Şehir Kimliği Üzerinde İlçe Memnuniyeti, İlçeye Bağlanma ve Şehre Bağlanmanın Seri Çoklu Aracılık Etkisi Modeli: İstanbul Örneği

Öz

Yerleşim yerine yönelik memnuniyetin mekâna bağlanmayı artırdığı, mekâna bağlanmanın da mekân kimliği üzerinde olumlu etkiye sahip olduğu ayrı ayrı pek çok araştırmada incelenmiş; ancak memnuniyet, bağlanma ve kimlik arasındaki ilişkilerin bir arada incelendiği sınırlı sayıda çalışma olduğu görülmüştür. Bu çalışmada, İstanbul özelinde ilçeye yönelik memnuniyet ve şehir kimliği arasındaki ilişkide ilçeye bağlanma ve şehre bağlanmanın seri çoklu aracılık etkisi incelenmiştir. Araştırma, İstanbul’un farklı ilçelerinde yaşayan, yaşları 17 ile 64 arasında değişen 228 katılımcı ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Veri toplama araçları arasında İlçe Memnuniyeti Ölçeği, Mekâna Bağlanma Ölçeği, Mekân Kimliği Ölçeği ve Sosyo-demografik bilgi formu yer almaktadır. Araştırmanın sonuçları ilçe memnuniyeti ve şehir kimliği arasındaki ilişkide (1) ilçeye bağlanma ve (2) ilçeye bağlanma ve şehre bağlanmanın seri çoklu aracı etkiye sahip olduğunu göstermiştir. Bulgular özellikle İstanbul gibi bir metropolde şehirle kurulan ilişkide sınırları daha belirgin olan ilçe düzeyindeki mekânın önemli olduğunu gösterir niteliktedir. Araştırma sonuçlarının hem Çevre Psikolojisi alanyazınına hem de ilçe ve şehir düzeyinde yerel yönetimlerin hizmet politikalarına katkı sağlanması beklenmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• mekana bağlanma
• mekan kimliği
• ilçe memnuniyeti

The Serial Multiple Mediation Effect Model of District Satisfaction, District Attachment, and City Attachment on City Identity: The Case of Istanbul

Öz

Many studies have shown that residential satisfaction increases place attachment, and that place attachment positively influences place identity. However, only a limited number of studies have explored the relationships between satisfaction, attachment, and identity together. This study examines the serial multiple mediation effect of district attachment and city attachment on the relationship between district satisfaction and city identity in Istanbul. The research was conducted with 228 participants, aged 17 to 64, living in various districts of Istanbul. Data collection tools included the District Satisfaction Scale, the Place Attachment Scale, the Place Identity Scale, and a socio-demographic information form. The findings revealed that (1) district attachment, and (2) both district attachment and city attachment together, have a serial multiple mediation effect on the relationship between district satisfaction and city identity. The results suggest that in a metropolis like Istanbul, the district level, with its more distinct boundaries, plays a crucial role in shaping the relationship people have with the city. This study is expected to contribute to both the field of Environmental Psychology and the service policies of local governments at the district and city levels.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• place attachment
• place identity
• district satisfaction

Kaynakça

1. Anton, C. E. & Lawrence, C. (2014). Home is where the heart is: the effect of place of residence on place attachment and community participation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 40, 451-461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.10.007
2. Arkonaç, S. (1995). Şehirli ve gecekondulu grupların birbirlerini ve kendilerinin tariflerinde ayırdedici davranışları. Psikoloji Çalışmaları, 20, 95-112.
3. Babacan, T. & Koramaz, E. K. (2021). Konutlarda kişiselleştirmeler ve yere bağlılık duygusunun gelişimi. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Teknoloji ve Uygulamalı Bilimler Dergisi, 4(1), 47-56.
4. Baker, D. A. & Palmer, R. J. (2006). Examining the effects of perceptions of community and recreation participation on quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 75(3), 395-418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-004-5298-1
5. Baydeniz, E. & Kılıcı, L. (2022). The effect of destination satisfaction and place attachment on behavioral intention: the case of Seferihisar. Istanbul Management Journal, 93, 67-88.
6. Belanche, D., Casalo, L. V. & Flavian, C. (2017). Understanding the cognitive, affective and evaluative components of social urban identity: Determinants, measurement, and practical consequences. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 50, 138-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.02.004
7. Belanche, D., Casaló, L. V. & Rubio, M. Á. (2021). Local place identity: A comparison between residents of rural and urban communities. Journal of Rural Studies, 82, 242-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.01.003
8. Bernardo, F. & Palma-Oliveira, J. (2013). Place identity, place attachment and the scale of place: The impact of place salience. Psyecology, 4(2), 167-193. https://doi.org/10.1080/21711976.2013.10773867

9. Bernardo, F. & Palma-Oliveira, J. M. (2016a). Urban neighbourhoods and intergroup relations: The importance of place identity. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 45, 239-251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.01.010
10. Bernardo, F. & Palma-Oliveira, J. M. (2016b). Identification with the neighborhood: Discrimination and neighborhood size. Self and Identity, 15(5), 579-598. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2016.1178665
11. Beyer, A., Kamin, S. T. & Lang, F. R. (2017). Housing in old age: dynamical interactions between neighborhood attachment, neighbor annoyance, and residential satisfaction. Journal of Housing for the Elderly, 31(4), 382-393. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763893.2017.1335671
12. Bilgin, N. (1997). Yer kimliği ve kentsel yurttaşlık. Siyaset ve İnsan içinde. (ss. 102-110). Bağlam Yayıncılık.
13. Bilgin, N. (2011). Sosyal düşüncede kent kimliği. İdealkent, 2(3), 20-47.
14. Bolak-Hisarlıgil, B. (2008). Martin Heidegger’de “mekan” düşüncesi: hermeneutik-fenomenolojik bir yaklaşım. Erciyes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 25(2), 23-34.
15. Bonaiuto, M., Breakwell, G. M. & Cano, I. (1996). Identity processes and environmental threat: The effects of nationalism and local identity upon perception of beach pollution. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 6(3), 157-175. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1298(199608)6:3<157::AID-CASP367>3.0.CO;2-W
16. Bonaiuto, M., Aiello, A., Perugini, M., Bonnes, M. & Ercolani, A. P. (1999). Multidimensional perception of residential environment quality and neighbourhood attachment in the urban environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19(4), 331-352. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1999.0138
17. Bonaiuto, M. & Fornara, F. (2017). Residential satisfaction and perceived urban quality. Reference module in neuroscience and biobehavioral psychology içinde (ss. 1-5). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809324-5.05698-4
18. Brown, B., Perkins, D. D. & Brown, G. (2003). Place attachment in a revitalizing neighborhood: Individual and block levels of analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23(3), 259-271. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(02)00117-2
19. Casakin, H., Hernández, B. & Ruiz, C. (2015). Place attachment and place identity in Israeli cities: The influence of city size. Cities, 42, 224-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2014.07.007
20. Casakin, H. & Reizer, A. (2017). Place attachment, residential satisfaction, and life satisfaction: Traditional and renewed kibbutz. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 27(7), 639-655. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2017.1317313
21. Chen, N., Dwyer, L. & Firth, T. (2014). Effect of dimensions of place attachment on residents’ word-of-mouth behavior. Tourism Geographies, 16(5), 826-843. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616688.2014.915877
22. Chen, N. & Dwyer, L. (2018). Residents’ place satisfaction and place attachment on destination brand-building behaviors: Conceptual and empirical differentiation. Journal of Travel Research, 57(8), 1026-1041. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287517729760
23. Chen, N., Hall, C. M., Yu, K. & Qian, C. (2019). Environmental satisfaction, residential satisfaction, and place attachment: The cases of long-term residents in rural and urban areas in China. Sustainability, 11(22), 6439. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11226439
24. Chow, K. & Healey, M. (2008). Place attachment and place identity: First-year undergraduates making the transition from home to university. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28(4), 362-372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.02.011
25. Cuba, L. & Hummon, D. M. (1993a). A place to call home: Identification with dwelling, community, and region. Sociological Quarterly, 34(1), 111-131. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1993.tb00133.x
26. Cuba, L. & Hummon, D. M. (1993b). Constructing a sense of home: Place affiliation and migration across the life cycle. Sociological Forum, 8, 547-572. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01115211
27. Çeker, A. & Belge, R. (2015). İstanbul’da kentsel dönüşüm kapsamında gerçekleşen bir olgu: Soylulaştırma. Türk Coğrafya Dergisi, 65, 77-86. https://doi.org/10.17211/tcd.30494
28. Dağ, K. (2022). Mekânsal bağlılık ile mekân tatmini arasındaki ilişkide çevreci davranışsal niyetin rolü. JOEEP: Journal of Emerging Economies and Policy, 7(2), 141-154.
