Scholarlink

Objectives <p>Dilapidated or neglected aspects of the built environment — such as abandoned houses or litter — are recognized across disciplines as harmful to community wellbeing and safety. Researchers utilize a variety of tools to observe these items, with Google Street View (GSV) being among the most recent advances. While GSV allows researchers to virtually visit locations without the time, cost, and resources required to go in-person, the validity and reliability of these observations may raise concerns. </p> Methods <p>In this study, we examine inter-method and inter-coder reliability for 22 items consistent with established indicators of physical disorder and guardianship. We compare physical disorder observations across 5 researchers who coded 30 streets in Baltimore City, both in-person and using GSV.</p> Results <p>Using the intra-class correlation coefficient, we find higher reliability across coders and methods for items that are less transitory (e.g., boarded up windows). In addition, consistency issues between GSV and in-person methods were prevalent and largely pointed to validity issues in GSV. Specifically, many items that were observed in person were “missed” in GSV.</p> Conclusions <p>While our findings indicate a preference for the validity and reliability of in-person observation, they do not serve as a final verdict on the utility of GSV.&#xa0;</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Now you see it, now you don’t: social systematic observation of physical disorder using Google Street View

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年1月16日

查看全文
  • Lisa M. Pierotte,
  • Lauren Porter,
  • Alaina De Biasi

摘要

Objectives

Dilapidated or neglected aspects of the built environment — such as abandoned houses or litter — are recognized across disciplines as harmful to community wellbeing and safety. Researchers utilize a variety of tools to observe these items, with Google Street View (GSV) being among the most recent advances. While GSV allows researchers to virtually visit locations without the time, cost, and resources required to go in-person, the validity and reliability of these observations may raise concerns.

Methods

In this study, we examine inter-method and inter-coder reliability for 22 items consistent with established indicators of physical disorder and guardianship. We compare physical disorder observations across 5 researchers who coded 30 streets in Baltimore City, both in-person and using GSV.

Results

Using the intra-class correlation coefficient, we find higher reliability across coders and methods for items that are less transitory (e.g., boarded up windows). In addition, consistency issues between GSV and in-person methods were prevalent and largely pointed to validity issues in GSV. Specifically, many items that were observed in person were “missed” in GSV.

Conclusions

While our findings indicate a preference for the validity and reliability of in-person observation, they do not serve as a final verdict on the utility of GSV.