Cross-cultural differences in tolerance for crowding: Fact or fiction?

Abstract

It is widely believed that cultures vary in their tolerance for crowding. There is, however, little evidence to substantiate this belief, coupled with serious shortcomings in the extant literature. Tolerance for crowding has been confused with cultural differences in personal space preferences along with perceived crowding. Furthermore, the few studies that have examined cultural variability in reactions to crowding have compared subgroup correlations, which is not equivalent to a statistical interaction. Although the authors found a statistical interaction indicating that Asian Americans and Latin Americans differ in the way they perceive crowding in comparison to their fellow Anglo-American and African American citizens, all four ethnic groups suffer similar, negative psychological distress sequelae of high-density housing. These results hold independently of household income.

Household overcrowding and psychological distress among Nunavik Inuit adolescents: a longitudinal study

“…Moving into a bigger household with more opportunities for privacy would be beneficial for the mental health of parents of young children, but not for other adults [26]. Nevertheless, household overcrowding seems to be experienced similarly across cultures and ethnic groups [27–30]: Asian Americans, Latin Americans, Anglo Americans and African Americans suffer from psychological distress when they live in an overcrowded household [31]. Also, women living in an overcrowded household may be more likely than men to suffer from associated mental health problems [27,32], though this is not always observed [18].…”

Impacts of Store Crowding on Shopping Behavior and Store Image

“…While the effects of crowding on human behavior have been examined by several environmental design researchers (Evans & Lepore, 2000), exploration of the effects of layout design on perceived crowding and shopping behavior in the retail setting has been absent in the literature (Eroglu & Machleit, 1990;Machleit et al, 1994;Machleit et al, 2000;Turley & Milliman, 2000). Extension of such investigation, the impact of physical environments such as floor layout design, aisle tables, and ceiling height on retail crowding, from general living environments to the commercial retail domain may have significant practical and theoretical implications in understanding consumer shopping behavior (Turley & Milliman, 2000), and can provide store planners with an insightful guideline for addressing crowded shopping environments.…”

The Role of Collective Efficacy in Defendants’ Acceptance of Plea Bargaining: A Perspective on Housing Density

“…Specifically, high housing density results in psychological distress and negative interpersonal interactions across ethnic groups. Coupled with focal concern theory, defendants who suffer from high housing density tend to live in the communities with low collective efficacy, thereby leading to differential acceptance of plea bargaining [25]. Thus, housing density can be an effective proxy to predict a community's collective efficacy and a key factor in defendant's plea bargaining decisions.…”