1932

Abstract

Recent theoretical and methodological advances in urban sociology, including spatially located data, provide new opportunities to consider the joint influence of mobility and place in urban social life. This review defines the concept of activity space, describes its origins in urban sociology, and examines the extent to which activity space approaches advance sociological research in four substantive domains—spatial inequality and segregation, social connectedness and engagement, crime and offending patterns, and health and health-related behavior. It next describes the evolution of methods for location tracking and new approaches that hold promise for maximizing urban mobility and activity space contributions. It then discusses how location data may be augmented to enhance our sociological understanding of the structure, meaning, and implications of the places people visit or traverse in daily life. We close with new directions for activity space research, emphasizing how such work could enable comparative contextual research.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054848
2020-07-30
2024-06-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/soc/46/1/annurev-soc-121919-054848.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054848&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Adams P, Rabbi M, Rahman T, Matthews M, Voida A et al. 2014. Towards personal stress informatics: comparing minimally invasive techniques for measuring daily stress in the wild. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare (PERVASIVEHEALTH 2014)72–79 New York: ACM
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ahas R, Silm S, Järv O, Saluveer E, Tiru M 2010. Using mobile positioning data to model locations meaningful to users of mobile phones. J. Urban Technol. 17:13–27
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Asakura Y, Iryo T. 2007. Analysis of tourist behaviour based on the tracking data collected using a mobile communication instrument. Transp. Res. A 41:7684–90
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Baker PS, Bodner EV, Allman RM 2003. Measuring life-space mobility in community-dwelling older adults. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 51:111610–14
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Basta LA, Therese S, Richmond TS, Douglas J, Wiebe DJ 2010. Neighborhoods, daily activities, and measuring health risks experienced in urban environments. Soc. Sci. Med. 71:111943–50
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Baudains P, Braithwaite A, Johnson SD 2013. Target choice during extreme events: a discrete spatial choice model of the 2011 London riots. Criminology 51:2251–85
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bengtsson L, Lu X, Thorson A, Garfield R, Schreeb JV 2011. Improved response to disasters and outbreaks by tracking population movements with mobile phone network data: a post-earthquake geospatial study in Haiti. PLOS Med 8:8e1001083
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bernasco W. 2010. A sentimental journey to crime: effects of residential history on crime location choice. Criminology 48:2389–416
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bichler G, Christie-Merrall J, Sechrest D 2011. Examining juvenile delinquency within activity space: building a context for offender travel patterns. J. Res. Crime Delinq. 48:3472–506
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Boivin R, D'Elia M. 2017. A network of neighborhoods: predicting crime trips in a large Canadian city. J. Res. Crime Delinq. 54:6824–46
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Brantingham PJ, Brantingham PL. 1981. Environmental Criminology Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Brantingham PJ, Brantingham PL. 2008. Crime pattern theory. Environmental Criminology and Crime Analysis R Wortley, L Mazerolle 78–93 Abingdon, UK: Willan
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Brockmann D, Hufnagel L, Geisel T 2006. The scaling laws of human travel. Nature 439:7075462–65
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Browning CR, Calder CA, Boettner BB, Smith A 2017a. Ecological networks and urban crime: the structure of shared routine activity locations and neighborhood-level informal control capacity. Criminology 55:4754–78
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Browning CR, Calder CA, Soller B, Jackson AL, Dirlam J 2017b. Ecological networks and neighborhood social organization. Am. J. Sociol. 122:61939–88
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Browning CR, Soller B. 2014. Moving beyond neighborhood: activity spaces and ecological networks as contexts for youth development. Cityscape 16:1165–96
