Athens Center of Ekistics

Habitability — occupants' needs and dwelling satisfaction

Author(s): Dan Soen
Source: Ekistics, Vol. 46, No. 275 (MARCH/APRIL 1979), pp. 129-134
Published by: Athens Center of Ekistics
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/43620145
Accessed: 10-03-2017 20:02 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Athens Center of Ekistics is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Ekistics

This content downloaded from 128.122.230.148 on Fri, 10 Mar 2017 20:02:21 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Habitability - occupants' needs
and dwelling satisfaction
Dan Soen

satisfaction
Dr Soen is Research Professor at the Interdisciplinary Center for at a certain point in time can be defined only
Technological Analysis and Forecasting, Tel Aviv University. He terms.8
in relative
has contributed several articles to EKISTICS, the last oneThebeing
actual satisfaction of the occupant can be defined
"Social distress in settlements in Israel," January 1976. The
in two ways: as a clear, explicit declaration by the oc-
present article is taken from New T rends in U rban Planning (Per-
cupant that the apartment pleases him, or as the absence
gamon Press 1979), pp 119-32. This was edited by Dan Soen
of a complaint when an opportunity to complain about the
and contains the papers given at an International Symposium
at Tel Aviv, December 1977. apartment is given to the occupant.9
As stated, numerous studies have dealt with the prob-
lem of occupant satisfaction with the apartment. Most
Habitability and occupant's satisfaction do not adopt the overall approach. In different studies
one finds, therefore, a positive correlation between the
The literature dealing with the determination of the stan-occupant's satisfaction with his apartment and various
dard measurement of housing is fairly abundant.1 Thespecific factors.
basic problem of anyone trying to deal with the generalFor instance, Mogey and Morris have found that satis-
analysis of the subject is that the approaches found in thefaction depends on a whole system of beliefs and opinions
literature are rather specific; this means that some stu-
that the occupant entertains in respect to his dwelling
dies concentrate on the social aspect of the subject, and which are not connected with its physical charac-
others deal with the economic aspect, and others exa- teristics.10 Riemer connected this satisfaction with the
mine the political aspects or the environmental, patho- value of the apartment in the market.11 Back has stated
logical, psychological, physiological and even anthropo- that a condition for satisfaction is ownership of the apart-
morphic aspects of housing.2 ment as against rental of one.12 Rossi came to the con-
Only a small part of the literature deals with an overallclusion that satisfaction is a function of the occupant's
approach to the subject,3 the reason for this limitation neighbors, or of his opinion of them.13 A whole series of
probably being due to the fact that those dealing with the investigators have maintained the opinion that satisfac-
problem of occupants' satisfaction with their apartments tion results from the proximity of friends or members of
have not yet developed a dependable research metho- a related group in the neighborhood.14 Riemer and Cot-
dology for the overall study of habitability.4 tan saw in the area units per head the point of departure
In the final count, one may say that anyone dealingfor satisfaction.15 Mogey and Morris thought the number
with housing faces a much more complex problem than of rooms per family to be the factor that determines satis-
the provision of shelter. Housing quality is influencedfaction,16 and Chapin pointed to the availability of space
by a whole series of factors - engineering, social, be- for different uses as the determinant.17 Morris and
havioral and others,5 as has been formulated by AmosMogey make satisfaction dependent on the possession
Rapoport.6 of a private bathroom and kitchen.18 On the other hand,
The house is an institution, not just a structure, created for aWilner, Walkley and Cook considered satisfaction to arise
complex set of purposes. Because building a house is a cul-
from the absence of various nuisances (such as rats,
tural phenomenon, its form and organization are greatly in-
insects, etc.),19 whereas Oates maintained the opinion
fluenced by the cultural milieu to which it belongs. Very early
that the level of services supplied by the local authority
in recorded time, the house became more than shelter for
is a contribution to satisfaction. Gallogy saw the habi-
primitive man, and almost from the beginning, "function" was
tability, convenience of the apartment and the physical
much more than a physical or utilitarian concept. Religious
ceremonial has almost always preceded and accompanied appearance
its of the surroundings as a decisive factor.190
foundation, erection, and occupation. If provision of shelter In later studies attempts were made to adopt overall
approaches while using more accurate techniques. It
is the passive function of the house, then its positive purpose
is the creation of an environment best suited to the way of life
was found, as a result, that satisfaction is a function of a
of a people - in other words, a social unit of space. whole series of factors. Thus, for instance, Western, Wel-
The same complexity finds its expression in the state- don and Tan Tsu Haung adopted the technique of factor
ment by Max Sorre that the house is the physical expres- analysis in their examination of occupant's satisfaction
sion of what he calls Genre de Vie - a term which em-in Singapore, and found satisfaction to depend on nine
braces, in his view, all cultural, spiritual, material andvariables in the following descending order: sani-
main
social factors affecting the apartment.7 tary facilities, washing facilities, cooking facilities, size
Furthermore, the quality of housing is not static, of
since
apartment, living rooms, ventilation, noise factor, re-
it varies in accordance with different circumstances.
fuse disposal services and cleanliness of the neighbor-
Since the occupant's satisfaction is not absolute,hood.20
it fol-The first-named source, which contributed a
considerable weight to these variables, substantiated
lows that the quality of t'he dwelling unit or the occupant's

