Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
    • Front Matter Portal
    • Journal Club
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Home
Home
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
    • Front Matter Portal
    • Journal Club
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
Commentary

Geography and personality: Why do different neighborhoods have different vibes?

Shigehiro Oishi
  1. Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4400

See allHide authors and affiliations

PNAS January 20, 2015 112 (3) 645-646; first published January 12, 2015; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1423744112
Shigehiro Oishi
Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4400
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: soishi@virginia.edu
  • Article
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Many travelers today, like Marco Polo in the 13th century, marvel at the different vibes possessed by different nations. Portugal has a different feel than France, which has a different feel than the United Kingdom, which is also very different from China. These differences arise in part because of different languages, customs, climates, and geographies. What about different neighborhoods in the same city? Do different neighborhoods have different vibes, even if they speak the same language, have the same holidays, the same favorite sports teams, and the same high and low temperatures? Most people living in a large city would say, “Yes, of course!” However, do they know why different neighborhoods feel so different, even within the same city? My guess is that most people can point to demographic or socioeconomic status differences across neighborhoods (e.g., “that is a Mexican neighborhood,” or “a lot of rich folks live there”), but would have no idea where agreeable people live or where introverts live. Jokela et al.’s (1) paper presents the possibility that different neighborhoods feel different not just because of their residents’ socioeconomic status, demographics, or built-environments, but also because of the actual personality of their residents. Jokela et al. collected self-reports on Big Five personality (extraversion, neuroticism, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness) and life satisfaction from over 56,000 Londoners (1). Using respondents’ residences, Jokela et al. mapped the personalities of 216 London neighborhoods. Not surprisingly, people high in openness to experiences tend to live in the city center (e.g., Camden Town, King’s Cross), whereas people low in openness live in the outer regions of London (Fig. 1). Similarly, agreeable and conscientious people overwhelmingly live outside of the city center. Residents of Hammersmith and Battersea are very extraverted, whereas residents of East Ham and Hanwell are very introverted. Interestingly, the Hammersmith and Hanwell neighborhoods are only about 5 miles away from each other, yet the personality of these neighborhoods is very different.

Fig. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

(A) Camden Town (NW5), London. Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons/Misterzee. (B) Ormonde Terrace (NW7), London. Image courtesy of Selin Kesebir, London Business School, London.

Readers could spend hours dissecting the six maps of London. A contribution of Jokela et al. (1) is that they have quantified neighborhood variations in terms of residents’ personalities and life satisfaction rather than in terms of demographic and economic characteristics, and have demonstrated geographic clustering, as well as sudden shifts in personality across neighborhoods.

However, Jokela et al.’s (1) paper is not just a collection of pretty maps. Rather, the work presents a major advancement in personality research (and the psychology of geography in general).

Psychology, which is typically defined as the scientific study of thinking, feeling, and behavior (2), has long been interested in the role of the environment. Social psychology in particular has extensively explored the role of the environment in thinking, feeling, and behavior. However, the “environment” most often investigated by social psychologists has been a person’s immediate context, such as orders given by an authority figure (3), the presence of others in bystander intervention (4), or specific roles assigned by the experimenter, such as “prisoner” and “prison guard” (5). Community psychology and environmental psychology emerged in the 1970s to address macroenvironments (6, 7). Unfortunately, although community psychology and environmental psychology did address many important issues related to macroenvironments, the movements never became a dominant force within psychology. The rise of close relationship research, cultural psychology, and evolutionary psychology in the 1990s and the 2000s expanded the environmental scope of social psychological investigations to chronic relationship contexts, cultural contexts, and ancestral environments. However, these programs of research rarely explored objective macroenvironments, such as population density, ethnic diversity, and residential mobility (8). Jokela et al.’s (1) paper finally breaks away from the traditional, microview of environment, and combines it with another new development in psychological science: Big Data.

In addition to personality and life satisfaction data from over 56,000 Londoners, Jokela et al. (1) gathered many neighborhood characteristics, including unemployment rates, population density, crime rate, green space, and so forth. Combined with earlier research suggesting that personality is partially heritable (9), the present findings imply that open people are not just attracted to urban neighborhoods, but that they help “create” that urban neighborhood feel.

Perhaps open people are more likely to paint a funky mural, play instruments on the street, display unusual ornaments in their windows, or patronize an off-beat café. In doing so, they create and spur the urban feel of their neighborhood. Likewise, agreeable and conscientious people are not just attracted to the suburban areas of London, but help create their neighborhoods’ safe and predictable feel, perhaps by maintaining and displaying neat, green gardens and keeping the streets clean and orderly. Although sociologists have already documented diverse scenes in different neighborhoods (10), Jokela et al.’s (1) work points out the dynamic possibility that people with different personalities may create different neighborhood scenes, which further help others identify their preferred places to live, work, and play in the future. However, Jokela et al.’s study was cross-sectional, and they did not follow the same individuals over time. Thus, the temporal process is uncertain. In the future, it will be important to document whether certain personalities predict residential relocation to certain neighborhoods [selection effect (11)], or whether living in certain neighborhoods leads to the development of certain personality characteristics (location effects). Similarly, the role of residents’ personalities in the creation of neighborhood cultures and scenes should be documented longitudinally. For example, does an influx of open individuals lead to the creation of more galleries and museums in neighborhoods? Finally, it is important to examine whether similar geographical clustering is happening in great cities with different histories and cultures (e.g., Shanghai, Mumbai, Nairobi, Buenos Aires).

In addition to the geographical clustering of personality and life satisfaction, Jokela et al. (1) demonstrate the importance of the person–environment fit effect on life satisfaction. Person–environment fit has been one of the oldest and most important questions in personality psychology (12). However, most research so far has focused on the fit between personality and immediate situations, such as being alone or with someone, working, or recreation (13). Many other famous “person–environment” studies did not really measure environments, but rather assessed life events (14). There is no question that these studies provide valuable information regarding the person–environment interaction. However, most previous studies missed the potential impact of concrete macroenvironments. There have been several person–environment fit studies that did explore the role of macroenvironments, but these studies have been mostly at the level of the nation (15). However, there is a great deal of heterogeneity in any nation, and thus the interpretation of those findings has not been definitive. In contrast, Jokela et al. (1) investigated fit at a much finer level—namely, postal code areas—which presented much more concrete information about the environments, and therefore made the current person–environment fit effect much moreIn addition to the geographical clustering of personality and life satisfaction, Jokela et al. demonstrate the importance of the person–environment fit effect on life satisfaction.convincing. Specifically, Jokela et al. show that individuals high in openness to experience were more satisfied with their lives if they lived in neighborhoods characterized by high population density, younger people, childless couples, and ethnic diversity than if they lived in neighborhoods characterized by low-density, older people, couples with children, and ethnic homogeneity. To my knowledge, this is the first study to show that personality predictors of life satisfaction vary depending on neighborhood characteristics.

Why is the current person–environment fit finding on life satisfaction so important? This is partly because it is very difficult to figure out how to be happier (16). For example, many people think that making $10,000 more per year would make them substantially happier. However, when people start making $10,000 more, they realize that their happiness level has not increased. “Love is all you need,” the Beatles sang, and many think the same. However, even the happiness gained by marriage is typically short-lived. It is not an overstatement to say that it is difficult to be happier. Fortunately, although people may fail at introspection regarding what makes them happy, people are fairly good at evaluating their own personality. People know whether or not they are agreeable or open to new experiences. The present findings thus have direct implications for people’s subjective well-being, as people high in openness to experiences can now intuit that they should live in a city center (if they want to be happy), whereas those low in openness should avoid living there. Where to live is an important and often very expensive decision. Jokela et al.’s (1) research suggests that knowing one’s personality and neighborhood characteristics can help facilitate such a decision.

Great cities in the 21st century, such as London and New York, are increasingly diverse. Marco Polo was one of the few individuals in the 13th century to travel extensively outside of his native land and experience different worlds. Now ordinary people in great cities can travel within the same city, experiencing diverse worlds only footsteps away. However, who would have thought that it was the personality of residents that matters so much in creating neighborhood vibes?

Jokela et al. (1) demonstrate both how that neighborhood diversity is created, and how important it can be for the well-being of its residents.

Footnotes

  • ↵1Email: soishi{at}virginia.edu.
  • Author contributions: S.O. wrote the paper.

  • The author declares no conflict of interest.

  • See companion article on page 725.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Jokela M,
    2. Bleidorn W,
    3. Lamb ME,
    4. Gosling SD,
    5. Rentfrow PJ
    (2014) Geographically varying associations between personality and life satisfaction in the London metropolitan area. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112:725–730
    .
    OpenUrl
  2. ↵
    1. Myers DG
    (2014) Psychology (MacMillan, New York), 10th Ed
    .
  3. ↵
    1. Milgram S
    (1963) Behavioral study of obedience. J Abnorm Psychol 67(4):371–378
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Darley JM,
    2. Latané B
    (1968) Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility. J Pers Soc Psychol 8(4):377–383
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Zimbardo PG
    (1973) On the ethics of intervention in human psychological research: With special reference to the Stanford Prison Experiment. Cognition 2(2):243–256
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Kelly JG
    (1971) Qualities for the community psychologist. Am Psychol 26(10):897–903
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Craik KH
    (1973) Environmental psychology. Annu Rev Psychol 24:403–422
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. ↵
    1. Oishi S
    (2014) Socioecological psychology. Annu Rev Psychol 65:581–609
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Bouchard TJ Jr
    (1994) Genes, environment, and personality. Science 264(5166):1700–1701
    .
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. Silver D, et al.
    (2010) Scenes social context in an age of contingency. Soc Forces 88(5):2293–2324
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    1. Jokela M,
    2. Elovainio M,
    3. Kivimäki M,
    4. Keltikangas-Järvinen L
    (2008) Temperament and migration patterns in Finland. Psychol Sci 19(9):831–837
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. ↵
    1. Lewin K
    (1935) A Dynamic Theory of Personality (McGraw Hill, New York)
    .
  13. ↵
    1. Diener E,
    2. Larsen RJ,
    3. Emmons RA
    (1984) Person × situation interactions: Choice of situations and congruence response models. J Pers Soc Psychol 47(3):580–592
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Caspi A, et al.
    (2003) Influence of life stress on depression: Moderation by a polymorphism in the 5-HTT gene. Science 301(5631):386–389
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    1. Fulmer CA, et al.
    (2010) On “feeling right” in cultural contexts: How person-culture match affects self-esteem and subjective well-being. Psychol Sci 21(11):1563–1569
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. ↵
    1. Wilson TD,
    2. Gilbert DT
    (2003) Affective forecasting. Adv Exp Soc Psychol 35:345–411
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
PreviousNext
Back to top
Article Alerts
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PNAS.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Geography and personality: Why do different neighborhoods have different vibes?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from PNAS
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the PNAS web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Geography and personality
Shigehiro Oishi
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Jan 2015, 112 (3) 645-646; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1423744112

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
Geography and personality
Shigehiro Oishi
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Jan 2015, 112 (3) 645-646; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1423744112
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Article Classifications

  • Social Sciences
  • Psychological and Cognitive Sciences

See related content:

  • Personality in London
    - Jan 12, 2015
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 112 (3)
Table of Contents

Submit

Sign up for Article Alerts

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

You May Also be Interested in

Setting sun over a sun-baked dirt landscape
Core Concept: Popular integrated assessment climate policy models have key caveats
Better explicating the strengths and shortcomings of these models will help refine projections and improve transparency in the years ahead.
Image credit: Witsawat.S.
Model of the Amazon forest
News Feature: A sea in the Amazon
Did the Caribbean sweep into the western Amazon millions of years ago, shaping the region’s rich biodiversity?
Image credit: Tacio Cordeiro Bicudo (University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil), Victor Sacek (University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil), and Lucy Reading-Ikkanda (artist).
Syrian archaeological site
Journal Club: In Mesopotamia, early cities may have faltered before climate-driven collapse
Settlements 4,200 years ago may have suffered from overpopulation before drought and lower temperatures ultimately made them unsustainable.
Image credit: Andrea Ricci.
Steamboat Geyser eruption.
Eruption of Steamboat Geyser
Mara Reed and Michael Manga explore why Yellowstone's Steamboat Geyser resumed erupting in 2018.
Listen
Past PodcastsSubscribe
Birds nestling on tree branches
Parent–offspring conflict in songbird fledging
Some songbird parents might improve their own fitness by manipulating their offspring into leaving the nest early, at the cost of fledgling survival, a study finds.
Image credit: Gil Eckrich (photographer).

Similar Articles

Site Logo
Powered by HighWire
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS Feeds
  • Email Alerts

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Special Feature Articles – Most Recent
  • List of Issues

PNAS Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Chemistry
  • Classics
  • Front Matter
  • Physics
  • Sustainability Science
  • Teaching Resources

Information

  • Authors
  • Editorial Board
  • Reviewers
  • Subscribers
  • Librarians
  • Press
  • Site Map
  • PNAS Updates
  • FAQs
  • Accessibility Statement
  • Rights & Permissions
  • About
  • Contact

Feedback    Privacy/Legal

Copyright © 2021 National Academy of Sciences. Online ISSN 1091-6490