Effects of Crowding in a Student Environment¹

Abstract

Responses to crowding were examined in two student dormitories (Dorm A and Dorm B). Dorm B had more rooms per floor, smaller sized rooms, and a general layout which seemed conducive to a higher level of social stimulation. Students living in Dorm B reported being less involved with their roommates, being in a worse mmod, and experiencing more crowding. The role of crowding in mediating the relationship between type of dormitory as an independent variable and mood and interpersonal relationship as dependent variables was discussed.

Crowding Stress and Human Behavior

“…In addition, such students perceived a high degree of crowding and experienced greater overall stress than did their counterparts (Baum & Valins, 1977). Two other sets of investigators have found similar effects (Zuckerman, Schmitz, & Yosha, 1977;Stokols & Resnick, Note 4).…”

Population density, crowding and human behaviour

“…Initially, high density was seen as a necessary antecedent for crowding although this restriction has now been relaxed by some (Schiffenbauer et al, 1977). Similarly, the original proposition that crowding is only an aversive stimulus has also been dropped (Choi et al, 1976;Zuckerman et al, 1977). In his original conceptualization of crowding Stokols (i972a) distinguished between social crowding and non-social crowding.…”

“…However, they also found that the amounts of usable space and visual space were not related to the extent of crowding perception. Zuckerman et al (1977), questioning 80 students at an undisclosed location, found students in dormitory A felt less crowded, were in better moods and had closer relationships with their roommates than students in dormitory B where students had 13 per cent less space and in which design criteria produced high levels of potential social interaction. Comparing residents of rooms occupied by triples with those occupied by doubles, Baron et al (1976) found residents of triples expressed greater feelings of crowding, perceived less control over room activities, expressed more negative interpersonal attitudes and experienced a more negative room ambience.…”

“…One might also question whether some situations considered by researchers to reflect high density and crowding really are extreme enough to bring about observable effects (Wiesenthal and Buchalter, 1976). The problems generated by the artificiality of many studies are further exacerbated by the lengths of the tests (Zuckerman et al, 1977). Typically, their duration is about one to four hours; longer tests of more than a day's duration are very rare (Smith and Haythorn, 1972).…”