Ekistics 275, March /April 1979 129

This content downloaded from 128.122.230.148 on Fri, 10 Mar 2017 20:02:21 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
about 25 percent of the variability of the factors which function of two key factors:
account for satisfaction with the surroundings. Within 1 . the stage in the occupant's life cycle
this basket of factors the quality of transportation cov- 2. the occupant's life style.
red 14 percent of the variability, quality of schools and
availability of services 7 percent each, safety and clean-
1. Stage of life cycle: Beyer has distinguished four se-
liness 5 percent.21 parate stages, each of which has a planning projection
On the other hand, Onibokun adopted a systematic ap- on the occupant's needs:27
proach for measuring two indices: the relative habitabi- a) The young couple stage - a young core family with
lity index (RHl) and the relative satisfaction index (RSI).22 no :hildren;
These indices included 74 variables, out of which 28 be-
b) Founding family - a couple with children below
longed to the dwelling subsystem. The most important
the age of 8;
characteristic that transpired from the analysis of the
c) Growing family - parents and children aged 8-18;
occupant's replies within the scope of examination of this
subsystem were, in descending order: adequacy of the d) The contracting family - pair of aging parents,
internal space - number of rooms and their size; ad- some of whose children have already passed the
equacy of the dwelling equipment - washing facilities, age of 18.
storage and cupboards; type of apartment; other apart- However, in general, it is usual to distinguish three stages
ment characteristics; physical quality of the apartment; in the life cycle:
and, lastly, privacy in the apartment. a) Stage of growing family - the stage in which the
The positive correlation between the above-mentioned core family is established and produces its off-
variables and the satisfaction with the dwelling appears
spring;
logical enough, and in some studies one occasionally
finds confirmation of these correlations. However, from b) Stage of contracting family - the stage where the
time to time one encounters findings that do not agree
children grow and begin to leave their parents'
with one another.
home;
c) The static stage - the stage at which the children
Thus, for instance, it is found that the tenants in the
houses provided by the American Ministry of Defence, have left their parents' home, and the parents con-
where the apartments were fairly spacious, were less tinue to live by themselves in the dwelling unit.
satisfied with their apartments than were the dwellers in
2. Lifestyle: This is an outcome of a whole series of fac-
old, less spacious, students' quarters.23 In another study
tors including culture, socio-economic status, character
it was found that 6 percent of those surveyed (white-
of the family (extrovert or introvert), etc. Nevertheless,
collar workers) lived in the same apartment as their
owing to the fact that the requirements vary from family
relatives. Twenty-one percent of those surveyed (blue-
to family in accordance with the interplay of the life cycle
collar workers) also lived together with relatives. How-
stages and the life style (this interplay being capable of
ever, the ratio of complaints on congestion was inverse:
schematic representation in matrix), it is possible to
29 percent of the white-collar and only 6 percent of the
speak of a morphological framework of the basic require-
blue-collar workers complained about housing conges-
ments, such as:28
tion.24 Lastly, Back's study showed that persons who
lived in high congestion were more satisfied with their a) Need for shelter and security;
apartments than those who lived in less congested dwel-b) Physiological needs;
ling units.25 c) Social needs;
The conclusion to be drawn is that the dwelling units
affect satisfaction within the framework of a number of d) Aesthetic needs.
constraints.26 One first has to take into account that the As far as the relative importance of these needs is
occupant's satisfaction expresses the difference be- concerned, one may quote Clare Cooper:29
tween his previous dwelling and the present one. In other There is . . . one simple rule of thumb that pertains to choos-
words, one person is likely to be less satisfied with his ing between conflicting needs. The most basic human en-
vironmental need is for shelter; we are assuming that any
spacious villa than someone else with his small apart-
ment. The differences in the satisfaction factor are likely housing design, however maladapted to the resident's social
needs, will at least provide that. When people's shelter needs
to be due to the previous dwellings of the two people. have been satisfied, they become concerned about security
Secondly, people's dwelling desires correspond to what from outside threats, real or imagined. When the needs of
they consider practical, and this is not too far from what shelter and security are taken care of, people begin to de-
is already in the family's possession. Thirdly, since satis- mand that their housing also fulfill needs for comfort and con-
faction is a function of a whole series of factors, some venience. There may be little concern for exterior aesthetics,
variables are liable to cancel each other out and to affect but considerable concern about having a house that is cozy
negatively the satisfaction of the occupant. and comfortable and easy to maintain.
At the next stage in the hierarchy of needs, when comfort
and convenience are taken for granted, the house is seen as
Occupant's needs - general survey a locale for socializing and self-expression. Finally, when all
these previous needs are taken care of, people become con-
In the systematic approach, the occupant's satisfaction cerned about the aesthetics of their house and neighborhood
with his dwelling depends to a large extent on the key . . . So, for example, if the choice is between aesthetics and
question of whether the dwelling unit meets his needs. comfort, the latter must come first; if the choice is between
But, how is it possible to define the occupant's needs? security and self-expression, the former must come first. That
First of all, one may state that the basic needs are a is, in a hierarchy extending from lower or more basic needs

130 Ekistics 275, March/ April 1979

This content downloaded from 128.122.230.148 on Fri, 10 Mar 2017 20:02:21 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 to higher or more specialized needs, from shelter, security, Among the Iroquois another order obtained, not a cen-
comfort, convenience, through socializing, self-expression, tral core, but one long house within which the various
and aesthetics, a lower need must always take precedence family units were concentrated on both sides. Along the
over a higher one. Not until the lower needs have been satis- length of a giant structure 80 ft. long and 70 ft. wide was
factorily met will the higher ones emerge into consciousness.
a kind of public area and a central fireplace. Among the
With regard to the spectrum of possible solutions for Pomo Indians the families are grouped in yet another way
everything concerning the basic needs of man, again - in the form of dwelling clusters.
there exists a fairly ramified literature. All these examples clearly show how it is possible to
For instance, man has a physiological basic need to find different planning solutions for the same basic needs
breathe. The Eskimos do not see any contradiction be- of man in a series of cultures. One may note that this can
tween this basic need and the concentration of pungent be easily proved also in Western cultures. Furthermore,
smells within their igloos and therefore take no steps to in the Western culture it is sometimes appropriate to look
solve this problem of smells: a problem which a Western for different solutions to the same basic needs to solve
man would find an unbearable nuisance.30 The same ap- the problem of different habits, even when considering
plied to the Japanese, to whom the smell of the privies the housing of families in the same stage of the life cycle
was accepted as an inseparable part of the traditional and with the same general life style. Thus, for instance,
home.31 A hint of this can also be found in the Mishna: eating habits are likely to affect different planning re-
"Rich is the one whose privy is close to his table." quirements. The family which gathers for formal meals
Again, there is a whole series of cultures where sanc- in the living room differs from the one which eats infor-
tity attaches to smoke and therefore this is also encour- mally in the kitchen. The family that eats together at
aged in the home. No contradiction is seen between the fixed times differs from the one in which each member
need to breathe and the dwelling being enveloped in takes food for himself as he wishes at any time of the
smoke.32 Western culture, however, considers smoke day. Rapoport has pointed this out as follows:38
a nuisance, although with different degrees of tolerance. The prevalence of the barbecue in Los Angeles affects more
The same applies to the different attitudes to open than just house form, since increasing use of the backyard,
windows and the fear of night chills in various cultures, with its barbecue and swimming pool, makes it, and the
which find expression in the planning of the house.33 house, more than ever the center of life.
Likewise, the attitude to darkness, which the African There are variations in other parts of the dwelling and
tribe of Manaleke requires for religious observances, their use, such as the bathroom. In the study published
results in houses planned to be kept in darkness.34 Con- some ten years ago by Alexander Kira, he points out that
sequently, ventilation is also affected. the form of the bathroom is an outcome of man's attitude
Another physiological basic need is for food, without to his own body, to the question of rest, privacy, etc.39
which man cannot exist. With the Aztec tribe the kitchen In advertisements in the USA stress is often laid on the
was placed in a separate structure. With the Incas, cook- number of bathrooms in the apartment, which sometimes
ing took place in an open courtyard, while the tribe of exceeds the number of bedrooms in it.40 The basic hy-
Tuardas in North Africa lit fires within the tents for gienic problems remain but the importance attached to
warmth but cooked outside, and the Japanese cooked them and the forms of solutions found for them differ in
within a depression in the floor.35 This is an additional accordance with the attitudes and values maintained by
example of different solutions to the same basic needs. man and not necessarily according to utilitarian consi-
So much for physiological needs. However, there also derations. This is what determines, for instance, the
exist other basic needs, such as social ones, which in- preference for shower or bathub.41
clude the family. This brings us back to another one of the basic needs
The family is a universal social institution; there is notwhich are largely determined by the culture, although
a single culture where this institution is absent.36 How- not less than by the character, of man: the need for pri-
ever, the composition of the family and its framework are vacy. Although man is by nature a social being, he also
varied and different. These variations, of course, affect needs privacy. The attitude to privacy differs in different
the planning of the dwelling unit. The house intended for Western countries, such as Germany, USA and Britain 42
the whole family differs essentially from that intended for and even within those countries in different subcultures.
the extended family. The housing needs of a mono- In the process of massive urbanization which has encom-
gamous family are radically different from those of the passed humanity in the past century, stress has been
polygamous family. laid during the last two generations on the preservation
However, even when the same type of family is con- of man's individuality, in an attempt to protect man from
sidered, there are still various ways of meeting its needs. conformist pressures of group life. The prevalent at-
Thus, for instance, one finds the extended family within titude is that a good plan must preserve a suitable ba-
the tribe of Kabyles in North Africa, the Iroquois of the lance between the community and the individual. The
USA and the Southwestern Pomos of California. In all theoreticians of garden cities intended to provide green
three tribes there exists the same basic social framework open spaces for general use, maintained by the com-
munity. The prevailing tendency at present is to estab-
but one finds entirely different dwelling units in each.37
With the Kabyles the whole family lives in one inde- lish in the town a spatial hierarchy: private space at-
pendent structure. The inner core is common and is sur-tached to the dwelling unit, semi-private space for use
rounded by a row of thatched houses which shelterby a group of neighbors and ending with public open
the
spaces in the "quarter."43
extended family. A similar arrangement of multiple hou-
ses around an internal core is also found among the From the sociological and psychological social as-
Incas. pects, it is today agreed that privacy has positive functions

