An Observation of Human Behavior on the L Train
Charles Tripp
Silberman School of Social Work at Hunter College
December 2013
1
The colorful cast of straphangers you see on the New York City Subway are a part of life
in the five boroughs. Most people take the same trains along the same routes and see similar
people during these regular journeys. I live in the East Village neighborhood of Manhattan, so
the L train is an important part of my daily routine. Three times a week, I take the L nine stops
into Brooklyn to work at my field placement. Many other times during the week, I will take the L
to get to or from class or en route to a social gathering.
From 14th Street/8th Avenue all the way to the Halsey Street you will find a diverse crowd
that represents the neighborhoods the train serves. People’s behavior differs depending on social
class, gender, race, age, and a multitude of other factors. Observing situations on the L train has
shown me the different theories of human behavior in practice by real people. All the different
types of people act differently, but have no choice but to interact with one another in order to get
to where they are trying to go. The different types of people you see on the L train represent the
different groups you can find in a diverse urban environment like Brooklyn.
The way people act has a profound influence on those around them. When they act in
groups, their behaviors become more noticeable and apparent to an outside observer. Their
behavior defines their status as a member of that group. This behavior is then passed on to their
children and can be observed in the developmental phases. Culture can have a major impact on
their behavior especially in this environment. Even further, systems theory can explain why they
act they way they do within their group. The ecological perspective explains how this influences
their entire environment. Once the group defines their environment, then this atmosphere will
have a profound impact on the development of children within these groups. Their behavior
therefore is an intertwined network of different factors all playing a hand in their lives and
2
development as people. All of these dynamics of social behavior feed off of each other and
create what is know as person in environment.
The first stop in Brooklyn, coming from Manhattan, is Bedford Avenue. This
neighborhood, known as Williamsburg, has been categorized by what many consider to be
immense urban renewal. What was once a dilapidated, industrially depressed neighborhood has
quickly turned into the epicenter of what is considered “hip” and “trendy.” Rents have gone sky
high and have brought in droves of wealthy professionals usually only found in Manhattan. Due
to the recent nature of Williamsburg’s revival, many people who live in this area are wealthy and
young. This group of people, the young and wealthy professionals, can be found focused around
the Bedford Avenue stop. These people live there, shop there, or dine and drink there and the
influx of this group has made Bedford Ave one of the most trafficked stops on the L train. This
group is easy to spot based on their class status. Many will be seen wearing clothes from
expensive stores and other items that verify their class status. Their race will mostly be white, but
there will be some deviation from this. This group is mostly seen coming to and from Manhattan.
They very rarely have children in tow, and usually appear to be attending social functions or
going to work. Their presence is well known when the train passes between Manhattan and
Brooklyn as it crowds up and is very loud. This group is seen in large numbers, but only between
14th Street/8th Ave and Lorimer Street.
Once the train goes beyond Lorimer St, the remaining groups of people I observed will be
filling the seats. The first of this group is the artist crowd. They have rejected the Bedford Ave
part of Williamsburg for a more authentic Brooklyn experience. They generally cannot afford to
live in the epicenter of Williamsburg and would not want to regardless. They find cheap rents
and communal living situations on the stops beyond Lorimer St and are very easy to point out on
3
train. Their style is usually eccentric, but not always. Sometimes they have children with them,
but usually they do not. They strike a balance between the wealthy professionals and the people
of color, but an outside observer would consider them more akin to the wealthy professional.
They will be seen at any time of day, not only rush hour or late on weekend nights. Their class is
generally expressed through their attention to fashion, but it is hard for an outsider to truly know
what social class they represent simply by looking at them. Their label as artist (or at least
bourgeois) is determined by their dress, what they carry with them, the conversations they have,
and their overall behavior. They will generally stay together with their group, and not interact
much with other groups. This group is never seen in large numbers at any one time, but is always
present if you are anywhere on the L train between Halsey Street and Manhattan.
