Psychological Security of Urban Dwellers and the Subject–Spatial Environment of the City

Abstract

The physical and spatial environment of a city is closely related to the general well-being of residents and their psychological security. The study aimed to examine the relationship between the physical and spatial urban environment and psychological security of its residents. The sampling consisted of 272 Yekaterinburg residents (Russia) aged 20–70. Psychological security was evaluated through the Urbanites Psychological Security Scale proposed by O.Yu. Zotova and L.V. Tarasova. A questionnaire was employed to identify objective factors in the urban environment. The findings indicate that the period when city dwellers perceive the urban environment as most reliable is between 20 and 45 years, with women evaluating relationships in the city as more trustworthy. The residents whose length of residence in the city is 10–40 years rated the comfort of the urban environment the most highly. Individuals who have resided in various urban areas report a heightened sense of control over their environment, awareness of their surroundings, and environmental competence. As the size of their living space per person expands, their assessment of the dependability of social relationships within their urban environment becomes more favorable, and the intensity of their interaction with the environment is associated with an enhanced sense of psychological security in urban environments.

1. Introduction

The urban environment offers numerous opportunities for active and fulfilling lives, providing a range of comforts and conveniences. In addition to enhanced living standards, city residents have greater access to diverse leisure activities, and the division of labor within urban societies provides more avenues for productive leisure pursuits.

Notwithstanding the fact that the majority of the global population resides in urban areas, the emotional well-being of city dwellers remains a relatively neglected aspect of research and practice. Cities are frequently regarded in a mechanical and impersonal manner, as a mere aggregation of edifices and technologies. This perspective tends to overlook the most crucial element: the people who inhabit them.

While it is indubitable that the availability of employment opportunities, the quality of infrastructure, and the architectural design of a city are of paramount importance, it is also evident that a city is, at its core, an emotional canvas of the human experience. A substantial body of research indicates that the environment in which one lives has a direct impact on personal growth and well-being [1,2,3]. According to the Russian psychologists T.V. Drobysheva and A.L. Jouravlev, it is the “necessity to optimize the “social life” of the city within the framework of urbanism that encourages the specialists’ search for interconnection, interdependence, and interaction between the city and its inhabitants” [4] (p. 197).

The fundamental objective of urban settlements is to meet the multifaceted needs of their inhabitants by fostering a secure and pleasant environment [5]. The psychological security of urban residents is defined as their subjective assessment of multiple aspects of their environment [6]. It is therefore evident that psychological security is closely related to environmental factors. Psychological security is a state of equilibrium between the internal mental state and external environment [7]. It can also be considered as an interdependent relationship between the two. If we consider psychological security to be the stability of the mental state, it can be argued that it performs an adaptive function, acting as a kind of background in the life of a city dweller [8,9].

The urban environment is a social sphere that is multifaceted and contradictory. It is characterized by specific interactions, multiple social conditions, and scenarios that are constantly evolving [10]. The city is analogous to a living organism in its intricate nature, diversity, and systematic interconnectedness, which often prompts architects to utilize the metaphor of an “urban organism” in their professional discourse [11]. The city can be conceived as a living organism, which may yield intriguing and productive ideas that emphasize its organic qualities. I. Kaymaz [12] noted that a city is more than merely a physical structure; rather, it encompasses social and cultural elements as well. The citizenry constitutes a city’s most fundamental element and is essential for the continued vitality and functionality of any urban environment [13]. There exists a mutual relationship between the physical characteristics of a city and its inhabitants [14,15]. It is apparent that there is a necessity for an investigation of urban development from a social–psychological perspective and an in-depth analysis of the social psychology associated with urban lifestyles.

1.1. Theoretical Foundations and Concepts

The sense of psychological security experienced by an individual depends on their living environment, with the surrounding context significantly influencing both their behavior and personal development. Humans are continuously exposed to their environment to varying degrees, and depending on a multitude of factors, experience a range of emotions. These emotions may either facilitate or impede development, with anxiety, fears, stress, and other factors playing a role in this process [16]. Security is a subjective perception of assurance, a sense of belonging, and a feeling of being in the right place with the right people [17]. Those who perceive themselves as having played a role in the formation of their community are more likely to identify with it [18,19,20].

The psychological security of a city dweller is a state of personality in which individuals are able to satisfy their basic needs for self-preservation and the perception of their own psychological security within the city. It can be considered a measure of the individuals’ mental stability, and is largely responsible for determining the features of their response to different situations [21].

The psychological security of those residing in urban areas has been studied since the end of the last century. A body of research indicates that visual indications within the built environment, such as broken windows [22], graffiti, derelict buildings, and damaged streetlights [23,24,25], can elicit a sense of unease and vulnerability. The broken windows theory [22] posits that there is a correlation between an individual’s physical environment and their propensity to engage in criminal activity.

In his Prospect Refuge Theory, J. Appleton [26] demonstrated that the possibility of observation, the distance to observe and hear, the presence of social control, accessibility, and the physical presence of others create a safe environment for habitation. Current research on the psychological security of urban residents emphasizes spatial boundaries in the city [27,28]. O.A. Baevskiy [29] stated that the more clearly defined and compact the boundaries within residential areas, the more developed the internal territory. He further posited that the segmentation of inhabited space reflects our desire for order and security [30]. The implementation of a visibility corridor, the erection of fences, and the delineation of the territory all serve to enhance social oversight, psychological comfort, and the state of security among the citizenry [31]. The presence of an orderly environment can elicit feelings of security and tranquility, while the establishment of defined boundaries can indicate the level of maturation within a given area.

Other theories explore the relationship between perceptions of security and socio-demographic characteristics of urban residents. Depending on age [32], gender [33], and ethnicity [34,35], people perceive security differently. Soundscape [36], visual complexity [37], and even climatic terrain [38] are important criteria in shaping psychological security.

The psychological security of those residing in urban areas is influenced by a number of objective factors, including the unemployment rate, migration patterns, socio-economic issues, and so forth [39], which affects the emotional ties of citizens, their attitude toward the urban environment, and their willingness to implement environmentally friendly actions.

