1. Urbanism, Crowding & Noise

2. Milgram’s Cognitive Overload Model: Reactions to Overload Represents an updating of Simmel’s explanation of the difference between rural and urban life Long standing interest in differentiating the city from the countryside Ferdinand Toënnies described a difference between Gemeinschaft (community)and Gesellschaft (society) Ferdinand Toënnies ( 1855-1936)

3. Georg Simmel (1858-1918) An influential German sociologist and philosopher often cited for his writing on the psychological effects of city living “The Metropolis and Mental Life” (1903) was a very influential paper adopted and updated by Milgram

4. Milgram’s Cognitive Overload Model: Reactions to Overload Allocate less time to each input (brusque manner) Disregard low priority inputs Redrawn boundaries in social transactions—shift overload to others Receptor is blocked prior to entrance into system (unlisted telephone numbers) Filtering devices diminish intensity of inputs (answering machines) Creation of special institutions to absorb inputs/shield the individual

5. Lofland’s Privacy Model: Symbolic Transformations Source: Lofland, L. H. (1973). A world of strangers: Order and action in urban public space. New York: Basic Books Rules for urban behaviour: –Minimize expressivity –Minimize body contact, keep to the right –Sit away from others –Minimize eye contact with strangers –When in doubt, flee –Disattend, pretend not to notice deviants

6. Models of Crowding Stokols equilibrium model (interaction approach) –Uses phenomenological (subjective) reports –Density/crowding distinction (physical vs. psychological measurement Freedman drive energization model –Hullian learning theory approach E = H x D where E = excitatory potential (probability of behaviour, H = habit strength (number of repetitions of a behaviour, D = drive (e.g., hunger, thirst, etc.)

7. Personal Attributes Personality traits Momentary drive states Intelligence & other skills Environmental Qualities PhysicalSocial Amount &status configuration ofpower space Stressors Noise Heat Exposure time Experience of Stress Psychological Physiological Response to stress

8. Models of Crowding Esser’s brain evolution model –Based upon Maclean’s brain evolution model

9. Esser’s Crowding Model Crowding is overstimulation of the nervous system Maclean’s brain evolution model Oldest sectionbrain stem (crowding due to overload) limbic system (crowding when stimuli clash with expectations) neocortical (posthetic) brain (crowding due to excessive Newestnovelty in stimuli) section

10. Problems with Studying the Abnormal No phenomenological reports possible when studying psychotic patients Confound in joint manipulation of social and spatial density Different diagnostic groups may react differently to various environmental conditions (confounding variable) Limited adaptive mechanisms in institutionalized individuals Poor external validity (generalizability) Institutionalization in itself may produce peculiar behaviour

11. Role of Ethology Apply the methodology, not the results of ethology Heuristic value in stimulating research No phenomenological reports possible with animals Animal resources are much more limited than human resources

12. Generalizability of Laboratory Studies Limited time variable Weaker manipulations than real world crowding Projective/simulational research may be inappropriate Sex of subject is frequently confounded with sex of the group

13. Calhoun’s Research on Overcrowding in Rats Impossiblility of crowding in nature over a long time period as a result of population regulating forces: Territorial behaviour Relationship between weight and fertility in females

14. Behavioural Sink (Syndrome of Crowding Effects) Dominance hierarchy Pansexuality (multiple copulations, homosexual behaviour Faulty maternal care given to pups Passive, withdrawn behaviour of submissive male rats Adrenal gland enlargement Generalization to humans?

15. Case Studies of Extreme Overcrowding African slave trade ships Black Hole of Calcutta Concentration camps in WW II

16. Community Noise Noise is everywhere (indoors as well as outdoors) Noise seems accepted as a necessary evil in industrial society Noise gets less media attention than other, more conspicuous forms of pollution Noise affects health/well-being Unlike industrial noise, watchdog agencies are less obvious in community noise Aircraft noise may always be present Women, children, and the elderly are especially vulnerable since they spend more time in their homes and neighbourhoods

17. Stress and Health Cognitive appraisal of stress (Lazarus’ model) Perceptions of danger varies with group membership and value systems Physiological effects Psychological effects Coping attempts Certain groups are more at risk Prolonged stress is life threatening

18. Noise and Health Increase in hypertension (high blood pressure) Increased consumption of medication Increased hospital admissions Increase in physician visits Increase in cardiovascular problems Increase in sleep problems Increase in mortality Lower birth weight babies Slower height and weight gains in children Hearing loss

19. Noise and Children Children may be more vulnerable because: –Spend more time outdoors –Physical growth/development is incomplete –Better hearing –Poorer listening skills –Less developed language skills –Immature attention mechanisms –Requirement of a higher signal/noise ratio –Weak frustration coping skills

20. Noise Effects in Children Poorer auditory discrimination Reduced physical growth Slower psychological development Poorer progress on standardized tests Lower tolerance for frustration Heightened blood pressure Lessened perceptions of control Lowered attentiveness Heightened distractibility

21. Bronzaft (1981) P.S. 98 is located 220 feet from an elevated train line—classes were disrupted every 4.5 minutes for a 30 second interval. Mean Reading Achievement Test Scores Before Noise Reduction Quiet SideNoisy Side Grade 22.652.25 Grade 33.062.63 Grade 56.235.05 Grade 66.945.99

22. Bronzaft (1981) Students on the noisy side did significantly poorer on the standardized reading test. After noise reduction (rubber rail mounts, acoustic ceilings), total noise decreased 6-8dBA (train noise level = 81-83 dBA) There were no significant reading test differences for quiet and noisy classrooms following the noise reduction interventions. Is a Hawthorne effect possible?

23. Page (1977) Experiment 1 Noise level% helping 50 dB60 80 dB45 100 dB35 Dependent measure: picking up dropped cards

24. Page (1977) Experiment 2: Dependent measure:picking up dropped packages Noisy street (92 dB)80% Helped Regular street (72 dB)90% Helped Provided physical help: 72% males, 39% females Proved verbal help: 14% males, 45% females

25. Mathews & Canon (1975) Experiment 1: Condition% helping Natural noise (control, 48 dB)72 Medium white noise (65 dB)67 High white noise (85 dB)37 Dependent measure: Number of arithmetic problems willing to solve

26. Experiment 2: No cast condition% helping Natural noise (50dB)20 High noise (87 dB)10 Cast condition Natural noise (50 dB)80 High noise (87 dB)15 High noise: lawn mower running with muffler removed Low noise: usual background noise in the residential neighbourhood

27. Possible Explanations for Less Aid Under Noisy Conditions: Information overload may cause screening of inputs and a de-emphasis on needs of others Noise may function as a distractor Noise may prevent verbal communication, raising costs (efforts) of social interaction Production of negative affect and mood change: irritation, annoyance, unpleasantness Aversive quality of noise may lead to escape, reducing likelihood of assistance

28. Cohen & Lezak (1977) Slide content Calm Distress Quiet2.132.06 Noise1.381.44 Dependent variable: Number of social cues slides remembered The data supports Milgram’s overload model

29. Korte & Grant (1980Location: Dundee, Scotland (pop. 200,000) 2 locations in central business district Noise noise (75 dB)Low noise (70 dB) Novel Items: 1. Pink party hat worn by female, balloons tied to a tree. 2. Sign: “Attention: Project in Progress”, female holding bright yellow teddy bear.

30. Korte & Grant (1980) Location: Dundee, Scotland (pop. 200,000) 2 locations in central business district Noise noise (75 dB)Low noise (70 dB) Novel Items: 1. Pink party hat worn by female, balloons tied to a tree 2. Sign: “Attention: Project in Progress”, female holding bright yellow teddy bear.

31. Korte & Grant (1980) Dependent measure: Awareness of object Noise Level High Low Present35%56% Absent65%44% Support for Milgram’s Overload Model