Students’ subjective assessment of vandalism: security issues

Introduction. The relevance of this study stems from the increased vulnerability of student youth, as a social group, to environmental risks. Vandalism of urban spaces can significantly affect individuals’ subjective sense of safety; however, this phenomenon remains insufficiently researched. Aim. The present study aims to examine the perception and evaluation of vandalism in the urban environment from the perspective of student youth, taking into account their experiences of safety within a metropolitan context. Methodology and research methods. The study was conducted using a sociological questionnaire developed by the authors, comprising sections designed to assess social well-being, a multidimensional evaluation of safety (physical, psychological, and social), perceptions of vandalism, and socio-demographic characteristics. The sample consisted of 807 respondents aged between 14 and 35 years (mean age 18.48 years), all of whom were students at colleges and universities. Data were analysed using JASP version 0.96.0, employing descriptive statistics, frequency analysis, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Student’s t-test, and Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Results. It was found that 88% of student youth hold a negative or nuanced attitude towards vandalism, while 12% display tolerant attitudes. A consistent pattern emerged: an increase in tolerance towards vandalistic behaviour is associated with a statistically significant decrease in perceptions of both the physical and social safety of the urban environment. Pronounced gender differences were observed: girls identify a broader range of phenomena as vandalism and perceive them more acutely as threats (p ≤ 0.01). Correlation analysis revealed two patterns of relationships: destructive forms of vandalism (such as broken windows and damaged infrastructure) correlate negatively with safety indicators, whereas instrumental acts of vandalism (such as worn footpaths and passages through fences) correlate positively with illumination and the sense of social community. Scientific novelty. For the first time in a Russian youth sample, the differentiated structure of the perception of vandalism in the context of safety has been empirically validated. This study broadens the theoretical understanding of the heterogeneous impact of various forms of vandalism (destructive, instrumental, symbolic) on subjective safety assessments, refining and supplementing the classic “broken windows” theory with the proposition that functional, adaptive disorder may be perceived by the community as an acceptable practice, which does not diminish – and in some respects enhances – the sense of comfort and community. Practical significance. The results of the study can inform the development of strategies to enhance the safety of urban environments, specifically targeting student populations, including those in university towns and on campuses. The identified patterns enable the prioritisation of managerial decisions: the prompt remediation of the effects of destructive vandalism (such as broken windows and damaged bus stops), the regulation of the semiotic environment (removal of aggressive and unlawful content), and the legitimisation of adaptive environmental changes requested by young people through community dialogue.

1. Chuprov V.I., Zubok Yu.A., Williams C. Molodezh’ v obshchestve riska = Youth in a Risk Society. Moscow: Publishing House Yur. Norma, NIC INFRA-M; 2015. 230 p. (In Russ.) Accessed December 14, 2025. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=28518043

2. Didkovskaya Ya.V., Vishnevsky Yu.R., Zyryanova O.B. Social safety of student youth as a subjective perception of risks. Nauchnyi rezul’tat. Sotsiologiya i upravlenie = Research Result. Sociology and Management. 2022;8(4):57–70. (In Russ.) doi:10.18413/2408-9338-2022-8-4-0-6

3. Wunsch K., Fiedler J., Bachert P., Woll A. The tridirectional relationship among physical activity, stress, and academic performance in university students: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18(2):739. doi:10.3390/ijerph18020739

4. Kutuzova E.I., Chernyaev I.A. Prevalence of chronic fatigue syndrome among senior students of a medical university. Innova. 2023;9(2):30–37. (In Russ.) Accessed December 14, 2025. https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=54658678

5. Pereira S., Reay K., Bottell J., Walker L., Dzikiti C. University Student Mental Health Survey 2018: A Large Scale Study into the Prevalence of Student Mental Illness within UK Universities. 2018. Accessed December 14, 2025. https://uploads-ssl.webflow.com/561110743bc7e45e78292140/5c7d4b5d314d163fecdc3706_Mental%20Health%20Report%202018.pdf

6. Ribeiro Í.J., Pereira R., Freire I.V., de Oliveira B.G., Casotti C.A., Boery E.N. Stress and quality of life among university students: a systematic literature review. Health Professions Education. 2018;4(2):70–77. Accessed December 14, 2025. https://hpe.researchcommons.org/journal/vol4/iss2/2/

7. Kruzhkova O.V., Vorobyeva I.V., Pecnikova J. Perception of vandal damage by youth: the perceptual stage. Rossiyskiy deviantologicheskiy zhurnal = Russian Journal of Deviant Behavior. 2021;1(1):51–69. (In Russ.) doi:10.35750/2713-0622-2021-1-51-69

8. Hirtenlehner H., Leitgöb H., Stiebellehner K., Birklbauer A., Bacher J. Vandalismus und Sachbeschädigungsdelinquenz von Kindern und Jugendlichen. Zeitschrift fuer Jugendkriminalrecht und Jugendhilfe. 2019;2:120–132. (In German) Accessed December 14, 2025. https://www.dvjj.de/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/ZJJ_2_2019.pdf

9. Halsey M., Young A. The meanings of graffiti and municipal administration. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology. 2002;35:165–186. doi:10.1375/acri.35.2.165

10. Kruzhkova O.V. Memorability and cognitive errors in graffiti recognition in an urban environment: results of a field experiment. Nauchnyy dialog = Scientific Dialogue. 2025;14(2):163–180. (In Russ.) doi:10.24224/2227-1295-2025-14-2-163-180

11. Babikova M.R., Kruzhkova O.V. Two-factor model of graffiti perception determinants among metropolis residents. Nauchnyy dialog = Scientific Dialogue. 2025;14(8):255–276. (In Russ.) doi:10.24224/2227-1295-2025-14-8-255-276

12. Shvindt U.S. Aesthetic and problematic orientation of street art in the perception of the urban population (the case of Yekaterinburg). Koinon. 2021;2(2):100–115. (In Russ.) doi:10.15826/koinon.2021.02.1.005

13. Gartus A., Helmut L. The white cube of the museum versus the gray cube of the street: the role of context in aesthetic evaluations. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 2014;8:311–320. doi:10.1037/a0036847

14. Subbotina L.Yu. What to understand by the state of personal security. Yaroslavskiy psikhologicheskiy vestnik = Yaroslavl Psychological Bulletin. 2021;3(51):37–42. (In Russ.) Accessed December 14, 2025. https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=47296736

15. Emelyanova T.P., Drobysheva T.V., Vikentieva E.N., Tarasov S.V. Activity of Muscovites in the urban environment: the role of the responsibility factor. RUDN Journal of Psychology and Pedagogics. 2022;19(1):7–20. doi:10.22363/2313-1683-2022-19-1-7-20

16. Afable A., Rybarczyk G., Rivera B., Landsbergis P. The urban stress model: a framework for understanding the persistence of health disparities in cities. Cities & Health. 2026. doi:10.1080/23748834.2025.2604406

17. Antipova A.A., Kasarkina E.N. Higher education institution as a subject of adaptation of rural students to urban conditions. Sovremennye issledovaniya sotsial’nykh problem (elektronnyy nauchnyy zhurnal) = Modern Studies of Social Issues (Online Scientific Journal). 2014;6:4. (In Russ.) doi:10.12731/2218-7405-2014-6-4

18. Zotova O.Yu., Tarasova L.V. A method for measuring the psychological safety of urban residents. Voprosy psikhologii = Voprosy Psychologii. 2025;71(2):128–138. (In Russ.) Accessed December 14, 2025. https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=83246752

19. Zotova O.Yu., Tarasova L.V. Psychological safety of urban residents as a predictor of the desire to stay living in the city. Rossiyskiy psikhologicheskiy zhurnal = Russian Psychological Journal. 2025;22(1):240–257. (In Russ.) doi:10.21702/2r2sqe82

20. Wilson J.Q., Kelling G.L. Broken windows: police and neighborhood safety. Atlantic Monthly. 1982;249(3):29–38. Accessed December 14, 2025. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/03/broken-windows/304465/

21. Yuan L., Dan Y., Leng Y., Zhang J. Influencing factors of urban safety perception based on the combination of multi-source data and machine learning: a case study of Nanchang City, China. Scientific Reports. 2025;16. doi:10.1038/s41598-025-34110-3

22. Abdul Malek N., Manohar M. Visitors perception on vandalism and safety issues in a Malaysian urban park. Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management. 2009;4(13):93–107. Accessed December 14, 2025. http://irep.iium.edu.my/4012/

23. Mumford K., Power A. Disorder in the neighbourhoods: families’ experiences of crime, gangs, neighbour problems, vandalism, graffiti, drugs and ’rough’ behaviour. In: Mumford K., Power A., eds. Nine. 2022:197–228. doi:10.46692/9781847425690.009

24. Baker T., Wolfer L. The crime triangle: alcohol, drug use, and vandalism. Police Practice and Research. 2003;4:47–61. doi:10.1080/1561426032000059187

25. Gargiulo I., Garcia X., Benages-Albert M., Martinez J., Pfeffer K., Vall-Casas P. Women’s safety perception assessment in an urban stream corridor. Developing a safety map based on qualitative GIS. Landscape and Urban Planning. 2022;198(4):103779. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103779

26. Abdul Rashid S., Hussaini Wahab W.N.M.W.M., Mohd Rani W. Street design and women’s safety perception. PLANNING MALAYSIA: Journal of the Malaysian Institute of Planners. 2017;15(4):13–20. doi:10.21837/PMJOURNAL.V15.I4.313

27. Austin D.M., Sanders C. Graffiti and perceptions of safety: a pilot study using photographs and survey data. Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture. 2007;14(4):292–316.

