bs_bs_banner

PsyCh Journal (2015):

DOI: 10.1002/pchj.90

Perceived Residential Environment Quality Indicators and

neighborhood attachment: A confirmation study on a Chinese
sample in Chongqing
Yanhui Mao,1 Ferdinando Fornara,2,3 Sara Manca,1 Mirilia Bonnes,3 and Marino Bonaiuto1,3
1

Dipartimento di Psicologia dei Processi di Sviluppo e Socializzazione, Sapienza Universit di Roma,

Roma, Italy, 2Dipartimento di Psicologia, Universit degli Studi di Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy,
3

Centro Interuniversitario di Ricerca in Psicologia Ambientale (CIRPA), Sapienza Universit di Roma,

Roma, Italy
Abstract: This paper concerns peoples assessment of their neighborhood of residence in a Chinese urban context. The aim of the study
was to verify the factorial structure and the reliability of two instruments originally developed and validated in Italy (the full versions of the
Perceived Residential Environment Quality Indicators [PREQIs] and of the Neighborhood Attachment Scale [NAS]) in a different cultural
and linguistic context. The instruments consist of 11 scales measuring the PREQIs and one scale measuring neighborhood attachment (NA).
The PREQIs scales include items covering four macroevaluative domains of residential environment quality: architectural and urban
planning aspects (three scales: Architectural and Town-planning Space, Organization of Accessibility and Roads, Green Areas),
sociorelational aspects (one scale: People and Social Relations), functional aspects (four scales: Welfare Services, Recreational Services,
Commercial Services, and Transport Services), and contextual aspects (three scales: Pace of Life, Environmental Health, Upkeep and Care).
The PREQIs and NAS were included in a self-report questionnaire, which had been translated and back-translated from English to Chinese,
and was then administered to 340 residents in six districts (differing along various features) of a highly urbanized context in China, the city
of Chongqing. Results confirmed the factorial structure of the scales and demonstrated good internal consistency of the indicators, thus
reaffirming the results of previous studies carried out in Western urban contexts. The indicators tapping the neighborhoods contextual
aspects (i.e., pace of life, environmental health, and upkeep) emerged as most correlated to NA.
Keywords: Chinese urban context; neighborhood attachment; perceived environmental quality; PREQIs; residential satisfaction
Correspondence: Professor Marino Bonaiuto, Dipartimento di Psicologia dei Processi di Sviluppo e Socializzazione, Sapienza
Universit di Roma, Via dei Marsi 78, Roma 00185, Italy. Email: marino.bonaiuto@uniroma1.it
Received 26 November 2013. Accepted 15 January 2015.

Environmental psychology (see Bonaiuto, 2004; Bonnes &

Secchiaroli, 1995; Lawrence, 2002; Tognoli, 1987) and
related disciplines focused on peoples quality of life have
addressed the relationship between inhabitants and their
neighborhood of residence in the urban environment.
According to the WHOQOL Group (1994), the environmental field is at least as important as other basic domains in
predicting an individuals overall quality of life (Power,
Bullinger, & Harper, 1999). At present, the urban context
(particularly at the residential level) is the most common
everyday-life environment across the world.

The literature on psychological responses to residential

environments shows that the term residential can refer to
different geographical levels (Marans, 2003), ranging from
the home, to the neighborhood, to local open spaces, up to the
city or even larger geographical entities (Bonaiuto & Alves,
2012), from a micro to a macro level. For example, there are
studies in which the main focus is the town (Rantanen &
Kahila, 2009), others in which it is the residential complex
(Fornara, Bonaiuto, Bonnes, Carrus, & Passafaro, 2007),
and yet others in which it is the inhabitants homes
(Gmez-Jacinto & Hombrados-Mendieta, 2002).

2015 The Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

PREQIs and NA: A confirmation study in a Chinese city

In this paper, the geographical unit of analysis is the

neighborhood, which can be considered as a bridge between
the home and the city in peoples perceptions and actions
toward the residential environment. Earlier studies have
shown that the neighborhood serves as a link between the
home and the city in organizing an inhabitants pattern
of activities, and this could allow us to consider structures
and processes concerning both the private and the public
sphere, as the former predominates at the home level and the
latter at the city level (e.g., Bonaiuto & Bonnes, 1996, 2002).
The more global experience of inhabitants with their place
of residence is captured by their satisfaction with their residence, which is termed residential satisfaction and has
been defined as the experience of pleasure or gratification of
living in a specific place (Canter, 1977). Residential satisfaction is used, and is one of the most studied psychological
patterns related to the residential environment. It can be
conceived of as a multifaceted dimension (Francescato,
2002), including the three classic facets (cognitive, affective,
and behavioral) of the psychological construct of attitude
(Rosenberg & Hovland, 1960). In this paper, we focus on
only the first two facets of residential satisfaction at the
neighborhood level, namely the cognitive facet, as measured
by the perceived residential environment quality indicators,
and the affective component, indicated by the attachment to
the neighborhood of residence.
Perceived residential environment quality has been investigated through analysis of the evaluative responses people
have toward specific environmental features (i.e., the dimensions characterizing their place of residence). This stems
from the more general research topic concerning the indicators of perceived environmental quality, which refers to peoples assessment of an array of features of their socialphysical environment (see Craik & Zube, 1976). The
assessment of environmental quality as judged by those who
occupy (or live in) a given place (e.g., residents in their
neighborhood) is extremely useful, as there can be incongruences between the objective and the subjective ratings of
environmental qualities, as evidenced in features of urban
neighborhoods (Bonaiuto, 2004; Bonnes, Scopelliti,
Fornara, & Carrus, 2012). Focusing on residents evaluations of their neighborhood quality, various scholars (e.g.,
Canter, 1983; Guest & Lee, 1984) have stated that they cover
three main domains: spatial (i.e., architectural and urban
planning), human (i.e., people and social relationships), and
functional (i.e., services and facilities). More recently,
Italian studies have confirmed the plausibility of distinguish-

ing among these three aspects of neighborhood perception in

the urban environment (e.g., Bonnes, Bonaiuto, & Ercolani,
1991). Moreover, a fourth evaluative domain regarding contextual features (pace of life, environmental health vs. pollution, and upkeep/care) has emerged during a study carried
out in Rome (Bonnes, Bonaiuto, Aiello, Perugini, &
Ercolani, 1997), and has been confirmed in subsequent
surveys in Rome and other Italian medium- and small-sized
cities (Bonaiuto, Fornara, & Bonnes, 2003, 2006; Fornara,
Bonaiuto, & Bonnes, 2010). It should be noted that these
four evaluative aspects of residential perceived quality
overlap substantially with almost all the environmental features of quality of life identified by the WHOQOL Group
(1994).
To tap these domains of perceived environmental quality
of neighborhood of residence within the urban context, specific instruments measuring the Perceived Residential Environment Quality Indicators (PREQIs; Bonaiuto, Aiello,
Perugini, Bonnes, & Ercolani, 1999; Fornara et al., 2010)
were developed. The PREQIs represent a standard set of
aspects to evaluations of a specific category of places (i.e.,
the urban neighborhood) and are designed to facilitate policy
and monitoring functions (Bonaiuto & Alves, 2012).
The instruments measuring inhabitants PREQIs include
11 scales (Fornara et al., 2010) structured by factors indicating attitudes distributed over four macroevaluative domains
of residential quality. The first domain, concerning architectural and urban planning aspects of residential quality,
includes three scales (Architectural and Town-planning
Space, Organization of Accessibility and Roads, and Green
Areas) which encompass indicators for attitudes toward
Building Volume, Building Aesthetics, Building Density,
External Connections, Internal Practicability, and Green
Areas. The second domain, related to sociorelational aspects,
consists of a single scale (People and Social Relations) with
indicators regarding Security and Tolerance, Sociability and
Cordiality, and Discretion and Civility. The third domain,
concerning functional aspects, has four scales (Welfare Services, Recreational Services, Commercial Services, and
Transport Services) which include indicators concerning
Social Care Services, School Services, Sports Services,
Sociocultural Activities, Commercial Services, and Transport Services. The last domain relates to contextual aspects
and comprises three scales (Pace of Life, Environmental
Health, and Upkeep and Care) with indicators of evaluations
about Relaxing versus Distressing, Stimulating versus
Boring, Environmental Health, and Upkeep and Care.

2015 The Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

PsyCh Journal

The affective component of residential satisfaction has

been studied through the analysis of the emotional response
that people develop toward their places of life over time: The
construct of place attachment has been used to tap this
pattern (see Manzo & Devine-Wright, 2014). This construct
concerns feelings, bonds, thoughts, and behavioral intentions that people develop over time with reference to their
socialphysical environment (Brown & Perkins, 1992). For
its salience in both relational and temporal terms, the residential environment can be seen as one of the most important
places in our everyday life. The construct of neighborhood
attachment (NA) has been operationalized as the tendency
to express a favorable evaluation of the place of living, the
motivation for ameliorating it and the reluctance to move
from it (Bonaiuto et al., 2006, p. 25). Although theoretically
NA is multifaceted, it has emerged as a monodimensional
factor, even when it has been measured using items covering
different aspects of the construct (see Bonaiuto et al., 1999;
Bonnes et al., 1997).
Both PREQIs and the NA indicator were included in
surveys carried out in different Italian urban contexts, previously in a large city like Rome (Bonaiuto et al., 1999,
2003)the Italian capital, with approximately 2,600,000
inhabitantsand then in other medium- and small-sized
Italian cities (Bonaiuto et al., 2006), ranging from approximately 500,000 to 50,000 inhabitants, respectively. These
validation studies in the Italian linguistic and cultural
context provided verification of both the dimensional structure and the internal consistency of the scales that comprise
the PREQIs and NA. The full versions of these tools or
abbreviations of them (in terms of areas, scales or items,
either in a paper-and-pencil or on-line format) also have
been used in other countries within Anglo Saxon or Northern
European geographical and cultural areas (e.g., Kytt,
Broberg, Tzoulas, & Snabb, 2013; Kytt, Kahila, & Broberg,
2011). Presently, ongoing validation studies are being
carried out in different linguistic and cultural contexts more
or less closer to the Italian context, mostly in countries
within the European Union (e.g., France, Croatia, Portugal,
Spain, Sweden), but also in Near Eastern countries at the
European border (i.e., Turkey and Iran).
This study, as part of this research program, aimed to
verify the factorial structures and the reliability of the tools
within the context of China, which, in comparison to the
aforementioned countries, represents by far the most different and distant context from Italy in geographical, linguistic,
and cultural terms. With the third largest territory world-

wide, China has a wide variety of geographical features

including areas dominated by mountains, rivers, deserts, and
lakes.

Aims and Hypothesis

Due to the linguistic and cultural distinctiveness between the
original context of validation of PREQIs and NA and the
Chinese context, the aims of this study were to verify both
the number and the factorial structure of PREQIs and NA
indicators that were found in previous studies in Italy, as well
as to confirm their internal consistency in a dramatically
different cultural and linguistic context (compared with the
original context of creation and validation in Italy). In particular, the validation work was performed with the full
versions of PREQIs and NAS (Bonaiuto et al., 2003, 2006).
This option was chosen to: (a) ensure that potentially important aspects related to a given factor were not missed in the
Chinese context, and (b) allow comparisons with other sets
of data that are being collected in other cultural contexts, as
mentioned earlier. It is also worth noting that this study was
the first in which confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was
used for the validation of the full versions, given that in
previous validation studies in the Italian context an exploratory technique (i.e., principal components analysis) was run
(see Bonaiuto et al., 2003, 2006).
Thus, as has emerged in previous studies which used these
tools (see Bonaiuto et al., 1999; Bonnes et al., 1997),
significant positive correlations between NA and most of
the PREQIs were hypothesized and expected in the
present work.

Method
Participants and context
A total of 1,231 residents were contacted, of which 668
responded (response rate was 54%). Excluding those individuals who were either inattentive or for whom there were
missing data on crucial study variables, a final sample of 340
participants remained (completion rate was 15%). The participants consisted of 56.1% males and 43.9% females, aged
between 17 and 72 years (M = 39, SD = 11 years). Of those
in the sample, 43.4% held a doctoral or masters degree,
47.6% held a bachelors degree, 7.1% held a high school
diploma, and 1.9% had only a middle school education.
The self-defined socioeconomic income of the sample was
36.7% medium, 28.6% low, 26.7% medium-low, 5.8%

2015 The Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

PREQIs and NA: A confirmation study in a Chinese city

medium-high, and 2.3% high. Approximately 38.2% were

single, 49.9% were married, 9.3% were living together, 2.3%
were divorced, and 0.3% were widowed. Participants were
living in six districts of urban Chongqing, namely Nanan,
Jiulongpo, Dadukou, Jiangbei, Shapingba, and Yuzhong,
which are characterized by a different distance between the
city center and the neighborhoods in urban Chongqing.
Chongqing is one of the four municipalities of China (which
are equivalent to Italian provinces in the Chinese administrative structure) and is located at the connecting region of
West and Central China. This geographic area represents the
geographic core of inland China, being a traffic node linking
South and North China, and containing three transport hubs,
namely Chinas fourth largest international airport, the
inland river transport networks biggest port, and the junction of eight railways.
Instruments
The instrument was a self-report questionnaire which initially had been translated from English to Chinese, and was
subsequently back-translated from Chinese to English
by a professor teaching English language acquisition at
Chongqing University. This self-report Chinese language
questionnaire comprised the full version of PREQIs (11
groups of scales, 140 items) and NA (1 scale, 8 items) scales
(see Bonaiuto et al., 2006). In each scale there were both
positively worded items related to the presence of environmental quality (e.g., It is pleasant to see this neighborhood), and negatively worded items concerning the lack of
quality (e.g., In this neighborhood many green areas are
disappearing). Response options were provided on sevenpoint Likert-type scales, ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to
7 (totally agree). As a completely different and complex
language system, the Chinese language (which is the most
widely spoken language in the world) has its own contextual
meanings, so before administering the questionnaire some
modifications from the translated English version had to be
made to the wording of items to fit this distinctive linguistic
context.
Procedure
The online version of the questionnaire was created by
putting all items on a software platform called EFS Survey.
The survey link was sent to the potential respondents via
email and QQ (an instant messaging system that is similar to
Skype and is used widely in China) by the first author, in
order to obtain their participation. Respondents who

accepted the invitation to participate completed the questionnaire with reference to their own residential neighborhood.
The data gathering phase ran from May 30 to August 31,
2012.
Data analysis
CFA was conducted (LISREL 8.51: Jreskog & Srbom,
2001) to validate the factorial structure of the PREQIs and
NA scales. Following the procedure used by Fornara et al.
(2010), a step-by-step iterative analysis was run for each
scale, starting from the verification of an initial solution
including all the items (each one loading only on the
expected factor). To assess the models goodness of fit, and
consequently to decide whether to accept the solution that
emerged at a given step or rather to search for better solutions by eliminating one or more items, a set of indices1 (and
relative cut-off values for acceptable fit) was adopted (see Hu
& Bentler, 1999). These indices were: the root-mean-square
error of approximation (RMSEA) with a cut-off value of .08
(see Browne & Cudeck, 1993), the standardized root-meansquare residual (SRMR) with a cut-off value of .08, the
nonnormed fit index (NNFI) and the comparative fit index
(CFI) with a cut-off value of .95, and finally a chi-square/
degrees of freedom ratio of less than 3 (Carmines & McIver,
1981).
The internal consistencies of the PREQIs and NAS were
examined using Cronbachs alpha coefficient. Each PREQIs
and NAS index was computed as a mean score of the
observed variables (i.e., the items) selected in the models.
Pearsons bivariate correlations were then run between the
NAS aggregate score and each PREQIs aggregate score to
test their relationship.

Results
CFA factor structures
CFA results are presented in Table 1 for each PREQIs scale
included in the four macroevaluative domains of residential quality (i.e., architectural and urban planning,
socorelational, functional, and contextual aspects), as well as
for the NA scale.
Architectural and urban planning aspects

For the Architectural and Town-planning Space scale (Scale

A in Table 1), the model included three correlated factors.
The first factor, Building Volume (F1 in the table), consisted
of five items (all negatively worded) related to the excessive

2015 The Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

PsyCh Journal

Table 1
Confirmatory Factor Analysis Results for PREQIs and NA Scales
Items
Scale A: Architectural and Town-planning Space (no. of items = 15)
20. The size of some buildings is excessive in this neighborhood.
18. Buildings are too tall in this neighborhood.
19. Buildings are too large in this neighborhood.
21. In this neighborhood buildings are too tall compared to the width of streets.
17. The volume of buildings is too big in this neighborhood.
10. Buildings have unpleasant colors in this neighborhood.
11. Buildings are unpleasant in this neighborhood.
12. The buildings have an unpleasant shape in this neighborhood.
14. Building details are well-made in this neighborhood.
15. This neighborhood is aesthetically unpleasant.
5. Buildings are too clustered in this neighborhood.
1. Buildings are too close together in this neighborhood.
3. Theres little space between buildings in this neighborhood.
4. Theres enough space between buildings in this neighborhood.
6. This is a roomy neighborhood.
Alpha
Fit indices: 2 = 211.49; df = 86; 2/df = 2.459; RMSEA = .066; SRMR = .057; NNFI = .95; CFI = .96
Scale B: Organization of Accessibility and Roads (no. of items = 10)
31. This neighborhood is well connected with important parts of the city.
30. The city-center can be easily reached from this neighborhood.
32. This neighborhood is too cut-off from the rest of the city.
33. Theres a large choice of roads to get out of the neighborhood.
34. It is easy to go out from this neighborhood.
26. Parking places and parking lots are lacking in this neighborhood.
22. Parked cars impede walking in this neighborhood.
25. It is dangerous to cycle in this neighborhood.
23. There is a good availability of parking spaces in this neighborhood.
28. Theres not enough space to walk in this neighborhood.
Alpha
Fit indices: 2 = 62.94; df = 34; 2/df = 1.851; RMSEA = .050; SRMR = .046; NNFI = .95; CFI = .96
Scale C: Green Areas (no. of items = 6)
37. There are enough green areas in this neighborhood.
36. There are green areas for relaxing in this neighborhood.
39. In this neighborhood green areas are in good condition.
43. The green areas are too small in this neighborhood.
40. There is at least a garden/park where people can meet in this neighborhood.
42. The green areas are well-equipped in this neighborhood (lighting, driveways, benches, waste bins, etc.).
Alpha
Fit indices: 2 = 14.53; df = 8; 2/df = 1.816; RMSEA = .049; SRMR = .027; NNFI = .98; CFI = .99
Scale D: People and Social Relations (no. of items = 9)
48. Late in the evening there is the risk of dangerous encounters in this neighborhood.
46. Disreputable persons hang around in this neighborhood.
47. People often behave uncivilly in this neighborhood.
61. In this neighborhood people only have formal relationships.
57. In this neighborhood it is difficult to make friends with people.
59. In this neighborhood people tend to be isolated.
53. In this neighborhood you feel watched.
55. In this neighborhood you feel controlled by others.
56. In this neighborhood people are discreet.
Alpha
Fit indices: 2 = 51.48; df = 21; 2/df = 2.451; RMSEA = .065; SRMR = .045; NNFI = .94; CFI = .97
Scale E: Welfare Services (no. of items = 7)
71. Elderly care services are lacking in this neighborhood.
70. Social services are inadequate in this neighborhood.
72. The local health service is inadequate in this neighborhood.
73. The local health service is satisfactory in this neighborhood.
93. Schools are generally good in this neighborhood.
91. This neighborhood has good school facilities.
92. Schools can be easily reached on foot in this neighborhood.
Alpha
Fit indices: 2 = 41.06; df = 13; 2/df = 3.158; RMSEA = .080; SRMR = .060; NNFI = .95; CFI = .97

2015 The Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

F1

F2

F3

.88
.86
.86
.82
.53
.90
.87
.85
.79
.60

.89

.85

.80
.76
.75
.67
.61
.84

.84
.76
.49
.62
.61

.80

.74
.53
.51
.41
38
.63

.84
.75
.75
.55
.48
.48
.81

.87
.68
.60
.78
.61
.59

.78

.74

.90
.85
.79
.47

.83

.82
.75
.75
.81

.86
.72
.41
.62

PREQIs and NA: A confirmation study in a Chinese city

Table 1
Continued
Items

F1

Scale F: Recreational Services (no. of items = 10)