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Browning CR, Soller B, Jackson AL 2015. Neighborhoods and adolescent health-risk behavior: an ecological network approach. Soc. Sci. Med. 125:163–72
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Burgess EW. 1925. The growth of the city: an introduction to a research project. The City RE Park, EW Burgess 47–62 Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Cagney KA. 2016. Activity space, social interaction and health trajectories in later life Grant R01AG050605, Natl. Inst. Aging Washington, DC: awarded Aug 25
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Cagney KA, Browning CR, Jackson AL, Soller B 2013. Networks, neighborhoods, and institutions: an integrated ‘activity space’ approach to research on aging. New Directions in the Sociology of Aging LJ Waite, TL Plewes 60–80 Washington, DC: Natl. Acad.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Cagney KA, York Cornwell E 2018. Place, aging, and health. Future Directions for the Demography of Aging: Proceedings of a Workshop131–55 Washington, DC: Natl. Acad.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Cairncross F. 2001. The Death of Distance: How the Communications Revolution Is Changing Our Lives Cambridge, MA: Harv. Bus. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Catlett CE, Beckman PH, Sankaran R, Galvin KK 2017. Array of things: a scientific research instrument in the public way. Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Science of Smart City Opererations and Platforms Engineering (SCOPE ’17)26–33 New York: ACM
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Catlett CE, Cesario E, Talia D, Vinci A 2018. A data-driven approach for spatio-temporal crime predictions in smart cities. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Smart Computing (SMARTCOMP 2018)17–24 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Chaix B. 2009. Geographic life environments and coronary heart disease: a literature review, theoretical contributions, methodological updates, and a research agenda. Annu. Rev. Public Health 30:81–105
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Chaix B, Kestens Y, Bean K, Leal C, Karusisi N et al. 2012. Cohort profile: residential and non-residential environments, individual activity spaces and cardiovascular risk factors and diseases—the RECORD Cohort Study. Int. J. Epidemiol. 41:51283–92
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Chaix B, Méline J, Duncan S, Merrien C, Karusisi N et al. 2013. GPS tracking in neighborhood and health studies: a step forward for environmental exposure assessment, a step backward for causal inference. Health Place 21:46–51
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Choudhury T, Pentland AS. 2002. The sociometer: a wearable device for understanding human networks. Proceedings of Computer Supported Cooperative Work—Workshop on Ad Hoc Communications and Collaboration in Ubiquitous Computing Environments http://www.lifewear.gatech.edu/resources/Choudhury,_Pentland_-_The_Sociometer_-_A_Wearable_Device_for_Understanding_Human_Networks.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Choudhury T, Pentland AS. 2003. Sensing and modeling human networks using the sociometer. Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Wearable Computers216–22 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Choudhury T, Pentland AS. 2004. Characterizing social networks using the sociometer. Proceedings of the North American Association of Computational Social and Organizational Science (NAACSOS) http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.61.8296&rep=rep1&type=pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Colabianchi N, Coulton CJ, Hibbert JG, McClure SM, Ievers-Landis CE, Davis EM 2014. Adolescent self-defined neighborhoods and activity spaces: spatial overlap and relations to physical activity and obesity. Health Place 27:22–29
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Colombo GB, Chorley MJ, Williams MJ, Allen SM, Whitaker RM 2012. You are where you eat: Foursquare checkins as indicators of human mobility and behaviour. Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PERCOM)217–22 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Cornwell B. 2015. Social Sequence Analysis: Methods and Applications Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Costa J, Guimbretière F, Jung M, Choudhury T 2019. BoostMeUp: improving cognitive performance in the moment by unobtrusively regulating emotions with a smartwatch. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 3:240
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Cranshaw J, Schwartz R, Hong J, Sadeh N 2012. The livehoods project: utilizing social media to understand the dynamics of a city. Proceedings of the 6th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media58–65 Palo Alto, CA: AAAI
    [Google Scholar]
  36. D'Silva K, Noulas A, Mascolo C, Misra A 2018. The role of urban mobility in retail business survival. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 2:31–22
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Daggitt ML, Noulas A, Shaw B, Mascolo C 2016. Tracking urban activity growth globally with big location data. R. Soc. Open Sci. 3:4150688
    [Google Scholar]
  38. de Montjoye YA, Hidalgo CA, Verleysen M, Blondel VD 2013. Unique in the crowd: the privacy bounds of human mobility. Sci. Rep. 3:11376
    [Google Scholar]
  39. de Montjoye YA, Radaelli L, Singh VK 2015. Unique in the shopping mall: on the reidentifiability of credit card metadata. Science 347:6221536–39
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Diez Roux AV, Mair C 2010. Neighborhoods and health. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1186:1125–45
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Dong G, Ma J, Kwan MP, Wang Y, Chai Y 2018. Multi-level temporal autoregressive modelling of daily activity satisfaction using GPS-integrated activity diary data. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 32:112189–208
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Dong X, Morales AJ, Jahani E, Moro E, Lepri B et al. 2019. Segregated interactions in urban and online spaces. arXiv:1911.04027 [cs]
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Eagle N, Pentland AS. 2006. Reality mining: sensing complex social systems. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 10:4255–68
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Ellis M, Wright R, Parks V 2004. Work together, live apart? Geographies of racial and ethnic segregation at home and at work. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 94:3620–37
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Ferrari L, Mamei M. 2011. Discovering daily routines from Google Latitude with topic models. Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PERCOM)432–37 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Fischer CS. 1982. To Dwell Among Friends: Personal Networks in Town and City Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Gabrielli L, Rinzivillo S, Ronzano F, Villatoro D 2014. From tweets to semantic trajectories: Mining anomalous urban mobility patterns. Citizen in Sensor Networks J Nin, D Villatoro 26–35 Cham, Switz.: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Gan M, Nie YM, Liu X, Zhu D 2019. Whereabouts of truckers: an empirical study of predictability. Transp. Res. C 104:184–95
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Gerdes G, Greene C, Liu XM 2018. The Federal Reserve Payments Study: 2018 Annual Supplement Washington, DC: US Fed. Reserve Syst.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Gibson C, Perley L, Bailey J, Barbour R, Kershaw T 2015. Social network and census tract-level influences on substance use among emerging adult males: an activity spaces approach. Health Place 35:28–36
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Golledge RG, Stimson RJ. 1997. Spatial Behavior: A Geographic Perspective New York: Guilford
    [Google Scholar]
  52. González MC, Hidalgo CA, Barabási AL 2008. Understanding individual human mobility patterns. Nature 453:7196779–82
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Graif C, Freelin BN, Kuo YH, Wang H, Li Z, Kifer D 2019. Network spillovers and neighborhood crime: a computational statistics analysis of employment-based networks of neighborhoods. Justice Q https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2019.1602160
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  54. Griffiths G, Johnson SD, Chetty K 2017. UK-based terrorists’ antecedent behavior: a spatial and temporal analysis. Appl. Geogr. 86:274–82
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Hamermesh DS, Frazis H, Stewart J 2005. Data watch: the American time use survey. J. Econ. Perspect. 19:1221–32
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Hasan S, Schneider CM, Ukkusuri SV, González MC 2013. Spatiotemporal patterns of urban human mobility. J. Stat. Phys. 151:1/2304–18
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Hawelka B, Sitko I, Beinat E, Sobolevsky S, Kazakopoulos P, Ratti C 2014. Geo-located Twitter as proxy for global mobility patterns. Cartogr. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 41:3260–71
