Keiser, through his study The Spreading of Disorder (2008), expanded on Kelling and Wilson’s (1982) Broken Window Theory by introducing elements of visual cues in attempt to measure deeper levels of behavioural response based on visual stimuli. Keiser (2008) provided a series of experiments intended to expand on the Broken Windows principal using staged visual scenarios applied in a practical community setting. Keiser’s initial scenario involved using two almost identical alleyways across the street from one another; one defaced with illegal graffiti while the other left in a clean state. Using bike racks in each alleyway, Keiser (2008) placed mock advertisements on the bikes that were left on the racks. Providing trash cans next to each bike rack, owners of the bikes were given the opportunity to throw away the useless advertisements. Keiser’s (2008) data collection reflected that 69% of the bike owners in the vandalized alley littered the advertisements on the ground directly next to their bikes only a meter or two from the trash container. Conversely, across the street in the graffiti free alleyway, only 33% of the people using the bike racks littered the advertisements, with a majority electing to throw the pamphlets into the trash cans (Keiser, 2008).
Beyond the Spreading of Disorder (1995), Keiser (2008) expanded his research to include scenarios of varying degrees of negative and positive visual conditions, which he referred to as “respect cues”. Keiser (2008) created scenarios in which community members were presented with situations ranging from negative visual cues such as streets strewn with garbage, to positive cues with people actively cleaning the streets, measuring the behavioural response of community members based on the positive and negative visual ques presented. Through these scenarios, Keiser orchestrated situations where pedestrians were presented opportunities to perform positive actions such as standing up a fallen bicycle, or helping pick up oranges that had fallen from the hands of a person carrying shopping bags. With Keiser’s research team observing, the experiment produced a 6% positive behavioural response from community members exposed to streets with negative cues such as litter and graffiti. In contrast, the scenarios presented with neutral respect cues, as in a clean street, produced a 40% positive response rate. Most significantly however, in conditions where community members were exposed to a positive visual cue, presented as a person actively sweeping a street, 82% of subjects observed reacted positively in helping to pick up the fallen groceries (Keiser, 2012).
Although this research was conducted in an isolated setting the results have the potential to affect a much broader area. According to Spicer (2012), this visual influence at a neighbourhood level has the potential to spread influence to other neighbouring regions. Spicer explains the social influence of a small area, such as a city block, has the capacity to spread to other neighbourhoods affecting the broader community and eventually the wellbeing of the entire city. Spicer (2012) recognizes the breakdown of urban regions based on micro (city blocks), meso (communities) and macro (cities) geographies, and their relationship to one another. Describing this relationship, she illustrates the importance of micro level perceptions in the context of the larger (macro) city unit. Spicer (2012) states that the perceptions created by positive visual and physical presentation of the micro city block can not only reduce crime and negative behaviour, but become the catalysts for positive response in the larger community. Spicer (2012) states that physical spaces are located at the most basic city block level and combine to form neighbourhoods which jointly structure a city. Each of these components is impacted by distinctive factors which “mediate how individuals perceive block-level occurrences and how they act in the community” (Spicer, 2012. p.96). These individual-based micro level perceptions influence the ideology in the macro level community based on the collective belief of the community.
Spicer (2012) continues, “If disorder saturates the microstructures, social decline begins as citizens retreat, avoid, and re-negotiate their community” (Spicer, 2012. p.95). As people begin to isolate themselves, relationships and inter-community communication becomes compromised, and the presence of street level stewardship diminishes further, perpetuating the cycle of visual deterioration, anti-social behaviour, and community vulnerability.
Like an infection, as the cycle of community deterioration continues, it can spread to other regions of community structure and geography. As the cycle of negative visual perceptions continues, the effect on the community moves beyond the social level and begins influencing other pillars of community structure. The visual distress of the community and resulting anti-social behaviour now causes a shift in the community effecting economics, housing, business, crime levels, and perceptions of safety. In the wake of this visual deterioration, businesses begin to relocate, schools restructure and long-term residents and families move to other communities which they consider to safer or more stable. The community now becomes saturated with an influx of more transient residents with no emotional connection to the community, or the influx of groups of people who participate in anti-social behaviours. The community experiences job losses because of the exodus of local businesses, quality teachers leave the school district, and a long list of other scenarios occur that continue the downward spiral of the community. As this cycle which was once isolated to a localized community gains momentum, it has the ability spread and restart the cycle of broken windows in other communities (Skogan, 2009). Spicer (2012) and Keiser’s (2008) study provide insight to the potential detriment of negative visual elements, and how seemingly isolated instances of visual disruption can influence people on a community or city scale.