Visual Image of the City in the Representations of Its Citizens: A Study of Krasnodar Residents

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The visual image of a city is an important factor in the subjective well-being of its residents. The perception of the visual side of the urban environment and its impact on the emotional, cognitive and behavioral characteristics of citizens has been studied by both international and Russian scientists. However, most of them focus on certain aspects of the urban environment. In this regard, of research interest are the citizens’ complex impressions about the visual image of their city. The study of the visual image of the city was carried out on the basis of the theory of social representations. The purpose of the work was to examine the social representations (SRs) of the visual image of the city and particularly the visual image of Krasnodar. The sample of the study consisted of respondents permanently residing in Krasnodar ( n = 354). The research methods were associative experiment and P. Vergès’ “prototypical analysis”, which made it possible to identify the hypothetical structure of SRs, using the frequency and rank of occurrence of the concept. The structure of the respondents’ SRs of the visual image of their city, obtained as a result of the study, revealed that the core of the citizens’ SRs included the architectural ensemble creating the style of the city and the visual characteristics of a well-planned and organized everyday urban space, whereas tourist-attractive elements of the urban environment were on the periphery of their SRs. The respondents’ SRs about the visual image of Krasnodar include, first of all, its centers of attraction, i.e., the historical center of the city and the “new center” (Krasnodar Park), as well as visual signs of comfortable and safe living. In general, the results of the study showed that the idea of the visual image of a city is largely determined by the specifics of an individual’s place of permanent residence, the historically established features of the urban environment, its opportunities and problems.

About the authors

Oksana R. Tuchina

Kuban State Technological University

Author for correspondence.
Email: tuchena@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5525-7645
SPIN-code: 6989-5374

Doctor of Psychology, Associate Professor, Professor of the Department of History, Philosophy and Psychology

2 Moskovskaya St, Krasnodar, 350072, Russian Federation

Ivan A. Apollonov

Kuban State Technological University

Email: obligo@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1926-8213
SPIN-code: 7423-6142

Doctor of Philosophy, Associate Professor, Professor of the Department of History, Philosophy and Psychology

2 Moskovskaya St, Krasnodar, 350072, Russian Federation

References

  1. Artemyeva, E.Yu. (1999). Fundamentals of the psychology of subjective semantics. Moscow: Smysl Publ. (In Russ.)
  2. Berman, M.G., Jonides, J., & Kaplan, S. (2008). The cognitive benefits of interacting with nature. Psychological Science, 19(12), 1207–1212. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02225
  3. Bovina, I.B., Dvoryanchikov, N.V., Melnikova, D.V., & Lavreshkin, N.V. (2022). Studying social representations: An outsider’s perspective. Social Psychology and Society, 13(3), 8–25. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17759/sps.2022130302
  4. Chen, S., & Liu, Z. (2016). What determines the settlement intention of rural migrants in China? Economic incentives versus sociocultural conditions. Habitat International, 58, 42–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2016.09.004
  5. Chernyavskaya, O.S. (2013). Nizhny Novgorod through the eyes of Nizhny Novgorod residents: The inner image of the city. Bulletin of the Nizhny Novgorod University. Social Sciences, (1), 69–76. (In Russ.)
  6. Drobysheva, T.V., & Zhuravlev, A.L. (Eds.). (2016). Social-psychological studies of city. Moscow: Institute of Psychology, Russian Academy of Sciences. (In Russ.)
  7. Fedotova, N.G. (2019). Visual carriers of the cultural memory of the city (on the example of Veliky Novgorod). Praxema. Problems of Visual Semiotic, (2), 42–62. (In Russ.) http://doi.org/10.23951/2312-7899-2019-2-42-62
  8. Filko, A. (2015). Visual perception of the image of the city and methods of its research. Urbanistics, (3), 1–15. (In Russ.) http://doi.org/10.7256/2310-8673.2015.3.16497
  9. Franek, M., Petruzalek, J., & Sefara, D. (2019). Eye movements in viewing urban images and natural images in diverse vegetation periods. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 46, 1264773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2019.126477
  10. Gabidulina, S.E. (2012). Psychology of the urban environment. Moscow: Smysl Publ. (In Russ.)
  11. Galindo, M.P., & Hidalgo, M.C. (2005). Aesthetic preferences and the attribution of meaning: Environmental categorization processes in the evaluation of urban scenes. International Journal of Psychology, 40(1), 19–27. http://doi.org/10.1080/00207590444000104
  12. Galli, I., & Fasanelli, R. (2021). From prototypical stimuli to iconographic stimuli: The power of images in the study of social representations. RUDN Journal of Psychology and Pedagogics, 18(2), 391–401. http://doi.org/10.22363/2313-1683-2021-18-2-391-401
  13. Galli, I., Fasanelli, R., & Schember, E. (2018). The construction of icons as a means of access to the social representation of culture. Culture & Psychology, 24(2), 212–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X17721860
  14. Galyapina, V.N., & Lebedeva, N.M. (Eds.). (2022). Values, identities and intercultural relations in Russia: Cross-regional analysis. Krasnodar: KubSTU Publishing House. (In Russ.)
  15. Hidalgo, M.C., Berto, R., Galindo, M.P., & Getrevi, A. (2006). Identifying attractive and unattractive urban places: Categories, restorativeness and aesthetic attributes. Medio Ambiente y Comportamiento Humano, 7(2), 115–133
  16. Izbasarova, S.A., Melnikova, O.T., & Sukhina, T.V. (2022). The role of the logo in the actualization of the visual expressiveness of the brand. National Psychological Journal, (2), 56–64. (In Russ.) http://doi.org/10.11621/npj.2022.0206
  17. Kaptsevich, O.A. (2021). Psychological effects of visual perception of the urban environment: A systematic review. Psychology, (3), 575–597. (In Russ.) http://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2021-3-575-597
  18. Kaptsevich, O.A. (2022). Semantic aspects of urban objects perception: Evidence from the associative experiment. Izvestia: Herzen University Journal of Humanities & Sciences, (204), 115–128. (In Russ.) https://www.doi.org/10.33910/1992-6464-2022-204-115-128
  19. Karmanov, D., & Hamel, R. (2008). Assessing the restorative potential of contemporary urban environment(s): Beyond the nature versus urban dichotomy. Landscape and Urban Planning, 86(2), 115–125. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.01.004
  20. Kashkabash, T.V. (2013). Features of the perception of the visual-communicative space of Moscow. Science and Business: Ways of Development, (10), 25–28. (In Russ.)
  21. Khrapova, V.A., & Vlasova, Ya.M. (2010). Fury of color: Visual images of the modern city. Sociology of the City, (4), 12–14. (In Russ.)
  22. Kolchin, E.A., Ivanov, V.A., & Tnalieva, D.B. (2016). Physical perception of color in urban space. International Journal of the Humanities and Natural Sciences, 3(1), 115–117. (In Russ.)
  23. Krasheninnikov, A.V. (2020). Cognitive urban studies: Archetypes and prototypes of the urban environment. Moscow: KURS Publ. (In Russ.)
  24. Kuo, F., & Sullivan, W. (2001). Environment and crime in the inner city: Does vegetation reduce crime? Environment and Behavior, 33(3), 343–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916501333002
  25. Lindal, P.J., & Hartig, T. (2013). Architectural variation, building height, and the restorative quality of urban residential streetscapes. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 33, 26–36. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2012.09.003
  26. Logunova, E.N. (2012). Features of the formation of a visual image of a large city (on the example of Krasnoyarsk). Youth and Science: Proceedings of the VIII All-Russian Scientific and Technical Conference of Students, Graduate Students and Young Scientists, Dedicated to the 155th Anniversary of K.E. Tsiolkovsky. Krasnoyarsk: Siberian Federal University. (In Russ.) Retrieved July 1, 2023, from http://elib.krasu.ru/handle/2311/7593
