Density is the number of people in a
prescribed space, for example, in a square kilometre. It is therefore a
physical condition and can be separated into two types:
Crowding is the experience of the people in a
given setting and is a subjective psychological concept. This means that
feelings of crowding will vary from individual to individual as it involves a
personal interpretation of the level of density. Therefore some people will
feel 'crowded' more quickly than others.
It might be expected that situations of
similar density would lead to the same reactions. However, there are a number
of different factors that can affect how crowded an individual perceives a
situation to be. These include:
·
. the relationship with the people involved
·
. the duration of the experience
·
. the physical context of the experience
·
. the meaning of the experience.
Crowds
may arise for a many different reasons, may be engaged in various activities
and may be of differing sizes and compositions. The table below offers one
classification of a range of crowd types based on their purpose or activities.
Any one crowd may exhibit one or more of these types and may change type over
time.
|
Crowd type |
Description |
Example |
|
Ambulatory |
Walking. usually calm |
Shoppers on a
pavement |
|
|
|
during the Christmas |
|
|
|
period |
|
Disabled. or of |
Crowd has limited |
A disability rights
rally |
|
limited mobility |
movement |
|
|
Cohesive/spectator |
Shared interest of |
Fans at a concert or |
|
|
participants - for example. |
sporting event |
|
|
watching a specific
activity |
|
|
Expressive/revelous |
Emotional release |
Spectators cheering
in |
|
|
|
unison or rejoicing
after |
|
|
|
an even t |
|
Participatory |
Involved in an actual
event |
A community fun-run |
|
Aggressive/hostile |
Initially verbal.
open |
Holiday-makers
delayed |
|
|
to lawlessness |
at an airport |
|
Demonstration |
A group that is
organised |
Pickets and protest |
|
|
to some extent |
marches |
|
Escape/trampling |
Attempts to avoid
real or |
Emergency evacuations |
|
|
imagined danger |
following a fire
alarm |
|
|
|
or bomb scare |
|
Dense/suffocating |
Reduction of
individual |
The crushing of a
crowd |
|
|
physical space such
that |
against barriers or
in |
|
|
movement is severely |
narrow exits |
|
|
impaired |
|
|
Rushing/looting |
Attempts to obtain or
steal |
Ticket-holders
rushing to |
|
|
something |
enter a concert that
they |
|
|
|
believe has started |
|
|
|
without them |
|
Violent |
Attacking or
terrorising |
Rioters setting light |
|
|
others |
to property |
Based on Berlognghi (1993)
Fruin (1981) describes critical crowd
densities - that is, the number of people per unit area - as
a key characteristic in crowd disasters. Critical crowd densities are approached when the floor
space per standing person is 1.5 square feet (0.14 m˛) or less. In a moving
crowd, space restrictions limit mobility, worsening risks from crowding. At 25
square feet (2.3 m) per person, a stream of pedestrians can maintain normal
walking speed and avoid one another. As space is restricted to 5 square feet
(0.5 m˛) per person, speed is reduced - for example, people exiting a stadium
or theatre are reduced to shuffling. By 3 square feet (0.28 m˛) per person
involuntary contact is experienced between people, and at 2 square feet (0.18
m˛) per person potentially dangerous crowd forces begin to develop.
Dubos (1965) studied lemmings (small rodents
that have short tails and fur covered feet) living in the Scandinavian mountain
regions. It is well documented that every 3-4 years the lemmings go down to the
edge of the sea and many of them fall over the edge and drown. This was
believed to have been a biologically pre-programmed event to prevent
overcrowding and limit their numbers. However, on closer examination, this
research found that the event was frenzied with many of the lemmings dying
accidentally. The researchers proposed that the reason for this was that their
rapid reproduction led to a great increase in density which in turn influenced
brain and adrenal functioning.
Another natural study carried out earlier by
Christian, Flyger and Davis (1960) investigated Sika Deer on James Island, and
came to a similar conclusion. They examined the records that were kept about
the deer and found that initially in 1916 there had been four deer on the
island. By 1955, this had increased to between 280 and 300 deer. However, three
years later half of the deer had died, and by 1960 only 80 deer were left. The
researchers were concerned by this sudden decline in the deer population, and
post-mortems were conducted on the deer. They found that they appeared to have
been in good shape with shiny coats and well developed muscles. However, their
adrenal glands were ten times larger than normal, and after further testing to
eliminate possible causes the researchers concluded that the adrenal glands
were enlarged as a result of stress. This stress was believed to have been as a
reaction to the crowding.
