Stereotypes and Urban Images

Author(s): Jacquelin A. Burgess

Source: Area, Vol. 6, No. 3 (1974), pp. 167-171
Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of
British Geographers)
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20000865 .
Accessed: 28/03/2011 01:41

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Blackwell Publishing and The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) are
collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Area.

http://www.jstor.org
Stereotypes and urban irmages
Jacquelin A. Burgess, University of Hull

Summary. The existence of stereotypes within contemporary images of the environment

is discussed and a method for their identification presented.

There are two distinct approaches to the study of urban imagery. The more
common interpretation has been a structural one in which the relationship
between components of the individual's image and the city is revealed through
the construction of mental maps whose separate featurescorrespond to features
within the urban environment (e.g. Downs and Stea, 1971). The alternative
approach is concerned more with the meaning of places to people and less
with their reduction to nodes, edges and paths. It focuses on the experiences
of the individual, and the image-as a necessary simplification of the city
reflects this unique experience. The language people use about places provides
a valuable insight into this personal experience and the image may be studied
through their descriptions. It is through these descriptions of places that
stereotypes have the greatest potential for development. Stereotypes have been
recognized as an important element in urban and regional perception although
the substantive research has been into historic perceptions of environment
(e.g. Bowden, 1969). This paper represents an initial consideration of con
temporary stereotypes and is illustrated by data from a research project into
the images of Kingston upon Hull.
A common definition of 'stereotype' is of an image containing distorted or
erroneous information. Fishman (1956) suggests that the consensus among
social psychologists is that ' its contents are inferior, shoddy, " wrong" ideas '
(p. 28) and should be changed. This view of stereotypes has evolved through the
study of ethnic prejudice which has been concerned with the categorization of
social groups and the attribution of certain characteristics to individuals on the
basis of group membership (Cauthen, Robinson and Krauss, 1971). It is postu
lated that the stereotyped image has warped from an initial ' grain of truth'
and this initial truth should be identified. However, the main stumbling block
in the argument about truthfulness has been the question of proof. Fishman
(1956, p. 54) makes the point that stereotypes become autonomous precisely
because their validity cannot be assessed. He is supported by Campbell (1969,
p. 824) in his suggestion that the only way to substantiate or discredit the
stereotype is by comparison with some objectively defined data set.
The stereotyping of places may be seen as the development of images which
for the most part are generated from a number of secondary sources. ' Stereo
types appear to be learned by word of mouth or from books and films. These
media create a vast cultural matrix in which images can develop and persist
irrespectiveof the reality they are supposed to represent.' (Karlins, Coffman
and Walters, 1969, p. 1). Superficially, the city would appear to offer the
objective reality against which the stereotyped image could be matched. How
ever, this would be inappropriate for a conceptual position which maintains
that stereotypes of places cannot be tested against the' reality 'they are supposed
to represent since this reality is present only in other images of the place. The
results given in this paper compare two images. One image is that given by the