The final group whose behavior will be observed are the Hispanic straphangers of the L
train. They can be found in a pretty high volume anywhere between 8th Avenue and Halsey
Street and beyond. This group rarely gets off the train at Bedford Ave and is usually already on
the train once I board at Myrtle Av. They are frequently speaking with each other in Spanish, but
not very loudly. They rarely interact outside of their group, and this could be because of
language barriers or discomfort with the other group. It is evident that many have been living in
Brooklyn for a while. On the other hand, some have also very clearly moved to New York City
recently. This is shown by the way they act on the subway. Their class status is evident by both
the neighborhoods they live in and other factors. In many instances, you can tell they are going
to or from work at a low wage job. This is shown by both the uniforms you will see people
wearing and the times you see people going to and from work. This group frequently travels with
their family, unlike the other two groups. Often this group will have strollers with young
children. This group has a clear distaste for the people that have made Williamsburg into the
4
neighborhood that it has become. The tidal wave of gentrification has pushed this group out to
farther on the L train and the wave continues to spread beyond its traditional borders.
These groups all act in very distinct ways that separate them from each other. Their
behavior interacts greatly with the descriptions previously given. Cultural theories can explain
these behaviors in depth. Rogoff argues that we need to “…identify regularities that make sense
of the variations across communities as well as the impressive commonalities across our human
species” (Rogoff 2003). This means that in order to understand how culture interacts with
behavior, one must notice commonalities between the behavior of one group, but also realize that
this characteristic manifests itself differently across cultures. Once particular pattern of behavior
of the wealthy professionals on the L train is their tendency to travel in large groups and drink
together. These groups are hard to miss—they are commonly found anywhere between Lorimer
Street and Union Square on a weekend night. They are loud, usually intoxicated, and travel in
large groups. Their outfits and ability to spend exorbitant amounts to just enter a bar or club
flaunts the culture of this class. The common theme that permeates this culture is their disposable
income and weekend leisure time. Many are seen going to work during the business hours of the
week. The money that is earned is not spent on children or their families, so their culture dictates
them to spend their money freely during leisure times.
Rogoff states, “Culture isn’t just what other people do.” (Rogoff 2003). The shared
experience of cultural tradition goes beyond the idea that people just follow the crowd. Young
professionals before them spent their income and weekends in the same way. “Broad cultural
experience gives us the opportunity to see the extent of cultural processes in everyday human
activities and development, which relate to the technologies we use and our institutional and
community values and traditions” (Rogoff 2003). Rogoff is saying here that people’s shared
5
behaviors are not a coincidence, but rather a broad trend that impacts our day-to-day existence.
We share these behaviors as a way to relate to each other and share experiences. The idea of
going to Williamsburg on a weekend night has the cultural connotation of a good time and
therefore exists within the subconscious of this group. The idea of living in Williamsburg also
shows status within this culture. Cultures thrive on shared ideas like these.
In understanding one’s own culture, it is crucial to compare it to others. To notice this
culture of young professionals one must notice who rides the subways with them on weekend
nights. Rogoff argues that “Engaging with people whose practice’s differ from those of one’s
own community can make one aware of aspects of human functioning that are not noticed until
they are missing or differently arraigned” (Rogoff 2003). The behavior of this one group glares
out to an outside observer because they are on the same subway trains as their neighbors and
cultural counterparts.
This culture is easy to define in contrast to the other cultures it interacts with. On any
given train, you will notice the difference between the artists and Hispanic populations with the
young professionals is the way they hold themselves and the geography of their lives. The
demeanor of this group makes them distinct. They almost always are seen in large and loud
groups, and seem to be with exclusively people their own age. Most importantly, the culture of
this group seems to foster a sense of happiness. This is not to say that happiness is exclusive of
this group, but it is much more evident from an outsider observer. This is especially true when
compared to the other groups observed. Shared culture is not the only way to understand the
behavior of these groups. Other theories show a much deeper approach to understanding what
makes the behavior of the different groups that take the L train unique.
6
The behaviors of these different groups do not exist in a vacuum, but rather they exist in a
“system.” Nothing happens simply by chance, and all aspects of behavior are interconnected and
related with each other (Greene 2008b). Each group is the member of a distinct social system,
just as they are a part of their distinct culture. Greene argues, “There is a high degree of
interdependence and internal organization among members of a social system” (Greene 2009b).
Systems theory says that a complex network of different relationships brings everyone in a group
together. The system that a person is a part of will play into their behavior and can be a
determining factor in their behavior as I observed. The bourgeois artists on the train did not
decide to live in Williamsburg by a coincidence. Rather, a series of factors led to their decision
to be a Brooklyn resident and then subsequently live in and around Williamsburg.