76. This neighborhood is well equipped with sports grounds.
75. You can do various sports in this neighborhood.
77. There are areas where you can do outdoor sports in this neighborhood.
78. If you like jogging, this neighborhood is suitable.
79. Outdoor sport areas are not sufficient in this neighborhood.
80. Sports grounds are insufficient in this neighborhood.
86. The neighborhood is often animated by several cultural events (exhibitions, shows, etc.).
88. This neighborhood is well served to host theatre performances.
84. In the evening this neighborhood offers various attractions.
89. In this neighborhood libraries are adequate for residents needs.
Alpha
Fit indices: 2 = 84.61; df = 31; 2/df = 2.729; RMSEA = .071; SRMR = .054; NNFI = .95; CFI = .96
Scale G: Commercial Services (no. of items = 6)
92. Anything can be found in the neighborhoods stores.
91. There are all kinds of stores in this neighborhood.
93. This neighborhood is well-served with stores.
97. In this neighborhood stores do not provide a wide range of products.
95. Special things are lacking in the neighborhoods stores.
98. In this neighborhood stores selling the most needed products can be easily reached.
Alpha
Fit indices: 2 = 16.41; df = 6; 2/df = 2.735; RMSEA = .072; SRMR = .036; NNFI = .96; CFI = .98
Scale H: Transport Services (no. of items = 5)
103. The quality of public transportation is poor in this neighborhood.
105. The time spent waiting for public transport is too long in this neighborhood.
101. Buses are too uncomfortable in this neighborhood.
99. In this neighborhood public transport provides good connections with the rest of the city.
100. In this neighborhood the frequency of public transport is adequate for residents needs.
Alpha
Fit indices: 2 = 3.76; df = 3; 2/df = 1.253; RMSEA = .027; SRMR = .023; NNFI = .99; CFI = 1.00
Scale I: Pace of Life (no. of items = 11)
106. There is a calm atmosphere in this neighborhood.
107. If compared with the chaos of other areas, this neighborhood is still liveable.
109. There is a peaceful pace of life in this neighborhood.
110. This neighborhood is an oasis of tranquility.
108. Living in this neighborhood is quite distressing.
118. Only a few things can be done in this neighborhood.
117. This neighborhood is very boring.
116. Nothing happens in this neighborhood.
120. Days always seem the same in this neighborhood.
114. This neighborhood is full of activity.
115. Every day something interesting happens in this neighborhood.
Alpha
Fit indices: 2 = 98.33, df = 39; 2/df = 2.521; RMSEA = .067; SRMR = .064; NNFI = .93; CFI = .95
Scale J: Environmental Health (no. of items = 7)
127. There is too much noise in this neighborhood.
128. In this neighborhood the traffic intensity is really too much annoying.
126. This is a polluted neighborhood.
125. Residents health is threatened by pollution in this neighborhood.
122. The air is clean in this neighborhood.
124. This is a quiet neighborhood.
123. This neighborhood is generally not polluted.
Alpha
Fit indices: 2 = 31.55; df = 11; 2/df = 2.868; RMSEA = .074; SRMR = .045; NNFI = .96; CFI = .98
Scale K: Upkeep and Care (no. of items = 7)
130. Road signs are well-kept in this neighborhood.
129. Streets are regularly cleaned in this neighborhood.
135. The refuse collection service is efficient in this neighborhood.
131. Residents show care for their neighborhood.
134. Residents avoid dirtying the place in this neighborhood.
133. Residents do not respect the environment in this neighborhood.
132. There are too many holes in the neighborhoods streets.
Alpha
Fit indices: 2 = 19.78; df = 11; 2/df = 1.798; RMSEA = .049; SRMR = .030; NNFI = .97; CFI = .98

F2

F3

.93
.89
.81
.66
.48
.45

.87

.83
.61
.57
.57
.73

.90
.78
.73
.38
.36
.30
.75

.81
.64
.62
.32
.32
.72

.92
.73
.71
.50
.40

.79

.76
.75
.57
.47
.36
.31
.75

.88
.83
.70
.59
.58
.58
.51
.87

.79
.70
.56
.54
.40
.39
.30
.76

2015 The Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

PsyCh Journal

Table 1
Continued
Items

F1

Scale L: Neighborhood Attachment (no. of items = 7)

146. I have nothing in common with this neighborhood.
145. I would willingly live in another neighborhood.
147. I do not subscribe to this neighborhoods life-style.
144. I do not feel integrated in this neighborhood.
143. This is the ideal neighborhood for me.
142. It would be very hard for me to leave this neighborhood.
141. This neighborhood is by now part of me.
Alpha
Fit indices: 2 = 29.43; df = 10; 2/df = 2.943; RMSEA = .076; SRMR = .030; NNFI = .96; CFI = .98

F2

F3

.82
.81
.76
.57
.51
.42
.42
.83

Note. CFI = comparative fit index; NA = neighborhood attachment; NNFI = nonnormed fit index; PREQIs = Perceived Residential Environment Quality Indicators;
RMSEA = root-mean-square error of approximation; SRMR = standardized root-mean-square residual.

size of buildings. The second factor, Building Aesthetics

(F2), included five items (one positive and four negative)
regarding neighborhood pleasantness and the beauty of
buildings (in terms of shape and color). The third factor,
Building Density (F3), contained five items (two positive
and three negative) concerning the presence or lack of
adequate space between buildings, as well as the balance or
imbalance between built-up areas and open spaces. The
Pearson correlations were r = .37 (p < .001) between F1 and
F2, r = .42 (p < .001) between F2 and F3, and r = .61
(p < .001) between F1 and F3. Six items were removed from
the original scale, one from the first factor, three from the
second factor, and two from the third factor. The model fit
was acceptable.
For the Organization of Accessibility and Roads scale
(Scale B in Table 1), the model included 10 items loading on
two correlated factors. The first factor, External Connections
(F1 in the table), contained five items (four positive and one
negative) on neighborhood connections with (or isolation
from) the city center and other city areas. The second factor,
Internal Practicability (F2), included five items (one positive
and four negative) concerning the ease of walking and
cycling, as well as the space availability for parking. The
correlation between these two factors was r = .20 (p < .01).
Four items were eliminated from this scale, one item from
the first factor and three items from the second. Fit indices
for this model indicated a good global fit.
For the Green Areas scale (Scale C in Table 1), the model
included six items (five positive and one negative) loading
on the single factor of Green Areas (F1 in the table). The
items reflect the quality and quantity of the green areas, as
well as the availability and usability of neighborhood green
areas for relaxing or for social meetings. Four items were
deleted from the original scale. Model fit indices were good.

Sociorelational aspects

For the People and Social Relations scale (Scale D in

Table 1), the model included three correlated factors. The
first factor, Security and Tolerance (F1 in the table),
contained three items (all negative) regarding the risk of
dangerous night meetings, the presence of incivility, and
people considered dangerous. The second factor, Sociability and Cordiality (F2), consisted of three items (all
negative) that referred to a propensity toward formal interpersonal relationships, isolation, low sociability, and poor
friendship. The third factor, Discretion and Civility (F3),
included three items (one positive and two negative)
regarding the occurrence of gossip, inadequacy of privacy,
and being controlled. The Pearson correlations were r = .32
(p < .001) between F1 and F2, r = .31 (p < .001) between
F2 and F3, and r = .34 (p < .001) between F1 and F3. With
reference to the original scale, nine items were removed
(three from the first factor, four from the second factor,
and two from the third factor) to reach acceptable fit
indices.
Functional aspects

For the Welfare Services scale (Scale E in Table 1), the

model included seven items loading on two correlated
factors. The first factor, Social Care Services (F1), consisted
of four items (one positive and three negative) concerning
social services (good or inadequate), health services, and
eldercare services provided by the local health authorities.
The second factor, School Services (F2), included three
items (all positive) referring to the quantity and quality of
schools in the neighborhood. The Pearson correlation
between these two factors was r = .35 (p < .001). Four items
were deleted (one from the first factor and three from the
second) to reach acceptable fit.

