Housing Adjustment Theory

Earl W. Morris & Mary Winter
(Morris, b. 1922) (Winter, b. 1940)
Source: www.threegfarms.com ; www.las.iastate.edu


Summary:
The theory of housing adjustment behavior is a framework for understanding the process by which households seek to maintain equilibrium, the causes of disequilibrium, and the consequences of existing in a state of disequilibrium. In this sense, equilibrium refers to a state in which the household’s current housing is in accordance with the norms of both society and the household itself, and it fits the needs of the household. Housing norms include space, tenure and structure type, quality, expenditure and neighborhood. When one or more of these norms is not met by the household’s current housing, the household experiences a housing deficit.


A deficit is a “condition or set of conditions that is subjectively defined as undesirable in comparison with a norm” (Morris & Winter, 1996, p. 22). For example, a typical space norm is the expectation that the dwelling will have enough rooms that opposite sex children will not have to share a bedroom once they reach a certain age. However, if a dwelling does not have enough rooms for this norm to be upheld, the household will experience a deficit. Deficits lead to feelings of dissatisfaction with one’s current housing, and chronic dissatisfaction may cause the household to engage in change behavior in the form of adjustment, adaptation, or regeneration. However, the household’s preferred change behavior is predicated on overcoming any constraints that impose on the household’s ability to remedy the situation. A household may experience constraint in one or more of the following areas: resources, predispositions, discrimination, market, or household organization. On the other hand, a deficit in one area, such as the bedroom example above may be offset by a positive deficit in another area, for example a really large backyard. Thus, the household will have to determine which deficit is more dissatisfactory to them and make their changes based on that decision.


The theory of housing adjustment has been well-validated through studies conducted over two decades. However, an important criticism to consider when discussing the use of theory is the risk of decelerating or narrowing the development of any field of research by adhering to one principal theory. As Elaine Pedersen (2007) has succinctly stated, “theory is everywhere,” yet not every theory used will be as prevalent or well-validated as Morris and Winter’s theory of housing adjustment. In fact, “there will be times when an initial theoretical context is important to a particular question or when the discovery of a new theoretical perspective is desired. When a new theoretical perspective is desired, the scholar will not define the research process by using a preexisting theory” (Pedersen, 2007, p.120). Thus, although the use of preexisting theories is undeniably important to the development of knowledge within a given field, so is the use of as-yet-unnamed theories.


Level of Analysis:
Primarily meso/household.

Methods:
Quantitative; may be used to inform qualitative studies.
Theoretical Model for the Housing Adjustment Theory
Morris & Winter (1996), p. 71.


Application:
The theory of housing adjustment has been used extensively to study housing satisfaction, housing preferences, residential mobility, and housing decisions. For example, Keller, Farr, Kirby, and Rusco (1997) referred to the Morris and Winter theory (1978) in their discussion regarding the role of housing norms, values, and cultural background in shaping housing satisfaction and housing preferences. Krofta, Morris, and Franklin (1994) used this theory to study housing decisions among older age cohorts, whereas Bruin & Cook (1997) looked at constraints and residential satisfaction among low-income, single-parent families.

References:
Bruin, M. & Cook, C. (1997). Understanding constraints and residential satisfaction among low-income single-parent families. Environment and Behavior, 29, 532-553.
“Earl W. Morris & Mary Winter” [Photograph]. Retrieved May 7, 2009 from Welcome to 3G Farms,
Keller, T.C., Farr, C.A., Kirby, S.D., & Risco, J. (1997). Housing and its influence on life and job satisfaction among clergy. Housing and Society, 24, 15-34.
Krofta,, J., Morris, E.W., & Franklin, E. (1994). Housing, health and the needs for help in older households: Differences among age cohorts. Housing and Society, 21, 76-89.
Morris, E.W. & Winter, M. (1975). A theory of family housing adjustment. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 37, 79-88.
Morris, E.W. & Winter, M. (1978). Housing, family, and society. New York: Wiley.
Morris, E.W. & Winter, M. (1994). Housing, family, and society (Rev. Ed.). Ames, IA: Morris & Winter.
Morris, E.W. & Winter, M. (1996). Housing, family, and society (Rev. Ed.). Ames, IA: Morris & Winter.
Pedersen, E. (2007). Theory is everywhere: A discourse on theory. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 25(1),106-128.

Steggell, C.D., Binder, S.K., Davidson, L.A., Vega, P.R., Hutton, E.D., & Rodecap, A.R. (2001). Exploring theories of human behavior in housing research. Housing and Society, 28(1/2), 3-32.