29. Devine-Wright, P. & Lyons, E. (1997). Remembering pasts and representing places: The construction of national identities in Ireland. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17(1), 33-45. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1996.0037
30. Dixon, J. & Durrheim, K. (2004). Dislocating identity: Desegregation and the transformation of place. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(4), 455-473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.09.004
31. Fornara, F., Bonaiuto, M., Bonnes, M., Carrus, G. & Passafaro, P. (2006). Sustainability and residential satisfaction within exclusive residential complexes in the city of Rome. D. Shehayeb, H. Turgut-Yildiz & P. Kellet (Ed.), Appropriate home: Can we design “appropriate” residential environments içinde (ss. 37-48). Housing & Building National Research Centre.
32. Fornara, F., Bonaiuto, M. & Bonnes, M. (2010). Cross-validation of abbreviated perceived residential environment quality (PREQ) and neighborhood attachment (NA) indicators. Environment and Behavior, 42(2), 171-196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916508330998
33. George, D. & Mallery, P. (2020). IBM SPSS statistics 26 step by step: A simple guide and reference (16. Baskı). Routledge.
34. Gifford, R. (2002). Making a difference: Some ways environmental psychology has improved the world. R. B. Bechtel & A. Churchman (Ed.), Handbook of environmental psychology içinde (ss.323–334). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
35. Gomez-Jacinto, L. & Hombrados-Mendieta, I. (2002). Multiple effects of community and household crowding. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 22(3), 233-246. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2002.0236
36. Göregenli, M. (2010). Çevre psikolojisi. İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
37. Göregenli, M. & Karakus, P. (2014). The relations between socio-spatial mobility and urban-related identity: A comparative analysis of internal migrants and host culture members in six big cities of Turkey. 4th International Conference: Ecology of Urban Areas Proceedings (ss.470-478). Zrenjanin, Serbia.
38. Göregenli, M., Karakus, P., Kösten, E. Y. Ö. & Umuroglu, I. (2014). Mahalleye bağlılık düzeyinin kent kimliği ile ilişkisi içinde incelenmesi. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 29(73), 73-85.
39. Göregenli, M., Karakus, P. & Gökten, C. (2016). Acculturation attitudes and urban-related identity of internal migrants in three largest cities of Turkey. Migration Letters, 13(3), 427-442. https://doi.org/10.59670/ml.v13i3.294
40. Grillo, M. C., Teixeira, M. A. & Wilson, D. C. (2010). Residential satisfaction and civic engagement: Understanding the causes of community participation. Social Indicators Research, 97(3), 451-466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-009-9511-0
41. Gustafson, P. (2009a). More cosmopolitan, no less local: The orientations of international travellers. European Societies, 11(1), 25-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616690802209689
42. Gustafson, P. (2009b). Mobility and territorial belonging. Environment and Behavior, 41(4), 490-508. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916508314478
43. Halpenny, E. A. (2006). Environmental behaviour, place attachment and park visitation: A case study of visitors to Point Pelee National Park. Doktora tezi, The University of Waterloo, Waterloo.
44. Halpenny, E. A. (2010). Pro-environmental behaviours and park visitors: The effect of place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(4), 409-421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.04.006
45. Hauge, A. L. (2007). Identity and place: a critical comparison of three identity theories. Architectural Science Review, 50(1), 44-51. https://doi.org/10.3763/asre.2007.5007
46. Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2. baskı). The Guilford Press.
47. Hernandez, B. (2021). Place attachment: Antecedents and consequences (Antecedentes y consecuencias del apego al lugar). Psyecology, 12(1), 99-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/21711976.2020.1851879
48. Hernandez, B., Hidalgo, M. C., Salazar-Laplace, M. E. & Hess, S. (2007). Place attachment and place identity in natives and non-natives. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(4), 310-319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2007.06.003
49. Hidalgo, M. C. & Hernandez, B. (2001). Place attachment: Conceptual and empirical questions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21(3), 273-281. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2001.0221
50. Hur, M., Nasar, J. L. & Chun, B. (2010). Neighborhood satisfaction, physical and perceived naturalness and openness. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(1), 52-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.05.005
51. Jiao, L., Ren, Z., Guo, Z., Gao, S. & Xu, Y. (2023). Individual differences in place attachment and pro-environmental behavior: Pride as an emotional tie. Personality and Individual Differences, 214, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2023.112357
52. Junot, A., Paquet, Y. & Fenouillet, F. (2018). Place attachment influence on human well‐being and general pro‐environmental behaviors. Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology, 2(2), 49-57. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts5.18
53. Kalaycı Önaç, A. & Gönüllü Sütçüoğlu, G. (2021). Effect of urban change on place attachment: evidence from two locations from a city in Turkey with similar historical landscape values. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 14(11), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-021-07318-6
54. Khaleghimoghaddam, N., Arzhangi, S. & Rajaeipour, N. (2023). Investigating the contribution of socio-physical structure of neighborhoods on residents’ sense of attachment. PLANARCH-Design and Planning Research, 7(2), 191-202. https://doi.org/10.5152/Planarch.2023.23121
55. Kılıç, T. & Hardal, S. (2014). Kentsel dönüşümün sosyal ve mekansal yansımalarına bir örnek: Sarıgöl Mahallesi (Gaziosmanpaşa-İstanbul). Türk Coğrafya Dergisi, 62(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.17211/tcd.33157
56. Kırlı-Özer, G., Çahantimur, A. & Kırlı, S. (2020). Aidiyet duygusu kentlerin algılanmasında etkili etkenlerden birisi midir? Bir pilot çalışma. Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi, 21(3), 285-291. https://doi.org/10.5455/apd.63211
57. Kim, J. & Kaplan, R. (2004). Physical and psychological factors in sense of community: New urbanist Kentlands and nearby Orchard Village. Environment and Behavior, 36(3), 313-340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916503260236
58. Köse, B. Ç. (2022). Antecedents of domestic tourists’ loyalty: The Role of place attachment and satisfaction. OPUS Journal of Society Research, 19(46), 276-288. https://doi.org/10.26466/opusjsr.1069174
59. Kuo, H. M., Su, J. Y., Wang, C. H., Kiatsakared, P. & Chen, K. Y. (2021). Place attachment and environmentally responsible behavior: The mediating role of destination psychological ownership. Sustainability, 13(12), 6809. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13126809
60. Laczko, L. S. (2005). National and local attachments in a changing world system: Evidence from an international survey. International Review of Sociology—Revue Internationale de Sociologie, 15(3), 517-528. https://doi.org/10.1080/03906700500272525
61. Lalli, M. (1992). Urban-related identity: Theory, measurement, and empirical findings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12(4), 285-303. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80078-7
62. Lewicka, M. (2005). Ways to make people active: The role of place attachment, cultural capital, and neighborhood ties. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(4), 381-395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.10.004
63. Lewicka, M. (2008). Place attachment, place identity, and place memory: Restoring the forgotten city past. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28(3), 209-231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.02.001
64. Lewicka, M. (2010). What makes neighborhood different from home and city? Effects of place scale on place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(1), 35-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.05.004
65. Lewicka, M. (2011a). Place attachment: How far have we come in the last 40 years?. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31(3), 207-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.10.001
66. Lewicka, M. (2011b). On the varieties of people’s relationships with places: Hummon’s typology revisited. Environment and Behavior, 43(5), 676-709. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916510364917
67. Low, S.M. & Altman, I. (1992). Place attachment. I. Altman & S. M. Low, (Ed.) Place attachment, human behavior and environment içinde (12, 1-12). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-8753-4_1
68. Mills, A. (2008). The place of locality for identity in the nation: Minority narratives of cosmopolitan Istanbul. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 40(3), 383-401.
69. Mouratidis, K. & Andersen, B. (2023). What makes people stay longer in the densifying city? Exploring the neighbourhood environment and social ties. Housing Studies, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2023.2185593
70. Öncü, A. (1999). İdealinizdeki ev mitolojisi kültürel sınırları aşarak İstanbul’a ulaştı. Birikim, 123(7), 26-34.
71. Öncü, A. (2000). İstanbullular ve ötekiler küreselcilik çağında orta sınıf olmanın kültürel kozmolojisi. Ç. Keyder (Ed.), İstanbul küresel ve yerel arasında içinde (ss. 117-144) , Metis Yayınları.
