The Effects of Population Density and Noise

The Effects of Population Density and Noise

Our nation is growing but how does this growth affect the people who call it home? In the 2010 Census it was reported that there are 88.4 people per square mile in the United States. This figure is up 18.4 people per square mile from the 2008 Census that reported only 70 people per square mile (US Census, 2010). These numbers demonstrate the rapid growth of our nation and the increasing population density. Along with increased density one can safely assume the increase in noise and pollution as well as the redefinition of terms such as territory, privacy and even personal space. Most people go about their lives without ever looking at these things, without considering how these important aspects society directly affect them as individuals. In this paper we will examine the concepts of territory, personal space and privacy. We will also examine the effects of noise pollution and the things that drive population density as well as how green environments affect individuals and groups.

Territory, Privacy and Personal Space

Proximity is the distance one thing is to another; the closeness. We all experience this in one way or another with every other person on earth and proxemics is the term used to describe the phenomenon. Proxemics is defined as “person-environmental spatial associations and covers the areas of territoriality, crowding, and personal space (Arkkelin & Veitch, 1995).” The concept of proxemics or a “personal bubble” is not a new one and it is as much a part of who we are as our arms and legs. The expansion and contraction of the “bubble” is dependent on any number external and internal of environmental influences. Personal space is affected by our need for privacy and our reactions to territory.

Territory

Generally when we think of the term territory we think of large tracts of land or an area vast and wide. Although this is still a true an accurate generality it is not the definition we would associate immediately with groups or individuals. Territory refers to the governing space around an individual that specifies the distance between themselves and other people or beings. Human territory can be broken down into three types or domains; primary, secondary and public (Brown, Lawrence & Robinson, 2005).

Primary territories are private spaces that are generally permanent such as an individual’s home. A secondary territory is one that is not “owned” but rather borrowed for a short period of time such as a person’s workstation or a booth at a restaurant.   The one we are most familiar with are public territories. In public territories we accept encroachments as we experience the public interactions such as those found in shopping malls, elevators or fast food restaurants. Although an individual maintains their “personal bubble” encroachment is more easily accepted in this scenario (Brown, Lawrence & Robinson, 2005).  

Privacy

Territorial practices and behaviors are in large part designed to maintain some degree of privacy. Obviously the distinction of territorial boundaries determines the level of privacy afforded such as is expected in the primary territory where an individual can expect almost uninterrupted privacy as this territory is “owned” rather than shared or borrowed. Irwin Altman proposed the “Privacy Regulation Theory” in 1975 that suggests that by altering the degree of “openness” creating a persona boundary that is more or less receptive of social interactions; therefore privacy is a process of selective control over a personal boundary by either an individual or a group. According to his theory each individual desires a certain level of privacy at all times and thus employs mechanisms such as self disclosure to determine or regulate the desired privacy level.  (Baxter & Montgomery, p92, 1998).

Personal Space

An important part of privacy and territory is the concept of personal space. Personal space is defined as “the sense of invisible boundaries around an individual body and separating one from others, the encroachment of which may cause anxiety, cf. intimate space (personal space,n.d.).” In an article by Humair Hashmi, a Psychologist and professor at Imperial College Lahore, the concept of personal space is defined as “the area around the body one regards and perceives to be an extension of the self, a personal domain. This area or space may not be entered into or used by the others without the consent and permission of the protagonist. This space is usually demarcated in the cognitive map, a map that one keeps within one’s mind (Hashmi, 2006).” 

Although we are social creatures we all have personal space. The development of this personal space is dependent on a number of factors such as gender, age, environment, culture and mental stability. In Hashmi’s article he discusses how “shrinkage” and “expansion” of the personal space occurs in response to environment. He states “Shrinkage and expansion of this space is also related to environmental stressors; including light, temperature, humidity, presence or absence of noxious stimuli, such as odor and noise etc. (Hashmi, 2006).”

As Hashmi noted there are differences in personal space. This is bolstered by Edward Halls’ Proxemics theory. According to this theory there are levels or degrees of separation found on the personal space scale that is dictated by factors such as culture, biology, and social constructs (Brown, 2010). According to his scale there are 3 types of “personal spaces” that are dictated by distances (Brown, 2010). The first is defined as the intimate space that is the best described as a person’s “bubble”; the first eighteen inches or so of space surrounding an individual (Brown, 2010). This is followed by the social or consultative space that is defined as the space a person is comfortable in social situations or routines and is usually defined by 4 -8 foot “bubble” (Brown, 2010). The final space is known as the public space that is defined as the space that determines anonymous or impersonal interactions and it is designated at approximately 12- 15 feet (Brown, 2010).