Crowcroft, P. and Rowe, EP.
(1958) The growth of confined colonies of the wild
house-mouse (Mus musculus L.): the effect of dispersal on female fecundity. Proceedings of the
Zoological Society of London. 131. 357-65
Aim: To investigate the effect of
the restriction of space on colonies of house mice, with particular respect to
fecundity (reproductive capability).
Method:
Seven
colonies were established, each consisting of one adult male and two adult
females. Each colony was housed in a pen with high metal walls and eight nest
boxes measuring 6 feet (1.8 m) square. Some of these animals had access to much
larger pens (more than 100 square feet [9.3 m˛]) after 32 or 40 weeks.
Results: In crowded conditions the
mice populations increased and then levelled off. The failure to reproduce once
a certain population density was reached appeared to be the result of non-fecund
(infertile) females. This did not appear to be a direct effect of stress as
aggression was not observed between the females and none sustained injury. In
crowded situations the female mice were found to have low fecundity because
they could not be penetrated by the males and had inactive ovaries. In addition
they had thread-like uteri and excessive fat deposits. Those animals that
remained in crowded conditions did not return to a fecund condition, whereas
colonies that dispersed into larger pens showed an increase in birth rate
indicating a return to fecund status.
Conclusion: These
results suggest that. For mice, at least, populations have a self-regulatory mechanism for limiting reproduction when the population
density is high. This appears to act on the reproductive capacity of the
females through a reversible change in their physiology and anatomy.
Some of these
effects on fecundity described by Crowcroft and Rowe (1958) may have been a
consequence of lack of exercise rather than crowding per se. Indeed,
Schneider (1946) reversed the loss of fecundity in caged house-mice by
introducing exercise wheels.
One of the most famous studies into crowding
was undertaken by Calhoun (1962) using Norway rats. Calhoun designed a 'rat
universe' and in a series of six trials installed populations of Norway rats
and watched what happened as population size increased. The rat universe
consisted of a rectangular box, 10' X 14' in size, divided into four cells
which could each house 12 rats in comfort. Each rat universe was provided with
sufficient food and fresh water and nesting materials as required.
If the pens are spread in a line, it is obvious that
cells Band C are really thoroughfares for all the rats and that A and D are the
only pens with defensible space; that is, space which is defendable by
the rats who live there.
The rats in each universe began to breed and were left alone
until they reached 80 in number. At this point any infants that survived
weaning were removed in order to maintain the numbers. Calhoun observed
that once overcrowding occurred, the behaviour of the rats changed and the
patterns of family groups which successfully raised their young no longer
existed, especially in the middle pens.
The more dominant males claimed cells A and D and
defended their territory, thus limiting numbers, and their behaviour was as
normal as possible even though the pens were more crowded than normal. The
remaining rats had to inhabit cells B and C which became known as the
'behavioural sink' and it was here that there was most evidence of both
physiological and behavioural abnormalities. Both male and female behaviour in
the sink changed considerably. Nest building and the rearing of young, although
attempted, were inadequate, resulting in infant mortality rates as high as 96
per cent (compared with 50 per cent in the less-crowded pens).
The middle pens also produced four other groups of
males. The first consisted of a number of very aggressively dominant males who constantly
pursued oestrous females, fighting for the most dominant position. These fights
resulted not only in battle wounds between the males, but on occasions in the
wounding of females and young. This behaviour also led to a high rate of
mortality from diseases in pregnancy with almost half the females in cells B
and C dying by the sixteenth month of the study. The second group of males made
advances to anything that moved, irrespective of its age or gender. The third
group, on the other hand, was completely passive and ignored the other rats of both sexes. The final group was described by
Calhoun as 'probers' and these were hyperactive, hypersexual, sometimes
homosexual and occasionally cannibalistic.
Many of the effects on the rats can also be explained
by Selye's General Adaptation Syndrome. Male rats in dense conditions produce
fewer sperm and female rats start oestrus at a higher age, and their
reproductive cycles occur less frequently and are of shorter duration than rats
kept in much lower density conditions. This may well explain one way in which
animals in the wild maintain optimum population size without the need to throw
themselves into the sea!
The conclusions reached by Calhoun, that high density
led to the observed changes in behaviour, has received considerable criticism.
One of the biggest criticisms addresses the fact that he was not only studying
the effects of high social density, but also territoriality. The rats in cells
A and D had an environment which was easier to defend and therefore they were
protecting their territory, whereas the rats in the centre two cells were
severely disadvantaged. Perhaps an answer would have been to make each cell
have a separate entrance and an exit so that all the rats were subjected to the
same environmental conditions, and this would have removed the confounding
variable of territoriality. It is also questionable whether these results
relate to real-life situations because Calhoun manipulated a number of factors
in the study. The first was removing any surviving young after the population
reached the 80-rat level. The second was that in the wild, overcrowding would
result in the rats leaving and finding a new environment and they were
prevented from doing that in this study. In fact, in an earlier naturalistic
observation, Calhoun had found that wild rats seemed able to limit population
size according to available space without any human intervention. In defence of
the study, other research with animals has provided similar evidence of
behavioural change in terms of increased aggression and social withdrawal.
As a consequence of his findings, Calhoun (1971) proposed a mechanism by which crowding could have its effect upon animals. He suggested that each species has an optimal group size at which the individuals within it can tolerate the balance between beneficial and non-beneficial contacts with others. Beyond this size, the costs of social contacts (for example, competition and aggression) outweigh the benefits (for example, food sharing and ease of mate location).
Researchers have examined the effect of
increased social density on prisoners, as obviously they are unable to escape
their environment and effects can be monitored over a period of time. McCain,
Cox and Paulus (1976) researched the impact of different levels of density
among prisoners and found that those inmates living in conditions of low social
and spatial density were ill less frequently than those living in higher
densities. They conducted further research and found that inmates who lived in
higher density settings were more likely to suffer from high blood pressure and
that high density was linked to higher death rates among prisoners.
Lundberg (1976) studied male passengers on a
commuter train and compared high and low density conditions. There were enough
seats for everyone even in the most crowded conditions. Urine samples were
collected to measure for levels of adrenaline and higher levels were found
after the high density journeys, suggesting increases in arousal and thus
increases in stress. Further results found that regardless of how crowded, the
train was, those who boarded at the first stop had lower adrenaline levels than
those who boarded the train half way through the journey. Although their
journey was longer, 72 minutes rather than 38 minutes, the control they
experienced, by being able to choose their seats in an initially low density
situation, led to them being able to cope with the higher density situation.
Heshka and Pylypuk (1975) also conducted a study that took physiological
measures following exposure to high density in the participants' natural
environment. Levels of cortisol, a steroid compound produced by the adrenal
cortex, were measured (as high levels of cortisol indicate high levels of
stress). Students who spent the day in a high density shopping centre were
compared with students who stayed on a relatively low density college campus.
They found that males who had been in the high density situation had higher
levels of cortisol than the control group, but females showed no difference.
Pandey (1999)
asked participants living in high- or low-density areas of Gorakhpur City,
India, about their health status. A positive relationship between crowding and
illness was found; that is, people living in more crowded areas exhibited
poorer physical and mental health. These people also reported a strong
sensation of crowding (in other words, there was a positive correlation between
objective crowding and feelings of crowding) and reduced perceived control.
However, Chan (1999) tested 414 urban residents from the hyper dense
metropolis of Hong Kong and found
that residents in spatially constrained dwellings did not necessarily feel
crowded. Where architectural designs met expectations - that is, the
participants were satisfied with their physical surroundings - this helped to
alleviate feelings of crowdedness.
Not only may
high-density living conditions pose greater health risks, but it also seems to
impair our ability to care for our own health. Menezes et al. (2000)
studied a range of factors that could have been related to discharged
psychiatric patients failing to comply with outpatient treatment. The only
variable associated with poor compliance was residential crowding. Patients
living in very crowded homes were twice as likely to miss outpatient
appointments as those living in less-crowded homes.
