeur driven car, will be at loss in a crowded public transport. (d) Relationship Shared: As seen earlier, our emotions dominate the interpersonal distance that we share. We can be intimate and close to someone only if we bond emotionally. The more we dislike a person, greater will be the interpersonal distance. (e) Personality: Our personal traits also influence the amount of space that we need around us. Gifford (1982) found that extroverts and friendly people need less personal space than cold and quarrelsome people. New research from University College London found that anxious people need more interpersonal space as they tend to get threatened soon. Shy, people with autistic, and people having claustrophobia also need more space. Sommer (1959) explained that people diagnosed with schizophrenia also show typical and variable personal space. When they are in a withdrawal phase, they want large distance but when they are into attention seeking phase, they want proximity. Research is also done on the distance and problem behaviour. It was found that violent criminals too like to keep large interpersonal distance. v. Circumstantial or Situational Factor: The need for personal space may vary in the same person according to the situation. As we have seen in the Unit, in crowding, one would not mind many people jostling around in a fare or an exclusive movie premier. The people sitting on both sides of your seat in a theatre may be accepted without a murmur. But if it is hardly filled, many seats are vacant and still two people talking at a distant seat may also invade into privacy. Research also suggests that we will be more comfortable to occupy those seats beside us rather than in front or back of us, we tend to suddenly feel offended if people come closer in front or behind than if they are on our sides. So, the personal space bubble seems to be elliptical and situational. Tedesco and Fromme (1974) reorted that requirement of interpersonal space was less during a competitive situation whereas in cooperation tasks, the requirement of personal space was more. vi. Expectations and Social Perception: The personal space is also decided by what is our expectation about the person we are going to meet. The social perception about that person will also influence our interpersonal distance. If we have a negative view, we prefer to be at a distance and need more personal space. Skorjans (1991) examined the personal space of participants in relation to the perceived violence level of the criminal whom they were about to meet. They were told that one of them is the violent offender, the other non-violent offender and third one has not offended any law ever. The result indicated that participants kept maximum space with the violent offender and minimum with the non-offender. Kleck (1969) and Baron(1978) also validated this finding. Thus, it is amply clear that interpersonal distance is integral in regulating our interaction with others and it is a very good indicator of the shared relationship. This makes personal space a very important aspect of behavioural studies because interaction is the base of all our social interactions in life. Whether it is our work, play, or rest, we will be more successful if we are aware of the positive and negative aspects of the interpersonal distance.

Methods of Studying Personal Space There are 4 basic research methods to study personal space (Aiello, 1987). (1) Simulation Method: In this, the person is placed in an imaginary situation and he is told to imagine the kind of interaction he would have with others in it. Sometimes dolls or miniature symbolic figures are used to project their view. Nowadays computer graphics can also be used. This is particularly useful for children but the artificial lab set up does not allow sweeping generalisation to real life. (2) Quasi-Projective or Laboratory Methods: In this method, the person uses his own body in relation to other person under controlled laboratory conditions. The other person may be real or imagined. For example, the stop-distance method, the person may approach a person till s/he starts feeling uncomfortable. Another method under this can be interactional method where direct, unobtrusive observation of actual interactions is done in the laboratories. Though laboratory method attempts to control relevant variables to avoid confounding, the lab results are difficult to generalise in the natural environment. (3) Naturalistic or Field Methods: In this method, distances between people are measured in the natural settings. This method has ecological validity as it is done in the natural surroundings. But this has some in built drawbacks like we may not know the kind of relationship the two share, other relevant variables can interfere besides of course the ethical issues involved in intruding into someone’s privacy. (4) Questionnaire: A questionnaire in which participants have to imagine a situation and rate whether they feel uncomfortable in the situation. An example is the Comfortable Interpersonal Distance Scale (CIDS) (Duke and Nowicki, 1972), on which participants have to rate where they feel uncomfortable in the situation, which they are imagining. But there is a possibility that a person may not comprehend the situation or s/he may lie. Thus, there are many methods of measuring personal space and each has its own plus and minus point. Since the topic is very personal and sensitive, there is no one ideal method of measurement. But they do help us to have a basic idea of what a personal space is.