| Title |
Mapping Residents' Perceptions of Neighborhood Boundaries: A Methodological Note
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
American Journal of Community Psychology, April 2001
|
| DOI | 10.1023/a:1010303419034 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Claudia J. Coulton, Jill Korbin, Tsui Chan, Marilyn Su |
| Abstract |
Neighborhood influences on children and youth are the subjects of increasing numbers of studies, but there is concern that these investigations may be biased, because they typically rely on census-based units as proxies for neighborhoods. This pilot study tested several methods of defining neighborhood units based on maps drawn by residents, and compared the results with census definitions of neighborhoods. When residents' maps were used to create neighborhood boundary definitions, the resulting units covered different space and produced different social indicator values than did census-defined units. Residents' agreement about their neighborhoods' boundaries differed among the neighborhoods studied. This pilot study suggests that discrepancies between researcher and resident-defined neighborhoods are a possible source of bias in studies of neighborhood effects. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 272 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 3% |
| Italy | 3 | 1% |
| Canada | 3 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 253 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 84 | 31% |
| Researcher | 36 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 30 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 25 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 19 | 7% |
| Other | 47 | 17% |
| Unknown | 31 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 130 | 48% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 6% |
| Psychology | 15 | 6% |
| Environmental Science | 15 | 6% |
| Design | 10 | 4% |
| Other | 38 | 14% |
| Unknown | 47 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 October 2023.
All research outputs
#3,173,508
of 24,838,271 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Community Psychology
#165
of 1,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,431
of 42,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Community Psychology
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,838,271 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,122 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 42,280 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.