  27. Melnikova, O.T., & Mezentseva, A.S. (2018). Visual methods in socio-psychological research. Social Psychology and Society, 9(3), 42–52. (In Russ.) http://doi.org/10.17759/sps.2018090305
  28. Moliner, P., & Bovina, I. (2021). Introduction: The heuristic value of social representations theory. RUDN Journal of Psychology and Pedagogics, 18(2), 291–298. http://doi.org/10.22363/2313-1683-2021-18-2-291-298
  29. Moscovici, S., & Duveen, G. (2000). Social representations. Explorations in social psychology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press
  30. Negami, H.R., Mazumder, R., Reardon, M., & Ellard, C.G. (2018). Field analysis of psychological effects of urban design: A case study in Vancouver. Cities & Health, 2(2), 106–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/23748834.2018.1548257
  31. Ozerina, A.A., & Timofeev, N.E. (2020). Visual image of the city in the minds of students (on the example of the city of Volgograd). Herzen Readings: Psychological Research in Education, (3), 516–521. (In Russ.) http://doi.org/10.33910/herzenpsyconf-2020-3-95
  32. Piskunova, A.E. (2022). Urban space as a construct of perception: the anthropological dimension of Novokuznetsk. Tomsk Journal of Linguistic and Anthropological Research, (1), 146–156. (In Russ.)
  33. Radina, N.K. (2016). Urban studies and social psychology: The city in the minds of the townspeople. Social-Psychological Studies of the City (pp. 61–82). Moscow: Institute of Psychology, Russian Academy of Sciences. (In Russ.)
  34. Rose, G. (2007). Visual methodologies. An introduction to researching with visual materials. London: Sage.
  35. Schember, E., Tuselli, A., Fasanelli, R., & Galli, I. (2015). The internal structure of the social representation of culture: An empirical contribution. International E-journal of Advances in Social Sciences, 1, 174–179
  36. Shmelina, O.S., & Tsygankova, O.E. (2016). Images of a “dream city” and a real city in the minds of residents of large and small cities. Social-Psychological Studies of City (pp. 27–49). Moscow: Institute of Psychology, Russian Academy of Sciences. (In Russ.)
  37. Smolova, L.V. (2015). Psychology of interaction with the environment (ecological psychology). Moscow: FLINTA Publ. (In Russ.)
  38. Surkov, A.V. (2017). Dynamic model of metropolis perception in the context of urban cultural processes. Bulletin of the Ural Federal University. Problems of Education, Science and Culture, (3), 183–190. (In Russ.)
  39. Tennessen, C.M., & Cimprich, B. (1995). Views to nature: Effects on attention. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15(1), 77–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-4944(95)90016-0
  40. Tuchina, O.R., & Apollonov, I.A. (2019). Regional identity as a factor of psychological security. Humanization of Education, (5), 166–179. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24411/1029-3388-2019-10061
  41. Ulrich, R.S. (1981). Natural versus urban scenes: Some psychophysiological effects. Environment and Behavior, 13(5), 523–556.
  42. Valtchanov, D., & Ellard, C.G. (2015). Cognitive and affective responses to natural scenes: Effects of low level visual properties on preference, cognitive load and eye-movements. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 43, 184–195. http://doi.org/10.1016/J.JENVP.2015.07.001
  43. Van den Berg, A.E., Joye, Y., & Koole, S.L. (2016). Why viewing nature is more fascinating and restorative than viewing buildings: A closer look at perceived complexity. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 20, 397–401. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2016.10.011
  44. Volodarskaya, E.A. (2021). Study of the image of a scientist in the context of the concept of social representations of Serge Moskovisi. RUDN Journal of Psychology and Pedagogics, 18(2), 402–421. (In Russ.) http://doi.org//10.22363/2313-1683-2021-18-2-402-421
  45. Vorobieva, I.V., & Kruzhkova, O.V. (2012). Psychology of the urban environment. Ekaterinburg: Publishing house of Russian State Vocational Pedagogical University. (In Russ.)
  46. Vyrva, A.Yu. (2017). The study of the perception of the architectural urban environment based on the study of Google panoramas. Experimental Psychology, 10(1), 89–108. (In Russ.) http://doi.org/10.17759/exppsy.2017100107
  47. Vyrva, A.Yu., & Leontiev, D.A. (2015). Subjective semantics of architectural images. Possibilities of subjective-semantic methods in the study of the perception of architecture. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 11(4), 96–111. (In Russ.) http://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2015110409
  48. Weinstein, N., Przybylski, A.K., & Ryan, R.M. (2009). Can nature make us more caring? Effects of immersion in nature on intrinsic aspirations and generosity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(10), 1315–1329. http://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209341649
  49. White, M., Smith, A., Humphryes, K., Pahl, S., Snelling, D., & Depledge, M. (2010). Blue space: The importance of water for preference, affect, and restorativeness ratings of natural and built scenes. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(4), 482–493. http://doi.org/10.1016/J.JENVP.2010.04.004
  50. Wilson, J., & Kelling, G. (1982). Broken windows: Police and neighborhood safety. Atlantic Monthly, 249, 29–38
  51. Zhogoleva, A.V., Leonova, V.A., & Polukeeva, T.S. (2020). Peculiarities of urban space perception of the historical center of a large city. Innovative Project, 5(11), 24–29. (In Russ.) http://doi.org/10.17673/IP.2020.5.11.2
  52. Zotova, O.Yu. (2023). Subject-spatial and physical urban environment as a condition for the psychological security of urban residents. RUDN Journal of Psychology and Pedagogics, 20(2), 352–373. (In Russ.) http://doi.org/10.22363/2313-1683-2023-20-2-352-373

Copyright (c) 2023 Tuchina O.R., Apollonov I.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies