Territorial Attitudes and Victimisation: A tale of two neighbourhoods

Main Article Content

Aldrin Abdullah
Massoomeh Hedayati Marzbali
Azizi Bahauddin
Mohammad Javad Maghsoodi


One popular use of design strategies for crime prevention is territorial functioning. This study examines the relationship between territorial functioning and victimisation in two neighbourhoods with different crime rates. The quantitative-based method using a questionnaire survey was employed in this study. The survey covered residents' victimisation rates and territorial attitudes as a dimension of territorial functioning. A sample of 206 inhabitants from two neighbourhoods in the UK took part in the study. Through a hierarchical regression analysis, the study revealed that a high victimisation rate was associated with low territorial attitudes. People who perceived more territorial attitudes were less likely to be victimised than their opposite counterparts irrespective of the neighbourhood context.

Article Details

How to Cite
Abdullah, A., Marzbali, M. H., Bahauddin, A., & Maghsoodi, M. J. (2018). Territorial Attitudes and Victimisation: A tale of two neighbourhoods. Journal of ASIAN Behavioural Studies, 3(7), 101–109. https://doi.org/10.21834/jabs.v3i7.263


Altman, I. (1975). The Environment and Social Behavior: Privacy, Personal Space, Territory, Crowding. Monterey, California: Brooks/Cole.

Austin, D. M., Furr, L. A., & Spine, M. (2002). The effects of neighborhood conditions on perceptions of safety. Journal of Criminal Justice, 30(5), 417-427.

Brower, S., Dockett, K., & Taylor, R. B. (1983). Residents' perceptions of territorial features and perceived local threat. Environment and Behavior, 15(4), 419-437.

Brown, B. B., & Altman, I. (1983). Territoriality, defensible space and residential burglary: An environmental analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 3(3), 203-220.

Brunson, L., Kuo, F. E., & Sullivan, W. C. (2001). Resident Appropriation of Defensible Space in Public Housing: Implications for Safety and Community. Environment and Behavior, 33(5), 626-652.

Chang, D. (2011). Social Crime or Spatial Crime? Exploring the Effects of Social, Economical, and Spatial Factors on Burglary Rates. Environment and Behavior, 43(1), 26-52.

Greenberg, S. W., Rohe, W. M., & Williams, J. R. (1982). Safety in urban neighborhoods: A comparison of physical characteristics and informal territorial control in high and low crime neighborhoods. Population & Environment, 5(3), 141-165.

Hedayati Marzbali, M., Abdullah, A., Razak, N. A., & Maghsoodi Tilaki, M. J. (2012a). The Influence of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design on Victimisation and Fear of Crime. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32(2), 79-88.

Hedayati, M., Abdullah, A., Razak, N. A., & Maghsoodi, M. J. (2012b). The relationship between socio-economic characteristics, victimization and CPTED principles: evidence from the MIMIC model. Crime, Law and Social Change, 58(3), 351-371.

Newman, O. (1972). Defensible space; crime prevention through urban design New York: Macmillan.

Perkins, D. D., Wandersman, A., Rich, R. C., & Taylor, R. B. (1993). The Physical Environment of Street Crime: Defensible Space, Territoriality and Incivilities. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 13(1), 29-49.

Reynald, D. M., & Elffers, H. (2009). The Future of Newman's Defensible Space Theory: Linking Defensible Space and the Routine Activities of Place. European Journal of Criminology, 6(1), 25-46.

Taylor, R. B., Gottfredson, S. D., & Brower, S. (1981). Territorial cognitions and social climate in urban neighborhoods. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 2(3), 289–303.

Taylor, R. B., Gottfredson, S. D., & Brower, S. (1984). Block crime and fear: Defensible space, local social ties, and territorial functioning. Journal of Research in crime and delinquency, 21(4), 303-331.

Wilson-Doenges, G. (2000). An exploration of sense of community and fear of crime in gated communities. Environment and Behavior, 32(5), 597-611