28. Štambuk M., Bahmatova Nerlović M., Komšo K., Miholić A., Spajić L. Shaping impressions of the space: effects of street art/graffiti in different public space contexts. Društvena istraživanja. 2023;32(4):613–634. doi:10.5559/di.32.4.03

29. Kruzhkova O.V., Vorobyeva I.V. Vandalism: safety boundaries and risks of the spread of extremism. Lichnost’ v ekstremal’nykh usloviyakh i krizisnykh situatsiyakh zhiznedeyatel’nosti = Personality in Extreme Conditions and Crisis Situations. 2025;15:24–29. (In Russ.) Accessed December 14, 2025. https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=82776389

30. Đukić N. Graffiti and urban identity: negative perception of graffiti as an indicator of an urban identity crisis. In: Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference “Post-Socialist Transformation of the City”. Novi Sad; 2020:123–135. Accessed December 14, 2025. https://www.academia.edu/43703371/Graffiti_and_Urban_identity_Negative_perception_of_graffiti_as_an_indicator_of_an_urban_identity_crisis

31. Korobitsyna L.V., Kruzhkova O.V. Vandalism and the transformation of historical memory: theory and practice. Dialog so vremenem = Dialogue with Time. 2025;91:237–250. (In Russ.) doi:10.21267/AQUILO.2025.91.91.016

32. Rudenkin D.V. Vandalism in the perception of young people in Russian сities: results of a cross-regional study. Psikhologiya. Istoriko-kriticheskie obzory i sovremennye issledovaniya = Psychology. Historical-Critical Reviews and Current Research. 2021;10(5-1):28–38. (In Russ.) doi:10.34670/AR.2021.35.97.003

33. Rudenkin D.V. What young people in a large russian city know and think about vandalism: the case of Yekaterinburg. Sotsiodinamika = Sociodynamics. 2022;6:47–62. (In Russ.) doi:10.25136/24097144.2022.6.34435

34. Kolomeets E.N. Graffiti as a component of youth culture in Russia of the XXI century (on the example of the city of Novosibirsk). In: Molodezh’ XXI veka: obrazovanie, nauka, innovatsii: Materialy XI Vserossiyskoy studencheskoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii s mezhdunarodnym uchastiem = Youth of the XXI Century: Education, Science, Innovation: Proceedings of the XI All-Russian Student Scientific and Practical Conference with International Participation; December 7–9, 2022; Novosibirsk, Russia. Novosibirsk: Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University; 2023:67–68. (In Russ.) Accessed December 14, 2025. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=53793655

35. Vorobyeva I.V., Kruzhkova O.V. Vandalism in the urban environment as a marker of territorial insecurity. Vestnik Omskogo universiteta. Seriya: Psikhologiya = Herald of Omsk University. Series: Psychology. 2019;4:5–10. (In Russ.) doi:10.24147/2410-6364.2019.4.5-10

36. Sampson R.J., Raudenbush S.W. Seeing disorder: Neighborhood stigma and the social construction of brokenwindows.Social Psychology Quarterly. 2004;67(4):319–342.doi:10.1177/019027250406700401

37. Zlokazov K.V., Karayani Yu.M., Karayani A.G., Shakhmatov A.V. Urban vandalism in the perception of youth: an empirical study of the attribution of its causes. Psikhologiya i pravo = Psychology and Law. 2021;11(3):77–93. (In Russ.) doi:10.17759/psylaw.2021110306

38. Abdullah A., Hedayati Marzbali M., Maghsoodi Tilaki M.J. Examining gender differences in residents’ perception of safety in residential areas based on the incivilities thesis. Honar-Ha-YE-Karbordi (Journal of Applied Arts). 2024;4(2):71–89. doi:10.22075/aaj.2021.11484.1063

39. Keel Ch., Wickes R., Lee M., Jackson J., Benier K. Vulnerability in the Neighborhood: A Study of Gender Differences in Perceptions of Control. 2021. doi:10.31235/osf.io/8nrgc

40. Park S.Y., Han G., Rhee J.H., Lee K.H. Gender disparities in perceived visibility and crime anxiety in piloti parking spaces of multifamily housing: a virtual reality study. Frontiers of Architectural Research. 2025;14(2):471–486. doi:10.1016/j.foar.2024.09.005

41. Pain R. Gender, race, age and fear in the city. Urban Studies. 2001;38(5-6):899–913. doi:10.1080/00420980125600

42. Newman O. Defensible Space: Crime Prevention Through Urban Design. Macmillan; 1972. Accessed December 14, 2025. https://archive.org/details/defensiblespacec00newm

43. Egorova D.D., Mayorova E.E., Stepkina V.S. Political content as a potential source of psychological trauma. Ekonomika i sotsium = Economy and Society. 2020;6(73):600–604. (In Russ.) Accessed December 14, 2025. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=44002959

44. Kotabe H.P., Kardan O., Berman M.G. The nature-disorder paradox: a perceptual study on how nature is disorderly yet aesthetically preferred. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2017;146(8):1126–1142. doi:10.1037/xge0000321

45. Cohen S. Property destruction: motives and meanings. In: Ward C., ed. Vandalism. Architectural Press; 1973:23–53 Accessed December 14, 2025. https://archive.org/details/vandalism0000ward

46. Martinelli P.M. Tactical appropriations in the urban realm: informal practices and reinventions in the contemporary city. In: Informality and the City: Theories, Actions and Interventions. Springer; 2022:35–51. Accessed December 14, 2025. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-99926-1_3

47. Stevens Q., Dovey K. Interests. In: Temporary and Tactical Urbanism. Routledge; 2022:3–18. doi:10.4324/9781003284390