In understanding the psychological security of urban residents, it is crucial to consider factors that contribute to resilience and coping mechanisms. P. Diotaiuti, S. Corrado, S. Mancone, and L. Falese [40] demonstrated the importance of self-regulatory modes and basic psychological needs in enhancing resilience among endurance athletes. This insight is relevant to urban populations as well, where resilience can significantly impact psychological security.

A review of the literature (

Table 1. A Review of the Literature on the Signs of Psychological Security in Urban Environments.

Author(s)	Signs of Psychological Security
Q.J. Wilson and G.L. Kelling (broken windows theory, 1982) [22]	There is a correlation between an individual’s physical environment and the probability of that individual engaging in criminal behavior.
J. Appleton (prospect-refuge theory, 1975) [26]	The possibility of observation, the distance to observe and hear, the presence of social control, accessibility, and the physical presence of others create a safe environment for habitation.
A.V. Krasheninnikov (2020) [30]	Segmentation of habitat.
O.A. Baevskiy (1985) [29]	The interrelationship between the delineation of boundaries and the subsequent development of land.
N.S. Bruce, W.J. Davies (2014) [36]	The familiar sounds of city life: the noise of cars, streetcars, bell-ringing, etc.
A.S. Dosen, M.J. Ostwald (2013) [37]	Visual complexity.
W. Wei et al. (2017) [38]	Mild climate.
G. Van Hal (2015) [39]	Unemployment rate, migration processes, socio-economic challenges.
J. Wang, R. Long, H. Chen, Q. Li (2019) [6]	Emotional background and confidence level; adaptability of behavior.
A. Bingley (2013) [47]; P.B. Warr (1990) [48].	Habitual surroundings; familiar environment.
H. Staats, T. Hartig (2004) [49]	The presence of significant others, such as friends or family members.

) reveals a dearth of empirical studies directly addressing the issue of urban dwellers’ psychological security [41,42,43,44,45,46]. And, there is a notable absence of research examining the interrelationship between psychological security and the physical and spatial environment of the city. In particular, the Chinese psychologists J. Wang, R. Long, H. Chen, and Q. Li. [6] developed a scale of psychological security for city dwellers in 2019. This scale identifies various aspects of psychological security, including emotional background and confidence level, adaptability of behavior (including risky behavior), physical and mental health, level of trust in the world, and readiness for socially active behavior.

In addition, key factors contributing to the sense of psychological security include familiarity with the urban environment, the degree of recognition of the urban atmosphere [49], and the perception of the city in the context of a friendly environment [50]. The familiarity of one’s surroundings and environments fosters a sense of competence with the environment, thereby enabling individuals to refrain from expending cognitive resources on concerns related to uncertainty [47,48,51]. Thus, according to Galina Gornova, Doctor of Philosophy, “a successful orientation activity has been found to engender a sense of security and self-assurance, which subsequently affects one’s emotional well-being” [52].

A sense of security can also be gained when a person is surrounded by people who are significant to them, such as friends or family members [49,53].

1.2. Factors Affecting Psychological Security of Urban Residents

An individual’s psychological security represents a topic of significant interest across a range of disciplines, including economics, psychology, and sociology. In recent years, there has been a notable upsurge in interest among urban researchers and psychologists in the field of psychological security. The field of security studies is primarily concerned with two key areas: the first is the analysis of insecurity, with a particular focus on the identification and assessment of threats and risks [54]; the second approach examines the relationship between specific environmental factors and an individuals’ psychological security [55,56,57].

Recent studies have demonstrated the existence of a profound and intricate interconnection between urban environments and psychological security. Noise, air pollution, a scarcity of green spaces, and a prevalence of visually dull environments have the potential to induce significant adverse psychological effects. For instance, aircraft noise has been demonstrated to induce severe stress [58], and unpleasant odors can negatively impact the perception of others [59] and increase aggression [60], as well as contribute to an elevated prevalence of psychological disorders [61]. Moreover, other factors, such as the presence of green space [62], the height of trees, informal spaces [63], street design [64], and air pollution [65], also have explanatory power regarding psychological security.

Similarly, the social environment also exerts a significant influence on the perceptions of security. For example, J.F. Helliwell and R.D. Putnam [66] demonstrated that interaction with neighbors and friends positively affects happiness, and D. Ettema and M. Schekkerman [67] noted that mutual support and safety conditions among people living in a neighborhood positively correlate with people’s happiness. The psychological security of residents is influenced by external, objective factors. To some extent, economic factors influence the psychological security of urban residents [39], as evidenced by the stability of professional activity and low unemployment rates. In addition to economic factors, the degree of familiarity with and recognition of an urban environment plays a pivotal role in determining the duration of the stay of both locals and foreign nationals.

Despite a growing corpus of research indicating a robust correlation between geospatial variables and overall well-being, there is a paucity of research examining the impact of the urban environment on psychological security. Therefore, it is necessary to extend the existing body of literature on psychological security by examining the factors that influence one’s sense of security.

The authors of this article focused on objective factors that can influence the psychological security of individuals residing in urban areas (Figure 1). A review of existing literature revealed the relevance of four factors:

• Duration of residence in the city: the length of continuous residence in one location.
• Intra-city moves: a change of residence and living conditions within the same city.
• The movement of individuals during their day-to-day activities (also referred to as daily movement practices). This includes the trajectories of activities such as “home–work”, “home–shop”, “home–work–work–shop–restaurant”, and so on, i.e., the typical patterns of movement of urban dwellers throughout a single day.
• Type of housing: e.g., apartment/detached house, room, year of construction, floor, number of meters per person, etc.

1.3. Psychological Security and Intra-City Moves

The process of relocation within an urban environment can be viewed as an act of modifying one’s place of residence. Such actions offer insight into the experiences, events, and processes that shape an individual’s life trajectory and imbue this transition with meaning [68]. As individuals interact with and experience changing locations throughout the course of their lives, their perceptions of these places are inherently shaped by an evaluation of the associated displacement. “The meaning of a place is subject to change, whereas the memory of it remains when the actual circumstances have a different meaning” [69] (p. 250).