Nature and Space

There are a number of things that affect our perception of territory, personal space and privacy; one of the most underestimated things is that of nature. The existences of parks and “green spaces” have a strong connection to the psychology of an individual and a community. In a bulletin produced by the national Recreation and Parks Association, the connection between green spaces and psychology are demonstrated through research projects. The research projects showed that those living in a community with green space experienced less aggression in interpersonal relations. The studies showed that much like animals when we are compartmentalized such as those living in stacked dwelling like high-rise apartments and condos that have little to no green space are less able to resolve issues without aggression (Kuo, 2010). The research was based on the concept of animals that were held in habitats deemed to unfit or unnatural that resulted in observable disruptions in social behavior and functioning.

Urban Environments

A fair amount of research has been conducted over the past 20 years that demonstrates the effects of a “nature” connection and the mental well being of individuals and communities. In a document produced by Dr.John Davis of Naropa University the connection is defined a “public health strategy”. In his exploration of the subject he demonstrates the positive effects of nature on the human condition such as the relaxation effect, restoration effect, and the recovery effect (Davis, 2008).

It is not hard to imagine how nature can accomplish this as most would agree that there a sense of calm that comes over a person as they are exposed to wide open spaces, leafy green trees and a breeze fragranced by wildflowers. This effect is sought after by people as they move to urban areas in an attempt to connect in a way that cannot be accomplished so easily in the city dwelling atmosphere. For some urban areas are the last great refuge of nature and human coexistence as the natural surroundings foster improved mental and physical health the result is the reciprocal effect of caring for the nature that sustains them.

Population Density

As demonstrated in the human reaction to urban environments people have a need for “space’; however as our population grows at an alarming rate the premium on “space” has increased.  In an article published in the US News and World report; author Michael Barone stated “Demography is destiny (Barone, 2006).” He goes on to show that even the framers of our constitution considered the expansion of population but were then as we are now woefully ill prepared for the rapid expansion and the consequences of the resulting population density.

The that the our nation and world’s population is growing at such alarming rates leads us to wonder what effect this will have on territory, personal space, privacy and even our health. Barone noticed these effects in his exploration Canadian expansion as he realized; what I think most of do; that we are quickly losing the “space” needed for healthy physical and psychological growth (Barone, 2006). Along with the population growth and density of our cities and towns we are faced with issues that could not have been seen by the founders of our nation or the founders of other great nations. With growth come the increase in population through births and immigration, the reduction of natural green spaces and the increase of noise; all of which have an impact on how we perceive the world around us and the way we interact with it. 

Noise Pollution

The world, once a quiet place filled with only the sounds of nature is filled with a mixture of sounds made up of people and industry; what we now call noise. It is a matter of simple math; more people equals’ more noise as the introduction of industry and technology increases. Now it is not just noise; now the sounds of the city and industry have become pollutants. Any sound that is unwanted is considered noise pollution (Stansfeld & Matheson, 2003). More realistically we mean the sounds of the very industry and action that drives our society.

Noise pollution has negative physiological and psychological effects on individuals and communities. The physiological effects can be seen in hearing loss, sleep disturbances, hypertension, increased physiological stress responses, and even cardiovascular disease (Stansfeld & Matheson, 2003). An individual living in a city may not even notice the extent of the noise pollution they are exposed to as the long term effects are not readily seen. However an individual who is from a rural area may experience noise pollution as an annoyance rather than a “real” risk to health; this is mostly because the effects are not considered fatal.

The psychological effects of noise pollution are more readily visible or observable. The most observable phenomenon of noise pollution to the psychology of an individual is increased agitation. This increased agitation and decreased tolerance is correlative to the disturbances in activity through startle response; interrupted communications through increased extraneous noises from transportation and industry; as well as sleep disturbances associated with irregular exposure to industrial and transportation noises (Stansfeld & Matheson, 2003). 

Noise reduction

Combating noise pollution is no easy task. There is no way to avoid it so it must become part of our social construct to control it as much as possible. With the increase in transportation and industry we must find a way to reduce the level of noise produced while maintaining the necessary production levels of both. Some good ways to reduce the amount of noise pollution an individual is exposed to is through planning and safety. Through planning one can be prepared for exposures, even those that may be unexpected such as air craft noise, or jack hammers. Having ear plugs go a long way to reducing the physiological and psychological effects of noise pollution. One can also limit themselves to exposure by being conscious of the volume on the stereo or where they sit in a rock concert.

