| Description |
Problem. This study investigated relationships between dominance status in a group and use of the physical enironment. On the basis of research on dominance and territoriality, it was hypothesized that (a doinance relations and territorial behavior in a group remain stable; (b low doinant Ss show higher territorial behavior than high dominant Ss; and c) high dominant Ss use highly desirable areas more often than do other group members. "Territorial behavior" was defined in two ways: a) with respect to an area, the tendency for its use to be relatively exclusive to one user: and b) with respect to an individual, his tendency to use habitually one place rather than several places equally. "Dominance" was defined as the ability to influence others. Meth. Ss were juvenile delinquent boys aged 12 through 15 who lived in a residential cottage in a youth rehabilitation facility. Methods included a) a 10-week period of systematic observation of space usage using a live observe3r to record Ss' locations, b) structured interviews with each Ss for assessment of dominance ranks, c) a privately adminstered questionnaire for assessment of desirability of areas, and d) use of institutional records of reported disruptive behavior. Because of population changes, the 10-week study was divided into three separate periods for analysis. Period I had a relatively stable population; Period II began with a major shift in membership; and Period III began with a minor membership change. Results. 1) Ss were able to reliably rank one another on dominance ; and dominance ranks remained temporally stable despite population shifts. 2) Territorial behavior did not remain stable ; instead it uniformly declined after the replacement of two highly dominant Ss in Period II, and increased during Period III. 3) A non-significant trend suggested that high dominant Ss showed the highest territoriality during Period I, contrary to predictions, but during Period III, low dominant Ss showed significantly more use of desirable areas than other group members. During Periods II and III, high dominant Ss used desirable areas more, but not significantly more, than other group members. 5) During Period II, there was a non-significant increase in reported disruptive behavior, coincident with major population shifts. Conclusions. 1) An adequate description of territorial behavior in a group involves consideration of both interpersonal aspects of the group and properties of areas. Factors which may be associated with variability in territorial behavior include a) dominance status, b) interpersonal conflict, and c) desirability of areas. 2) Because previous conceptions of territory have not adequately considered interpersonal factors and properties of areas, the territory concept needs to be extended in its application to human behavior. |
