Affective Dimensions of Urban Crime Areas : Towards the psychogeography of urban problem areas

Abstract. Traditional studies of crime areas within cities by geographers focus on the spatial variations in the incidence of crime, as well as the social deprivation and social disorganization of these areas. Although these social content and behavioural features are often highly correlated with crime areas. it is argued that analytical studies of crime areas need to be extended to deal with the feelings and attitudes of people in these areas.Ten separate dimensions of the affective domain are hypothesized, each of which describes different feelings and attitudes that characterize crime areas. These can be called «terrains of distinctive affective characters», namely: social inadequacy; despair or limited goals; exclusion and discrimination; acceptance of decay and destruction; anxiety and fear: spontaneity of actions and emotions: indifference to others; low selfcontrol and restraint; approval of subversive or deviant values; and peer group allegiance in gangs. Confirmation of these dimensions must wait for empirical testing but they point the way to the systematic development of a psycho-geography of crime areas in which the dimensions can be linked to different theories of criminal behaviour.

Affective Dimensions of Urban Crime Areas: Towards the psycho-geography of urban problem areas Wayne K.D. Davies, Calgary 1 Introduction Although many geographers in the past have contributed to the crime literature, including texts by research¬ ers such as Georges-Abeyie & Harris (1980) or Her¬   bert (1982), their contribution has largely focused on the spatial patterns of crime and their correlations with social variables, environmental associations -whether physical conditions or design features -or the pres¬ ence or absence of facilities in an area.However, their work is still very small when compared to the vast liter¬ ature on crime and delinquency by sociologists, criminologists and psychologists and it is curious that few geographers have applied the many theories of crime to their studies, such as those summarized in basic books by Pelfrey (1980), Hagan (1985), or Muncie  & McLaughlin (2001).This is especially true of ideas that explain why individuals are prone to crime, such as older ideas of neutralization (Sykes & Matza 1957) and self-control (Gottfredson & Hirschi 1990), or newer theories such as General Strain Theory (Agnew 1999) and Mentalization (Fonagy 2003;Hofer 2003).Racine (2002), in a recent comprehensive review of the literature on crime with special reference to France and Switzerland, has criticized the traditional approach of geographers who have contributed to the study of crime.He argued that students of crime patterns have spent too much time attempting to find spatial corre¬ lates of crime, such as social deprivation (Booth 1894;  Sampson & Groves 1989; Veysey & Messner 1999)  or social disorganization and anomie (Durkheim 1951;   Merton 1938,1957; Shaw & MacKay 1942;  Passas &   Agnew 1997).Instead he argued that there is a need to focus more upon perceptual issues, not only about how we think about these areas, but also about the percep¬ tions and attitudes of people who live in crime areas.In his words: «We need to integrate analysis of the problems and causes of violence with our own perceptual Systems.. .This would allow the inhabitants of these neighborhoods -along with those of the other inhabitants of the city -to engage in what amounts to a new interpretation of their own reali¬ ty...the perceptual Systems in question invest the city with symbolic meanings...» (Racine 2002:587, italics

added).
This paper focuses only upon the need to improve the perceptual approach to the study of crime areas as recommended by Racine, what may be popularly described as the psycho-geography of crime areas.This may be especially relevant today once it is recognized that so many of the acts of crime against persons rep¬ resent what seem to be senseless and often unpremeditated acts, whereas so much of the criminology liter¬ ature searches for rational explanations in line with the scientific approach.Certainly there are many stud¬ ies in human geography and ecology proposing con¬ cepts such as «territories of fear» (Tuan 1977) or other feelings about areas of crime.In addition, there are many ethnographic studies which have illuminated our knowledge of such areas, especially studies of what is known as street culture in inner city ghetto areas today (Anderson 1978a, 1978b, 1998).But the descriptive approach followed by ethnographical research means that most studies obviously focus on the feelings and behavior of people in the particular areas studied, rather than comparing several areas in the search for common features that can be generalized into meas- urable concepts, such as the quantitative approach adopted by Community psychologists such as Unger   & Wandersman (1985) in studies of the cognitive and affective dimensions of Community differentiation.There is still a great deal of controversy over the types and ränge of these dimensions, for most studies by psychologists are of individuals, rather than groups in area.But some geographers have explored the approach as an extension of factorial ecology meas¬ ures (Davies 1984) and tried to define and measure the ränge of cognitive-affective dimensions in Community areas in a multidimensional, rather than a Single vari¬ able sense (Davies, Chan & Townshend 1999; Davies  & Townshend 1999; Townshend 2002).This contrasts with the past practice of only identifying and studying individual affective dimensions as Single concepts, such as sentiment or symbolism, as in the classical urban ecology literature.Further support for the study of the affective domain comes from recent papers by Ander¬ son & Smith (2001) as well as Bochet & Racine (2002), both of which call for more attention to the emotive domain in geography.However, it must not be forgotten that there is a long, if episodic, literature in such issues in geography, as work by Porteous (1986) shows.This paper contributes to the developing trend of interest in the affective domain by combining previous studies of the cognitive-affective domains in Community areas with those of crime areas.Its key question is to determine whether a distinctive set of cognitive-affective dimensions can be hypothesized for crime areas, based on the existing literature, in which the focus is upon areas in which there are high levels of crime against persons and property, as well as klick and anti-social behavior.
2 Are crime areas terrains of unique affective character?
Crime itself is a socially constructed and often con¬ tested phenomenon that depends upon the definition of some kinds of behavior by the State as being anti¬ social and punishable by law.Not only do these defi¬ nitions vary by jurisdictions and through time but the measurement of crime acts is fraught with difficulties because so much is unreported and subject to vari¬ able recording and degrees of success in finding the offenders (Newman 1999; Herbert 2002).Although these problems may make it difficult to identify the real extent of crime, some areas have sufficient con¬ centrations to be defined by the presence of crime alone.Although explanations for these concentrations and their persistence are often linked by geographers to traditional explanatory factors of the social struc¬ ture of the areas, such as social deprivation, or social disorganization, as described above, it is argued that as much importance should be attributed to the attitudes and feelings of the people in these areas.This moves the research interest in crime areas to the study of the affective dimensions of these areas -dimensions asso¬ ciated with the feelings and attitudes of people -both inside and outside the areas.Such attitudes are impor¬ tant parts of what Miller (1958), Suttles (1968) and Fischer (1976) recognized as being a sub-culture, or a distinctive way of life in these areas, which differs from the main host society.As such, they complement the distinctive social characteristics of people in many of these areas -namely their material conditions and the way that they behave -with the attitudes that are held by the residents.
A review of the literature from both ethnographical and Statistical studies in criminology linked to Racine's (2002) discursive review of crime variations led to the provisional conclusion that at least ten very dif¬ ferent altitudinal characteristics of people can be iden¬ tified in these areas and many of these can be linked to existing theories of criminal behavior.They are pro¬ posed as distinctive dimensions, or separate sources of attitudinal Variation that summarize what may be called the psycho-geography of high crime or delin¬ quency areas.These are summarized as «terrains» of different affective character in this review.rather than «areas or landscapes», simply because these latter terms are more often associated with physical forms.Also, the introduction of a new term seems more useful in drawing attention to the different basis - the affective domain -of the source of differentiation being dealt with.This makes it easier to distinguish the concepts from the more traditional explanations dis¬ cussed above.either the area content ideas of social deprivation.or behavioral conditions such as social disorganization.As in the case of the ränge of affective dimensions proposed for Community areas (Davies 1995; Davies & Townshend 1999).the dimensions of Variation that are identified below can be more or less strong.and may be more or less present in various areas.Hence there can be innumerable combinations of these hypothesized dimensions to create very differ¬ ent types of crime areas.However. it must be stressed that the degree of Separation and cohesion of these dimensions is still provisional.Indeed.some of these dimensions may, on empirical testing.be shown to be composed of sub-dimensions.whilst there may be others that still need to be isolated.
(Tl) Terrains of social inadequacy.Compared to the host society in which these people live, most inhabit¬ ants of these areas lack the skills, education and previ¬ ous success in life to be successful in the rest of society.