167
168 Stereotypesandurbanimnages

inhabitants of the city, the other is an image held by people who have no direct
experience of the city. Neither image is defined as ' true ' or ' untrue': both are
representations of unique experiences. It is proposed that whereas the image is a
simplication of environmental experience, the stereotyped image-highlighted
by a less complex structure-represents an oversimplification.
Stereotypes may be measured by an adjectival checklist (hereafter ACL)
which consists of a number of attributes presented to the respondent. To
measure the image of Hull an ACL was used in two questionnaire surveys. One
survey was of a random sample of the inhabitants of Hull (N= 180), the second
was a stratified random sample in other areas of England (N= 540). Forty-eight
attributeswere included in theACL.1 The attributeswere presented in alphabetic
order and respondents were requested to tick as many, or as few of the words
which matched their impressions of Hull.
The images for two groups were compared. The inhabitants of Hull formed
one group and 180 respondents from the English survey formed the second
group. These people have no personal knowledge of the city and have not
conversed with anyone who may have visited Hull. It is expected that this group
will possess a stereotyped image of the city. The results from the ACL are given
in Table 1, in which the total response for each attribute is expressed as a
percentage of the number of respondents.The scores for the inhabitants of Hull
(Group A) have been ranked to establish which attributes are considered most
characteristicof the city.Group B represents the scores from theEnglish survey.
Views from inside and outside
The image described by the inhabitants of the city is diverse. It contains tradi
tional elements of the city-docks (81 %), ships (65 %) and fishy (58 %) but these
are not considered the most characteristic, being interspaced with other attri
butes. The city is described as friendly (740%)and considered a good shopping
centre (85%). There is agreement about features such as large council estates
(75 %), low wages (61 %) and congested traffic (57%) which may be indicative
of dissatisfaction with the city. However, such a contention is not supported by
the use of more emotive terms, there are very low scores for attributes such as
characterless (9%), depressed (13%) and drabness (14%). There would appear
to be an element of civic pride perhaps, within the image-a lot of potential
(47 %) for example. The emphasis upon trees, parks (74 %) and the description
of Hull as a garden city (52 %) reflects a preoccupation of the inhabitants which
is present in much of the local literature.
There is only limited correspondence between the scores of the two groups.
The image given by group B is much less diverse. The most characteristic
attributes of the city are docks (90%), ships (79%), fishy (75%) which have
higher scores than those given by the inhabitants. Apart from these, the most
common attributes are working class city (85%)-which is also considered
highly characteristic by the people of Hull (84 %)-heavy industry (67 %),
large council estates (59 %), slums (63 %), unemployment (57 %) and cold (56 %).
There is a far greater emphasis upon the affective attributes in this image
drabness (49 %), grey (42 %), characterless (39 %). There are consistently higher
scores for the last twenty attributes, many of which have unfavourable
connotations.
It has been proposed that if Group B possesses a stereotyped image of the
city it would be revealed in the restriction of attributes selected. This would
Stereotypes and urban images 169

Table 1. The adjective checklist: attributes and results

Attribute Group A Group B

Number Percentage Number Percentage

1. Good shopping centre 154 85 87 48

2. Working class city 152 84 154 85
3. Docks 147 81 162 90
4. Large council estates 136 75 109 59
5. Friendly 133 74 70 38
6. Trees, Parks 133 74 51 28
7. Ships 118 65 143 79
8. Low wages 111 61 53 29
9. Fishy 105 58 136 75
10. Congested traffic 104 57 90 50
11. Tower block flats 102 56 62 34
12. Redevelopment 100 55 72 40
13. Flat 96 53 76 42
14. A garden city 94 52 5 2
15. Isolated 90 50 24 13
16. Lot of potential 85 47 65 36
17. Historic buildings 83 46 40 22
18. Growing population 81 45 77 43
19. Light industry 81 45 71 39
20. Unemployment 70 38 104 57
21. Strong local community 54 30 61 33
22. Modern 54 30 46 25
23. Heavy industry 53 29 121 67
24. Rapid expansion 50 27 42 23
25. Middle class suburbia 48 26 42 23
26. Lots to do 46 25 50 27
27. Slums 46 25 115 63
28. Cold 46 25 102 56
29. Secure 42 23 46 25
30. Derelict 42 23 54 30
31. Wide streets 42 23 33 18
32. Poverty 40 22 51 28
33. Boring 35 19 46 25
34. Mediocre 30 16 37 20
35. Grey 27 15 76 42
36. Drabness 26 14 89 49
37. Regional centre 26 14 42 23
38. Depressed 24 13 77 43
39. Overcrowded 24 13 80 44
40. Aftluent 20 11 40 22
41. Militancy 18 10 54 30
42. Theatres 18 10 53 29
43. Characterless 17 9 71 39
44. Smoke 16 8 96 53
45. Aggressive 16 8 48 26
46. Cobbles 10 5 31 17
47. Hilly 0 22 12
48. Coalmines 0 27 15
(N=180 for both groups)

provide support for the hypothesis that the stereotype is an oversimplification

of environmental experience. Oversimplification implies an element of distortion;
lack of diversity and any distortion present in the image is revealed by differences
between the two sets of scores. The differences between the two scores on each
attribute were tested using Chi-square to see whether there were any which were
170 Stereotypes and urban images

significantly different. Out of a total of 48 chi-square values, 22 were

found to be significantly different at the 0 01 level (with 1 d.f.). These are shown
in Figure 1, which illustrates the distribution of the two sets of scores. The
percentage score for each attribute is plotted on both axes. Four distinct
clusters of attributes indicate the relationships between the two images. Cluster I
shows those attributes both groups consider characteristic of Hull: docks, ships,
fishy, working class city and large council estates. There is also agreement over
middle-range characteristics applicable to many places: redevelopment, light
industry, and congested traffic.Cluster IV shows those attributes with low
scores in both images. The mixture of characteristics and contradictions among
them, such as poverty and affluence, modern and derelict suggests they are
inappropriate in the description of the city.

-100
4
Differ significontly Group A
at 0 010/. level (percent)
-90

05

-370
0 40j 60 70 80 3
90ro8
1
9g (percent)
37 39 ~ ~ ~ ~ 7
4060

*4~~~~~~~~~~4

Figure 1. The relationship between two images of Hull: stereotyped attributes.

The most interesting clusters are II and III containing attributes given a low
score by one group and high by the other. The chi-square values highlight these
differences. Clusters II and III could be described as the stereotype dimension.
The attributes in III represent those attributes considered characteristic by
people with no experience of the city: unemployment, heavy industry, slums, cold,
smoke and drabness. All are significantly different from the inhabitant's image.
It is suggested that these attributes are associated with any industrial northern
town, they are words used in the description of these cities since the mid
l9th century. There is concurrence between the two images in the use of
working class city and large council estates. These also are part of the Northern

City stereotype but they are also features which the inhabitants find charac
teristic of Hull.
There is another interesting aspect to these results. It has been shown that
the city does possess an external stereotype but there are significant differences
Stereotypes and urban images 171

among the attribute scores in cluster II. The characterization of Hull as a

garden city by its inhabitants has been commented on. However, there are other
features within this cluster which have the appearance of stylized responses,
stylized in the sense that they are attributesmuch commented upon in the local
literature.This is illustrated by attributes such as isolatedwhich reflects the
long-standing concern over the Humber Bridge and historic buildingswhich
reflects the emphasis in local ' folklore ' on the historic importance of the city.
In conclusion, these resultshave shown thatHull is a citywith well-developed
internal and external images. The internal image is an amalgam of the inhabi
tants' experiencewhich contains the essentials of the city and also illustrates
the importance of an awareness of local traditions in the assessment of urban
images. The stereotype reveals the basic features of the city which are aspects
most commented upon in the press and other media. Behind these, providing
substance to the image, stands the ghost of theNorth Country Town revealed in
all its 19th-century symbolism.

Notes and references

1. The problem of enforced responses occurs with the use of an ACL. The attributes included
in thisACL were abstracted from three pieces of pilot research: a survey in East Anglia using
open-ended questions about the character of Hull; a local, open-ended questionnaire schedule
for the inhabitants of the city; a place response test given to 64 students which took the form of
spontaneous adjectival responses to 32 stimulus place names, including Hull.
Bowden, M. J. (1969) The perception of theWestern Interior of theUnited States, 1800-1870:
a problem of historical geography. Proc. Ass. Am. Geog, 1, 16-21.
Campbell, D. T. (1967) Stereotypes and the perception of group differences, American Psycho
logist, 22, 817-29.
Cauthen, N., Robinson, I., and Krauss, H. (1971) Stereotypes: a review of the literature
1926-1968, Journal of Social Psychology, 84, 103-25.
Downs, R. M. and Stea, D. (eds.) (1971) Cognitive Mapping: Images of Spatial Environment,
Chicago: Aldine.
Fishman, J. (1956)An examination of the process and function of social stereotyping, Journal
of Social Psychology, 43, 27-64.
Karlins, M., Coffman, T. L., and Walters, G. (1969) On the fading of social stereotypes:
studies in three generations of college students, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
13, 1-16.

Dudley Stamp and 20th IGC Awards, 1974

The Royal Society has announced the 1974 list of geographers awarded grants under
the terms of theDudley Stamp Memorial Fund and the 20th International Geographical
Congress Fund.

Dudley Stamp Memorial Fund

Miss J. Kinsey, University of Liverpool, forManufacturing industry in the Bouches-du
Rhone (?50)
Miss R. V. Lakin, Bedford College (University of London), for Social and economic
constraints on rural development in Venezuela (?50)
Dr C. Thomas, New University of Ulster, for Transformation of rural communities in
Slovenia (?50)
(The fund was established in 1967 inmemory of Sir Dudley Stamp for the encourage
ment of geographical study and research, especially by young geographers. The
Trustees have inmind, particularly, the desirability of strengthening the links between
geographers in the United Kingdom and those in other lands.)