Baum, A. and Valins, S. (1977) Architecture
and Social Behavior: Psychological
Studies of Social Density. Hilldale, NJ: Erlbaum
Aim: To investigate the balance between the
benefits of increased opportunities to interact: as density increases and the
costs of such
enforced encounters.
Method: The perceptions and
behaviour of occupants of two different types of university hall of residence
were compared. The accommodation was either corridor-style or suite-style. Each
offering the same amount of space per individual, the same number of individuals
per floor and the same facilities (bathroom and lounge). They differed only in
the number of other individuals sharing those facilities (either 4-6 in suites and 34 on corridors) and hence the number of
different interpersonal encounters (in other words. the social density varied).

Results:
Residents
in corridor-style accommodation perceived their Floors to be more crowded. They
were more likely to feel that they had to engage in inconvenient and unwanted
social interactions and they expressed a greater desire to avoid other people.
Their Feelings of helplessness were reflected in their social skills. They were
less likely to initiate a conversation with a stranger were less able to reach
a consensus after a discussion were less socially assertive and were more
likely to give up in a competitive game.
Conclusion: Exposure to a large number of other people - especially when the group
lacks social
structure - has negative consequences,
resulting in less sociable behaviour. The enforced uncontrollable personal
contacts experienced by the corridor residents led to a feeling of
helplessness. So they tended to avoid social interactions and were less
assertive in ambiguous situations because they had learned that they had little
control over their social environment.
Kaya, N. and Erkip, E. (2001) Satisfaction in
a dormitory building: the effects of floor height on the perception of room
size and crowding. Environment
and Behavior. 33. 35-53
Aim: To investigate the effects of room location (Floor
height) on students' perception of the size of their room and how crowded they
felt.
Method: Residents occupying two dormitory blocks (one
For men and one For women) at Bilkent University. Ankara. were studied. The identical
Five-storey buildings contained identical rooms and had equal densities. The
occupants were surveyed with regard to their perception of their room size,
privacy and satisfaction.
Results: Residents on the highest Floor perceived
their rooms to be larger and felt less crowded than residents on the lowest
Floor. Participants who perceived their rooms as being larger expressed greater
Feelings of privacy and were more satisfied with their dormitory rooms.
Conclusion:
The perception of density as
well as the actual density affect the sensation of crowding and hence
satisfaction with accommodation.
Aim: To examine the potential long term consequences
of high density living on academic performance and health.
Participants: 144 male students from five
high-rise university dormitories where unexpected tripling had occurred in
rooms normally used as doubles. 102 were three to a room and 42 were two to a
room.
Method: Participants were given seven
different measures to complete in an hour. Five of these were in the hall study
lounges. These were: a present living
situation questionnaire, a comfortable interpersonal distance measure, a
privacy scale, a past spatial history focusing on past living experiences and
an internal-external locus of control scale. The other two measures: a room
evaluation scale and a series of territorial maps were given in the individual
dorm rooms.
Results: The major triple-double differences
were as follows:
·
Evaluation of
living space: triples rated their living space as more cramped and saw their
rooms in more negative ways than doubles.
·
Self-perception
of privacy and control: triples were less satisfied with their privacy and with
the co-operation they received from their roommates in achieving privacy.
·
Interpersonal
adjustment: triples perceived that they received less cooperation from
roommates and were less satisfied with their roommates.
·
It was also
found that triples visited the health centre more frequently but the difference
was not significant. There were no overall significant differences in academic
performance.
Conclusions: This study demonstrates that living
in a high-density environment in the real world can have a negative effect on
an individual's liking for others and also have a negative impact on their
health.
Machleit, K., Eroglu, S.
and Mantel, S.P. (2000) Perceived retail crowding and shopping satisfaction:
What modifies the relationship? Journal of Consumer Psychology. 9. 29-42
Aim: To
examine the relationship between retail store crowding and shopping satisfaction.
Method: A total of 1006 participants were used in two Field and one laboratory experiment to investigate the importance of high density on emotions and satisfaction.
Results: Shopping satisfaction was shown to be reduced by the emotions associated
with crowding. However, this effect was moderated by expectations of crowding
and personal tolerance for crowding. These relationships were found in both
laboratory and field settings.