Ekistics 275, March /April 1979 131

This content downloaded from 128.122.230.148 on Fri, 10 Mar 2017 20:02:21 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
in the development of personality. The possibility of As stated earlier, within the system of the occupant's
voluntarily detaching oneself from the group makes the needs there is a hierarchy of priorities which is headed
individual willing to return to full activity within the group. by the need for shelter and security, and which ends
When privacy disappears there is danger to harmony in with the aesthetic need, for which most occupants only
the social interrelationships.44 find time when all the other needs have been met.
Here the central question to be asked from the plan- Thus, for instance, Clare Cooper states that the vari-
ner's point of view is: How is it possible to define the ables that foster the satisfaction of low income people
term "privacy"? with their apartments are fixed in accordance with the
In a series of articles written by the sociologist Mar- following, in descending order:52
garet Willis, following a questionnaire study 45 three cate-
gories of privacy have been distinguished: a) internal space sufficient for family activities;
a) privacy within the house; b) rooms and building materials facilitating easy and
inexpensive maintenance;
b) privacy in relation to other people, such as neigh-
bors; c) visual and oral privacy from neighbors and pas-
sersby;
c) privacy which in its physical form is security against
being watched. d) sufficient privacy within the apartment;
Various authors have expressed the view that privacy e) pleasant internal forms of the apartment;
with regard to surroundings is more important to a per- f) attractive external appearance of the building
son than privacy in the family circle.46 This has been which affords some individual characteristics.
aptly expressed by Clare Cooper as follows:47 "... if a
choice has to be made, the design should emphasize The aesthetic needs thus occur last.
privacy from the outside over internal privacy." Nevertheless, there exists a wide professional litera-
What can also be found in literary sources is that the ture on this subject for the simple reason that in the af-
meaning attached to privacy and the value given to it fluent Western society most basic needs of the occupant
depend apparently on the socio-economic standing. are met in any case, and therefore he can find time for
Thus, for instance, Cutler found in a study carried out by aesthetic needs. Add to this, that the housing unit often
her in New York that one half of the families belonging serves the prestige needs of the middle class in an am-
to the low socio-economic stratum complained of the bitious, upwardly mobile society.
lack of privacy in comparison to 10 percent of members Professionals agree that the external appearance of
of the middle class. No person of the higher class pre- the building helps greatly in its sale. There are, never-
sented a similar complaint.48 When requested to define theless, considerable differences among people in their
the basis of privacy, membersof the lowersocio-economic readiness to give up internal space for external appear-
stratum mentioned a room to oneself as the distinguish- ance. In Britain, for instance, occupants of public hous-
ing factor to twice the extent that it was mentioned by ing say, when asked, that the appearance of the building
members of the upper stratum (70 percent versus 34 makes no difference. The internal features of the apart-
percent). On the other hand, 44 percent of members of ment are the ones that matter.53 Nevertheless, John
the upper stratum and only 8 percent of the lower stra- Raven concluded, from the great popularity of houses in
tum mentioned such factors as courtyard privacy, rooms the bungalow style, that these declarations do not reflect
that can be closed, additional bathrooms in the apart- reality. Since buildings in this style are not particularly
ment, guest rooms in the apartment, and a domestic help convenient, it appears that it is not the convenience that
not residing with the family. makes them popular Since they do not represent dwel-
In connection with privacy, it is perhaps apt to quote lings of the higher stratum, the reason for this popularity
Chapin:49 is not imitation of the upper classes. Through elimination,
Thus privacy becomes a value. One may question the validity there remains the aesthetic consideration - the external
of imputing to others the desires, needs, and wants that are appearance of the building. People are unable to define
characteristic in this respect of nervously high-strung, sophis- exactly what they like and what they dislike in their build-
ticated, and responsive intellectual persons. Perhaps the ing - they simply know that the building either pleases
common run of home occupants is not as sensitive to depri- or displeases them.
vation of privacy as some, but it is safer to assume that some
The same aesthetic consideration also finds expres-
individuals born to the common run of humanity will be sen-
sion in the wish of the occupant to give his dwelling, as
sitive. . . Privacy is needed for thinking, reflection, reading
far as possible, an individual character both inside and
and study, and for aesthetic enjoyment and contemplation.
Intrusions on the fulfillment of personal desires need to be out. Thus, for instance, evidence is found in the USA that
shut off. . . both in the working stratum and in the middle class there
Finally, one may note that Osmond has distinguished is a wish for independent units.54 Clare Cooper, for in-
between two basic kinds of space:50 stance, argues that it is because many of the lower stra-
tum feel so humiliated and dehumanized by different
a) socio-petal, which brings people together:
government departments (social security, employment
b) socio-fugal, which removes people from one an- bureau, also housing, etc.) that they want their apart-
other.
ments to give an impression of identity and singularity.
The consensus among behavioral scientists is that the There is also strong evidence from Britain which points
spatial organization of the optimal dwelling unit must be in the same direction, namely to the wish of the occupant
such as to permit the family both interaction and privacy to live in a unit which has a personal stamp. To start
(and should therefore include both socio-petal and socio- with, this comes into expression in the great reluctance
fugal elements).51 of the British to live in multi-story buildings. One of the