Although these are the characteristics linked to social deprivation, the issue goes beyond material conditions, but can be explained by the differential distribution of rewards in society so familiär in Marxist theory.These conditions can also mean that most people in the area have low levels of personal esteem and self-worth, often combined with high self-denigration, which are often passed on to subsequent generations through poor parenting.Moreover.individuals have few and usually limited goals for the future, or few purposes in life, and very fragile coping mechanisms or support Systems when problems inevitably emerge.This makes many people vulnerable to take escape routes that seem to offer hope of alleviation, at least temporarily, through alcohol.drugs and non-legkimale activities, in an attempt to improve their Situation -although not all take this path.Participation in such behaviors often makes their Situation worse.since this often leads to medical self-abuse and conflicts with the law.
(T2) Terrains of despair and limited goals.Most people in these crime areas are not able to fulfill their goals through legitimate activity, given their lack of skills and limited resources, both in social and financial capital.Hence a condition of despair and hopelessness frequently characterizes most people.It leads to an acceptance of the existing condition with little expec- tation of any change.Life in these areas in Dubet's (1987) words is a «struggle against the odds».ofbarely surviving in the mainstream of society leaving them marginalized.crealing whal he called a condition of la geilere (Racine 2002).People either have no goals, or rather goals that are not feasible of being achieved, given their skills, ability to work lo attain them, and the conditions under which they live.TThey have very low expectations of their ability to either alter their current Situation or the area in which they live -by themselves, or with others.This means the majority of residents have low feelings of empowerment, of being able to change the environment in which they live, with few opportunities of moving elsewhere.
(T3) Terrains ofexclusion-discrimination.Individuals in these areas are frequently stigmatized and labeled by Outsiders -informally by individual decisions, or formally by police or media labeling -because of the perceived high levels of incivility and crime in the area and the conditions of social deprivation.In addi¬ tion, the frequent (but not always inevitable) presence of high concentrations of one or more disadvantaged ethnie groups adds to the degree of Separation.These conditions frequently lead to low levels of contact with Outsiders and even adverse treatment by members of the mainstream society who do not want to mix or associate with the people from these areas.The result is a feeling of exclusion from the rest of society, since they have few jobs or social contacts with Outsiders, and a feeling of being discriminated against, which reinforce the degree of Separation of the residents.
It usually leads to feelings of alienation from the host society, and resentment against its members.This exclusion is often expressed in two physical contexts.
In a spatial sense many of these areas are either in remote locations -because they are peripheral or not well connected sites in transport terms, such as the public housing estates in the U.K. or the French ban¬ lieueor because walls have been deliberately con¬ structed to cut these areas off from neighboring areas.
In a «basic needs» context these areas are usually deficient in medical, retail and social Services, for few private providers of such Services wish to operate in such areas, given the fear and incidence of crime.The exception may lie in publically-provided facilities, or in Services associated with illegal or barely legal activi¬ ties that are often tolerated by the forces of law and order through differential policing.Complementing the insiders feeling of exclusion is the negative way that Outsiders view these areas, adding to the feeling of Separation or alienation from the mainstream of society.The frequent stream of negative reports about these areas from various media reports adds to the negative symbolization of these areas, which reinforce the feelings of exclusion.
The contrast between the conditions experienced within these areas, compared to conditions outside, lead many insiders to envy the Situation of others, whether the wealth or opportunities of individuals out¬ side the area, or the prosperity of surrounding regions.
For most this may be a simple benign trait; but for some, the contrast breeds bitlerness against what are seen as unfair rewards and an unjust society.This may encourage these individuals to seek ways of gaining access, however illegally, to these rewards, which fre¬ quently involves activities that the host society has «constructed» as being criminal behavior.For benign envy to turn into active resentfulness that leads to criminal actions.involves overturning existing societal codes of behavior relating to the rights of individuals and property.This change from feelings to action may be triggered by. or are dependent upon, some of the following sets of altitudinal dimensions.
(T4) Terrains ofdecay-destruction acceptance.Many crime areas have the appearance of a neglected and vandalized environment, füll of the physical signs of decay, litter and graffiti.However it is not the actual physical conditions and appearance of the area so much as an acceptance of the conditions, that is linked with the feeling that it is impossible to rectify these conditions.Anti-social individuals in these areas often prevent progress in cleaning up the local environment.
Also, there are also few role modeis prepared to stand up against these vandals and criminals to show a better way of life.In any case, since many people in the area feel they have no real stake in the area, and have noth¬ ing left to lose, some of these people may well be persuaded to turn upon the area, destroying existing prop¬ erty and Services, especially those owned by Outsiders, as a response to the frustrations of their life.Yet we must be cautious.The number of people vandalizing the area may be small; the normal condition is one of simply aeeepting the conditions that are found, rather than trying to improve the area.But once some signs of vandalism or even lack of repair appear, the inability or refusal of residents.landlords or government to rectify these problems, or to identify, admonish or even Charge the offenders seem to encourage similar behavior, producing a cycle of increasing dereliction, often called the «broken Windows» trend because it Starts with this visible form.
(T5) Terrains of anxiety and fear.The high levels of incivility, delinquency and crime ensure that many res¬ idents in these areas also have very high levels of anxi¬ ety about their safety and often a real fear of being robbed or beaten.Usually relatively few residents of the area are perpetuators of serious crime; it is the people in the area who are the real victims.So resi¬ dents are not only fearful about crimes but are witnesses to crimes against others.Since they are fearful of retribution if they inform on crimes that they have seen, there is little incentive to do more than aeeept the conditions.Although emphasis on this issue of fear may be placed upon the presence of what most would see as crime, it may be the daily exposure to high levels of what may be best described as «incivility to others» that presents the highest real levels of anxiety in these areas.These are acts that include individuals being jos-tled, verbally abused by swearing or being ridiculed.
or exposed to behaviors.such as littering.that cause discomfort for the observer.These incivilities are often perceived as the early stages of more aggressive behav¬ iors that cause real härm to either persons or property.
The result is that many people.especially the elderly and females, avoid such situations by staying indoors.
especially at night.This reduces what may be seen as the «eyes on the street».a surveillance that is often accepted as reducing crime, since perpetuators may be more easily identified and caught.
(T6) Terrains ofspontaneity of actions/emotions.One of the fundamental features of growing up is the abil¬ ity to exercise control over emotions and basic human urges, as well as appreciating the consequences of vari¬ ous actions, especially the use of violence on others.
However some individuals do not learn such behavior, and are more prone to read quickly without thought, which may often lead to violence against others and impulsive decisions to commit crime.Cohen (1955)   argued that one of the key characteristics of middle class socialization was the ability to postpone gratification and to think about the consequences of impul¬ sive actions.which means that spontaneity of action.or emotions that overtly hurts others is controlled.This type of feature parallels the way that middle class, and ambitious working class parents encourage their chil¬ dren to cultivate skills and pass examinations.These are seen as providing a passport to future success.
Areas of high crime rates do seem to have this attitudinal characteristic of high spontaneity of action, which means that apparently unthreatening or passive individuals or groups can suddenly turn violent.Triv¬ ial disputes may suddenly escalate to unpremeditated murder if there are knives or weapons involved.
(T7) Terrains of indifference to others (Fonagy's «mentalization»).An important part of the ability to live together in harmony and safety is the ability to recognize the rights and needs of others.One of the crucial feelings of difference in these areas is the way that many of its inhabitants have high levels of indiffer¬ ence to others; this is not simply the lack of social connections that contribute to anomie, but the personal indifference to others.Fonagy's (2002, 2003) developmental theory of aggression coined the term men¬ talization to describe the extent to which individuals have been brought up with «no sense of the other», meaning an interest in, or concern for.other people's rights.Some individuals are not socialized in this way and have no, or little sense of concern if people are robbed or violated.This may be a crucial element in the increasing prevalence of what Racine (2002) and others have described as «violence for own sake».or «violence without content», which may be attributed to the same indifference for the fate of others.The mentalization theory may well provide the main justification for the presence of this type of affective dimen¬ sion in crime areas.Moreover.it does seem to have a great deal of potential in suggesting new ways of reducing the problems caused by this indifference to others.For example. at the teenage level anti-social actions such as bullying are rarely eradicated through physical control.It may be more effectively modified by showing perpetuators how their anti-social behav¬ ior affects others in a negative way. or by ensuring that they feel the same experiences.
(T8) Terrains of low restraint or self-control.Low levels of self-control are also found among a significant proportion of people in the area.especially those who may be able to dominate others through their aggres¬ sive behavior and indifference to others.One result is far less respect for the rights of other persons or for owners of property.This means that people with such attitudes.such as some rebellious teenagers.believe the rights of other people can be violated with impunity.The rationale behind the presence of low levels of self-control can be attributed to the neutralization and self-control/crime opportunity theories.At this stage in our understanding it is still not clear whether the dimension is a Single scale.Grasmick et al. ( 1993) used multivariate analysis on a set of questionnaire items to illustrate that several separate traits could be identified as separate features.These individual traits are self- centeredness.anger.impulsiveness.risk-taking.and a preference for physical activity, and for simple over complex tasks.However the authors argued that the most appropriate description of the results was a Single dimensional factor scale which summarized most of the variance.suggesting that self-control was a Single personality trail as suggested by Gottfredson & Hirschi's original theory (1990).Vazsonyi el al. (2001)  have confirmed the Utility of these traits and showed that although the first two of these factors were the best predictors of most crimes.assault was most highly linked to risk-taking.However these authors argued that these traits could not be combined in a Single uni-dimensional scale of self-control as suggested by Gottfredson & Hirschi (1990) and Grasmick et al.   (1993); rather these separate traits can be separately distinguished, although they come together in some people and make them especially prone to criminal acts.Most studies of delinquency and aggression have looked for ways in which some people acquire these traits.But it is worth noting again how Fonagy's (2003) new developmental theory of aggression argued the opposite, namely that aggression is part of the innate human condition but is socialized out in most children through various control mechanisms.especially those provided by mothers as people grow up.Other studies on aggression have shown that there is a generational consistency in these traits, since people identified as prone to such behaviors at an early age were also the individuals with high levels of aggression at later ages, suggesting that the mentalization process was not suc- cessful.In addition, what seems especially important in accounting for different attitudes towards crime is the feeling among many young adults that they are somehow immune from being caught; after all, there are often few people in an area willing to admonish people displaying anti-social behavior.Role modeis of people of middle class values or people with senses of fair play or religious conviction may have moved else- where; others are threatened into silence.This assump- tion of immunity often proves to be false as most per¬ petuators of crime are caught.But the revolving door of the criminal System in some countries means that even if criminals are caught they may not be punished, adding to the feeling of immunity from their actions.
(T9) Terrains of anti-social or subversive attitudes approval.Areas of crime contain people with subver¬ sive attitudes -or at least subversive as far as the host society is concerned, since they are opposed to it.This ensures that the area norms consist of values different from the rest of society, or they possess dis- sident values that they are prepared to express and act upon in the area, not simply to repress because of pressures from the host society.Some of these values may be labeled as criminal by the forces of law and order, but are not necessarily viewed in this way by those res¬ idents who may derive an income or even Status from such behaviors, at least until they are caught by the forces of law and order.A constant source of tension against existing mores comes from the development of unrestrained and often anti-social behaviors of some young adults, especially males, which produce gener¬ ational sequences of unsettling behavior.It can be argued that the challenge against existing attitudes and behaviors is always part of a normal process of early maturity for teenagers and young adults as they seek to throw off the constraints of family.One way may be to illegally adopt adult behaviors, such as drinking or smoking, or challenge existing Standards which can lead to attitudes which are different to, or even subver¬ sive of, existing societal norms.In addition, of course, they can adopt the general anti-social, and perhaps violent attitudes of the criminals in the local popula¬ tion because of admiration for their activities, or they emulate these behaviors lo gain acceptance and rec¬ ognition among their peers.Such generational rebellions may be present in all parts of the city, but in most areas a process of socialization through family, friends, adult role modeis and school leads most to eradicate such attitudes; it is a temporary phase of rebellion that is usually subsumed into attitudes that recognize the need to gain educational or employment qualifications.
Yet there are always individuals who have rejected the opportunity to take this path and engage in criminal behavior, often in search for thrills and excitement.In areas of high crime rates and social deprivation there are few incentives for young residents of crime areas to develop in this socially progressive way.since they have few expectations of such progress.Hence they may be socialized into adult criminality -showing the relevance of theories such as «learned behavior» or «social learning» (Hagan 1985) -since this seems to be the only path for material success within the area.
Of course, a minor route for the uneducated may lie in sporting or musical prowess, which take them outside the area to achieve another type of success in the host society.Focus upon the people who live in the area must not be allowed to disguise the fact that the «econ¬ omy» of many areas of high crime rates is often linked to the receipts obtained from Outsiders who visit the area temporality, to participate in illicit activities, such as Prostitution or drug acquisition, or entertainments banned in other parts of the city.due to political or social pressure.Clearly such individuals are partitipating in a sub-culture of dissent for at least part of their lifethe «second life» identified by Presdee (2000); this represents an important element in the mainte¬ nance of such areas.
(T10) Terrains of peer group (gang) allegiance and respect.Racine (2002) noted that one of the impor¬ tant personal needs of most people is the component of «respect or recognition by others».The basic human needs of recognition and respect by others is absent for many people in these crime areas because they have few achievements, and limited social connections through family or organizations such as schools.So the usual means of achieving respect and a future in the larger society are blocked, given low educational or skill levels.except for a few individuals in sport or music.The missing support System is often provided by unsupervised informal peer groupings, which can be formalized as gangs.These lie outside the formal or accepted structures of the host society and may be opposed to it because of the types of subversive values discussed above.Membership of these gangs provides feelings of attachment or belonging to other members of the group: they also provide the frisson of excitement through gang activity, especially robbery and often violence.These groups are able to make up their own behavioral rules, especially in conditions of adolescent rebellion, or at least the questioning of societal mores.Within a context of anti-social behavior and few constraints, it is hardly surprising that some of these groups are prone to crime, violence, or at least anti-social behaviors which provide the element of risk as well as achievement that may be absent in the rest of the lives of these members.They may also provide access to possessions.through robbery, that they could not otherwise obtain.Such behavior, or rather the approval of such behavior in an attitudinal sense, may be a challenge to existing or new members through some «rites of belonging»: they either provide thrills in throwing-off the constraints of society, or may be designed to prove that new entrants to the group belong to it, and, in doing so, participants obtain respect from participation in these activities.
Anderson (1998:102) has made the point succinctly: «most people in inner-city communities are not totally interested in the code (of the street).but a significant minority of hard-core street youths who have to maintain the code in order to establish their reputation because they have -or feel they have -few other ways to assert themselves.» The result is a socialization of some people, especially youths, to a new set of norms, which involves throwing off the guilt produced by adherence to other attitudes, so neutralization theory and social learning theory may be relevant explanations.Although it has long been known that gang members are more likely than non-gang members to commit various types of crime, it is worth noting Thornberry et al. 's (1993) study that shows that only 21 % of individuals in gangs were members of the group at all three time periods that were investigated.This not only shows the temporary attachment of many people to these groups, thereby providing another episodic element in crime behavior, but led to the important conclusion that «participation in the gang is a more important factor in generating delinquency than is the type of person who is recruited to join the gang» (ibid: 83).
Some children, who have experienced, feit, and internalized racist rejection and contempt from the main¬ stream society may be socialized into situations where they learn to express negative attitudes for the more conventional society in turn.As they mature they will invest themselves and their considerable mental resources in what can be called an «oppositional cul¬ ture» to preserve themselves and maintain their selfworth but also self-respecl from others.These are the values that command respect and approval by their peers, with few neighbors or outside forces able to intervene.Moreover, it is important to note that these gangs can provide the excitement that many crave, of challenging others, or outwitting the law.These gangs are frequently very territorial with their own defined «turfs» that others only violate at the risk of violence and which may be marked with gang signs or mark¬ ers.Adherence to these small «homelands» in par¬ ticular parts of the city provides an additional iden¬ tity, which is often reinforced with rivalry with gangs in other parts of the area or with Outsiders.Their «homeland», however impoverished and vandalized, provides them with a safe haven and an identity among their peers that many would otherwise not have.
Although the dimensions proposed can be seen as independent sources of differentiation it must be stressed that these attitudinal dimensions seem to fall into two quite distinct types.one set with essentially passive attitudes.the other with active attitudes.For example. the dimensions which index social or indi¬ vidual inadequacy, despair.exclusion-discrimination.
decay-destruction acceptance, and anxiety-fear seem to mark conditions that lead to passivity in a popula¬ tion.resulting in an unwillingness.or perhaps even in an inability for most residents of such areas to improve their position in life and to initiate opportunities to create change in such areas.In many ways these feel¬ ings are the results of the fact that they are the victims of societal injustice.either from others in their area, or more generally from the distribution of rewards and power in society.This produces negative attitudes towards their Situation, although some may have the fortitude and resources to escape the deprived.often socially disorganized conditions that dominate these areas.In contrast, the dimensions that are associated with spontaneity of actions-emotions, indifference to others, low or limited restraint or self-control of behav¬ ior, approval of anti-social or subversive values, and peer group-gang allegiance and respect, represent atti¬ tudes that are clearly in Opposition to the general norms found in the rest of society in most western cities and many can be linked to theories proposed to explain individual criminal behavior.Since there are few constraints upon their actions, and limited sociali¬ zation to what may be considered «good behavior», but high socialization and exposure to «bad» behav¬ ior from unsupervised peer groupings, it means that some residents in crime areas are prone to what the general population would describe as anti-social and even criminal behaviors.This enables them to gain per¬ sonal respect and approval from their peers by flouting the conventional norms.They ignore or downplay the rights of others.possess few constraints on their behavior and often act impulsively, without rationalizing the long-term consequences of actions.People with these attitudes may be in a minority in these crime areas, but are more likely to dominate and victimize their neighbors who possess the passive atti¬ tudes described above; the latter do not have the personal resources.or beliefs and support Systems to counteract the attitudes that can lead to potentially disruptive behaviors or to crime. 3

Conclusions
This study has developed some of the arguments used argued that the affective domain features hypothesized above for crime areas give these places as distinctive a character as those that come from the traditional spa¬ tial descriptions based on indicators of social depriva¬ tion, social disorganization or design flaws and facility deprivation (LaGrange 1999).These dimensions of the affective domain obviously add to the huge differences between these areas of high crime and other parts of the city.They also seem to play a large part in explaining why crime areas persist, for most attempts to eradicate these areas focus on changes in social structure or behavior, which may not change attitudes and feelings that have been shown to be frequently linked to par¬ ticular theories accounting for why individuals commit crime.There is no doubt that crime is the product of many causes, so it is inappropriate to over-empha- size any one of the various factors and explanations that have been proposed.although there does seem to be important linkages between many of the affective dimensions proposed and various theories of crime.Finally, it must be admitted that the dimensions iden¬ tified above are simply hypotheses at this stage in the research project, dimensions that were independently derived from the literature.Obviously they need to be empirically tested, adjusted and probably extended in the future.In addition, the relationships between these affective dimensions and those previously defined for communities needs to be explored.These issues must awak further study.
Abstract: Affective Dimensions of Urban Crime Areas: Towards the psycho-geography of urban problem areas Traditional studies of crime areas within cities by geog¬ raphers focus on the spatial variations in the incidence of crime, as well as the social deprivation and social disorganization of these areas.Although these social content and behavioural features are often highly cor- related with crime areas.it is argued that analytical studies of crime areas need to be extended to deal with the feelings and attitudes of people in these areas.Ten separate dimensions of the affective domain are hypothesized, each of which describes different feelings and attitudes that characterize crime areas.
These can be called «terrains of distinctive affective characters», namely: social inadequacy; despair or lim¬ ited goals; exclusion and discrimination; acceptance of decay and destruction; anxiety and fear: spontaneity of actions and emotions: indifference to others; low self- control and restraint; approval of subversive or deviant values; and peer group allegiance in gangs.Confirmation of these dimensions must wait for empirical testing but they point the way to the systematic devel¬ opment of a psycho-geography of crime areas in which the dimensions can be linked to different theories of criminal behaviour.
Teaching of Geography -relevant questions -What is the aim of the study?
-What new approach has been presented?-According to this approach, what factors lead to vio¬ lence?
-Distinguish between the «passive» and «active» dimensions in the affective or psycho-geography domain of crime or problem areas.
-Why do the «passive» psycho-geography dimensions make it difficult to change conditions in crime and deprived areas?-Discuss the extent to which the «active» dimensions of the affective domain in crime and deprived areas are essentially based on attitudes that oppose the general norms of society.
-Crime levels are difficult to compare because crime is essentially «socially constructed» with variable definitions in different areas and times.Discuss.
in a previous attempt to define the distinctive affective dimensions of Community areas (Davies 1995; Davies & Herbert 1993: Davies & Townshend 1999) by extend- ing the spatial domain of interest to crime areas.It is