Conclusion: People who expect
shops to be crowded and who are relatively tolerant of crowds are more likely to find shopping satisfying
under high-density conditions than those who have less realistic expectations
or are less tolerant.
Research has also been conducted in a more
controlled environment to examine the effects of density. Evans (1979) carried
out a laboratory experiment conducted with mixed sex groups of five males and
five females in a three and a half hour study, in either a small room or a
large room. Participants' heart rate and blood pressure were measured before
the experiment began and again after three hours; it was found that in high density
conditions participants had higher blood pressure and pulse rates than those in
more spacious conditions.
Lorenz (1950) proposed that aggression
is innate and builds up within all species, both humans and animals, until something
happens to trigger its release. Dollard et al. (1939) supported this
idea with the frustration-aggression hypothesis which suggests that
aggression only appears when we are frustrated in achieving some kind of goal.
Perhaps living in high-density conditions from which we cannot escape produces
frustration, and this may explain any relationship between density and
aggression.
Evidence which indicated a relationship between
density and aggression came from work with children who demonstrated higher
levels of aggression in high-density play situations (Aiello et al., 1979;
Ginsburg et al., 1977). However, further work indicated that density was
not the cause and that it could be attributed to scarcity of resources. Rohe
and Patterson (1974) found that high density produced more aggressive behaviour
when the play situation failed to provide enough toys for the increased numbers
of children, but when there were enough toys, increases in density had no
effect on aggressive behaviours. Evidence with adults found some gender
differences, with males generally becoming more aggressive with increases in
density, but even these findings were inconsistent. Males rated themselves as
more aggressive in small rooms (a situation of high spatial density), whilst
the females rated themselves as more aggressive in large rooms (Stokols et
al., 1973). However, when social density was manipulated and subjects had
prior warning of possible crowding, neither gender acted aggressively and both
tended to withdraw (Baum and Koman, 1976). These differences relate to the
different personal space requirements of the genders.
Research has found that men in long-term high density
situations such as prisons are more likely to demonstrate aggressive behaviour.
Gifford (1997) describes research in the US into whether there was a
relationship between the numbers of prison inmate assaults and the changing
size of the prison population. He discovered that a 30 per cent reduction in
prison population over a few months resulted in a 60 per cent drop in inmate
assaults. The prison later increased its population by 19 per cent and this
yielded a 36 per cent increase in assaults. Although there may have been other
factors that influenced these results, research into aggression in psychiatric
units in Sweden also discovered a relationship between social density and
aggression (Palmstierna et
al., 1991).
Research into aggression and crowding has
found that in some cases high density leads to aggressive behaviour while other
studies have found the reverse. This has led to the suggestion that both high
and low density do not necessarily lead to aggression while moderate density
does, suggesting an inverted U relationship.
Ehrlich and Freedman (1971) gave people
various games to play, in varying sized rooms and found that the smaller rooms
led to increased competitiveness and aggression, thus demonstrating the impact
of spatial density. Palmstierna, Huitfield and Wistedt (1991) reported the
effects of social density by looking at the behaviour of 163 acute care
psychiatric patients over a 25 week period and found that the major
predisposing factor to aggressive attacks was the number of patients around.
Many of the studies have found inconclusive
results as they are not 'real world' studies. The short term nature of them
makes the methodology very weak. However, it is difficult to study crowding in
the real world other than using correlations between, for example, spatial
density and crime statistics which suggest that there is a relationship between
high density and some types of crime.
The general finding is that high density
leads to decreased attraction, both physical attraction and liking towards
others. Research has also found that merely expecting higher density levels can
lead to a reduction in attraction; Baum and Greenberg (1975) found that
expecting to experience high social density was enough to elicit dislike. In
their study, students who were told that they were waiting for ten people
initially liked the people less than those who were told that they were waiting
for four people.
There also appear to be gender differences in
the impact that density has on attraction levels, with males experiencing a
more extreme reaction. Epstein and Karlin (1975) conducted an experiment where
males and females participated in same sex groups of six, solving puzzles. The
participants were asked afterwards to say how similar they perceived the others
to be. They found that males rated others more negatively in the high spatial
density groups whereas females rated the others more positively in high density
situations.
The differences in the levels of attraction shown by males and females' could be due to different personal space zones or to more co-operative socialisation of females and more competitive socialisation of males. This links to social norms, with it generally being seen as acceptable for females to discuss problems and support each other and as less acceptable for males to do this.
Research has suggested that one way in which
individuals deal with high density is to withdraw from the situation.
Withdrawal may occur in anticipation of the high density or as a reaction to
it. The consequences of withdrawal due to density may be a disruption to social
support networks. This in turn can have a negative effect as these are the
networks we often rely upon during times of stress which are therefore not
available. For example, Evans and Lepore (1993) found that individuals from
crowded homes were less likely to seek social support when they needed it and
rated others as less supportive than those from less crowded homes. Individuals
from crowded homes were also less likely to offer support to others.
Much of the work that has looked at density
and helping has been carried out in field studies which have obvious benefits
over the laboratory research that has been carried out into other effects of
density. It has been found that the greater the density the less the helping
behaviour.
One field experiment that has been carried
out with students was conducted by Bickman et al. (1973). They compared acts of
helping behaviour in high, medium and low density dormitories. Envelopes which
were stamped and addressed were dropped in the dorms and helpfulness was
measured by the number that were picked up and placed in the mail. They found
that 58 per cent mailed the letters in the high density dorms, 79 per cent in
medium density dorms, and 88 per cent in low density dorms. This therefore
demonstrates that more helping behaviour occurred in the lower density
situations. Jorgenson and Dukes (1976) investigated social density and
compliance in cafeterias. A notice was placed in the cafeteria asking people to
return their trays, and they found that more people did this in low density
conditions.
One reason why the level of helping behaviour
may be reduced in crowded situations links to the concept of diffusion of
responsibility. The more people that are present in a situation that requires
help, the less often help is given. This may be due to the fact that people
diffuse responsibility among themselves with no-one feeling that they ought to
be the one to help.
Once again there have been a variety of
studies carried out to test the impact that density has on task performance,
including both laboratory and field experiments. It would seem likely that if
density has a negative physiological effect and a negative effect on our social
behaviour it will also have a negative effect on task performance. In a
laboratory experiment, Paulus et al. (1976) found that both high spatial and
social density led to decreases in complex maze task performance, with high
social density having a greater effect than high spatial density.
Aiello, Epstein and Karlin (1975) conducted a
field study looking at student dorms. They had two conditions: three people in
a two person dorm (high density) or two people in a two person dorm (low
density). They found that there was a decrease in complex task performance for
the higher density condition.
This suggests that university students living
in low density settings may get better marks than those living in high density
settings. The increased density may overload an individual's information
processing ability which in turn will lead to a poorer performance of tasks
which require higher level cognitive skills.
A field study was also carried out by
Saegert, MacIntosh and West (1975). They tested participants in a socially
dense department store and at a busy railway terminal. One of the tasks was to
produce a cognitive map of their environment, enabling them to give directions
to others. The results showed that their ability to do this was impeded by the
high density.
Similarly a field
study was conducted by Bruins and Barber (2000) outside
a supermarket. Eighty people
were asked to take part at either crowded or uncrowded times. Findings
demonstrated that the performance was worse, particularly for mental tasks,
under crowded conditions.
Research has also found that there is the
possibility that being in high density situations will have lasting
after-effects. Evans (1979) found that participants who had been exposed to
high density situations later showed less persistence at solving unsolvable
puzzles than those who had been exposed to low density situations.
A number of factors linked to building design
could affect the extent to which people feel crowded in a high density setting.
First, it seems that having some space that an individual can claim to be her
own, regardless of actual size, prevents the effects of density and leaves
people feeling positive. For example, as described in the key study below, Cox
et al. (1984) found that prisoners who had small single cells were more
satisfied with their environment than those who had larger cells but had to
share with another prisoner. Therefore when designing new buildings it may be
beneficial to create more spaces for individuals rather than large communal
areas to minimise the effects of high density living. Similarly Baum and Valins
(1977) found that high-density accommodation that had been subdivided led to a
reduced feeling of crowding. One reason for this is that the separation of the
building into smaller units reduced the number of unnecessary social
interactions and thus reduced some of the feelings of high density.
