Research Proposal

Abstract

     Over the past few decades violent crimes in public spaces have skyrocketed. There have been more non-war related mass killings in the past 10 years than in all the years prior to that combined. Almost all of these take place in public spaces. Recognizing the distinct characteristics and identities of individual public spaces, this study takes a broader approach. Instead of concentrating on a singular location with features that may be unique to that specific context, the research aims to analyze multiple parks. The focus will be on evaluating their implementation of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles, with the intention of identifying patterns and insights that can inform strategies to enhance public safety in diverse settings. After analyzing each of these parks and the elements they chose to implement two new parks will be designed using nearly identical elements, the key difference being one having an open sightline of the whole park and the other having a closed sightline with many separate spaces within the entirety of the park. With these models, research participants will be asked to wear monitors that track their heart rate and blood pressure as they are led through each park to gauge their comfort or fear when exposed to open and closed sightline conditions.

​

Introduction

     Public parks, integral to community identity, contribute significantly to mental, physical, and social well-being. However, the safety concerns associated with crime and the potential misuse of park features pose challenges for landscape architects. The apprehension of excessive plant removal due to public and political worries over criminal activities in green spaces has led to a growing trend of abandoned parks, particularly in densely populated urban areas (Michael, 2002). Unfortunately, the public’s perception of these spaces can greatly influence the amount of use they receive. With growing concerns about safety in public spaces, more and more of these parks are left empty and abandoned, especially in densely populated urban areas. A statistically significant relationship exist[s] between measures of street-level CPTED and victimization. There was a direct relationship between higher levels of victimization and lower levels of street- level CPTED and vice versa. (Minnery, 2005). Moving forward with the analysis and implementation of CPTED principles and design aspects, this study will find the criteria which the general public use to determine whether or not a space is deemed safe or unsafe. The first section of the study will analyze the model park that utilizes open sightlines. In the past open sightlines were regarded as one of the key components of CPTED, often seen as the only option. The main intent of the Bryant Park redesign was to open up sight lines from inside and out, effectively making the park transparent (Thompson, 1999). However, later research concluded that this may not be the case. In the research conducted this type of park design lends itself to more crimes committed from a distance where visibility is required. Drug dealers want to be visible and available to buyers but, at the same time, not visible to law enforcement officers. Altering vegetation around seating (a consistent preference) should include minimizing ground cover and shrubs (Michael, 2002). In addition, users mentioned feeling safer in daylight . . . There were no significant associations between other physical features of parks and perceived safety in selected case study parks (Iqbal, 2018)

     In direct opposition to the previous section, this park design uses primarily closed sightlines in an attempt to negate crimes committed from a distance. A comparison of the level of privacy in WOPs and users’ perception of safety showed that most users felt safe in enclosed parks but not so in semi enclosed parks (Iqbal, 2018). The wall's placement and design are important considerations in an intricate set of relationships that either facilitate or prevent crime, but individual citizens cannot rely on the wall alone for safety. They, too, have a role to play in making a safe space (Zahm, 1995). An individual’s perception of safety is often relative to what is expected in a small scale social setting. For example, another form of closed park may include closure of sightline from above: According to studies and surveys conducted about the environmental security (a case study of Narges Ladies Park of Qom), it can be concluded that, given the religion condition of Qom, the existence of such a park is needed for women to feel peace of mind and security. It is better to create the roofed parks in all parts of the city for easy accession of women without any insecurity (Basregari, 2016)

     It is important for landscape architects to recognize that they have the foundational skills to effectively address crime. (Michael, 2002). Sometimes, institutional rules and regulations facilitate crime. Sarasota, Florida, discovered that its zoning code actually contributed to prostitution, drug sales and other problems in the North Trail sector. Owners could not improve the "mom and pop" motels on these properties because it was physically or economically impossible for them to conform to the density, setback, and other requirements of the zoning (Zahm, 1995) The greatest burden. The crime environment relationship and its application to the pursuit of environmental justice offer promising new avenues for these communities to secure their right to "a clean, safe; and healthy environment” (Heagerty, 2010).

     Overall, the goal of this research is to further understand how specific sightlines affect the perception of safety to the individual park user as it is currently a topic that has not been exclusively been researched. The main questions being asked here are how do open and closed sightlines directly affect users perception of safety and how does each individual demographic respond to sightline changes when determining how safe they feel.

