پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,230 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,757 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 115,113,397 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 89,878,316 |
ارزیابی اثرات سازمان اجتماعی‌ـ کالبدی محلۀ نارمک شمالی بر رضایتمندی سکونتی | ||
| بررسی مسائل اجتماعی ایران | ||
| مقاله 5، دوره 5، شماره 1، خرداد 1393، صفحه 113-140 اصل مقاله (620.64 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/ijsp.2014.53756 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| مینا صوفی نیستانی* 1؛ مجتبی رفیعیان2 | ||
| 1کارشناس ارشد برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران. | ||
| 2کارشناسارشد برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| توجه به سازمان اجتماعی‌ـ کالبدی محلات با توجه به تأثیراتی که بر کیفیت زندگی و به‌تبع آن رضایتمندی سکونتی شهروندان دارد، از جنبههای مختلف حائز اهمیت است. در این پژوهش در پی دستیابی به این هدف هستیم که با توجه به سازمان اجتماعی‌ـ کالبدی محلۀ نارمک شمالی رضایتمندی سکونتی ساکنان را با تأکید بر رابطۀ پویای انسان‌ـ محیط با یکدیگر مقایسه کنیم؛ برای پی‌بردن به این نکته که بعد از گذشت چند دهه از شکل‌گیری این محلات رضایتمندی سکونتی در کدام یک از بخشهای این محله مطلوبتر است. همچنین بررسی اینکه چه عواملی در میزان رضایتمندی سکونتی افراد نقش دارند. روش تحقیق بهکاررفته در این پژوهش تحلیلی‌ـ توصیفی است. حجم نمونۀ آماری مجموعاً معادل 300 نفر بوده است، روش نمونهگیری تصادفی ساده است. تحلیل دادههای پرسشنامه بر‌اساس سه سطح رضایتمندی (سکونتی، واحد مسکونی و محلۀ مسکونی)، دو بعد رضایت عینی‌ـ ذهنی و پنج عامل ابعاد واحد مسکونی، سازمان کالبدی، محیطی، اجتماعی و بعد ادراکی‌ـ احساسی انجام گرفته است. نتایج حاصل از آزمون t تکنمونهای و رگرسیون بیانگر آن است که رضایتمندی سکونتی در بخش شرقی در سطح پایینتر از متوسط و در بخش غربی در سطح بالاتر از متوسط (میانۀ نظری: 3) قرار گرفته است. رضایتمندی از مسکن در هر دو بخش بالاتر از متوسط و رضایتمندی محلهای آن‌ها پایینتر از متوسط قرار گرفته است. همچنین در بعد ذهنی و عینی تنها رضایت عینی بخش غربی در سطح بالاتر از متوسط و سایر موارد در سطح پایینتر از متوسط قرار دارند. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| : رضایتمندی؛ رضایتمندی سکونتی؛ رضایتمندی واحد مسکونی؛ رضایتمندی محلهای؛ رضایت عینی و ذهنی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| An Evaluation of Effects of Social-Physical Organisation on Residential Satisfation: The Case of North Narmak Neighborhood in Tehran | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Mina Sufi Neyestani1؛ Mojtaba Rafieian2 | ||
| 1M.A» Degree on Urban Planning, Islamic Azad University Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran. | ||
| 2Associate Professor of Department of Urban Planning, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Paying attention to the social and physicalorganization of neighborhoods is important from different aspects. Tehran's Neighborhoods experienced different urban patterns during their formation and development. In particular, North Narmakneighborhood has experiencedtwo different patterns in its eastern and western parts.The aim of this paperis to analyze the relationship between residents and their environment in two parts of North Naramk neighborhood by emphasizing social-physical organization of this neighborhood, and applyingplace theory. We concentrate onimportant factors that predict residential satisfaction. To gather needed datawe distributeda questionnaire to 300 randomly selected residents in eastern and western parts of North Narmak. Our analysis has been based on three levels (residential, housing and neighborhood), two dimensions(objective - subjective) and five factors (housing, physical organization, environmental, social organization and cognitive - emotional)of satisfaction.The results indicate that the level of residential satisfaction in east part is less than the average (mean=3) and in west part is more than the average.In both parts, the housing satisfaction is more than the average and the neighborhood satisfaction is less than the average.Also, with respect tothe subjective and objective dimensions, only objective satisfaction of west part is more than the average level of satisfaction and the others are lower than the average. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| : residential satisfaction, housing satisfaction, neighborhood satisfaction, objective and subjective satisfaction, place theory | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
1- Adriaanse, C. (2007), »Measuring residential satisfaction: A residential environmental satisfaction scale (RESS)«. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 22(3), 287-304.
2- Aiello, A., Ardone, R., & Scopelliti, M. (2010), «Neighbourhood planning improvement: Physical attributes, cognitive and affective evaluation and activities in two neighbourhoods in Rome«. Evaluation and Program Planning, 33(3), 264-275.
3- Berkoz L, ence Turk & mer L. Kellekci (2009), »Environmental Quality and User Satisfaction in Mass Housing Areas: The Case of Istanbul«, European Planning Studies, 17:1,161-174, DOI: 10.1080/09654310802514086.
4- Bonaiuto, M; Fornara, F; Bonnes, M. (2006), »Perceived Residential Environment Quality In middle- And low-Extension Italian Cities«. Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée / European Review of Applied Psychology, 56, 23-34.
5- Braubach, M. (2007), »Residential conditions and their impact on residential environment satisfaction and health: Results of the WHO large analysis and review of European housing and health status (LARES) study«. International Journal of Environment and Pollution, 30(3/4), 384-403.
6- Bruin, M., & Cook, C. (2002), «Understanding constraints and residential satisfaction among low-income single-parent families«.Environment and Behavior, 29(4),532-553.
7- Buys, L., & Miller, E. (2012),«Residential satisfaction in inner urban higher-density Brisbane, Australia : role of dwelling, neighbours and neighbourhood«.Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 55(3), 319-338.
8- Campbell, A., Converse, P.G., & Rodgers, W. (1976),«The quality of American life«. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
9- Canter, David V. (1977), »The Psychology of Place«, London, Architectural Press.
10- Carro, D., Valera, S., & Vidal, T. (2010), »Perceived insecurity in the public space: Personal, social and environmental variables. Quality & Quantity»: International Journal of Methodology, 44(2), 303-314.
11- Costanza, R., Fisher, B., Ali, S., Beer, C., Bond, L., Boumans, R., et al. (2007),«Quality of life: An approach integrating opportunities, human needs, and subjective well-being«.Ecological Economics, 61(2-3), 267-276.
12- Dissart, J., & Deller, S. (2000),«Quality of life in the planning literature«. Journal of Planning Literature, 15 (1), 135–159.
13- Dittmann, J., & Goebel, J. (2010),»Your house, your car, your education: The socioeconomic situation of the neighborhood and its impact on life satisfaction in Germany«. Social Indicators Research, 96(3), 497–513
14- Francescato, G Weidemann, S Anderson, J & Chenoweth, R (1979), »Residents‟ satisfaction in HUD-assisted housing: design and management factors«, Washington D.C. Office of Policy, Housing and Urban Development.
15- Foo,A,(2000),«Subjective assessment of urban quality of life in Singapor«.(1997- 1998),Habitat International, no.24, pp.31-49
16- Ge, J. & Hokao, K. (2006), »Research on residential lifestyles in Japanese cities from the viewpoints of residential preferences, residential choice and residential satisfaction«, Landscape and Urban Planning, 78(3), pp. 165–178.
17- Gifford, R., (1997),»Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practices«. (2nd ed.) Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
18- Galster, G., & Hesser, G. (1981), »Residential satisfaction: Compositional and contextual correlates«. Environment and Behavior, 13(6), 735-758.
19- Grillo, M. C., Teixeira, M. A. and Wilson, D.C. (2010),»Residential satisfaction and civic engagement: understanding the causes of community participation«, Social Indices Research, 97, pp. 451-456.
20- Herting, J. R., & Guest, A. M. (1985),»Components of satisfaction with local areas in the metropolis«, The Sociological Quarterly, 26, 99-116.
21- Ibrahim, M. and Chung, W., (2003), »Quality of Life Residents Living Near IndustrialEstates in Singapore«, Social Indicator Research, Vol. 61, PP. 201-225.
22- James, R., III, Carswell, A., & Sweaney, A. (2009), »Sources of discontent: Residential satisfaction of tenants from an internet ratings site«. Environment and Behavior, 41(1), 43-59.
23- Jiboye, A ,D.(2012),» Post-occupancy evaluation of residential satisfaction in Lagos, Nigeria: Feedback for residential improvement «,Frontiers of Architectural ResearchVolume 1, Issue 3, Pages 236–243
24- Lu, M. (1999),«Determinants of residential satisfaction: Ordered logit vs. regression models. Growth and Change, 30 (2), 264–287.
25- Marans,R.W.,Couper,M.,(2000),«Measuring the quality of community life: a program for longitudinal and comparative International research«.In:Proceeding sof the Second International Conferenceon Quality of Life in Cities,vol.2. Singapore.
26- McCray, J.W., and S.S. Day. (1977), » Housing values, aspirations, and satisfactions as indicatorsof housing needs «, Home Economics Research Journal 5, pp. 244-254.
27- Mellor, D., Stokes, M., Firth, L., Hayashi, Y., & Cummins, R. (2008),»Need forbelonging, relationship satisfaction, loneliness, and life satisfaction«.Personalityand Individual Differences, 45(3), 213-218.
28- Mesch, G. S., & Manor, O. (1998), »Social ties, environmental perception, and local attachment«. Environment and Behavior, 30, 504-519.
29- Oktay, D. & Marans, R.W. (2010), »Overall Quality of Urban Life and Neighborhood Satisfaction: A Household Survey in the Walled City of Famagusta«.Open house international, Vol 35,No 3, september 2010.
30- Onibokun, A. G. (1974), »Social system correlates of residential satisfaction«. Environment and Behavior 8 (3): 323-44.
31- Phillips, D R., Oi-Ling Siu, and A Yeh. (2005), »The impact of dwelling conditions on older persons‟ psychological well-being in Hong Kong: The mediating role of residential satisfaction«. Social Science & Medicine 60, no. 2: 2785-97.
32- Potter, J., & Cantarero, R. (2006), »How does increasing population and diverstiy affect resident satisfaction? A small community case study«.Environment and Behavior, 38(5), 605-625.
33- Salleh, A.G. (2008), »Neighbourhood factors in private low-cost housing in Malaysia«.Habitat International, 32 (4), 485-497.
34- Sirgy, M., & Cornwell, T., (2002), »How Neighborhood Features Affect Quality of Life«. Social Indicators Research, Vol. 59, No. 1, pp. 79-114.
35- Van Dyck, A, D. (2011), »Do adults like living in high-walkable neighborhoods?: associations of walkability parameters with neighborhood satisfaction and possible mediators«.HEALTH & PLACE. 17(4). p.971-977
36- Van Poll, R. (1997), »The perceived quality of the urban residential environment«, A Multi-attribute evaluation. Ph-thesis, Groningen: University of Groningen.
37- Young, A., Russell, D., & Powers, J. (2004), »The sense of belonging to a neighbourhood: Can it be measured and is it related to health and well being in older women?«Social Science and Medicine, 59(12), 2627-2637.
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 2,289 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,218 |
||