In the Soviet Union, the movement of individuals within a city was largely influenced by external factors, such as transfers, new housing opportunities, and other factors related to the allocation of housing [70]. In the context of the post-Soviet era, the event in question represents a situation in which an individual is “compelled” to make such a decision independently and is selective in determining the conditions under which they wish to live.

Individuals residing in urban areas tend to have specific preferences regarding their place of residence. The location of a residence in relation to the city center, the time spent commuting to work, the proximity of educational institutions for children (kindergarten, school, art schools), the availability of infrastructure, the service sector, the environmental characteristics of the immediate residential environment (the presence of green areas, parks, recreation areas, and the remoteness from industrial facilities) [71], and the aesthetic features (long-range panoramic views that give a sense of free passage and free space, junctions of landscapes comprising green and water areas) are all factors that influence the decision of where to live [52].

As posited by J.P. Schachter [72], the occurrence of internal city-to-city migration can be attributed to changes in housing conditions. Conversely, interregional migration is typically driven by employment opportunities. J.P. Schachter identified four categories of relocation types: family-related relocation, work-related relocation, housing quality-related relocation, and other-related relocation [72].

The majority of respondents (about 52%) move because of housing conditions, 25% for family reasons, and about 16% for work-related reasons [72].

Those who reside in urban areas are more likely to relocate when there is a discrepancy between their desired location and their current place of residence [73]. The move is an attempt to resolve this mismatch. The life cycle is seen as the principal driver of observed differences between individuals, with the transition through different life stages—such as childhood, adulthood, marriage, parenthood, and relocation to accommodate new housing needs—serving as key points of change [74].

The reasons for moving can be diverse, yet the relocation to a different part of the city often entails a number of adjustments. These include the need to adapt to new housing, the introduction of new neighbors, and the necessity to adjust one’s daily rhythm to the new place of residence. These changes can have a profound impact on urbanites’ psychological security, as they expand the boundaries of the city and facilitate the encounter with new people. Furthermore, if we apply the metaphor of K. Lynch [75], they contribute to the greater “readability” of urban space.

1.4. Psychological Security and Duration of Residence in the City

A city dweller’s perception of security is influenced by the duration of their residence within the urban environment [76,77]. It was determined that, in addition to social connections [78,79,80], the length of residence is a significant predictor of place attachment and an individual’s affective connection to a specific place [81]. However, B. Hernandez et al. [82] proved that individuals who have resided in urban areas for a limited duration are also capable of developing place attachment, suggesting that physical environmental factors may be more influential in attracting people than social factors.

The length of residence contributes to the perception that people may believe the place to belong to a particular group of residents and that this group has a right to the place [83]. Empirical evidence indicates that the duration of residence in a specific urban area is a significant factor in fostering social cohesion and integration [17,84]. For illustrative purposes, it can be observed that residents who had resided in a specific locality for a period of less than 4 years were more likely to identify it as unsafe in comparison to residents who had lived there for longer periods [85].

It can therefore be argued that the length of time spent residing in a city contributes to a sense of collective ownership of the place, which in turn encourages a sense of control over the city’s development and therefore a sense of security.

1.5. Psychological Security and Quality of Housing

As evidenced by sociological studies, the primary two categories of housing requirements can be classified as urban and environmental. The urban category encompasses factors such as proximity to the city center, busy streets [86], and proximity to historical and cultural sites, including theaters and museums. In contrast, the environmental category encompasses clean air and greater proximity to nature [87]. The location of a residence is often a reflection of one’s value preferences.

A significant scientific question concerns the relationship between the number of stories in a development and the security status of its residents. There is little research on the relationship between psychological security and the floor of residence in apartment buildings. In the majority of cases, research focuses on the correlation between the floor of residence and a number of psychological factors, including psychological well-being [88], mental health [89,90], antisocial behavior [91,92], quality of life, and other related aspects [93].

The literature indicates that residing in high-rise buildings has a negative impact on mental health [94], with women and children being particularly susceptible to the effects [95]. This is attributed to the limitations of social interaction and opportunities for play, which are inherent to such living conditions. In several studies, residing on upper floors has been found to diminish feelings of control and privacy [96]. Moreover, the proximity of neighbors [97] and the associated noise in high-rise buildings have been linked to a decline in overall mental health. Living in a high-rise building is associated with higher levels of loneliness among women [95].

Conversely, a number of studies have failed to establish a statistically significant correlation between an individual’s mental health and their housing type [98]. A comparison of the prevalence of anxiety and loneliness in apartment and house residents did not yield statistically significant differences [98].

The necessity for the use of elevators and stairs is an inherent aspect of living on upper floors. D. Pojani and M. Buka [99] believe that narrow, dark stairwells and elevators serve to inhibit social interaction, which in turn hinders the expansion of social ties. M. Gibson et al. [100] reached the conclusion that individuals in high rise buildings feel a lack of control, security, and privacy in public areas. These findings are consistent with the theoretical model developed by J. Appleton [26], which postulates that the perceived security of city residents is dependent upon their subjective perception of the degree of protection they feel in a particular urban setting with regard to crime and disorder. This encompasses the factors of surveillance and control (illumination of the territory), perspective (openness and spaciousness), and shelter (a place that offers protection from crime and the potential for intimidation, including the presence of other non-threatening individuals).

In contrast, other studies have yielded contradictory results, indicating that a greater floor elevation is correlated with heightened social cohesion, social contact, and social well-being [96,101]. However, residing on the ground floor may pose certain challenges due to limited control, privacy, and security.

A further indicator of housing quality is the number of square meters per capita in an apartment. The Better Life Index, ranked by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), indicates that the average Russian household has only one room per person, a figure which is shared by households in Turkey and Mexico. The highest rates are in Canada (2.5), New Zealand and the United States (2.4 each), with the OECD countries at 1.8 rooms per person. The average housing area in Russia is approximately 25 square meters per capita. This figure is considerably lower than the average for other European countries, where the figure is approximately 40 square meters per person, and in the United States and Canada, where the figure exceeds 70 square meters. Even in China, where population densities are high, the figure is higher, at 27 square meters [102].

The psychological security of the individual depends upon the ability to achieve the desired level of privacy within the home at any time, the recognition of the need for privacy and autonomy, and the capacity to exercise control.

In the general sense, overcrowding is defined as the presence of an excessive number of people in a confined living space. The concept and measurement of overcrowding exhibit considerable variation across continents, countries, regions, and communities. This variation is influenced by a multitude of factors, including cultural, social, economic, seasonal, geographic, and political considerations [103]. The ratio of the number of occupants to the number of rooms is the most commonly employed method for determining the degree of overcrowding.

In their work, Walter R. Gove and Michael Hughes [104] differentiate between objective and subjective crowding. The objective measure of crowding is quantified at the household level by the number of individuals present in a given space. In contrast, subjective crowding refers to a perception of inadequate space within a domicile.

In addition to this distinction, the existing corpus of literature makes a further differentiation between social and spatial densities. Social density is defined as the number of individuals residing together in a single household. Conversely, spatial density represents an inverse ratio, expressed in square meters per individual [105]. For instance, S. Torresin et al. [97] and J.L. Holmgren et al. [106] defined overcrowding as the number of individuals residing in a given dwelling. J. Ruiz-Tagle and I. Urria [107] and G.W. Evans [95] defined it as the number of people in a bedroom. Conversely, F. Duarte and A. Jiménez-Molina [108] defined it as the number of bedrooms per person. A. Keller et al. [98] and K. Raynor, L. Panza, and R. Bentley [109] posit that the fundamental aspect of comfortable living is the availability of sufficient space and autonomy, with a minimum of 43 square meters per person [98]. The necessity of space is largely dependent upon the functions of the household, as well as the frequency and type of activities that individuals perform within their homes. This includes whether they engage in work-from-home arrangements, prepare meals, host guests, or arrive at their residences only at night. The age and gender of the occupants also matter.

1.6. Psychological Security and Movement Throughout the Day

Security is one of numerous factors that influences the mobility of individuals in urban settings. In the context of contemporary society, the concept of security is understood to encompass a multitude of dimensions [110,111], including the safeguarding of individuals from physical assaults [112], the provision of security measures tailored to the needs of individuals with disabilities, and the promotion of psychological security. Mobility encompasses all methods of navigating urban environments, including walking, cycling, scooting, public transportation usage, driving a private automobile, and so forth. The presence, or perceived presence, of insecurity can influence urban mobility patterns and induce behavioral changes [113].

Moving around the city facilitates routine encounters, strengthening or weakening social ties [114,115]. Whatever the nature of the connections, the act of moving around the city contributes to the geography of the environment [116], which in turn promotes a sense of security for city dwellers, predictability, and a sense of trust [117].

It bears noting that the correlation between the frequency of urban travel patterns and the psychological security experienced by residents is not a unidirectional one. It is evident that security plays a pivotal role in shaping mobility choices and experiences of navigating the city. However, it is equally important to recognize that this form of security is, in turn, actively shaped by those same choices and experiences. A sense of security is created and maintained in part through the establishment of repetitive patterns of movement. These patterns can be observed in the routes that residents travel, in the places where they shop, on the streets, and in recreational spaces. It is clear that one of the most important ways to appropriate an environment [118] is by navigating it. The manner in which it is organized is therefore of critical importance to the state of security.

In order to make an appropriate choice, people must first orient themselves in the surrounding environment, allowing them to recognize and order the various urban cues. Successful orientation activities engender feelings of security and confidence in one’s abilities. In contrast, loss of orientation is associated with feelings of discomfort and anxiety, as well as a sense of being lost. The urbanite is able to “read” and utilize familiar elements of the environment to navigate effectively within the cityscape. It can be reasonably deduced that only those who have successfully adapted to the urban setting possess a high degree of environmental orientation. The act of traversing the city on a regular basis serves to familiarize the individual with their environment and increase their sense of orientation within it. Consequently, this facilitates the development of a psychological sense of security and comfort within the urban environment itself.

While advancements have been made in our comprehension of psychological security, considerable gaps persist, particularly in the context of urban environments and with respect to the security requirements of urban dwellers. Accordingly, it is the objective of this article to advance our comprehension of psychological security through an examination of urban lifestyles, with a particular focus on the nuances and shared characteristics of psychological security indicators. A review of the literature reveals that the psychological security of city residents is influenced by a number of external, objective environmental factors. An empirical study was conducted to ascertain the nature of this relationship. The aim of this study is to examine the specific characteristics of the relationship between the physical and spatial elements of urban environments and the psychological security of their inhabitants. In order to achieve the objective set forth in this study, a series of objectives were identified:

• To determine private and integral indicators of psychological security of city residents.
• To identify the gender and age characteristics of the psychological security indicators of urban residents.
• To determine the relationship of objective factors of the urban environment (the specific interactions of residents with these factors) with integral and private indicators of psychological security in city residents.

2. Materials and Methods

This study is dedicated to the examination of the distinctive characteristics of the interrelationship between the physical and spatial elements of urban environments and the psychological security of urban residents. The study was conducted in the city of Yekaterinburg.

Yekaterinburg is the fourth most populous city in the Russian Federation and represents one of the most compact urban areas in the country [119]. The city encompasses an area of 1,110,690 square kilometers, representing the third largest urban area in Russia, surpassed only by Moscow and St. Petersburg. The urban area of Yekaterinburg extends for 20 km from north to south and 15 km from west to east [120]. The compact city, as postulated by numerous scholars, provides for secure, economically advantageous and socially advantageous development [121,122,123]. Conversely, a number of studies [124,125,126] contend that the implementation of compact urban development may lead to an increase in land and housing prices, foster social isolation, negatively impact neighborhood satisfaction [127] and sense of attachment [128], and contribute to higher crime rates [129].

The urban fabric of the city is characterized by a diverse and multifaceted composition, featuring a blend of high-density, high-rise developments, individual residential urban environments, and historic mixed urban settings (Figure 2).

According to the Numbeo service [130], the city of Yekaterinburg is ranked 177th on the Security Index (a score of 54.95), and is between the cities of Pattaya (Thailand) and Genoa (Italy), which are considered to have a “moderate” security level by the survey’s authors. This assessment is based on several indicators, including the general perception of the crime rate, the perceived security level, and the responses of both residents and tourists regarding their feelings of security while walking during the day and night (Figure 3).

In a ranking of 195 global cities based on their respective qualities of life, Yekaterinburg is situated at the 173rd position, positioned between Ukraine’s Dnipro (172nd) and Colombia’s Bogota (174th). According to the Purchasing Power Index, Yekaterinburg ranks 134th, and it is ranked 110th in terms of crime rate. With regard to healthcare, Yekaterinburg ranks 181st, and with respect to the cost of living, 162nd (the top position in this ranking is held by Zurich, Switzerland). According to the most recent data, Yekaterinburg is ranked 125th in terms of its real estate price to income ratio. In terms of pollution, Yekaterinburg is ranked 32nd, with Beirut (Lebanon) at the top of the list and Helsinki (Finland) at the bottom, representing the least polluted city [130].

The city of Yekaterinburg is frequently the subject of research conducted by scholars based in Russia [137,138,139,140,141]. It was revealed that Yekaterinburg is perceived as the capital city of the region, as a city “where dreams come true”, where there is an “opportunity to find a promising job”, and where there are “great opportunities”, etc. Yekaterinburg is variously described as “the capital of the Urals”, “the heart of the Urals”, “the city between Europe and Asia”, “the city standing in two parts of the world”, “the city of mechanical engineering”, “the city of factories”, “the city of different sights”, “the city of interesting monuments”, “the city of impressive history”, “the city of historical events”, “the city of the death of the royal family”, and “the city of the Romanov family” [142].

2.1. Participants

The study involved 272 residents of Yekaterinburg, aged 20 to 70 years (mean age of 36 years, SD = 12.45).

Figure 4 illustrates the distribution of sample respondents by age group.

To create the research sample, preliminary targeting of internet sites was conducted to determine the localization of the target groups (adult residents of Yekaterinburg). Methods of attracting respondents included using banners and offers on various local news portals and online platforms such as social networks and blogs. The distribution of the survey invitation on diverse thematic platforms enabled the formation of a sample comprising individuals from various communities and groups. A cohort of respondents from the target audience completed an online electronic questionnaire containing a range of socio-demographic and residency information about a specific area of the city. Therefore, despite the randomization of the sample, the study included respondents who demonstrated both an appropriate level of interest in the research topic and the necessary motivation, as determined through a preliminary screening process. This resulted in a sample that included respondents from different (targeted) socio-demographic groups with some degree of interest and motivation to participate in the study, not just those willing to take surveys for a fee. Data collection from respondents aged 60 or over was conducted through a questionnaire survey, carried out with the assistance of Employment Centers and Public Organizations.

The sample was balanced with regard to gender, with 54% female and 46% male respondents. A total of 10.2% of respondents had obtained a secondary education, 47.5% had completed a secondary vocational program, and 42.3% had pursued higher education.

The study involved Yekaterinburg residents with a length of residence in the city from 1 to 63 years (the average length of residence was 25 years, SD = 16.27).

The study was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles set forth by the Russian Psychological Society [143]. The protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Department of Social Psychology at Liberal Arts University–University for Humanities. In accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, written informed consent was obtained from all subjects prior to participation.

2.2. Measures

A study was carried out to ascertain the psychological security of city residents. This involved utilizing a methodology devised by O. Yu. Zotova and L. V. Tarasova for measuring psychological security in urban populations [144]. The methodology comprises 38 statements, which are measured on a five-point scale and belong to six subscales: “Freedom”, “Comfort”, “Self-efficacy”, “Trusting relationships”, “Control over the environment” and “Reliability”, as well as an integral indicator of psychological security of city residents (Supplementary Materials).

The “Freedom” scale (Fr)comprises six items reflecting an individual’s subjective perception of their autonomy, independence, freedom of choice and action, personal development, self-realization, and capacity to resist and/or shield themselves from external influence in an urban environment. The “Comfort” scale (Cf) also includes six items that allow for concluding the extent to which a city resident feels psychological comfort, can satisfy his/her needs, does not feel threatened (or is able to protect himself/herself from it). The six-item “Self-Efficacy” scale (Se) is a measure of an individual’s capacity and inclination to engage in environmental development, their capability to alter their immediate surroundings (including the ability to safeguard themselves from adverse influences or factors), and their personal competence. The six-item “Trusting Relationships” scale (Tr) is designed to assess the presence of reliable, open, trusting relationships with specific individuals within the urban environment, including family members, partners, friends, and colleagues. The “Control over Environment” scale (Ce), which is represented by six items, serves to reflect the subjective sense of control of urban residents over their surrounding environment, as well as their awareness and environmental competence (i.e., an understanding of where and what resources are available, how to utilize them, where to access them, and how to behave in order to achieve their goals). The “Trustworthiness” scale (Tw) is comprised of eight statements and serves to quantify the degree of trust that an individual places in their surrounding environment. In other words, it assesses the extent to which the environment is perceived as safe. It is important to distinguish that this is not a measure of control. One can exert control over an object or situation without feeling trust or perceiving the environment as stable. Trustworthiness is intertwined with all preceding factors and only in conjunction with them does it become a defining characteristic of psychological security. This can be illustrated by a situation in which circumstances may be unfavorable, but the situation itself is predictable and stable, which does not necessarily imply psychological security. The integral indicator is evaluated based on an analysis of the private indicators.

The methodology demonstrates favorable psychometric characteristics, including retest reliability, consistency, and convergent validity [144].

Additionally, a questionnaire was used to determine the objective factors related to the urban environment where residents live and their interaction with it. The questionnaire evaluated several parameters, including length of residence in the city, presence or absence of intra-city moves, number of square meters of living space per person, floor of residence, peculiarities of moving around the city (time and intensity), and organization of one’s stay in the city during weekends.

Furthermore, the questionnaire form documented the respondents’ demographic information, including gender, age, and level of education.

The data were processed and analyzed using a single-factor regression analysis, the Kruskal–Wallis H test and the Mann–Whitney U-test, with the statistical software package SPSS 20.0.

3. Result and Discussion

In the initial phase of the study, the private and integral indicators of psychological security of the residents of Yekaterinburg were identified through the survey of respondents (Figure 5).

As illustrated in Figure 5, the red axes delineate the limits of the confidence interval, which is defined on the basis of the mean and standard deviation values derived from the standardization sample [144]. Therefore, the findings indicate a prevailing tendency among respondents in Yekaterinburg to perceive their level of psychological security as average or above, with all private and integral indicators falling within the normal range. To illustrate, residents of Yekaterinburg are, by and large, characterized by a sense of mental well-being, a lack of anxiety or distress, and a resilience that allows them to adapt to stressful situations without experiencing overwhelming feelings of anxiety or frustration. The residents of Yekaterinburg have established reliable, open, and trusting relationships with specific individuals who are willing to provide support, assistance, protection, and active listening. These individuals serve as a source of reliability and safety, allowing residents to be open and act without fear of negative influence or exploitation. The residents of Yekaterinburg have had a predominantly positive experience of interaction with their surrounding environment. They have been able to enjoy a sense of stability and security, and they have also been able to successfully overcome various threats (past). This experience engenders a sense of predictability regarding forthcoming circumstances, and individuals perceive their future in a positive light, as one that is replete with possibilities and devoid of insurmountable threats (future). Our findings align with those of other researchers, who have also observed that the majority of individuals tend to experience a sense of security [145,146].

In order to ascertain the specific characteristics of psychological security among residents of Yekaterinburg, a detailed analysis was conducted, taking into account the influence of age and gender using single-factor regression analysis. A correlation was observed between the age of city residents and their assessment of the urban environment as reliable, as evidenced by the comparison of age and parameters of psychological security. The nature of the established relationship is not linear (Figure 6).

A noteworthy finding is that the age at which urban residents perceive their environment as the most reliable tends to fall within the 20–45-year-old range. This is evidenced by a number of factors, including the sense of security and confidence city residents feel with regard to the care and support provided by city authorities, police, social and medical institutions. Additionally, residents within this age group tend to exhibit a higher level of job satisfaction and demonstrate greater environmental satisfaction compared to their younger and older counterparts.

Additionally, it should be noted that the age group of urban residents who perceive the urban environment as the most comfortable (i.e., those who find urban logistics convenient, including the level of transportation network development and the quality of highways, as well as those who feel comfortable and relaxed while walking around the city and believe they can satisfy most of their needs within this city) also falls within the 20–45 age range (Figure 7).

Moreover, the integral indicator of psychological security of city residents exhibits a similar pattern of change. The age group within which residents feel most secure in an urban environment is 20–45 years old (Figure 8). In accordance with the World Health Organization’s (WHO) periodization framework, this interval can be classified as a period of youth, a period of social maturation, growth, and the establishment of a sustainable life strategy with the objective of actualizing the life perspective of the individual. These results are consistent with the conclusions drawn by A. Kullberg et al. [147], which also indicated that individuals aged 60 and over tend to report higher levels of insecurity than younger age groups.

An examination of the correlation between gender and psychological security parameters in urban populations yielded comparable mean values for men and women (

Table 2. Comparative Analysis of the Psychological Security Parameters of Urban Residents of Different Genders (n1 = 146, n2 = 126).

Psychological Security Parameter	Males	Females	Mann–Whitney U Value	Level of Significance
Freedom	M = 2.88; SD = 0.45	M = 2.85; SD = 0.43	6456.000	0.620
Comfort	M = 3.60; SD = 0.78	M = 3.62; SD = 0.70	5911.000	0.872
Self-Efficacy	M = 3.57; SD = 0.65	M = 3.40; SD = 0.63	5911.000	0.139
Trusting Relationships	M = 3.70; SD = 0.80	M = 4.02; SD = 0.65	5657.500	0.0047
Control	M = 3.34; SD = 0.75	M = 3.41; SD = 0.61	6518.000	0.704
Trustworthiness	M = 3.64; SD = 0.80	M = 3.726; SD = 0.63	6355.000	0.500
Overall Indicator of Psychological Security	M = 3.45; SD = 0.55	M = 3.49; SD = 0.45	6357.500	0.503

). That is, regardless of gender, the respondents in the sample perceive themselves to have equal freedom in urban environments and believe in their ability to exert control over these environments. Both men and women perceive the same factors to contributing to their comfort and security in a given environment, including a sense of reliability, competence, and psychological security. It is also important to note that, as previously stated, regardless of gender, respondents exhibited the least expression of feelings of their own freedom and the ability to control the environment. Nevertheless, a statistically significant and reliable difference was identified in the assessment of the degree of trustworthiness of relationships in urban environments by men and women (with the indicator value in the male sample falling within the average range and the female sample exhibiting high values).

It seems plausible to suggest that the observed result, namely that women appraise relationships in an urban setting as more trusting (Figure 9), is associated with the fact that, traditionally, they are encouraged to prioritize the creation of harmonious relationships, the maintenance of equilibrium in communication, the development of partnership and interdependence, and the attainment of success in the domain of communication. In this regard, women are more inclined to express their emotions and feelings freely and fully [148]. They tend to demonstrate greater empathy and a stronger propensity to share personal experiences [149,150]. In comparison with males, females tend to demonstrate a greater degree of flexibility and openness to alternative perspectives with regard to the established moral standards. The manner in which they interpret these standards is dependent upon the specific context in which the situation arises. In contrast, men have historically been regarded as exhibiting a comparatively lower degree of empathic emotional engagement in interpersonal relationships. A male child’s communicative style tends to be more competitive and conflict-oriented than that of a female child [151]. Additionally, the content and outcome of joint activities for a man tend to be more important than the individual emotional state and feelings of the partner [152].

A nonlinear relationship was also identified when comparing a resident’s tenure in the city with their assessment of the comfort afforded by the urban environment (Figure 10). The urban environment is perceived as particularly comfortable by residents who have been living in the same city for between 10 and 40 years. This perception is shaped by the convenient availability of public transportation, green spaces, and the aesthetic appeal of courtyard areas. Furthermore, it is important to highlight that from the moment a person becomes a resident of an urban area, there is a progressive increase in the level of comfort and satisfaction derived from their urban environment. These results are consistent with prior research indicating that prolonged residence in a single location fosters the growth of robust social bonds [153,154] and civic engagement [155,156], which collectively enhance feelings of security.

However, after 37 years of residing in an urban environment, there is a discernible decline in the perceived quality of the surrounding environment, particularly in terms of comfort. In this instance, it may be the case that the observed trend is the result of the superposition of two factors, whereby residents aged 45 years or above exhibit a reduction in the assessment of environmental comfort (Figure 7). This result is consistent with the findings of numerous researchers who have observed that longer periods of residency may enhance individuals’ awareness of the actual risks associated with their place of residence, thereby reducing their perceived security status [157,158,159,160].

The act of a resident changing their place of residence is associated with a change in the sense of control they have over their urban environment. Individuals who have resided in various neighborhoods within the city demonstrate a more pronounced subjective sense of control over their environment, awareness, and environmental competence. This encompasses an understanding of the location of resources, the ability to utilize them effectively, knowledge of the most appropriate routes to reach desired destinations, and an awareness of the appropriate behaviors to adopt in order to achieve their goals. This feature was detected at a statistically significant level (Mann–Whitney U value is 4503.500, with p = 0.044).

The psychological security of a city resident is not contingent upon the duration of their tenure in the city.

A linear relationship was discovered between the expression of the parameter of psychological security of a city dweller, namely the presence of trusting relations in the city, and the spatial density of residence (Figure 11). In other words, an increase in the size of living space per person correlates with greater trust in the reliability of interpersonal relationships within the urban environment. A. Amerio et al. [161] also discovered that residing in a larger domicile facilitated daily activities and enhanced well-being and mental health.

The analysis of the correlation between the factors that indicates the mobility of city residents with the parameters of psychological security revealed the following. The typical movements of urban dwellers may be classified into these categories:

• Movement between the individual’s residence and their place of work or study.
• Movement between the individual’s home, place of work or study, and a nearby commercial establishment or public park.
• Movement between the individual’s home and other locations such as commercial establishments, public parks, or leisure facilities. In this case, the individual does not engage in paid or remotely managed work activities from their home base.
• Movement within the urban environment on a continuous or nearly continuous basis in pursuit of professional or personal business (Figure 12).

Each type of movement in an urban setting is distinguished by specific indicators of psychological security (Figure 13).

Consequently, the most psychologically secure citizens are those who traverse the city regularly, whether for occupational or personal reasons. This is a defining feature of both the private parameters of psychological security and the integral indicator. The only parameter that does not align with this trend is “Freedom”, which can be defined as the resident’s perceived autonomy, independence, and freedom for life activities, development, self-realization, and freedom from external influence. In other words, a resident who has a reduced level of engagement with the urban environment is less acutely aware of the constraints imposed by that environment. With regard to the other parameters of psychological security for urban residents, there is a tendency: as the intensity of interaction with the environment increases, so does the feeling of psychological security experienced by an individual in an urban setting. The detected trend was subsequently validated through statistical analysis (

Table 3. Reliability of Differences by Kruskal–Wallis H-Test of Urbanites’ Psychological Security Parameters in Groups with Different Daily Types of Movements.

Statistical Indicators	Parameters of Urbanites’ Psychological Security
	Freedom	Comfort	Self-Efficacy	Trusting Relationships	Control	Trustworthiness	Overall Indicator
Kruskal–Wallis H-Test	3.521	14.712	19.558	12.523	10.526	16.370	15.641
p-level of significance	0.318	0.002	0.000	0.006	0.015	0.001	0.001

).

The distinctive characteristics of human interaction with urban environments are also reflected in the manner in which city dwellers organize their leisure time. They tend to prefer activities that do not require leaving their place of residence, such as walking around the city or spending time outside the city. The study revealed that the residents who reported the highest levels of psychological security in an urban setting were those who engaged in direct interactions with the urban environment during their free time (“on weekends I walk around the city”).

The subsequent application of an experimental research design will facilitate the discovery of the causal relationship between the variables in question. Specifically, it will allow us to determine whether high psychological security causes city dwellers to spend more time in urban environments or whether immersion in these environments leads to increased psychological security (Figure 14). At this point, it is notable that statistically significant differences are present for all parameters of psychological security, with the exception of “Freedom” and “Control over the Environment” (

Table 4. Reliability of Differences by Kruskal–Wallis H-Test of Yekaterinburg Residents Engaging in Different Leisure Activities on Weekends.

Statistical Indicators	Parameters of Urbanites’ Psychological Security
	Freedom	Comfort	Self-Efficacy	Trusting Relationships	Control	Trustworthiness	Overall Indicator
Kruskal–Wallis H-Test	1.054	16.037	16.139	17.833	5.721	12.845	18.018
p-level of significance	0.590	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.057	0.002	0.000

).

Similarly, the research findings allow for the same kind of conclusion to be drawn with respect to the variable measuring the average time a resident spends in transit within the city per day (Figure 15). The respondents who participated in the study were divided into three groups based on the time they spend on transportation: Group 1 included those who spend less than 30 min per day moving around the city; Group 2 comprised individuals who spend between 30 and 60 min on transportation; and Group 3 consisted of those who spend over an hour per day on transportation. The study found that among the various parameters of psychological security of a city resident, the assessment of trusting relations in the city exhibited the most statistically reliable difference across the groups.

It is also important to note that the following indicators of trustworthiness of relations differ significantly (p < 0.05) between respondents who spend the minimum amount of time traveling around the city (less than 30 min) and those who do not. With respect to a given temporal interval, the indicator of the relationship confidence score is situated at an average level. As the time interval increases, the confidence index exhibits a notable shift towards the high value area (Figure 15). The question remains unanswered: does a high score on one of the psychological security parameters result in citizens spending more time in the city, or is it the case that immersion in the urban environment is a contributing factor in increasing the previously mentioned psychological security parameter?

In consideration of the floor of residence, which is a relatively stable factor with regard to psychological security of residents, no unambiguous relationship between these variables was established. This may be attributed to the fact that Yekaterinburg is a city that displays a remarkable diversity of architectural styles, with notable variations in the types of buildings observed across its different districts. For example, the first floors of buildings belonging to different typical series of house designs exhibit significant variation. The first floors of a typical multi-story building, for instance, differ from those of townhouses, duplexes, and cottages, which rarely exceed two or three floors (Figure 16).

It would be prudent for subsequent analyses of the correlation between the number of stories in buildings and the characteristics of the psychological condition of urban residents to consider the architectural nuances of residential structures and the specific characteristics of urban zoning.

Thus, it has been demonstrated that various objective characteristics of residents, including gender and age, along with their unique experiences with the urban environment—such as their history of relocating within the city and their patterns of movement within and around it—as well as environmental factors like the size of the living space per person, are associated with the psychological state of security in urban settings.

4. Conclusions and Proposals

In light of the intricate relationship between humans and urban environments, the enhancement of our comprehension of the manner in which urban settlements are molded by human behavior is of great significance. Such knowledge can furnish city planners and urbanists with invaluable data, enabling them to optimize beneficial consequences and mitigate adverse effects. Given that the phenomenon of urban life is a recent addition to the evolutionary history of the human species, and that our fundamental cognitive processes have not been adapted to the demands of urban existence, it is becoming increasingly pertinent to advocate for a field of study dedicated to understanding the psychological aspects of urban life.

In recent years, an increasing number of scholars and practitioners have emphasized the importance of attending to fundamental psychological requirements in the context of conflict resolution. It has become evident that the effective governance of urban areas extends well beyond the domain of infrastructure and political processes. It is essential to recognize the pivotal role played by key elements, such as security, social inclusion, dignity, cultural acceptance, opportunities for participation, equity, and recognition of differences, in fostering harmonious and sustainable urban communities.

The study has permitted the establishment of the fact that, when integral psychological security is sufficiently expressed, the respondents in the sample exhibit the least representation of the parameters of psychological security typical of urbanites, such as feelings of personal freedom and control over their environment. It would be beneficial to compare this established fact with the indicators of psychological security of residents of other Russian cities, as this could provide insight for further research.

The findings of the study indicate that the psychological security of a city resident is systematically related to two key factors: the objective characteristics of the residents themselves (gender, age) and the urban environment and the peculiarities of the organization of interactions between residents and the urban environment (as well as the features of movement around the city (time and intensity), etc.). Thus, women are more likely than men to perceive relationships within urban environments as being trust worthy. As individuals age, they tend to perceive their urban environments as increasingly reliable and comfortable. However, after approximately 40 years of age, these perceptions tend to decline gradually. The same pattern was also established with regard to the psychological security of urban dwellers as a whole. Furthermore, it was established that the degree of mobility exhibited by the city resident, the duration spent in the urban environment, and the spatial extent of the immediate personal space in urban conditions are directly correlated with an increase in the psychological security of the city resident.

A promising avenue for enriching urban planning strategies and promoting community cohesion is the exploration of the untapped reservoir of theories and practices in psychology. The concept of enhancing a city’s psychological resilience through a set of psychological principles signifies a notable advance in the creation of emotionally resilient urban landscapes.

The practical significance of the findings from this study is that they allow for an examination of the spatial conditions associated with different urban environment development scenarios. In addition, they can be applied in the realms of urban planning, policy, design, and management. The findings can be utilized by environmental psychologists to evaluate the quality of life of urban dwellers, investigate the influence of diverse stressors on urban populations, and develop strategies to modify the urban environment.

It should be noted at the outset that this study is not intended to be universally applicable, due to the inherent limitations of the research sample. These relate to the total number of respondents and their places of residence (all within the boundaries of the same city), and it would therefore seem prudent to consider this study as a pilot study, offering opportunities for further research. It is indubitable that the introduction of greater diversity within the sampling frame would have yielded results that were more representative of the population under study. This is particularly true with respect to the age composition of the sample. Increasing the size of the older group would undoubtedly enhance the reliability of the results. Concurrently, subsequent studies should prioritize an examination of the architectural forms through which inhabitants engage with their urban environment, including considerations of historical development, high-rise versus low-rise structures, and the potential influence these factors exert upon the outcomes of the study. A comparison of the results obtained from respondents in different areas of the city would undoubtedly permit the formulation of more comprehensive conclusions.

Furthermore, the implementation of an experimental research design in future research endeavors would facilitate the uncovering of the causal relationship between the variables of the urban environment and the parameters of psychological security experienced by city residents. It would be beneficial to explore further the sound environment (soundscape) of urban areas and its relationship with the psychological security of residents. In addition, investigating the nuances of how individuals experience psychological security, considering seasonal variations, could provide insight into how external changes in urban landscapes, evident during the transition from seasons, affect psychological security.

In conclusion, integrating psychological foundations into urban planning marks a significant shift in perspective, moving beyond the mere provision of physical infrastructure towards the active promotion of the emotional well-being and social cohesion of city residents. This holistic approach advocates for urban environments that are dynamic, humane, and prioritizes the well-being and aspirations of individuals within these spaces.