​

Literature Review

     Crime Prevention through Environmental Design, also known as CPTED, is a philosophy that encompass key principles such as positive activity support, access control, territoriality, natural surveillance, and maintenance. Within these concepts lie subcategories; for example, access control may include elements such as wayfinding signage, path definition, eliminating ambush points, or target hardening, just to name a few. Natural surveillance may encompass elements such as improving sight lines, land-use mix/activities, natural surveillance of gathering areas, buildings/windows orientation, visible playgrounds, simplicity of layout, defined pathways, trimmed landscaping, and improved lighting levels. All these principles extend to various settings such as public utilities—telephones, automated teller machines (ATMs), bus shelters/stops/train/metro, youth recreation facilities, public restrooms, pedestrian routes, as well as car park/underpass/overpass/crossing lighting (Iqbal & Ceccato, 2016).

     The main purpose of this section is to explore how visibility and lines of sight impact user’s perceived safety in the urban park setting. Street-level activities, the interconnection of pedestrian pathways, a sense of familiarity with the environment, and the upkeep of spaces emerged as crucial elements. In terms of urban design, the significance of smaller-scale buildings, featuring diverse facades or shopfronts, along with unobstructed lines of sight, was also highlighted as essential contributors to the perception of safety (Bennetts, et al., 2017). This same way of thinking can be applied to urban park design as well. Parks benefit from well-groomed trees and foliage, neatly trimmed bushes, effective lighting, and appropriate park furniture, all of which contribute to unobstructed sightlines and enhance natural surveillance. Thoughtful placement of park furniture not only serves as a means of observation but also fosters social connections among park users (Iqbal & Ceccato, 2016).

     The other main point to consider whiles this research is being conducted is a group of methodologies referred to as space syntax. Spatial syntax was first introduced by Hillier and Hanson in the 70s (Hillier & Hanson, 1984). It was used to analyze spatial layout of urban spaces as well as building interiors. The main premise of the theory is that types and configuration of space give that space a specific meaning or purpose which, in turn, affect human activities in that area (Jiang & Huo, 2020). This is not to say that that because a specific purpose was designed into an area or place that it will ultimately be used for that design purpose. For example, long metal tube handrails were commonly used along any given set of stairs in an urban setting. The designed use of these railings is to aid the public in traversing up and down the stairs in a safer manner. However, a subgroup of the public may use these metal tubed handrails as an impromptu urban skatepark and begin to congregate these regular until ultimately the space is redesigned or becomes entirely repurposed by the new user group.

     Lines of sight and space syntax are crucial because they directly impact the perceived safety of an urban park. The natural access control strategy involves ensuring that paths, doors, entrances, and exits are secure, visible, and easily accessible. Effective planning of elements such as fences, lighting, signs, and paths is crucial in achieving this goal. The intention behind such planning is to discourage criminals from engaging in unlawful activities (Matijosaitiene, 2015). Integrated and interconnected spaces are deemed secure due to their seamless flow and robust inter-visibility. Studies emphasize the significance of lighting, with electronic surveillance contributing to a decrease in crime rates. The geometry and configuration of the urban environment play a significant role in visibility, influenced by factors such as building heights, street widths, design and color of edge buildings, urban square layout, tree canopies, and nighttime lighting, all of which affect visible permeability and the perceived ambiance (Banerji, 2016). In most case studies reviewed or experiments conducted by other researchers, increased visibility whether by human line of sight or electronic surveillance results in lower crime rates (Iqbal & Ceccato, 2016).

     This is to be expected though, criminal activity has a long history of taking place in areas of low traffic, low visibility, and low patrolling. Using these findings, a new model for urban parks can be developed and tested, hopefully resulting in new standards for public space design. After all, it is the publics right to use spaces that they help finance and maintain. Another instance involves the utilization of public spaces and the entitlement to feel secure within them. It's clear that individuals instinctively safeguard the areas they possess and show respect for the territories of others. Monitoring a public park proves challenging due to its nature as a public good, a communal space where access is a legal right. Complexity arises as an individual's right to enter and enjoy the park is influenced by the collective right of everyone to feel secure within it (Iqbal & Caccato, 2016).

​

Preamble

     Crime Prevention through Environmental Design, also known as CPTED, is a philosophy that has been shown to reduce crime and promote safety. Natural surveillance, one of CPTED’s principles, has been shown to demonstrate its contribution to crime reduction if maximized (Iqbal and Ceccato 2016). . As addressed in the literature, maintaining long lines of sight is one of the strategies to maximize natural surveillance. Although this connection has been extensively studied for decades there have not been abundant, if any at all, papers specifically regarding lines of sight affecting users’ perception of safety urban parks. In order to properly understand the specific effects of sightlines in regard to CPTED a study specific to this niche must be conducted.

​

Method

     This study utilizes virtual reality in evaluating the perception of safety across two parks designed to assess the difference in the role of lines of sight in promoting safety. Two parks will be modeled using 3D Modeling software. These parks control for environmental features and amenities, they will both host the same plants and landscaping features, and will both have the same material surface choices. The only difference between the two parks would be the distribution of these environmental design features to create two different types of sight lines, open and narrow. In other words, the parks will have the same inventory but be laid out in a completely different format. The first park will have open lines of sight, trimmed and groomed shrubbery and trees, transparent amenities, and long views down non-exaggerated curved or straight pathways. The second park will have the opposite, overgrown shrubbery and trees, walled amenities, and short views down exaggerated curved pathways.

​

Participants

     The subjects recruited for this study will need to be extremely diverse. There will need to be representation across the board in regard to age, ethnicity, and gender. The groups of participants chosen will reflect the average of the demographic of the large urban cities in the United States (Frey, 2018). When inviting this group to participate they will be informed of study and its requirements for them to be monitored. An IRB approval will be obtained prior to the commencement of the study.

     The participant group will be recruited from around southern Michigan. They must have the ability to get to Michigan State University where the experiment will be conducted. Each individual participant will be selected based on previous experience with virtual reality, where they fit in the demographic range, and if they have a predetermined bias in the study.

​

The Experiment

     This study follows a quasi-experimental approach with the use of pre-recorded tour of two virtual parks. Participants will be given a description of the area around these two fictional parks. Participants will be asked to imagine that they were staying at a hotel for a work trip, across the street is a park they can use at any time, but the reception at the hotel tells them not to use it at night. The hotel is located at the edge of a very large city in the United States. After the conference, participants were asked to imagine that they decided to walk across the street and use the park at dusk.

     After receiving this information, the participants will start the virtual tour of these two parks. The two virtual parks will be displayed using a large laptop screen. Each participant will also be connected to Shimmer3 GSR+ to measure their Galvanic Skin Response. Additionally, the laptop is equipped with both an eye tracking system and an emotional analysis software designed by iMotions software. After the virtual walkthroughs are concluded the participants will complete a survey consisting of questions that determine their personality types and how they perceived their personal safety in the park. The surveys are displayed on the screen immediately after viewing each park. The survey is also designed using iMotions software. iMotions has the capacity to measure different emotional reactions like fear, sadness, and engagement, it also has the capacity to identify using the eye trackers, the exact area of the park that triggered such emotions. iMotions also adds data related to GSR.

​

Research Quality Standards

     Survey questions are established based on established theories of CPTED, eyes on the street, and defensible space within the context of park environmental design. Variables are manipulated and controlled. A random selection process will be used to enhance external validity. Because variables are controlled for between the two environments, then it is possible to assume and generalize the results to other parks with similar characteristics. Reliability is achieved by controlling for variables and repeating the experiment several times. When the results are within the same margin of error, then reliability is enhanced. Research remains objective throughout the research and all the research steps will be documented.

​

Data Analysis

     iMotions will export all the resulting measures as well as the surveys in an excel format. This allows the researcher to carry correlational analysis and statistical analysis such as Chi Square, that is used to compare whether there is a statistical difference in the perception of two different environmental features.

​

Limitations

     Unfortunately, virtual reality poses some serious limitations. Virtual reality is a powerful tool for research, it does come with certain weaknesses when compared to real-life experiences. Here are some of the notable weaknesses: Virtual reality may not fully replicate the richness and complexity of real-world environments. The visual and sensory cues provided by virtual reality may lack the nuance and detail present in actual environments, impacting the authenticity of the experience. Some individuals may experience motion sickness or discomfort when exposed to virtual environments, particularly if there is a mismatch between visual stimuli and the body's physical sensations. This can limit the duration and naturalness of the virtual reality experience. Experiences may not fully capture the subtleties of social interactions present in real-life settings. Facial expressions, body language, and other social cues may be inadequately conveyed, potentially impacting the ecological validity of social research. Findings from virtual reality studies may not always translate to real-world situations. Participants may react differently to virtual stimuli compared to actual environments, making it challenging to extrapolate results to broader contexts. Participants may need time to acclimate to the virtual environment, and their responses may be influenced by novelty or unfamiliarity. This could introduce a confounding variable, particularly in short-duration studies. However, some of the strengths of using this approach is the ability to control for environmental features in order to identify the influence of a certain feature.

​

Conclusions

     From research conducted on related topics, it is hypothesized that sight lines will generally result in a more positive perception of safety from users. In a similar test, results showed a strong link between security and factors like aesthetics and meaning. However, there's no significant connection between security and structural/physical factors or behavior patterns. The factor with the most impact on security is aggregation. When looking at demographics, gender doesn't affect feelings of security, but age, marital status, education, and occupation do. Older, married, educated, and housewife individuals tend to have higher security expectations than others in the study (Mahdinejad and Gholipour, 2020).