Table 5.
Rotated factor loadings for place attachment dimensions, including mean and standard deviation (n = 1334)
| Factors/items | Factor 1 | Factor 2 | Median1 | SD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Factor 1: place identity | 3.67 | .92 | ||
| ‘This area is very special to me’ | .948 | −.031 | 4.00 | 1.03 |
| ‘I identify strongly with this area’ | .936 | −.019 | 4.00 | 1.03 |
| ‘I am very attached to this area’ | .880 | .056 | 4.00 | 1.04 |
| ‘This area means a lot to me’ | .857 | .093 | 4.00 | 1.02 |
| ‘I feel this area is a part of me’ | .946 | −.081 | 4.00 | .98 |
| ‘Living in this area says a lot about who I am’ | .542 | .342 | 3.00 | 1.05 |
| Factor 2: place dependence | 3.00 | .96 | ||
| ‘I would not substitute any other area for doing the types of thing that I do here’ | −.073 | .958 | 3.00 | 1.08 |
| ‘Doing the activities I enjoy in this area is more important to me than doing them in any other place’ | −.020 | .917 | 3.00 | 1.07 |
| ‘No other area can compare to this area’ | −.037 | .911 | 3.00 | 1.12 |
| ‘I get more satisfaction out of living in this area than any other place’ | .126 | .805 | 3.00 | 1.11 |
| ‘This area is the best place for doing the things I like to do’ | .291 | .604 | 4.00 | 1.07 |
| Eigenvalue2 | 7.538 | 1.242 | ||
| % of cumulative variance | 68.5 | 11.3 |
KMO = .951; Bartlett’s test of sphericity χ 2(55) = 14,494.766, p < .001
Factor loadings derived from rotated pattern matrix using principal component analysis and oblimin rotation with Kaiser normalisation (rotation involves rotation of the axes in a factor analysis so that clusters of items fall as close to them as possible in order to aid interpretation). The final anti-image matrix showed no large values, the Bartlett test of sphericity Chi square value of 14,494.766 was significant (<.001), the overall measure of sampling adequacy was .951 and the communality for each variable was greater than .50, thus confirming that the data was adequate for factor analysis
1Mean scores range from 1 to 5 and reflect the summed scales of the Likert scale response categories of 1—strongly disagree, 2—disagree, 3—no opinion, 4—agree, 5—strongly agree
2Eigenvalues reflect the amount of variation in the data accounted by each factor, with eigenvalues over 1 typically determining the number of factors to be selected (Tabachnick and Fidell 1996)