All rights reservedAksel, Elifİmamoğlu, Çağrı2023-09-202023-09-202017978-989-99801-3-6 (E-Book)https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14235/656Book of proceedings: Annual AESOP Congress, Spaces of Dialog for Places of Dignity, Lisbon, 11-14th July, 2017Emotional connections of people with their environment have been investigated in various disciplines and certain crucial constructs have come out such as place attachment and place satisfaction obtaining attention in environmental psychology. Place attachment was defined as an essential element of personal identity and it was associated with certain constructs which can be analysed in both personal and community context (Anton & Lawrence, 2014; Brown & Raymond, 2007; Jorgersen & Stedman, 2001; Proshansky, Fabian, & Kaminoff, 1983). Place satisfaction was defined as “multidimensional summary judgement of the perceived quality of a setting” which means it is a concept generated by assessing physical and social attributes of an environment in terms of fulfilling a person’s needs(Stedman, 2002, p. 564). There have been multiple attempts to define place (Altman & Low, 1992; Easthope, 2004; Soja, 1998; Tuan, 1979). Place embraces the physical space through experiences and perspectives of the people (Relph, 1976; Sack, 1997; Stedman, 2003; Tuan, 1977). Spaces transform into places by use of meanings which are given to a setting (Tuan, 1977). Furthermore, Altman and Low (1992) define place as “the environmental setting to which people are emotionally and culturally attached” (p. 5). The construct of place indicates a space which is given meaning by way of individual, group or cultural approaches (Altman & Low, 1992). Moreover, Jorgersen & Stedman (2001) also proposed a framework of sense of place containing three constructs which are place attachment, place dependence and place identity.EnglishopenAccessconferenceObject891-897