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Hill PW, Goldstein H. 1998. Multilevel modeling of educational data with cross-classification and missing identification for units. J. Educ. Behav. Stat. 23:2117–28
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Hoeben E, Weerman F. 2014. Situational conditions and adolescent offending: Does the impact of unstructured socializing depend on its location. Eur. J. Criminol. 11:4481–99
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Hurvitz PM, Moudon AV. 2012. Home versus nonhome neighborhood: quantifying differences in exposure to the built environment. Am. J. Prev. Med. 42:4411–17
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Inagami S, Cohen DA, Finch BK 2007. Non-residential neighborhood exposures suppress neighborhood effects on self-rated health. Soc. Sci. Med. 65:81779–91
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Ivory VC, Russell M, Witten K, Hooper CM, Pearce J, Blakely Y 2015. What shape is your neighbourhood? Investigating the micro geographies of physical activity. Soc. Sci. Med. 133:313–21
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Jiang S, Ferreira J, González MC 2012. Clustering daily patterns of human activities in the city. Data Min. Knowl. Discov. 25:3478–510
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Jones M, Pebley AR. 2014. Redefining neighborhoods using common destinations: social characteristics of activity spaces and home census tracts compared. Demography 51:3727–52
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Kestens Y, Lebel A, Daniel M, Thériault M, Pampalon R 2010. Using experienced activity spaces to measure foodscape exposure. Health Place 16:61094–103
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Krivo L, Washington JHM, Peterson RD, Browning CR, Calder CA, Kwan MP 2013. Social isolation of disadvantage and advantage: the reproduction of inequality in urban space. Soc. Forces 92:1141–64
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Krysan M, Crowder K. 2017. Cycle of Segregation: Social Processes and Residential Stratification New York: Russell Sage Found.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Kwan M-P, Wang J, Tyburski M, Epstein DH, Kowalczyk WJ, Preston KL 2019. Uncertainties in the geographic context of health behaviors: a study of substance users’ exposure to psychosocial stress using GPS data. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 33:61176–95
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Lammers M, Menting B, Ruiter S, Bernasco W 2015. Biting once, twice: the influence of prior on subsequent crime location choice. Criminology 53:3309–29
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Le Menach A, Tatem AJ, Cohen JM, Hay SI, Randell H et al. 2011. Travel risk, malaria importation and malaria transmission in Zanzibar. Sci. Rep. 1:193
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Lenormand M, Louail T, Cantú-Ros OG, Picornell M, Herranz R et al. 2015. Influence of sociodemographic characteristics on human mobility. Sci. Rep. 5:110075
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Leverentz A. 2019. Beyond neighborhoods: activity spaces of returning prisoners. Soc. Probl. 67:1150–70
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Li X, Pan G, Wu Z, Qi G, Li S et al. 2012. Prediction of urban human mobility using large-scale taxi traces and its applications. Front. Comput. Sci. 6:111–21
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Lima A, Stanojevic R, Papagiannaki D, Rodriguez P, González MC 2016. Understanding individual routing behaviour. J. R. Soc. Interface 13:11620160021
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Lipperman-Kreda S, Morrison C, Grube JW, Gaidus A 2015. Youth activity spaces and daily exposure to tobacco outlets. Health Place 34:30–33
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Loebach JE, Gilliland A. 2016. Neighbourhood play on the endangered list: examining patterns in children's local activity and mobility using GPS monitoring and qualitative GIS. Child. Geogr. 14:5573–89
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Luo F, Cao G, Mulligan K, Li X 2016. Explore spatiotemporal and demographic characteristics of human mobility via Twitter: a case study of Chicago. Appl. Geogr. 70:11–25
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Malleson N, Andresen MA. 2015. The impact of using social media data in crime rate calculations: shifting hot spots and changing spatial patterns. Cartogr. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 42:2112–21
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Mason MJ, Korpela K. 2009. Activity spaces and urban adolescent substance use and emotional health. J. Adolesc. 32:4925–39
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Mason MJ, Mennis J, Way T, Light J, Rusby J et al. 2015. Young adolescents’ perceived activity space risk, peer networks, and substance use. Health Place 34:143–49
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Massey DS, Condran GA, Denton MA 1987. The effect of residential segregation on black social and economic well-being. Soc. Forces 66:129–56
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Matthews SA. 2012. Thinking about place, spatial behavior, and spatial processes in childhood obesity. Am. J. Prev. Med. 42:5516–20
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Matthews SA, Yang T-C. 2013. Spatial polygamy and contextual exposures (SPACEs). Am. Behav. Sci. 57:81057–81
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Menting B, Lammers M, Ruiter S, Bernasco W 2016. Family matters: effects of family members’ residential areas on crime location choice. Criminology 54:3413–33
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Mok D, Wellman B, Carrasco J 2010. Does distance matter in the age of the internet. Urban Stud 47:132747–83
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Mooney SJ, Bader MDM, Lovasi GS, Neckerman KM, Teitler JO, Rundle AG 2014. Validity of an ecometric neighborhood physical disorder measure constructed by virtual street audit. Am. J. Epidemiol. 180:626–35
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Murnane EL, Abdullah S, Matthews M, Kay M, Kientz JA et al. 2016. Mobile manifestations of alertness: connecting biological rhythms with patterns of smartphone app use. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Human–Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services465–77 New York: ACM
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Noulas A, Scellato S, Mascolo C, Pontil M 2011. An empirical study of geographic user activity patterns in Foursquare. Proceedings of the 5th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media570–73 Palo Alto, CA: AAAI
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Palmer JRB, Espenshade TJ, Bartumeus F, Chung CY, Ozgencil NE, Li K 2013. New approaches to human mobility: using mobile phones for demographic research. Demography 50:31105–28
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Park RE. 1915. The city: suggestions for the investigation of human behavior in the city. Am. J. Sociol. 20:577–612
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Phillips NE, Levy BL, Sampson RJ, Small ML, Wang RQ 2019. The social integration of American cities: network measures of connectedness based on everyday mobility across neighborhoods. Sociol. Methods Res. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124119852386
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  92. Quan-Haase A, Mo GY, Wellman B 2017. Connected seniors: how older adults in East York exchange social support online and offline. Inf. Commun. Soc. 20:7967–83
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Rainham DG, Bates CJ, Blanchard CM, Dummer TJ, Kirk SF, Shearer CL 2012. Spatial classification of youth physical activity patterns. Am. J. Prev. Med. 42:5e87–96
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Raudenbush SW, Bryk AS. 2002. Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2nd ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Rinzivillo S, Mainardi S, Pezzoni F, Coscia M, Pedreschi D, Giannotti F 2012. Discovering the geographical borders of human mobility. Künstl. Intell. 26:3253–60
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Robinson AI, Carnes F, Oreskovic NM 2016. Spatial analysis of crime incidence and adolescent physical activity. Prev. Med. 85:74–77
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Rossmo DK, Lu Y, Fang T 2012. Spatial-temporal crime paths. Patterns, Prevention, and Geometry of Crime MA Andresen, JB Kinney 38–64 New York: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Roth C, Kang SM, Batty M, Barthélemy M 2011. Structure of urban movements: polycentric activity and entangled hierarchical flows. PLOS ONE 6:1e15923
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Sampson RJ. 2012. Great American City: Chicago and the Enduring Neighborhood Effect Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Sampson RJ, Groves BW. 1989. Community structure and crime: testing social-disorganization theory. Am. J. Sociol. 94:4744–802
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Sampson RJ, Raudenbush SW, Earls F 1997. Neighborhoods and violent crime: a multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science 277:5328918–24
    [Google Scholar]
  102. Sapiezynski P, Stopczynski A, Gatej R, Lehmann S 2015. Tracking human mobility using WiFi signals. PLOS ONE 10:7e0130824
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Shareck M, Kestens Y, Frohlich KL 2014. Moving beyond the residential neighborhood to explore social inequalities in exposure to area-level disadvantage: results from the Interdisciplinary Study on Inequalities in Smoking. Soc. Sci. Med. 108:106–14
    [Google Scholar]
  104. Sharp G, Denney JT, Kimbro RT 2015. Multiple contexts of exposure: activity spaces, residential neighborhoods, and self-rated health. Soc. Sci. Med. 146:204–13
    [Google Scholar]
  105. Shaw CR, McKay HD. 1942. Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Shelton T, Poorthuis A, Zook M 2015. Social media and the city: rethinking urban socio-spatial inequality using user-generated geographic information. Landsc. Urban Plan. 142:198–211
    [Google Scholar]
  107. Sherman JE, Spencer J, Preisser JS, Gesler WM, Arcury TA 2005. A suite of methods for representing activity space in a healthcare accessibility study. Int. J. Health Geogr. 4:124
    [Google Scholar]
  108. Silm S, Ahas R. 2014. The temporal variation of ethnic segregation in a city: evidence from a mobile phone use dataset. Soc. Sci. Res. 47:30–43
    [Google Scholar]
  109. Simmel G. 1971. 1903. Metropolis and mental life. On Individuality and Social Forms DN Levine 324–39 Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  110. Simons RL, Burt CH, Barr AB, Lei M-K, Stewart E 2014. Incorporating routine activities, activity spaces, and situational definitions into the social schematic theory of crime. Criminology 52:4655–87
    [Google Scholar]
  111. Small ML, Adler L. 2019. The role of space in the formation of social ties. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 45:111–32
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Song C, Qu Z, Blumm N, Barabási AL 2010. Limits of predictability in human mobility. Science 327:59681018–21
    [Google Scholar]
  113. Song G, Bernasco W, Liu L, Xiao L, Zhou S, Liao W 2019. Crime feeds on legal activities: Daily mobility flows help to explain thieves’ target location choices. J. Quant. Criminol. 35:4831–54
    [Google Scholar]
  114. Subramanian SV, Kubzansky L, Berkman L, Fay M, Kawachi I 2006. Neighborhood effects on the self-rated health of elders: uncovering the relative importance of structural and service-related neighborhood environments. J. Gerontol. Soc. Sci. 61:3S153–60
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Sugie NF, Lens MC. 2017. Daytime locations in spatial mismatch: job accessibility and employment at reentry from prison. Demography 54:2775–800
    [Google Scholar]
  116. Sun L, Axhausen KW, Lee DH, Huang X 2013. Understanding metropolitan patterns of daily encounters. PNAS 110:3413774–79
    [Google Scholar]
  117. Tamura KB, Elbel B, Regan CSD, Al-Ajlouni YA, Athens JK et al. 2017. Residential and GPS-defined activity space neighborhood noise complaints, body mass index and blood pressure among low-income housing residents in New York City. J. Community Health 42:5974–82
    [Google Scholar]
  118. Tita GE, Cohen J, Engberg J 2005. An ecological study of the location of gang set space. Soc. Probl. 52:2272–99
    [Google Scholar]
  119. Toole JL, Herrera-Yaqüe C, Schneider CM, González MC 2015. Coupling human mobility and social ties. J. R. Soc. Interface 12:105
    [Google Scholar]
  120. Townley G, Kloos B, Wright PA 2009. Understanding the experience of place: expanding methods to conceptualize and measure community integration of persons with serious mental illness. Health Place 15:2520–31
    [Google Scholar]
  121. Trull TJ, Ebner-Priemer UW. 2009. Using experience sampling methods/ecological momentary assessment (ESM/EMA) in clinical assessment and clinical research: introduction to the special section. Psychol. Assess. 21:4457–62
    [Google Scholar]
  122. Vallée J, Cadot E, Roustit C, Parizot I, Chauvin P 2011. The role of daily mobility in mental health inequalities: the interactive influence of activity space and neighbourhood of residence on depression. Soc. Sci. Med. 73:81133–44
    [Google Scholar]
  123. Wan N, Lin G. 2016. Classifying human activity patterns from smartphone collected GPS data: a fuzzy classification and aggregation approach. Trans. GIS 20:6869–86
    [Google Scholar]
  124. Wan N, Qu W, Whittington J, Witbrodt BC, Henderson MP et al. 2013. Assessing smart phones for generating life-space indicators. Environ. Plan. B 40:2350–61
    [Google Scholar]
  125. Wang D, Pedreschi D, Song C, Giannotti F, Barabási AL 2011. Human mobility, social ties, and link prediction. Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD International Conference1100–8 New York: ACM
    [Google Scholar]
  126. Wang J, Kwan MP, Chai Y 2018. An innovative context-based crystal-growth activity space method for environmental exposure assessment: a study using GIS and GPS trajectory data collected in Chicago. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 15:4e703
    [Google Scholar]
  127. Wang Q, Phillips NE, Small ML, Sampson RJ 2018. Urban mobility and neighborhood isolation in America's 50 largest cities. PNAS 115:307735–40
    [Google Scholar]
  128. Wang Q, Taylor JE. 2014. Quantifying human mobility perturbation and resilience in Hurricane Sandy. PLOS ONE 9:11e112608
    [Google Scholar]
  129. Wang Y, Kang C, Bettencourt LMA, Liu Y, Andris C 2015. Linked activity spaces: embedding social networks in urban space. Computational Approaches for Urban Environments M Helbich, JJ Arsanjani, M Leitner 313–36 Berlin: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  130. Wesolowski A, Eagle N. 2010. Parameterizing the dynamics of slums. Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium103–8 Palo Alto, CA: AAAI
    [Google Scholar]
  131. Wesolowski A, Eagle N, Tatem AJ, Smith DL, Noor AM et al. 2012. Quantifying the impact of human mobility on malaria. Science 338:6104267–70
    [Google Scholar]
  132. Widhalm P, Yang Y, Ulm M, Athavale S, González MC 2015. Discovering urban activity patterns in cell phone data. Transportation 42:4597–623
    [Google Scholar]
  133. Wikström P-OH, Ceccato V, Hardie B, Treiber K 2010. Activity fields and the dynamics of crime. J. Quant. Criminol. 26:155–87
    [Google Scholar]
  134. Wikström P-OH, Oberwittler D, Treiber K, Hardie B 2012. Breaking Rules: The Social and Situational Dynamics of Young People's Urban Crime Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  135. Williams SA, Hipp JR. 2019. How great and how good? Third places, neighbor interaction, and cohesion in the neighborhood context. Soc. Sci. Res. 77:68–78
    [Google Scholar]
  136. Wilson WJ. 1987. The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, the Underclass, and Public Policy Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  137. Wodtke GT, Harding DJ, Elwert F 2011. Neighborhood effects in temporal perspective. Am. Sociol. Rev. 76:5713–36
    [Google Scholar]
  138. Wong DWS, Shaw S-L. 2011. Measuring segregation: an activity space approach. J. Geogr. Syst. 13:2127–45
    [Google Scholar]
  139. Yin J, Soliman A, Yin D, Wang S 2017. Depicting urban boundaries from a mobility network of spatial interactions: a case study of Great Britain with geo-located Twitter data. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 31:71293–313
    [Google Scholar]
  140. York Cornwell E, Cagney KA 2017. Aging in activity space: results from smartphone-based GPS tracking of urban seniors. J. Gerontol. Ser. B 72:5864–75
    [Google Scholar]
  141. Yuan Y, Raubal M, Liu Y 2012. Correlating mobile phone usage and travel behavior—a case study of Harbin, China. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 36:2118–30
    [Google Scholar]
  142. Zagheni E, Weber I. 2012. You are where you e-mail: using e-mail data to estimate international migration rates. Proceedings of the 3rd Annual ACM Web Science Conference348–51 New York: ACM
    [Google Scholar]
  143. Zenk SN, Schulz AJ, Matthews SA, Odoms-Young A, Wilbur J et al. 2011. Activity space environment and dietary and physical activity behaviors: a pilot study. Health Place 17:51150–61
    [Google Scholar]
  144. Zhang W, Derudder B, Jianghao Wang J, Shen W, Witlox F 2016. Using location-based social media to chart the patterns of people moving between cities: the case of Weibo users in the Yangtze River Delta. J. Urban Technol. 23:391–111
    [Google Scholar]
  145. Zhang X, Wang J, Kwan MP, Chai Y 2019. Reside nearby, behave apart? Activity-space-based segregation among residents of various types of housing in Beijing, China. Cities 88:166–80
    [Google Scholar]
  146. Zhong C, Arisona SM, Huang X, Batty M, Schmitt G 2014. Detecting the dynamics of urban structure through spatial network analysis. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 28:112178–99
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054848
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054848
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error