*^2 E k is tics 275, March /April 1979

This content downloaded from 128.122.230.148 on Fri, 10 Mar 2017 20:02:21 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
assumptions is that the people are afraid that the unifor- Many architects maintain that the occupants are not
mity attached to the outside appearance of the dwelling able to distinguish between good and bad; therefore,
units will also affect their personality - it will enforce there is no importance and meaning to records of their
and force conformity on them and will compel them to be preferences and satisfaction: architects are the ones
similar to one another. One of those surveyed expressed who have to educate and plan for the public. However,
a definite fear of regimentation.55 in a democratic Western society, to ignore the dweller's
However, in a positive way this develops into an ex- preferences harbors danger. If the built apartments are
pression of individuality that the occupants endeavour not desirable, then they are only occupied when there
to give their dwelling units after having entered them. is no alternative and with a heavy heart. Therefore, a
Thus, for instance, Amos Rapoport refers to the dwelling direct influence exists between the interrelationships of
group of the Prestonpans, Inchview, where standard units man and his built surroundings.
were built and standard gardening plans supplied to the In brief, one may restate Michelson's conclusions:62
occupants. Nevertheless, each of the occupants devel- Thus, even though a lack of wisdom may prevent people from
oped his own form of garden. Not a single one of them choosing what is clearly in their own best interests, it is their
adopted the planner's model.56 The same happened to preferences - and not architectural theories - that will, in
the fences in the front which showed many variations the long run, influence much of what happens in the cities.
from house to house, bringing in an expression of the
singular personal stamp. In places where it was not pos- References
sible to vary the frontage - as in Alfred Street in this
town - personal characteristics were given expression 1. A.A. Twichell and A. Solow, "A technique for the appraisal
in variations of the rear of the buildings which faced the of housing in urban problem areas," The Planners Journal
(1942:18), pp 18-28; L. Pollard, "Technique for determining
courtyard.57
the relative housing quality," Journal of the American Insti-
One may here include the summary by Amos Rapo- tute of Planners (1953:19), pp 234-37; A. E. Martin, "Environ-
port:58 ment, housing and health," Urban Studies (1967:3), pp 1-21 ;
Much new public or private housing no longer provides these N.N. Franklin, "The concept and measurements of minimum
possibilities. There is complete anonymity and lack of pos- living standards," International Labor Review (1967:95), pp
sibility to change, adapt or personalize in both buildings and 271-98; R.D. Katz, Intensity of Development and Livability
landscape, even though in other respects such housing may of Multi-Family Housing Projects (US Federal Housing Ad-
be admirable. Tenants are normally forbidden to paint the ministration, Washington, D.C., 1963); American Public
exterior woodwork in colours of their own choice. Projects Health Association, An Appraisal Method for Measuring
such as Park Hill, Sheffield, deny any outside expression the Quality of Housing; A Yardstick for Health Officials and
other than curtains, and these are lost in the vast scale of the Planners (New York, United Nations, 1950); "Methods for
blocks, while the entries (which seem of great importance establishing targets and standards for housing and environ-
in most houses) are completely anonymous with the doors mental development," Ekistics (January 1969), pp 3-14; The
placed side-by-side in a complete denial of any territoriality. Committee of International Federation for Housing and
The only remaining identification of entries is through the Town Planning, "Minimum standards for family dwellings,"
doormats, and even they disappear at Hyde Park, Sheffield. British Housing and Town Planning Review (1957:12), pp
The new plastic panels recently introduced in housing reduce 36-37.
even the possibility of using windows for self-expression. In 2. Amos Rapoport and Newton Watson, "Cultural variability in
the few cases where possibilities are provided, although not
physical standards," in Robert Gutman, ed., People and
intended or foreseen, advantage is taken of them - gardens
Buildings (Basic Books, New York, 1972), pp 33-53.
and balconies are changed, frames filled with lattices and
3. G. Francescato, S. Weidemann, J.R. Anderson and R. Che-
fences, and the maximum personalization possible occurs. noweth, "A systematic method of evaluating multifamily
Just as Rapoport summarized this aspect for Britain, housing," in DMG-DRS Journal, 9,2 (April-June 1975), pp
153-58, as well as in Ekistics, 242 (Jan. 1976), pp 60-63;
so - much earlier - did Catherine Bauer for the USA.59
A.G. Onibokun, "Evaluating consumers' satisfaction with
After studying various findings, she came to the con- housing - an application of a systems approach," in Jour-
clusion that one should avoid rigid uniformity and she nal of the American Institute of Planners (May 1974), pp
pointed out that monotony is the greatest danger in any 189-200.
large housing project. According to her: 4. T.M. Fraser, "Relative habitability of dwellings," Ekistics,
Most Americans do not want urbanity and uniformity - most 27 (January 1969), pp 15-18.
of them want individuality, the sense of unique and personal 5. Amos Rapoport, House Form and Culture (Prentice Hall,
qualities pertaining to each dwelling, and want the charm of New Jersey, 1969), pp 46ff; W. Michelson, Man and His
historical accretion and personal craftsmanship. Urban Environment - A Sociological Approach (Addison-
Wesley Publishing Co., 1970); D.R.H. Phillips, "Comfort in
In brief, the need to give a personal character to the home," Royal Society of Health Journal (1967:87), pp 237-
dwelling unit (and for what is called the need to territori- 46; Herbert Gans, The Urban Villagers (New York, The Free
alize) has been discussed by several investigators.60 Press, 1962); J. Raven, "Sociological evidence on housing,
This need to personalize includes psychological, social 2: the home environment," The Architectural Review (1967:
and cultural dimensions in addition to the aesthetic ones. 142), pp 236-45.
6. Amos Rapoport, see note 5.
Summary 7. Max Sor re, Les fondements de la geographie humaine (Ar-
mand Colin, Paris, 1952).
In summation, it appears that the complex of basic re- 8. D.R.H. Phillips, see note 5; A.G. Onibokun, see note 3.
quirements which should be met by an adequate dwel-9. Alvin L. Schorr, "Housing and its effects," in H.M. Proshan-
ling unit is exceedingly varied, and one can instance an sky, W.H. Ittelson and L.G. Rivlin, eds., Environmental Psy-
aspect that was brought up a few years ago by William chology: Man and his Physical Setting (Holt, Reinhart &
Michelson.61 Winston, New York, 1970), p 323.

13Q
Ekistics 275, March /April 1979

This content downloaded from 128.122.230.148 on Fri, 10 Mar 2017 20:02:21 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
10. J. Mogey and R. Morris, "An Analysis of Satisfaction," type- 30. Amos Rapoport, see note 5, p 61 .
script, 1960, quoted by Schorr in Proshansky et al, op. cit. 31. Bruno Tant, Houses and People of Japan (Sanseido, Tokyo
11. S. Riemer, "Maladjustment to the family home," American 1958), d 38.
Socioloaical Review (1945:10), dd 642 -48. 32. Pierre Deffontaines, Geographie et religions, 9th ed. (Librai-
12. K. Back, Slums, Projects and People. Social Psychological rie Gallimard, Paris, 1948), pp 29-30.
Problems of Relocation in Puerto Rico (Duke University 33. Amos RaDODort, see note 5, d 62.
Press, Durham, NC, 1962). 34. P. Deffontaines, see note 32, pp 32.
13. P. Rossi, Why Families Move (The Free Press of Glencoe, 35. Lord Ragland, The Temple and the House (W.W. Norton &
1955). Co., New York, 1964), p 47.
14. Marc Fried and Peggy Gleicher, "Some sources of residen- 36. A.M. Arensberg and S.T. Kimball, Culture and Community
tial satisfaction in an urban slum," Journal of the American (Harcourt, Brace & World, New York, 1965); Bernard Faber,
Institute of Planners, 27 :4 (1961), p 31 U; Wardell Bell and ed., Kinship and Family Organization (John Wiley & Sons,
Marion D. Boat, "Urban neighborhood and informal social New York, 1966).
relations," American Journal of Sociology, 62 (1957), p 392; 37. Amos Rapoport, see note 5, pp 63-64.
Scott Greer, "Urbanism reconsidered: a comparative study 38. Ibid., d 131.
of local areas in a metropolis," American Sociological Re- 39. Alexander Kira, The Bathroom, Cornell University Center for
view, 21 (February, 1956), p 22; Olavi Janus, "Det industrial- Housing and Environmental Studies, Research Report No. 7
iserade samhallet och konfakten met slaktingarna," Re- (1966).
search Reports 8 (Uppsala); Floyd Doťson, "Patterns of 40. Amos Rapoport, see note 5, p 131 .
voluntary association among urban working class families," 41 . Alexander Kira, see note 28, p 260.
American Sociological Review, 25 (1951). pp 687-93; Joel 42. Edward T. Hall, The Hidden Dimension (Doubleday & Co.,
Smith, William H. Form and Gregory P. Stone, "Local inti- New York, 1 966), pp 1 23-37.
macy in a middle-sized city," American Journal of Sociology, 43. Robert Gutmann, ed., People and Buildings (Basic Books,
40 (1954), p 281; Robert B. Zehner, "Neighbourhood and New York, 1972).
community satisfaction in new towns and less planned sub- 44. Barry Schwartz, "The social psychology of privacy," in Gut-
urbs," Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 37:6 man, op. cit., pp 152-69.
(1971), pp 379-85; R.J. Crothers, "Factors related to the 45. Margaret Willis, "What is privacy?", The Architects' Journal
community index of satisfactoriness," Ekistics, 30:177 (May 29, 1963), pp 1137-41; "Overlooking," The Architects'
(1970), pp 107-109; Terence Lee, "Urban neighbourhood Journal (June 5, 1963), pp 1181-87; "Personal relationship,"
as a social-spatial scheme," Human Relations, 21:3 (1968); The Architects' Journal (June 12, 1963), pp 1231-36; "De-
Henry Sanofi, "Social perception of the ecological neigh- signing for privacy," Ekistics (January 1964), pp 47-51 .
bourhood," Ekistics, 30:117 (1970), pp 130-32; also: "User 46. Gloria Sanduik, B.B. Schellenbarger and M. Mahoney Ste-
assessments of a low-income residential environment: Cha- venson, Resident Evaluation of Four Unit Development: Eu-
pel Hill, North Carolina, USA," Ekistics, 39:235 (1975), ppgene, Oregon (Eugene Planning Dept., July 1973).
390-93. 47. Clare C. Cooper, see note 28, d 260.
15. H. Cottan, cited in F. Chapin, "Some housing factors 48. re-Virginia Cutler, Personal and Family Values in the Choice of
lated to mental hygiene," American Journal ot Public Health a Home (Cornell University, New York, 1947).
(1951:41), p84i. 49. Stuart F. Chapin, "Some factors related to mental hygiene,"
16. J. Mogey and R. Morris, see note 10. Journal of Social Issues, 7, 1 92 (1 951 ).
17. F. C lapin, "The effects of slum clearance and rehousing 50.onHumphrey Osmond, "Some psychiatric aspects of design,"
family and community relationships in Minneapolis," Ameri- in L.B. Hammond, ed., Who Designs America (Anchor Books,
can Journal of Sociology (1938), pp 744-63; F. Chapin, see Doubleday & Co., New York, 1966).
note 15. 51. R.H. Smith, D.B. Downer, M.T. Lynch and M. Winter, "Pri-
18. J. Mogey and R. Morris, see note 10. vacy and interaction within the family as related to dwelling
19. D. Wilner, R. Walkley and S. Cook, Human Relations in Inter- space," Journal of Marriage and the Family (August 1969),
racial Housing (University of Minnesota Press, 1955). vol. 31, no. 3, p 561.
19a. W.E. Oates, "The effects of property taxes and local public 52. Clare C. Cooper, see note 28, pp 258-59.
spending on property values," Journal of Political Economy 53. John Raven, see note 5.
(November-December, 1969). 54. Clare C. Cooper, "Resident dissatisfaction in multifamily
19b. F. Gallogy, "Housing decisions in selecting a residence in housing," in William H. Smith, ed., Behavior, Design and
planned town house," Home Economics Res. Journal (1974: Policy Aspects of Human Habitats (University of Wisconsin,
2 [4]), p 251 Green Bay, 1972); Carl Norcross, Townhouses and Condo-
20. J.S. Western, P.D. Weldon, Tan Tsu Haung, "Housing and miniums: Residents' Likes and Dislikes (Urban Land Insti-
satisfaction with environment in Singapore," Journal of the tute, 1973).
American Institute of Planners (May, 1974), p 205. 55. John Raven, see note 5.
21. Ibid. 56. Amos Rapoport, "The personal element in housing: an argu-
22. A.G. Onibokun, see note 3. ment for open-ended design," RIBA Journal (July 1968), p
23. R. Kennedy, "Sociopsychological problems of housing de- 304.