2015 The Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

PREQIs and NA: A confirmation study in a Chinese city

For the Recreational Services scale (Scale F in Table 1),

the model included two correlated factors. The first
factor, Sports Services (F1), consisted of six items (four
positive and two negative) on the adequacy or scarcity of
outdoor and indoor neighborhood sports facilities. The
second factor, Sociocultural Activities (F2), contained four
items (all positive) regarding the presence of cultural
venues and events, theatres, cinemas, and libraries within
the neighborhood. The Pearson correlation between these
two factors was r = .41 (p < .001). Four items were
removed from the original scale (two items from each
factor). Model fit indices revealed an acceptable fit to the
data.
For the Commercial Services scale (Scale G in Table 1),
the model included six items (four positive and two negative)
loading on the single factor of Commercial Services (F1).
The items referred to the status of neighborhood shops as
well as the ease in reaching them. Two items were deleted to
reach an acceptable fit.
For the Transport Services scale (Scale H in Table 1) the
model included five items (two positive and three negative)
loading on the single factor of Transport Services (F1). The
items concerned the quality of public transport frequency,
variety, distribution, and connections within the neighborhood. Two items were removed from the original scale. The
model showed excellent fit indices.
Contextual aspects

For the Pace of Life scale (Scale I in Table 1), the model
included two correlated factors. The first factor, Relaxing
versus Distressing (F1), consisted of five items (four positive
and one negative) which referred to a calm (or chaotic) and
peaceful (or distressing) pace of life in the neighborhood.
The second factor, Stimulating versus Boring (F2), included
six items (two positive and four negative) which concerned
the presence or absence of interesting and exciting neighborhood events and activities. The Pearson correlation between
these two factors was .13 (p < .05). Five items were deleted
from the original scale (three in the first factor, and two in the
second). The fit indices for this model mirrored a good
global fit.
For the Environmental Health scale (Scale J in Table 1) the
model included seven items (three positive and four negative) loading on the single factor of Environmental Health
(F1). The items concerned the quality of the environment in
terms of the presence or absence of air pollution as well as
noise. Model fit indices revealed a good fit.

The Upkeep and Care scale (Scale K in Table 1) included

seven items (five positive and two negative) loading on the
single factor of Upkeep and Care (F1). The items concerned
both the public and residents care for their neighborhood
and its streets, road signs, etc. With reference to the original
scale, five items were removed. The model fit indices showed
a very good fit.
NA

For the NAS (Scale L in Table 1) the model included seven

items (three positive and four negative) loading on the single
factor of Neighborhood Attachment (F1). The items referred
to the presence or lack of NA. One item was removed from
the original scale. The fit indices for this model revealed a
good global fit.
Table 2 reports the internal consistency (i.e., Cronbachs
alpha values) for each PREQI and the NA scale.
Correlations between PREQIs and NA
The statistical parameters of the 19 aggregate PREQIs and
NA scales are presented in Table 3. The order of the 19
PREQIs is based on the size of their bivariate correlation
with NA, that is, from the highest to the lowest Pearson
correlation.
Almost all correlations between NA and PREQIs (i.e., 17)
were significant, except for two architectural and townplanning PREQIs, Building Volume and Internal Practicability. All four contextual aspect PREQIs showed a significant
and high bivariate correlation with NA, being (from the
highest to the lowest): Stimulating versus Boring (r = .52,
p < .001), Environmental Health (r = .38, p < .001), Relaxing versus Distressing (r = .36, p < .001), and Upkeep and
Care (r = .31, p < .001). In addition, the three PREQIs of
sociorelational aspects of residential quality showed a good
correlation with NA, which was greater for Sociability and
Cordiality (r = .47, p < .001), and smaller for Discretion and
Civility (r = .37, p < .001) and Security and Tolerance
(r = .27, p < .001). All of the PREQIs of functional aspects
showed a significant and moderately strong correlation with
NA: Sports Services (r = .39, p < .001), School Services
(r = .27, p < .001), Social Care Services (r = .27, p < .001),
Sociocultural Activities (r = .24, p < .001), Commercial Services (r = .23, p < .001), and Transport Services (r = .17,
p < .01). On the whole, even though the architectural and
urban planning PREQIs presented the only two indicators
uncorrelated with NA (Building Volume and Internal Practicability), and two correlated but low indicators (Building

2015 The Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

PsyCh Journal

Table 2
Summary of the Full Versions of the Chinese PREQIs and NA Scales
Targeted features of
residential quality
Architectural and urban
planning aspects

Scales

Factors

Architectural and Town-planning Space

Organization of Accessibility and Roads

Sociorelational aspects

Green Areas
People and Social Relations

Functional aspects

Welfare Services
Recreational Services

Contextual aspects

Commercial Services
Transport Services
Pace of Life

Neighborhood attachment

Environmental Health
Upkeep and Care
Neighborhood Attachment

Density, r = .19, p < .01, and External Connections, r = .15,

p < .01), it is worth noting that there were two indicators
with Pearson correlations higher than .30 (r = .33, p < .001
for Green Areas and r = .32, p < .001 for Building
Aesthetics).

Discussion and conclusion

PREQIs (Bonaiuto et al., 1999) are a set of indicators measuring how people perceive the quality of their urban residential environment, notably the neighborhood. NA is
operationalized as the tendency to express a favorable
evaluation of the place of living, the motivation for ameliorating it and the reluctance to move from it (Bonaiuto
et al., 2006, p. 25); it is the positive affective, cognitive,
and behavioral bonds that people develop over time with
their neighborhood. Both PREQIs and NA tools have originally been validated in Italy, and subsequently in other
countries within the European Union (France, Croatia, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden), and in Near Eastern countries at
the European border (i.e., Turkey and Iran). However, these
tools have now been validated for the first time in an East
Asian country with completely different geographical, linguistic, and cultural contexts. Specifically, the factorial
structure of PREQIs and NAS, the total number of
PREQIs, and the relationships among PREQIs within each
scale (for those structured by more than a single factor)

F1.
F2.
F3.
F1.
F2.
F1.
F1.
F2.
F3.
F1.
F2.
F1.
F2.
F1.
F1.
F1.
F2.
F1.
F1.
F1.

Building Volume
Building Aesthetics
Building Density
Internal Practicability
External Connections
Green Areas
Security and Tolerance
Sociability and Cordiality
Discretion and Civility
Social Care Services
School Services
Sociocultural Activities
Sports Services
Commercial Services
Transport Services
Relaxing versus Distressing
Stimulating versus Boring
Environmental Health
Upkeep and Care
Neighborhood Attachment

No. of
items

Alpha

5
5
5
5
5
6
3
3
3
4
3
4
6
6
5
5
6
7
7
7

.89
.85
.84
.63
.80
.81
.78
.74
.62
.83
.81
.73
.87
.75
.72
.79
.75
.87
.76
.83

confirm the previous studies carried out in Italy (see

Bonaiuto et al., 2003, 2006). Although 48 questionnaire
items were deleted, within which negatively worded items
were deleted more often than positively worded items, the
measures retained 100 items from the initial total number
of 148 items. In the present work, CFA via structural equation modeling was performed to validate the original tools
in the Chinese context, differing from previous validation
methods that have used principal components analysis (see
Bonaiuto et al., 2003, 2006). As expected, this methodological choice led to a more conservative selection of
items because an items factor loading was not the only
criterion used for keeping or eliminating an item from the
scale, as has been done in principal components analysis.
Nevertheless, CFA represents a better approach for confirmation and is more informative about scale level. Apart
from this methodological explanation, it should be noted
that PREQIs and NA scales have been developed and validated in a linguistic and cultural context that is quite different from the Chinese context. Despite the refining work
of adaptation, translation, and back-translation of items, it
is likely that some of the items that were expected to represent a given factor on the basis of the previous Western
studies were not perceived as such by the Chinese respondents. Because both method and culture differ among
the two results, future studies are necessary in order to
disentangle this issue.

2015 The Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

1
Note. PREQIs are ordered according to the size of their bivariate correlation with NA from the highest to the lowest Pearsons correlations. NA = neighborhood attachment; PREQ = Perceived Residential Environment Quality.

1
.291
1
.216
.204
1
.491
.167
.234
1
.249
.212
.423
.432
1
.139
.413
.375
.095
.174
1
.359
.073
.152
.146
.002
.035
1
.294
.201
.321
.412
.33
.191
.308
1
.312
.146
.005
.387
.168
.106
.328
.147
1
.153
.373
.266
.327
.175
.319
.284
.093
.173
1
.328
.273
.445
.233
.34
.331
.393
.32
.252
.272
1
.31 1
.326 .503 1
.328 .202 .301 1
.227 .473 .683 .273 1
.306 .663 .562 .289 .496 1
.258 .296 .396 .406 .327 .396 1
.193 .474 .591 .295 .581 .534 .378
.161 .376 .34
.243 .359 .335 .197
.354 .384 .388 .36
.323 .391 .401
.41
.484 .452 .176 .385 .433 .238
.22
.447 .147 .125 .193 .211 .003
.052 .28
.071 .199 .176 .126 .154
.19
.396 .404 .28
.315 .447 .639
.144 .279 .347 .174 .393 .286 .267
.215 .11
.253 .354 .258 .269 .334
.233 .232 .273 .177 .273 .329 .501
.073 .232 .245 .196 .299 .169 .404

19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3

2
1
.423
.378
.268
.266
.165
.238
.233
.177
.171
.236
.296
.512
.231
.149
.235
.179
.023
.043
1
.523
.472
.39
.383
.377
.364
.329
.318
.311
.272
.271
.27
.238
.231
.188
.172
.152
.101
.071
(1.079)
(0.966)
(1.173)
(1.312)
(1.176)
(1.126)
(1.080)
(1.188)
(1.085)
(0.914)
(1.362)
(1.270)
(1.372)
(1.292)
(1.036)
(1.256)
(1.076)
(1.163)
(1.083)
(1.322)
4.226
3.883
3.951
4.041
4.412
4.775
4.637
4.436
4.465
4.545
4.479
4.476
3.991
3.558
3.991
4.242
4.379
4.659
4.100
4.239
NA
Stimulating versus Boring
Sociability and Cordiality
Sports Services
Environmental Health
Discretion and Civility
Relaxing versus Distressing
Green Areas
Building Aesthetics
Upkeep and Care
School Services
Security and Tolerance
Social Care Services
Sociocultural Activities
Commercial Services
Building Density
Transport Services
External Connections
Internal Practicability
Building Volume
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.

Correlation
(NA-PREQ)
M (SD)
Variable

The internal consistency of PREQIs and NAS, which was

satisfactory in previous investigations (see Bonaiuto et al.,
2003, 2006), was confirmed substantially in this Chinese
validation survey, taking into account that in this study fewer
items were included in each scale, and Cronbachs alpha
coefficients are dependent on the number of items (i.e., with
the same intercorrelation among items, the lower the number
of items, the lower the alpha value). More specifically, as
indicated in Table 3, the alpha values of 17 scales ranged
between .89 (Building Volume) and .72 (Transport Services),
whereas only two scales presented lower values (Internal
Practicability at .63, and Discretion and Civility at .62). The
more reliable scales (greater than .80) were Building Volume
(.89), Sports Services (.87), Environmental Health (.87),
Building Aesthetics (.85), Building Density (.84), Social
Care Services (.83), School Services (.81), Green Areas
(.81), and External Connections (.80). Moreover, the
unidimensionality of NA was confirmed and the scale demonstrated good internal consistency ( = .83).
The relationships among PREQIs and the NA scale confirmed partially what emerged in a study in which a previous
version of these tools was used in the Italian context, specifically in Rome (see Bonaiuto et al., 1999). In particular,
comparing the relationships among PREQIs and NA in the
present work with those found in the previous study, the
following analogies are found. The perception of the presence (or absence) of stimulating features in the neighborhood (in Bonaiuto et al., 1999, it was labeled in negative
terms as Lack of Opportunities) is, in both studies, indicated
by the PREQIs that showed the highest association with NA.
A strong relationship with NA is also confirmed by another
contextual PREQI, which is the presence (or absence) of
relaxing features (i.e., Relaxing versus Distressing) in the
neighborhood (labeled as Quiet in Bonaiuto et al., 1999).
Architectural and urban planning PREQIs are remarkably
associated with NA, particularly Green Areas and Building
Aesthetics. With regard to sociorelational PREQIs, there is
confirmation of the role of Sociability and Cordiality
(labeled as Presence of Social Relationship in Bonaiuto
et al., 1999) in the development of NA. To a greater extent,
these social environment indicators have proved to be important in predicting residential satisfaction (Amrigo &
Aragons, 1990, 1997) and place attachment (Hidalgo &
Hernndez, 2001; Tabernero, Briones, & Cuadrado, 2010).
In sum, the adequacy of Pace of Life patterns (shown by the
Stimulating versus Boring, and Relaxing versus Distressing
indicators), sociorelational opportunities, and natural and

20

PREQIs and NA: A confirmation study in a Chinese city

Table 3
PREQ and NA Indices: Mean Score, Standard Deviation, and Correlation Matrix

10

2015 The Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

PsyCh Journal

built environment pleasantness seems to play an important

role in developing place attachment feelings both in the
Italian urban context and in the Chinese urban context. The
association between residents perceived environment
quality and NA in the present study also confirms the results
of studies carried out in the Spanish context. For example,
Tabernero, Martn, Valera, and Vidal (2013) found that residents perceived environment quality is important in determining NA, while Ruiz, Prez, and Hernndez (2013) found
that the perception of the environment is predictive of place
attachment, which in turn predicts the perception of the
environment.
Some distinctive features emerged in the present study. In
particular, it is worth noting that the strongest associations
with NA were found in the perceived quality of Sports Services and Environmental Health. In other words, it seems
that individual health-related issues (i.e., sports opportunities and presence/absence of a healthy environment) may be
particularly salient for the NA of the Chinese residents of
Chongqing. In this regard, according to the National Environmental Analysis released by the Tsinghua University and
the Asian Develop Bank in January 2013, air pollution in
Chongqing makes this city rank in the top ten list of the most
air polluted cities in the world (Staedter, 2013). This may
contribute to the relationship between NA level and healthrelated issues in the Chongqing sample. This specific
outcome also may reflect the broader cultural differences
between Chinese and Italian inhabitants in their relationships
with their own residential neighborhood. In other words, the
representativeness of our sample does not allow us to make
confident generalizations to all segments of the Chinese
population (Crano, Brewer, & Lac, 2015).
In sum, these findings may help explain the priority of
each environmental quality feature in promoting a positive
outcome from the inhabitant-place transaction. To this end,
the objective is to provide a scientific basis for understanding
the reciprocal relations between people and their space that
can provide an evidence-based platform for either environmental design or management (Bonaiuto & Alves, 2012).
Studies like the present one, which help in increasing the
cross-cultural validity of tools, can be a basis for expanding
such an approach to wider contexts. This goal becomes even
more important in a rapidly globalizing world, particularly as
far as the urban contexts and environmentsand the related
experiences of their inhabitantsare concerned (for similar
related issues, see also Becker, Bonaiuto, Bilotta, & Bonnes,
2011; Bonaiuto, Bilotta, & Stolfa, 2010).

11

A research line to be further developed consists of the

comparison between residents perceived quality of their
neighborhood and experts technical evaluations of the same
places, to assess when these two evaluations converge or
diverge (Gifford, 2002). This would be a step forward
in improving our knowledge of subjective and objective
environmental evaluations that subsequently can be considered, compared, and complemented within environmental
management strategies and interventions (Fornara et al.,
2010). One important development lies in understanding the
support function of the environment for peoples behaviors
and conduct, which are relevant for their quality of life, such
as the factors that increase the probability of walking in an
urban context, that is, its walkability from the point of view
of the inhabitants (e.g., Sugiyama, Ward Thompson, &
Alves, 2009).
On a different level, comparative studies between
Eastern countries (such as China) and Western countries
should help to detect cultural differences in the assessment
of which dimensions contribute more to both NA and residential satisfaction, as well as their relation to the perceived quality of specific aspects of residential places.
These topics represent a relevant issue not only within
environmental psychology and design disciplines, but also
more broadly within any approach interested in public
health and politics, as they are relevant to, or even part of,
perceived and actual quality of life and well-being. In other
words, the validated PREQIs and NA scales are useful
tools for measuring residents perceptions of the quality of
their neighborhood and can be considered as important
indicators of residents overall quality of life, given that
PREQIs and NA scales essentially share content related to
the environmental domain of quality of life (WHOQOL
Group, 1994).
In addition, some limitations warrant notice in this study.
First, as discussed, the participants were recruited in just one
city, although from different neighborhoods. This point suggests some caution in generalizing results to other Chinese
urban contexts. These socio-demographic differences could
be due to the online procedure, but they also could be independent from it; future studies will help to clarify this issue.
Nevertheless, previous studies (see Bonaiuto et al., 2006)
have shown that the factorial structure and content of
PREQIs and NAS found in a large city were confirmed in
medium- and small-sized cities within the same cultural
context. Second, the large number of items limited the
possibility of adding further measures in the research proto-

2015 The Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

12

PREQIs and NA: A confirmation study in a Chinese city

col. Further studies may focus on shortening the long version

into a shorter version (as has already been done in other
contexts; see Fornara et al., 2010), on comparing average
values across neighborhoods or cities to test the discriminant
validity of the tool (as in Bonaiuto et al., 2006), or on
using other variables to correlate them with PREQIs (e.g.,
Bonaiuto, Bonnes, & Continisio, 2004). In other words,
further studies in the Chinese context should be run to complete the validation work by verifying the concurrent and
discriminant validity of these tools.
In conclusion, the results of this study suggest that the
Chinese version of PREQIs and NAS can be a useful
method for assessing the extent to which individuals perceive the environmental quality of their neighborhood in
the Chinese context. Moreover, these findings provide
support for the cross-cultural generalizability of the factorial structure of the PREQIs despite the geographical,
cultural, and linguistic differences between the Chinese
context and European countries. This is similar to other
recent results from research in Middle Eastern countries,
including those from an Iranian sample in the city of Tabriz
(Bonaiuto, Fornara, Ariccio, Ganucci Cancellieri, &
Rahimi, 2015).

Note
1. The choice of which item to remove at each step was
done on the basis of two criteria: (a) a path coefficient (i.e.,
a lambda-X in the LISREL notation) lower than .30 with the
expected latent factor, and (b) the modification indices based
on the Lagrange multiplier test (Chou & Bentler, 1990).

Acknowledgments
The present work has been carried out thanks to partial
support from the grant of a PhD fellowship awarded to the
first author by the China Scholarship Council (2011605102),
and partial support from Sapienza Universit di Roma (University funds financial year 2010 and 2011) funded to the
corresponding author. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the position of any funding body or initiative. The authors wish
to acknowledge both Associate Professor Yiping Chen and
Professor Jing Peng at the Foreign Language Institute of
Chongqing University for support with back-translation and

partial data collection. The authors are also grateful for Professor William Cranos help with language revision.

References
Amrigo, M., & Aragons, J. I. (1990). Residential satisfaction in
council housing. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 10, 313
325. doi:10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80031-3
Amrigo, M., & Aragons, J. I. (1997). A theoretical and methodological approach to the study of residential satisfaction. Journal
of Environmental Psychology, 17, 4757. doi:10.1006/
jevp.1996.0038
Becker, F., Bonaiuto, M., Bilotta, E., & Bonnes, M. (2011).
Integrated healthscape strategies: An ecological approach to
evidence-based design. Health Environments Research and
Design Journal, 4, 114129.
Bonaiuto, M. (2004). Residential satisfaction and perceived urban
quality. In C. D. Spielberger (Ed.), Encyclopedia of applied
psychology (pp. 267272). doi:10.1016/B0-12-657410-3/
00698-X
Bonaiuto, M., Aiello, A., Perugini, M., Bonnes, M., & Ercolani, A.
P. (1999). Multidimensional perception of residential environment quality and neighbourhood attachment in the urban environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19, 331352.
doi:10.1006/jevp.1999.0138
Bonaiuto, M., & Alves, S. (2012). Residential places and neighborhoods: Towards healthy life, social integration, and reputable
residence. In S. D. Clayton (Ed.), The Oxford handbook
of environmental and conservation psychology (pp. 221247).
doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199733026.013.0013
Bonaiuto, M., Bilotta, E., & Stolfa, A. (2010). Feng shui and
environmental psychology: A critical comparison. Journal of
Architectural and Planning Research, 27, 2334.
Bonaiuto, M., & Bonnes, M. (1996). Multiplace analysis of
the urban environment: A comparison between a large and a
small Italian city. Environment and Behavior, 28, 699747.
doi:10.1177/001391659602800601
Bonaiuto, M., & Bonnes, M. (2002). Residential satisfaction in the
urban environment within the UNESCO-MAB Rome Project. In
J. I. Aragons, G. Francescato, & T. Grling (Eds.), Residential
environments: Choice, satisfaction, and behavior (pp. 101133).
Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey.
Bonaiuto, M., Bonnes, M., & Continisio, M. (2004). Neighborhood
evaluation within a multiplace perspective on urban
activities. Environment and Behavior, 36, 4169. doi:10.1177/
0013916503251444
Bonaiuto, M., Fornara, F., Ariccio, S., Ganucci Cancellieri, U., &
Rahimi, L. (2015). Perceived residential environment quality
indicators (PREQIs) relevance for UN-HABITAT City Prosperity Index (CPI). Habitat International, 45, 5363. doi:10.1016/
j.habitatint.2014.06.015
Bonaiuto, M., Fornara, F., & Bonnes, M. (2003). Indexes of
perceived residential environment quality and neighbourhood
attachment in urban environments: A confirmation study on the
city of Rome. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65, 4152.
doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00236-0
Bonaiuto, M., Fornara, F., & Bonnes, M. (2006). Perceived residential environment quality in middle- and low-extension Italian