72. Özata, T. & Özdemir-Darby, D. (2023). Yere bağlanma olgusunun önemli bir bileşeni olarak yeşil alanlar: kuzguncuk bostanı. Kent Akademisi, 16(2), 702-726. https://doi.org/10.35674/kent.1086441
73. Proshansky, H. M. (1978). The city and self-identity. Environment and Behavior, 10(2), 147-169. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916578102002
74. Puddifoot, J. E. (1997). Psychological reaction to perceived erasure of community boundaries. The Journal of Social Psychology, 137(3), 343-355. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224549709595445
75. Ramkissoon, H., Weiler, B. & Smith, L. D. G. (2012). Place attachment and pro-environmental behaviour in national parks: The development of a conceptual framework. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(2), 257-276. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2011.602194
76. Ramkissoon, H. & Mavondo, F. T. (2015). The satisfaction–place attachment relationship: Potential mediators and moderators. Journal of Business Research, 68(12), 2593-2602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.05.002 Ramkissoon, H., Mavondo, F. & Uysal, M. (2018). Social involvement and park citizenship as moderators for quality-of-life in a national park. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 26(3), 341-361. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1354866
77. Rollero, C. & De Piccoli, N. (2010a). Place attachment, identification and environment perception: An empirical study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(2), 198-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.12.003
78. Rollero, C. & De Piccoli, N. (2010b). Does place attachment affect social well-being?. European Review of Applied Psychology, 60(4), 233-238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2010.05.001
79. Sam, N., Bayram, N. & Bilgel, N. (2012). The perception of residential environment quality and neighbourhood attachment in a metropolitan city: A study on Bursa, Turkey. eCanadian Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(1), 22-39.
80. Scannell, L. & Gifford, R. (2010). The relations between natural and civic place attachment and pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(3), 289-297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.01.010
81. Scannell, L. & Gifford, R. (2017). Place attachment enhances psychological need satisfaction. Environment and Behavior, 49(4), 359-389. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916516637648
82. Secor, A. J. (2003). Citizenship in the city: Identity, community, and rights among women migrants to Istanbul. Urban Geography, 24(2), 147-168. https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.24.2.147
83. Secor, A. (2004). “There is an Istanbul that belongs to me”: citizenship, space, and identity in the city. Annals of the association of American Geographers, 94(2), 352-368. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.2004.09402012.x
84. Speller, G. M., Lyons, E. & Twigger-Ross, C. (2003). A community in transition: The relationship between spatial change and identity processes. Social Psychological Review, 4(2), 3-22.
85. Stedman, R. C. (2002). Toward a social psychology of place: Predicting behavior from place-based cognitions, attitude, and identity. Environment and Behavior, 34(5), 561-581. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916502034005001
86. Stedman, R. C. (2003). Is it really just a social construction?: The contribution of the physical environment to sense of place. Society &Natural Resources, 16(8), 671-685. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920309189
87. Şeker, M. (2011). İstanbul'da yaşam kalitesi araştırması. İstanbul Ticaret Odası.
88. Şeker, M., Sardanlı, A. & Bektaş, H. (2014). TRC2 bölgesi yaşam kalitesi araştırması. Karacadağ Kalkınma Ajansı. Şeker, M. (2015). Quality of life index: A case study of Istanbul. Istanbul University Econometrics and Statistics e-Journal, 23, 1-15.
89. Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6. Baskı). Pearson.
90. Temelova, J. & Dvorakova, N. (2012). Residential satisfaction of elderly in the city centre: The case of revitalizing neighbourhoods in Prague. Cities, 29(5), 310-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2011.11.015
91. Torunczyk-Ruiz, S. (2013). Neighbourhood attachment and city identity in ethnically mixed areas: Comparison of natives and migrants in four European cities. Estudios de Psicología, 34(3), 339-343. https://doi.org/10.1174/021093913808349244
92. Tajfel, H. (1982). Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33(1), 1-39.
93. Tajfel, H. & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour. S. Worchel, ve W. G. Austin (Ed.), Psychology of intergroup relations içinde (ss.7-24). Nelson-Hall.
94. Twigger-Ross, C. L. & Uzzell, D. L. (1996). Place and identity processes. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16(3), 205-220. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1996.0017
95. Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., Haslam, S. A. & McGarty, C. (1994). Self and collective: cognition and social context. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(5), 454-463. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167294205002
96. Veasna, S., Wu, W. Y. & Huang, C. H. (2013). The impact of destination source credibility on destination satisfaction: The mediating effects of destination attachment and destination image. Tourism Management, 36, 511-526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.09.007
97. Wnuk, A. & Oleksy, T. (2021). Too attached to let others in? The role of different types of place attachment in predicting intergroup attitudes in a conflict setting. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 75, 101615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101615
98. Xu, Y., Wu, D. & Chen, N. C. (2022). Here I belong!: Understanding immigrant descendants’ place attachment and its impact on their community citizenship behaviors in China. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 79, 101743. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101743
99. Yuksel, A., Yuksel, F. & Bilim, Y. (2010). Destination attachment: Effects on customer satisfaction and cognitive, affective and conative loyalty. Tourism Management, 31(2), 274-284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.03.007
100. Zenker, S. & Rütter, N. (2014). Is satisfaction the key? The role of citizen satisfaction, place attachment and place brand attitude on positive citizenship behavior. Cities, 38, 11-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.12.009