مطالعه شبکه معابر فضاهای پیاده‌محور با رویکرد ارتقای حس امنیت در شهر تبریز

حسین نوشی صوفیانی; رسول درس خوان; میر سعید موسوی

Authors

Hossein Noushi Soufiani Ph.D. Student, Department of Architecture & Urban Design, Ta.C., Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran Author https://orcid.org/0009-0006-8723-7319
Rasoul Darskhan Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Ta.C., Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4975-7648
Mir Saeed Moosavi Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Ta.C., Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran Author https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8142-665X

Keywords:

Pathways Network, Pedestrian-Oriented Spaces, Sense of Security, Perceived Security, Tabriz city

Abstract

This study aimed to examine the effects of physical–spatial, functional, social–interactional, and perceptual–emotional characteristics of pedestrian-oriented pathway networks on users’ perceived security in selected pedestrian areas of Tabriz. This applied study employed a quantitative descriptive–analytical design. The study population consisted of users of the Tarbiat, Dash Maghazeh Lar, Arg-e Tabriz, and Valiasr pedestrian pathways. Using Cochran’s formula and stratified probability sampling, data from 384 participants were analyzed. Data were collected using researcher-developed questionnaires assessing perceived security, pathway legibility and quality, spatial vitality, and social presence. Instrument reliability was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha, while construct validity was examined through confirmatory factor analysis. Pearson correlation, multiple regression, and structural equation modeling were conducted using SPSS and AMOS. The model-fit indices confirmed the adequacy of both the measurement and structural models. Perceptual–emotional factors had the strongest direct effect on perceived security (β=0.298, p<0.001), followed by physical–spatial factors (β=0.214, p<0.001), social–interactional factors (β=0.189, p<0.001), and functional factors (β=0.128, p=0.003). Social presence (β=0.183), perceived legibility (β=0.157), and spatial vitality (β=0.134) also had significant effects on perceived security. The total effects of social–interactional and physical–spatial factors were 0.325 and 0.322, respectively. Overall, the independent and mediating variables explained 71.2% of the variance in perceived security. Enhancing security within Tabriz’s pedestrian-oriented pathway network requires an integrated and multidimensional strategy that simultaneously improves physical quality, legibility, vitality, social presence, and users’ emotional perceptions. The design and management of pedestrian spaces should also prioritize the specific security and accessibility needs of vulnerable groups, particularly women and older adults.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Hossein Noushi Soufiani, Ph.D. Student, Department of Architecture & Urban Design, Ta.C., Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran

دانشجو دکتری تخصصی طراحی شهری

References

1. Gehl J. Cities for People. Washington, DC: Island Press; 2013.

2. Kweon BS, Rosenblatt-Naderi J, Ellis CD, Shin WH, Danies BH. The effects of pedestrian environments on walking behaviors and perception of pedestrian safety. Sustainability. 2021;13(16):8728.

3. Jabbari M, Fonseca F, Smith G, Conticelli E, Tondelli S, Ribeiro P. The pedestrian network concept: A systematic literature review. Journal of Urban Mobility. 2023;3:100051.

4. Yao S, Wang N, Wu J. How does the built environment affect pedestrian perception of road safety on sidewalks? Evidence from eye-tracking experiments. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. 2025;110:57-73.

5. Van Nes A, Yamu C. Introduction to Space Syntax in Urban Studies. Cham: Springer Nature; 2021.

6. Webster M. Definitions. Data Protection in the Financial Services Industry. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2017. p. 17-30.

7. Ceccato V, Nalla M. Crime and Fear in Public Places: Towards Safe, Inclusive and Sustainable Cities. Abingdon: Routledge; 2020.

8. Qin J, Feng Y, Sheng Y, Huang Y, Zhang F, Zhang K. Evaluation of pedestrian-perceived comfort on urban streets using multi-source data: A case study in Nanjing, China. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information. 2025;14(2):63.

9. Gallardo-Amores FJ, Del-Real C, Díaz-Fernández AM. Assessing urban security and safety smartness: A systematic review of key performance indicators. IET Smart Cities. 2025;7(1):e70000.

10. Te Braak P, van Tienoven TP. Navigating the city: A systematic literature review on women’s perceived safety in urban public space. Cities. 2025;162:105907.

11. Zeng E, Dong Y, Yan L, Lin A. Perceived safety in the neighborhood: Exploring the role of built environment, social factors, physical activity and multiple pathways of influence. Buildings. 2023;13(1):2.

12. Jacobs J. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Vintage Books; 1992.

13. Lynch K. The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1960.

14. Newman O. Defensible Space: Crime Prevention Through Urban Design. New York: Collier Books; 1973.

15. Tiwari R. Designing a safe walkable city. Urban Design International. 2015;20(1):12-27.

16. Hillier B, Hanson J. The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1989.

17. Nasar JL, Fisher B. ‘Hot spots’ of fear and crime: A multi-method investigation. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 1993;13(3):187-206.

18. McCormack GR, Koohsari MJ, Turley L, Nakaya T, Shibata A, Ishii K. Evidence for urban design and public health policy and practice: Space syntax metrics and neighborhood walking. Health & Place. 2021;67:102277.

19. Koohsari MJ, Oka K, Nakaya T, McCormack GR. Urban form metrics for promoting walking: Street layouts and destinations. Journal of Urban Health. 2023;100(5):1024-31.

20. Mohammad WW, Lokman NIS, Hasan R, Hassan K, Ramlee N, Nasir MM. The implication of street network design for walkability: A review. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2021;881(1):012058.

21. Şahin Körmeçli P. Analysis of walkable street networks by using the space syntax and GIS techniques: A case study of Çankırı city. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information. 2023;12(6):216.

22. Jeong I, Choi M, Kwak J, Ku D, Lee S. A comprehensive walkability evaluation system for promoting environmental benefits. Scientific Reports. 2023;13(1):16183.

23. Pereira MF, Santana P, Vale DS. The impact of urban design on utilitarian and leisure walking: The relative influence of street network connectivity and streetscape features. Urban Science. 2024;8(2):24.

24. Sharmin S, Kamruzzaman M. Meta-analysis of the relationships between space syntax measures and pedestrian movement. Transport Reviews. 2018;38(4):524-50.

25. Park Y, Garcia M. Pedestrian safety perception and urban street settings. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation. 2020;14(11):860-71.

26. Israt AS, Hassan AS. User-friendly street: A study on users’ perception ranking on physical attributes of pedestrian environment of Dhaka City. Open House International. 2022;47(2):218-34.

27. Whyte WH. The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. Washington, DC: The Conservation Foundation; 1980.

28. Mehta V, Bosson JK. Revisiting lively streets: Social interactions in public space. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 2021;41(2):160-72.

29. Carmona M. Public Places Urban Spaces: The Dimensions of Urban Design. 3rd ed. Abingdon: Routledge; 2021.

30. Noemani P, Ayshem M, Molayi A, Imani Shamloo J. Exploring the impact of desirable pedestrian walkway design indicators for citizens and tourists with a happy city approach (Case study: Arg Alley, Tabriz). Urban and Rural Management. 2024;23(75):75-91.

31. Rezaei Estabraq Z, Zabihi H, Ahmadian R. Evaluation and analysis of citizens’ sense of security in urban spaces (Case study: Zartoshtian neighborhood of Kerman). Urban Sustainable Development. 2022;3(9):75-92.

32. Salahi S, Rakhshandehroo M. Pedestrian walkway design with an approach to enhancing social interactions (Case study: Nahr-e-Azam, Chamran Boulevard, Shiraz). Fine Arts Quarterly – Architecture and Urban Planning. 2022;27(1):5-18.

33. Alavi-Rafiei ZS, Masoumi MA. The impact of pedestrianization on improving urban environmental quality. Architecturology. 2021;4(21):131-8.

34. Ahmadi H, Mehrjoo M. Investigating the effect of environmental quality components on citizens’ sense of security: A case study of the central pedestrian walkway of Hamadan. Journal of Urban and Regional Development Planning. 2020;5(12):105-35.

35. Anabestani AA, Javanshiri M, Ahmadi S. Analysis of the effects of physical planning on preserving rural security with emphasis on social security (Case study: Mashhad County). Physical Development Planning. 2019;6(2):11-29.

36. Orsini F, Batista M, Friedrich B, Gastaldi M, Rossi R. Before-after safety analysis of a shared space implementation. Case Studies on Transport Policy. 2023;13:101021.

37. Kasraian D, Adhikari S, Kossowsky D, Luubert M, Hall GB, Hawkins J. Evaluating pedestrian perceptions of street design with a 3D stated preference survey. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science. 2021;48(7):1787-805.

38. Kourtit K, Pele MMM, Nijkamp P, Pele DT. Safe cities in the new urban world: A comparative cluster dynamics analysis through machine learning. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2021;66:102665.

39. Azevedo V, Sani A, Nunes LM, Paulo D. Do you feel safe in the urban space? From perceptions to associated variables. Anuario de Psicología Jurídica. 2021;31(1):75-84.

40. Chen S, Lin S, Yao Y, Zhou X. Urban public space safety perception and the influence of the built environment from a female perspective: Combining street view data and deep learning. Land. 2024;13(12):2108.