2015 The Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

PsyCh Journal

cities. Revue Europenne de Psychologie Applique/European

Review of Applied Psychology, 56, 2334. doi:10.1016/
j.erap.2005.02.011
Bonnes, M., Bonaiuto, M., Aiello, A., Perugini, M., & Ercolani, A.
P. (1997). A transactional perspective on residential satisfaction.
In C. Desprs & D. Pich (Eds.), Housing surveys: Advances in
theory and methods (pp. 7599). Qubec: Centre de Recherche
en Amenagement et Developpement, Universit Laval.
Bonnes, M., Bonaiuto, M., & Ercolani, A. P. (1991). Crowding
and residential satisfaction in the urban environment: A contextual approach. Environment and Behavior, 23, 531552.
doi:10.1177/0013916591235001
Bonnes, M., Scopelliti, M., Fornara, F., & Carrus, G. (2012). Urban
environmental quality. In L. Steg, A. E. van den Berg, & J. I. M.
de Groot (Eds.), Environmental psychology: An introduction
(pp. 97106). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Bonnes, M., & Secchiaroli, G. (1995). Environmental psychology:
A psycho-social introduction. London: Sage.
Brown, B. B., & Perkins, D. D. (1992). Disruption in place attachment. In I. Altman & S. Low (Eds.), Human Behavior and
Environment: Vol. 12. Place attachment (pp. 279304).
doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-8753-4_13
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing
model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing
structural equation models (pp. 136162). Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
Canter, D. (1977). The psychology of place. London: Architectural
Press.
Canter, D. (1983). The purposive evaluation of places: A
facet approach. Environment and Behavior, 15, 659698.
doi:10.1177/0013916583156001
Carmines, E., & McIver, J. (1981). Analyzing models with unobserved variables: Analysis of covariance structures. In G. W.
Bohrnstedt & E. F. Borgatta (Eds.), Social measurement:
Current issues (pp. 65115). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Chou, C.-P., & Bentler, P. M. (1990). Model modification in covariance structure modeling: A comparison among likelihood ratio,
Lagrange multiplier, and Wald tests. Multivariate Behavioural
Research, 25, 115136. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr2501_13
Craik, K. H., & Zube, E. H. (Eds.). (1976). Perceiving environmental quality: Research and application. doi:10.1007/978-1-46842865-0
Crano, W. D., Brewer, M. B., & Lac, A. (2015). Principles and
methods of social research (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Fornara, F., Bonaiuto, M., & Bonnes, M. (2010). Cross-validation
of abbreviated perceived residential environment quality
(PREQ) and neighborhood attachment (NA) Indicators.
Environment and Behavior, 42, 171196. doi:10.1177/
0013916508330998
Fornara, F., Bonaiuto, M., Bonnes, M., Carrus, G., & Passafaro, P.
(2007). Sustainability and residential satisfaction within exclusive residential complexes in the city of Rome. In D. Shehayeb,
H. Turgut Yildiz, & P. Kellet (Eds.), Appropriate home: Can we
design appropriate residential environments? (pp. 2940).
Cairo: Housing & Building National Research Centre.
Francescato, G. (2002). Residential satisfaction research: The case
for and against. In J. I. Aragones, G. Francescato, & T. Grling
(Eds.), Residential environments: Choice, satisfaction, and
behavior (pp. 1534). Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey.

13

Gifford, R. (2002). Environmental psychology: Principles and

practice (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Gmez-Jacinto, L., & Hombrados-Mendieta, I. (2002). Multiple
effects of community and household crowding. Journal
of Environmental Psychology, 22, 233246. doi:10.1006/
jevp.2002.0236
Guest, A. M., & Lee, B. A. (1984). How urbanities define their
neighborhoods. Population and Environment, 7, 3256.
doi:10.1007/BF01257471
Hidalgo, M. C., & Hernndez, B. (2001). Place attachment: Conceptual and empirical questions. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 21, 273281. doi:10.1006/jevp.2001.0221
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in
covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new
alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary
Journal, 6, 155. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
Jreskog, K., & Srbom, D. (2001). Lisrel 8.51. Chicago, IL:
Scientific Software International.
Kytt, M., Broberg, A., Tzoulas, T., & Snabb, K. (2013). Towards
contextually sensitive urban densification: Location-based
softGIS knowledge revealing perceived residential environmental quality. Landscape and Urban Planning, 113, 3046.
doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.01.008
Kytt, M., Kahila, M., & Broberg, A. (2011). Perceived environmental quality as an input to urban infill policy-making.
Urban Design International, 16, 1935. doi:10.1057/
udi.2010.19
Lawrence, R. J. (2002). Healthy residential environments. In R.
Bechtel & A. Churchman (Eds.), Handbook of environmental
psychology (pp. 394412). New York, NY: Wiley.
Manzo, L. C., & Devine-Wright, P. (Eds). (2014). Place attachment: Advances in theory, methods and applications. Abingdon,
UK: Routledge.
Marans, R. W. (2003). Understanding environmental quality
through quality of life studies: The 2001 DAS and its use of
subjective and objective indicators. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65, 7383. doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00239-6
Power, M., Bullinger, M., & Harper, A. (1999). The World Health
Organization WHOQOL-100: Tests of the universality of quality
of life in 15 different cultural groups worldwide. Health Psychology, 18, 495505. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.18.5.495
Rantanen, H., & Kahila, M. (2009). The SoftGIS approach to local
knowledge. Journal of Environmental Management, 90, 1981
1990. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.08.025
Rosenberg, M. J., & Hovland, C. I. (1960). Cognitive, affective and
behavioral components of attitudes. In M. J. Rosenberg, C. I.
Hovland, W. J. McGuire, R. P. Abelson, & J. W. Brehm (Eds.),
Attitude organization and change: An analysis of consistency
among attitude components (pp. 114). New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press.
Ruiz, C., Prez, C., & Hernndez, B. (2013). Place attachment,
perceived restorativeness and quality of life: A relationship
model. Estudios de Psicologa, 34, 315321. doi:10.1174/
021093913808349271
Staedter, T. (2013, January 13). Seven of ten most air-polluted
cities are in China. Discovery News. Retrieved from http://
news.discovery.com
Sugiyama, T., Thompson, C. W., & Alves, S. (2009). Associations
between neighborhood open space attributes and quality of life

2015 The Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

14

PREQIs and NA: A confirmation study in a Chinese city

for older people in Britain. Environment and Behavior, 41, 321.

doi:10.1177/0013916507311688
Tabernero, C., Briones, E., & Cuadrado, E. (2010).
Changes in residential satisfaction and place attachment over
time. PsyEcology, 1, 403412. doi:10.1174/2171197107
92774771
Tabernero, C., Martn, A., Valera, S., & Vidal, T. (2013). Influence
of environmental perception of the neighbourhood on
place attachment: The impact of the physical care of the

neighbourhood. Estudios de Psicologa, 34, 299307.

doi:10.1174/021093913808349352
Tognoli, J. (1987). Residential environments. In D. Stokols & I.
Altman (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology
(pp. 655690). New York, NY: Wiley.
WHOQOL Group. (1994). Development of the WHOQOL:
Rationale and current status. International Journal of Mental
Health, 23, 2456. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41344692

Appendix
The overall set of items used in this research is listed below. Answers were provided by means of a 7-point Likert scale:
0 = totally disagree, 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = fairly disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = fairly agree, 5 = strongly
agree, 6 = totally agree.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.

(
)

43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.

2015 The Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

PsyCh Journal

86. ()

87.
88.
89.
90.

91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116

15

117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148

2015 The Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd