New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

First Impressions Can Be Quite Accurate

A study about the perception of neighborhoods reveals that our gut instinct based on the physical features of the neighborhood is highly accurate. Christie Nicholson reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


 

Starting in the1980s New York City police took a zero-tolerance approach to cracking down on moderate misdemeanors like litter or graffiti. The move was based on the so-called, "broken windows theory,” that disorderly, unkempt neighborhoods attract crime. The crackdown contributed to a significant crime decrease, although follow-up studies suggest that police presence itself was the key.


Now research reveals that there’s a link between a neighborhood’s appearance and the perception of safety. The work is in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.


Scientists presented photos of 20 neighborhoods to nearly 150 volunteers. After seeing the photos, the subjects were asked to rate the strength of ties between residents and their ability to protect the neighborhood against crime. These ratings were compared with those of actual residents. And the subjects’ impressions strongly matched the perceptions of the actual residents.


The researchers also asked about trust, and determined that the better the neighborhood looked, the more the subjects trusted the residents. They concluded that disorder can lead to distrust, which may discourage cooperation between neighbors.


Interestingly, in neighborhoods with vegetation, the amount of well-kept grass most correlated with a good rating of the social environment. So increasing urban green space may have far-reaching positive effects.

—Christie Nicholson

 

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe