Privacy regulation, territorial displays, and effectiveness of individual functioning.

Abstract

This study examines privacy regulation in terms of mechanisms used by college students to make themselves more or less accessible to one another, dormitory room decorations, and the relationships between privacy regulation, personal displays, and short-and long-term adjustment to a university setting.Newly entering Ist-year students completed a questionnaire that assessed privacy mechanisms, satisfaction with the university, and other topics. Content analyses of photos of room decorations were also completed. Those who eventually dropped out of the university over a year later had fewer and less effective privacy mechanisms, were less satisfied with university life, and were less active in various campus events. Although dropouts tended to decorate their rooms more than "stayins," their decorations showed less diversity and less commitment to the university setting.This study examines privacy regulation in a college dormitory setting in terms of the mechanisms used by students to make themselves more or less accessible to one another, the personal displays or decorations exhibited by students, and the relationships between privacy regulation, personal displays, and short-and long-term adjustment to a university setting.The study was designed in accordance with a model of privacy regulation proposed by Altman (1975Altman ( , 1976Altman ( , 1977a. This framework defines privacy as "the selective control of access to the self" and as a dialectic process that includes both the opening and closing of the self to others. At certain times people seek contact with others, and at other times they desire to avoid social contact. Although seeking and avoiding social interaction are opposites, a dialectic perspective treats them as part of a unified social system. A related aspect of Altman's approach is that privacy regulation is hypothesized to involve a variety of behavioral mechanisms such as verbal and paraverbal behavior, nonverbal behavior, Requests for reprints should be sent to Irwin Altman,

Exploring the relationships among liminal transitions, symbolic consumption, and the extended self

“…A second function of symbolic possessions during transitional periods is their facilitation of the establishment of a new identity (Vinsel, Brown, Altman, & Foss 1980). By acquiring possessions symbolic of their new role, individuals facilitate the psychological transformation to the new state.…”

Liminal mothers’ negotiation of conflicting service consumption

“…From the positive perspective the importance of certain items may be heightened during such periods. Existing possessions help to facilitate consumers' passage or 'transport' their identity to a new role (Belk, 1992) and new possessions signal a transition's completion (Vinsel et al, 1980). Even in accounts where the liminal state itself is considered problematic the literature still advances a positive role for consumption where possessions may be used to 'fill the void' (Noble and Walker, 1997, p. 34) producing pleasurable feelings which compensate for a negative emotional state (Sneath et al, 2009).…”

Student Satisfaction towards the Personalization of Appearance in Online Learning Environments

“…There are some studies in the literature which explain how people personalize their offices (Brunia & Hartjes-Gosselink, 2009;Wells, Thelen, & Ruark, 2007;Wells, 2000), their isolated areas like the ones in the poles (Evans & Carrere, 1994), their dormitory rooms (Vinsel, Brown, Altman, & Carolyn, 1980), and patient rooms (Holahan & Saegert, 1973). Similarly, personalization on mobile phones that surround our lives, computers, and electronic products are taking place, and research articles on personalization of learning environment continue to increase day by day.…”