There are other practices that societies have put into place to help diminish the amount of noise pollution produced. In 1972 congress passed the Noise Control Act. This act determined that inadequately controlled noise presents as danger to the health and well being of the public and as a result it established guidelines for state and local governments in their control of noise pollution (EPA, 1972). The first of the guidelines states that there be effective means of coordination of federal research and activities in noise control (EPA, 1972).  The second guideline establishes federal noise emissions standards for commerce (EPA, 1972). The third guideline provides information pertinent to the public and their exposure to noise pollution and noise reduction actions (EPA, 1972).

Conclusion

We are affected by so many factors in our environment such as population, noise, and perceptions of “space”. These things are not independent of one another but rather dependent on one another. Our perception of territory, privacy and personal space is directly affected by the population density of the area in which we live. Our interactions with others; although similar in spatial acceptance; is dictated by the amount of crowding we are exposed. The levels of noise; those unwanted sounds; that we are exposed also affects the way we interact, the way we perceive space and how we react to proposed encroachments.

Through a greater understanding of the concepts discussed in this paper we can be better prepared to acknowledge and combat the negative effects. We can be better equipped to consider alternative solutions in our private and public lives that are a healthy and responsible answer for all. Taking small steps towards the solution through a greater understanding is the key to successfully diminishing the impact population density and noise pollution will have on the future and those we leave to live in it.

References

Arkkelin, D., Veitch, R. (1995), Environmental psychology: An international perspective, 1e.New York, NY: Prentice Hall, Inc. Retrieved from https://ecampus.phoenix.edu/content/eBookLibrary2/content/TOC.aspx?assetid=b3c3245d-f6d6-4a31-9bd4-cf9dcb1016d1&assetmetaid=c513ccb7-db0c-4459-ad78-755bc911dd41

Barone, M. (2006). The Growth of a Nation. U.S. News & World Report, 141(12), 45.

Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.apollolibrary.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a2h&AN=22470034&site=ehost-live

Baxter L & Montgomery B.(1998) Dialectical approaches to studying personal relationship.(p.92) Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. Mahwah, New Jersey. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=YDfJ3aUHEk0C&pg=PA92&lpg=PA92&dq=what+is+altman'+privacy+regulation+theory&source=bl&ots=i9-oNhmQ_H&sig=G6ryF12O4A4bG523JQZ1nJxMh3A&hl=en&sa=X&ei=XdY3T4PyNpH_sQK-0cSTAg&ved=0CGIQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=what%20is%20altman'%20privacy%20regulation%20theory&f=false

Brown N. (2010) Edward T. Hall: Proxemic Theory, 1966. Center for Spatially Integrated Social Science. Regents of University of California, Santa Barbara, California. Retrieved from http://www.csiss.org/classics/content/13

Davis J. (2008). PSYCHOLOGICAL BENEFITS OF NATURE EXPERIENCES:

RESEARCH AND THEORY: With Special Reference to Transpersonal Psychology and Spirituality. Naropa Univeristy. Retrieved from http://www.johnvdavis.com/ep/benefits.htm

EPA, (1972) Noise Control Act. Environmental protection Agency.42 U.S.C. §4901 et seq. Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/lawsregs/laws/nca.html

Hashmi H. (October, 2006) PSYCHOLOGY: Personal space and territoriality. Daily News. World Call. Pakistan. Retrieved from http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006%5C10%5C12%5Cstory_12-10-2006_pg3_2

Kuo. F.E. (2010) Executive Summary. Parks and other Green Environments: Essential Components of a Healthy Human Habitat. Research Series. National Recreation and Parks Association. Retrieved from http://www.nrpa.org/uploadedFiles/Explore_Parks_and_Recreation/Research/Ming%20(Kuo)%20Reserach%20Paper-Final-150dpi.pdf

personal space. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged. Retrieved February 08, 2012, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/personal space

Stansfeld S. And Matheson M.P. (2003) Noise pollution: non-auditory effects on health. British Medical Bulletin Volume 68, Issue 1Pp. 243-257. Retrieved from http://bmb.oxfordjournals.org/content/68/1/243.full

U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). United states Profile. Population Density.  Generated February 11, 2012 from http://www2.census.gov/geo/maps/dc10_thematic/2010_Profile/2010_Profile_Map_United_States.pdf