Observing the artists on the train, they are defined by their eccentric dress and most often
what they carry with them. I give them the label artists because they will have anything between
a canvass and an upright bass. Their eccentric dress is hard to miss as well. Why would a person
like this be attracted to Brooklyn and more specifically Williamsburg and Bushwick? This
question is answered by systems theory. “The components of a system interact with and
influence one another. By virtue of this interaction, the component parts form a unique whole”
(Greene 2008b). Using systems theory, artists want to move to this neighborhood because likeminded people surround them. They are also driven by the cheap rents and outsider mentality
that living in Brooklyn brings about. The eccentric dress shows that they desire life as an
outsider, and living in Williamsburg (initially) was an effort to paradoxically feel welcomed as
an outsider. The artists on the L train are a social system within themselves.
Like all social systems, the social system of artists on the L train has boundaries and
these boundaries are shown in their behavior on the train. They interact very sparingly outside of
7
their group. You will very rarely see them interact with people outside of their group, and this
includes both the young professionals and the Hispanic population. When restrictions exist in a
social system, behavior can become adaptive to the environment around them. “Adaptive
systems produce effective responses to the demands of the environment” (Greene 2008b). This
argument explains why artists went to an industrially depressed neighborhood and rebranded the
space. In one instance, I overheard a few people from this group talking about rising rents. Their
response to rising rents was to move farther down on the L train. Now, you see empty
warehouses full of artists as far down as Halsey St. The adaptive nature of their existence allows
this group to interact positively with other groups in the area. This proves that social systems are
able to thrive and adapt to an environment around them.
Once groups are able to adapt, they begin to transact with their setting. The ecological
perspective takes the idea of systems theory one step further to show how people cannot only
adapt to their environment, but also have a profound influence on their surroundings.
Communities and groups exist within a “transactional setting” in their environment. “Using
Bronfenbrenner’s frame- work, the neighborhood can be viewed as a transactional setting that
directly and indirectly influences individual behavior and development” (Ohmer 2010).
Neighborhood residents engage in a symbiotic relationship in their space. Residents feed off of
their environment and their environment in turn focuses around their needs. This can most
clearly be seen in the Hispanic population of Williamsburg and Bushwick. Once you go beyond
the first few stops in Brooklyn, the wealthy crowd begins to dwindle and most of the train is
people of color. The class divide is seen clearly between a few stops, and once you exit the
subway the difference becomes even more obvious.
8
Ohmer asserts that “Poor, disadvantaged neighborhoods are frequently hostile
environments wherein children and families deal with negative life situations such as crime,
poverty, unemployment, decay, and social isolation” (Ohmer 2010). This condition is where the
transaction between person and environment takes class. The poor economic state of these
neighborhoods impact the behavior seen of this group on the L train. It is often you will see poor
Hispanic men playing music for money on the train or flat out begging for money. This is the
impact their environment has on them, as well as them exchanging with their well-to-do
neighbors. It is rare you see this group interacting with other members, which is what Ohmer
means when she notes that poor neighborhoods are riddled with “social isolation.” This feeling
of isolation impacts behavior greatly and can explain why I rarely see this group in large groups
(outside of the family) and they interact with each other sparingly.
The ecological perspective can explain some benefits for this group as well. Large
portions of the Hispanic population are recent immigrants and their native tongue is Spanish.
Greene notes that, “Person-environment forms a unitary system in which humans and
environment mutually influence each other” (Greene 2008a). People have a weighty influence on
their environment, which creates a cycle where people give and take from their environment.
Therefore, in a predominantly Hispanic community, it is often I hear Spanish being spoken.
Sometimes, people will approach me and speak in Spanish, assuming that I can speak it. I cannot
speak Spanish and politely say I cannot understand. The ecological perspective can explain the
cause for this behavior. When people exist in their environment they are likely to believe that
everyone exists within the same environment as them. The assumption is that most people speak
Spanish because indeed most people do. This assumption shows that people create an
environment and it is not done artificially.
9
The development of children within a group can be greatly impacted once a group creates
this symbiotic type of environment. Jean Piaget was a Swiss psychologist who theorized about
the development of children. “In Piaget’s view, a child’s intellectual adaptation is as much an
adaptation to the social environment as to the physical (DeVries 1997). As children get older,
they absorb everything around them and become influenced by the social groups that surround
them. When discussing Piaget, people often mention “…his view of the importance of peer
relations…” (DeVries 1997). Piaget notes that interacting with other young children within your
group is an important aspect of development at a young age. These theories are seen on the L
train in every group I observed. In one instance, I found two young kids observing a subway
advertisement as if it was a work of art. I couldn’t quite make out what they were saying, but
they were describing what they liked about the advertisement and what they did not like. These
children were with their mother who was an eccentrically dressed Williamsburg resident. From
my observation, she fell into the artist category. These children were feeding off of each other to
learn their shared values. They also must have gotten an inclination to critique this advertisement
form the environment in which they were raised.
Piaget also believes that a sense of mutual cooperation can be formed between a parent
and child (DeVries 1997). A child will model certain behavior after their parents because they
have been convinced that the way their parents act is the norm. Piaget argues that the parent and
child are “…striving towards a common goal.” (DeVries 1997). Oftentimes, children of the
Hispanic people you see on the train will have a very similar demeanor to their parents. The
children are not rambunctious and uncontrollable like children can be. Rather, they maintain a
stoic disposition similar to their parents. Many people are stoic on the subway. Children on the L
train will often act the same way despite how they may act at home. The reason children do this
10
is because they are heavily influenced by what they see within their environment. In this way, the
child has made a compact with the parent and group and begins to develop into a member of
their group. “Cooperation is a social interaction among individuals who see themselves as equals
and treat each other as such” (DeVries 1997). Piaget did not regard parents and their children as
equals, but believed that children would mimic their parents in an attempt to be considered an
equal during development. Piaget’s view on childhood development completes the cycle that
explains the behavior of people on the L train.
My observations on the L train and judgments of behavior have their limitations. My
judgments were based on both theories and assumptions I have made from my own social beliefs
and values. The theory of social construction argues that I have inherent bias towards my
subjects (Blundo & Greene 2008). I posses this bias because I have understand these groups
within the society that they have constructed. All people are different and overall diversity within
people of a group is an important variable to consider. “They [Constructionist theorists] suggest
that a fundamental reality cannot exist independently of the complexity of people’s lives”
(Blundo & Green 2008). It is obvious that people live complex lives and social constructionist
theorists do not categorize people for this very reason. The idea that people so easily conform
into groups is at odds with the idea that people are unique, which is held by many theorists and
myself. Though behavior can be explained in a certain context, it cannot be considered a uniform
code of how to act. Also, in now way are my assumptions true across the board, for any social
group. No ones assumptions are totally objective and often times human behavior is naturally
formed without outside influence.
I was not surprised at how much I expected to see the results I saw. I have observed this
same group of people many times and have noticed these trends over the course of many months.
11
When I actually set out to make a conscious effort to take note of what people were doing, I was
not surprised to see trends in similar groups and people behaving in ways that were impacted by
their environment. However, this experience gave me a new lens to view the world from. This
observation made me more aware of how interconnected all behavior can be. The theories
explained in this paper have made me realize that behavior is not totally random. It is something
that can be conditioned by a person existing within their environment.
People observed within their group in a natural environment can explain a lot about the
concepts behind human behavior. Behavior is a cyclical process that begins during the
developmental phases, expands as an adult, and then is passed back onto a child. Once a culture
permeates through a certain geographic location, a whole series of systems will emerge and
transactions will take place. Cultures and behaviors thrive in places that certain groups can call
home. Though one cannot deny that people are unique individuals, there are patterns within
behavior that can be explained and rationalized.
Works Cited
Blundo, R. & Greene R. (2008) Social Construction. Human Behavior Theory and Social
Work Practice. R. Greene (Ed.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers
DeVries, R. (1997) Piaget’s Social Theory. Educational Researcher, Vol 26, No. 2, pp 4-17.
Greene R. (2008) Ecological Perspective: An Eclectic Theoretical Framework for Social
Work Practice. Human Behavior Theory and Social Work Practice. R. Greene (Ed.).
New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers (a)
Greene R. (2008) General Systems Theory. Human Behavior Theory and Social Work
Practice. R. Greene (Ed.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers (b)
Ohmer, M. L. (2010) How Theory and Research Inform Citizen Participation in Poor
Communities: The Ecological Perspective and Theories on Self and Collective
Efficacy and Sense of Community. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social
Environment, 20: 1-19
12
Rogoff, B. (2003) Chapter 1: Orienting Concepts and Ways of Understand the Cultural Nature
of Human Development. The Cultural Nature of Human Development. Oxford University
Press, pp 3-36.
13