When planning new buildings, the size and
shape of the rooms should be taken into account. Rectangular rooms tend to feel
less crowded than square rooms, as do rooms where there are sufficient windows
and doors. Curved rooms tend to feel more crowded as do high rise buildings.
Therefore when designing new buildings it would be beneficial to take such,
factors into account to attempt to satisfy the eventual inhabitants and
hopefully reduce the potential feelings of crowding.
Aim: To investigate the effects of crowding
on inmates' physical and psychological health in state prisons.
Participants: Archival data from four prison
systems, Illinois, Mississippi, Oklahoma and Texas on over 175 000 inmates was
used alongside information collected directly from more than 2500 inmates.
Method: The prison environment was chosen as
crowding, defined as aversive levels of density, was long-term, intense and
inescapable. The prisons where the data were collected from ranged in
population from 500 to 3000 and the housing units varied from spacious single
rooms to densely populated dormitories for 70 or more inmates.
Results: Increases in prison population
without a proportionate increase' in facilities are associated with an increase
in rates of death, suicide and psychiatric problems while decreases in
population are accompanied by a reduction of these factors and inmate on inmate
attacks and self mutilations. Double cells led to negative effects on
disciplinary infraction rates and illness complaint rates compared to single
cells and open dormitory housing led to increased negative psychological
reactions and increased illness-complaint rates compared to single or double
cells.
Conclusions: Overall in a prison environment the greater the density the greater the negative effect. Therefore these findings have important implications for the design of prisons, in that providing inmates with some individual space will lead to positive effects both physically and psychologically. Coping with the effects of crowding
Individual differences can have an effect on
our ability to cope with crowding. For example, males are more likely to
experience the effects of crowding than females, particularly in the short
term, but may cope better in the long term. This could also be linked to an
individual's preference for personal space. People with a need for a large
interpersonal space are more badly affected in high density settings (Aiello,
1977). Men tend to like larger amounts of personal space, particularly when
interacting with other men. The level of personal space required could also
help to explain cultural differences in the ability to cope with crowding, as
Mediterranean people experience the most negative effects when in a crowded
situation.
The more control a person has over the
crowded environment the less negatively they experience it, thus the perceived
crowding is less. Schmidt and Keating (1979) identified three types of control:
·
. Behavioural control: having the ability to
work towards a particular goal, for example, trying to limit the time spent in
the high density situation.
They
suggested that if one or more types of control were present there would be a
reduction in crowding stress. Rodin, Soloman and Metcalf (1978) investigated perceived control and attempted
to manipulate the amount of control people had in a lift. By observing people
in the lift they found that there was a tendency to gravitate towards the
control panel (i.e. trying to have some control). Therefore they manipulated
whether or not people were able to stand near the control panel and found that
those given control felt better and thought that the lift was larger when
questioned afterwards. This suggests that if people feel that they have a
choice, and have a feeling of control over the situation, the perception of the
high density is not as negative. .
The ability to cope with crowding is also influenced
by the relationship the individual has with the other people in the situation.
The high density will be interpreted less negatively if the individual
experiences it with people he likes. This also raises the issue of the reason
for the density. If people are sharing a pleasant experience, for example a
concert, it is less likely to be perceived as crowded in a negative manner.
Whereas, if people are experiencing density in an unpleasant situation, for
example, trapped in a broken down tube train in rush hour, it is likely to be
perceived negatively.
One of the main coping strategies employed to
limit the impact of high density is social withdrawal. This includes behaviours
such as averting the gaze and using negative body language to attempt to block
any potential intrusions. Evans et al. (2000) found that living in high density
environments seems to predispose individuals to utilise social withdrawal as a
coping strategy. Those people who have learned to use social withdrawal in their high density living are
then able to use it as an effective coping strategy in other high density situations.
Sally Gadson, Philippe Harari, Karen Legge and Linda Sherry, 2005, Psychology A2 for OCR, Heinemann, 0-435-80671-8
Karon Oliver, 2002, Psychology in Practice, Environment, 0-340-84495-7
Craig Roberts and Julia Russell, 2002, Angles on environmental psychology, nelson thornes, ISBN 0-7487-5978-6