sign," in L. Festinger, S. Schachter & K. Back, eds., Social57. Ibid.

Pressures in Informal Groups (Harper & Bros., New York, 58. Ibid., p 305.
1950), pp 202-20. 59. Catherine Bauer, "Social questions in housing and com-
24. J. Dean, "The ghosts of home ownership," Journal of Social munity planning," Journal of Social Issues, vol. 7, nos. 1
Issues (1951 :7, 182), pp 59-68. & 2 (1951).
25. K. Back, see note 12. 60. Robert Sommer, "Alien building," Arts and Architecture
26. A.L. Schorr, see note 9. (April 1966), pp 18-19; Humphrey Osmond, see note 50,
27. Glenn H. Beyer, Farm Housing in the Northeast (Cornell Uni- p 292; R. Ardrey, The Territorial Imperative (Atheneum; New
versity Press, 1949), pp 10-11. York, 1966).
28. Clare C. Cooper, Easter Hill Village - Some Social Implica-
61 . William Michelson, "Most people don't want what architects
tions for Design (The Free Press, New York, 1975), pp 209- want," Trans-Action, vol. 5 (July-August 1968), pp 37-38.
11. 62. Ibid.
29. Ibid., p 21 1 .

134 Ekistics 275, March /April 1979

This content downloaded from 128.122.230.148 on Fri, 10 Mar 2017 20:02:21 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms