Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

The theory of housing adjustment states that households judge their housing in accordance with culturally derived norms. First posited in 1975, Earl W. Morris and Mary Winter's theory of housing adjustment became the crux of the text Housing, Family, and Society published in 1978. Since then, many articles published in the housing journal Housing and Society have employed the Morris and Winter theoretical framework to explain households’ norms and preferences for housing.

According to the theory, decisions about where to live are made at the household level. Household members use societal rules and standards, or norms, to evaluate their current residential circumstances regarding tenure and structure type, space, expenditures, quality, and neighborhood. Norms also are established at the household level and may sometimes differ from societal norms. Generally, normative housing in the United States is by owner-occupancy, preferably a single-family dwelling that includes a prescribed number of bedrooms based on the age and sex of household members. Housing expenditures should be no more than 30% of annual household income, and the neighborhood attributes and amenities should support household needs. Households experience dissatisfaction with housing that is non-normative due to deficits; in turn, their quality of life is compromised. According to Morris and Winter, a specific housing condition or set of conditions becomes a deficit when the condition has been subjectively defined as undesirable in comparison with a norm. Deficits result from constraints that keep a household from attaining the housing desired and together affect housing satisfaction and ultimately predict housing decision-making outcomes, that is, housing adjustments.

Figure 1 Model of Housing Adjustment Theory

None

Figure 1 illustrates the important role of constraints impeding the availability of normative housing, such as predispositions, household organization, market, resources, and discrimination.

Constraints

Five broad areas of constraint shape housing adjustments according to the model. Predisposition refers to constraints due to the psychological dimension of the household members similar to the personality of the individual. For example, locus of control, self-efficacy, motivation, or apathy may have a bearing on how households assess their housing deficits and, in turn, affect satisfaction with their housing situation. A household's organization, the allocation of roles, and the effective performance of them can also stymie or propel its ability to garner resources and to make and implement housing decisions. Heretofore, proxy variables have been most widely used to examine predispositional and household organizational constraints; little research has focused specifically on them. Market and resource constraints are often found to affect a household's ability to secure preferred housing. Previous research shows clearly that a lack of money, education, and skills among household members and the availability and supply of housing and financing in the marketplace influence housing decision making. The effect of discrimination has an equally well established effect on housing choices. Many minority populations have experienced discrimination, which thwarts housing availability. Blacks, Latinos, single-parent women, gay and lesbian couples, and those with physical and cognitive disabilities experience constraints that can reduce their ability to attain normative housing or achieve housing satisfaction. Even anticipated discrimination can result in limiting housing decisions.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading