To what extent is there an association between crowding and relationship break-up? And if so, is it a causal relationship? Housing space may affect the probability of separation because of stress, lower subjective well being, and poor mental health, any of which could put pressure on the relationship with the partner and eventually cause a break-up. Using the Luxembourgish PSELL 2003–2011, we operationalize crowding with a subjective measure. We check for the following confounding factors: financial difficulties, home ownership, nationality, and type of household member. We find that there is no significant association between crowding and separation once confounders are taken into account, not to mention causality. Instead, home ownership turns out to be of the utmost importance in explaining the bivariate association between crowding and union dissolution.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
We investigate housing effects on the dissolution of marital and cohabitational relationships and use break-up, separation, and union dissolution interchangeably when referring to these kinds of dissolutions.
Some scholars use the net divorce/marriage ratio to compare countries’ divorce rates (i.e. the Crude Divorce Rate/Crude Marriage Rate). Unlike some statistics, it is not advisable to look at the net divorce/marriage ratio in Luxembourg since this figure might be misleading: One would think that Luxembourg would be in the ‘vanguard’ of countries when it comes to divorce [having a net divorce-to-marriage ratio of 67.5 in 2013 (Eurostat)]. The reason is that the marriage rate in the country is extremely low, and (or likely because) the country has exceptionally high immigration rates.
The housing cost overburden rate is the percentage of the population living in households that spent 40% or more of their equivalized disposable income on housing.
About half of the Luxembourgish population is of foreign descent, and about one-sixth of the population has a Portuguese passport (the biggest group of immigrants in the country).
Commuting to work in Luxembourg from another country is very common. The country is small and distances from towns like Trier, Thionville, or Arlon are close.
On the relationship between income and housing deprivation in Luxembourg, see Fusco (2015).
Note that this might be a proxy for financial stress since it is a subjective measure; a perception of the individual about their own situation.
Couples with a mixed background (whether it is e.g. education, age, ethnicity, or religion) have been found to be more likely to break-up than those from a non-mixed background (Janssen 2001). We assume the same applies to couples with heterogamous nationalities.
According to the diffusion hypotheses of Liefbroer and Dourleijn (2006), countries with a small proportion of cohabitors (in the Luxembourgish PSELL this proportion is 16%) show a ‘positive’ effect of cohabitation on the risk of union dissolution. This is due to the fact that cohabitors in such societies are a selected group with more modern values than married couples.
This is 1.6% in each wave (3.6% between-averages per wave), which is comparable to the wavely number of separations in the BHPS/Understanding Society Panels in the UK (about 1–2%).
We also considered including (poor) health of the household head into the model, but this can be a mediator. Hence, we decided to leave it out.
Because the logistic regression is a latent dependent variable model, the variance of the dependent variable is not fixed and the estimator for the regression coefficients requires an assumption about the distribution and the variance of the error terms in particular (Karlson et al. 2012; Mood 2010). The regression coefficients of the full and the reduced model (the model without confounders) are therefore a combination of the true regression coefficients and a rescaling factor.
Note that the concomitant variables are just control variables, in the sense they are included in both the reduced and the full model, but their residual is not calculated and included in the reduced model.
Without the kitchen, bathroom, outbuildings, or study/work rooms.
Meaning that the house is seen as a place of self-expression, which is made a place of one’s own, which provides security and stability (André et al. 2017).
André, S., DeWilde, C., & Muffels, R. (2017). Do housing wealth and tenure (change) moderate the relationship between divorce and subjective wellbeing? HOWCOME Working paper Series, (19). Tilburg University.
Baldassare, M. (1983). Residential crowding and social behavior. In J. S. Pipkin, M. E. LaGory, & J. R. Blau (Eds.), Remaking the city. Social science perspectives on urban design (pp. 148–161). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Baum, A., & Koman, S. (1976). Differential responses to anticipated crowding: Psychological effects of social and spatial density. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,34(3), 526–536. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-35188.8.131.526.
Baum, A., & Paulus, P. B. (1987). Crowding. In D. Stokols & I. Altman (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology (p. 533). New York: Wiley.
Becker, G., Landes, E. M., & Michael, R. T. (1977). An economic analysis of marital instability. The Journal of Political Economy,85(6), 1141.
Bodson, L., & Segura, J. (2010). Le divorce au Luxembourg: en droit et en chiffres. Les cahiers du ceps/instead. nr. 2010-01. Esch-sur-Alzette.
Boertien, D., & Härkönen, J. (2018). Why does women’s education stabilize marriages? The role of marital attraction and barriers to divorce. Demographic Research,38, 1241–1276.
Breen, R., & Karlson, K. B. (2014). Education and social mobility: New analytical approaches. European Sociological Review,30(1), 107–118. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jct025.
Breen, R., Karlson, K. B., & Holm, A. (2013). Total, direct, and indirect effects in logit and probit models. Sociological Methods & Research,42(2), 164–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124113494572.
Brons, M. D., & Härkönen, J. (2018). Parental education and family dissolution: A cross-national and cohort comparison. Journal of Marriage and Family,80(2), 426–443. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12461.
Brüderl, J., & Kalter, F. (2001). The dissolution of marriages: The role of information and marital-specific capital. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology,25(4), 403–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022250x.2001.9990262.
De Graaf, P. M., & Kalmijn, M. (2006). Change and stability in the social determinants of divorce: A comparison of marriage cohorts in the Netherlands. European Sociological Review,22(5), 561.
Dewilde, C. (2008). Divorce and the housing movements of owner-occupiers: A European comparison. Housing Studies,23(6), 809–832. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673030802423151.
European Commission. (2016). MISSOC: Social protection in the Member States of the European Union. Situation on 1 January 1998–2006 and evolution. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/social_protection/missoc_tables_en.htm. Accessed January 16, 2017.
EUROSTAT. (2014). Housing statistics. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Housing_statistics. Accessed 10 Apr 2017.
EUROSTAT. (2016). Housing statistics. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Housing_statistics. Accessed 11 Mar 2019.
Evans, G. W., & Lepore, S. J. (1993). Household crowding and social support: A quasiexperimental analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,65(2), 308–316.
Feijten, P., & van Ham, M. (2010). The impact of splitting up and divorce on housing careers in the UK. Housing Studies,25(4), 483–507. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673031003711477.
Foye, C. (2016). The relationship between size of living space and subjective well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-016-9732-2.
Fuller, T. D., Edwards, J. N., Vorakitphokatorn, S., & Sermsri, S. (1996). Chronic stress and psychological well-being: Evidence from Thailand on household crowding. Social Science and Medicine,42(2), 265–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(95)00089-5.
Fusco, A. (2015). The relationship between income and housing deprivation: A longitudinal analysis. Economic Modelling,49, 137–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2015.04.002.
Gambaro, L., Joshi, H., & Lupton, R. (2017). Moving to a better place? Residential mobility among families with young children in the Millennium Cohort Study. Population, Space and Place,23(8), e2072. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2072.
González, L., & Viitanen, T. K. (2009). The effect of divorce laws on divorce rates in Europe. European Economic Review,53, 127–138.
Goode, W. J. (1962). Marital satisfaction and instability: A cross-cultural class analysis of divorce rates. International Social Science Journal,14, 507–526.
Goux, D., & Maurin, E. (2005). The effect of overcrowded housing on children’s performance at school. Journal of Public Economics,89, 797–819.
Gove, W. R., Hughes, M., & Galle, O. R. (1979). Overcrowding in the home: An empirical investigation of its possible pathological consequences. American Sociological Review,44(1), 59–80.
Graff-Reed, R. (2004). Positive effects of stressful life events: Psychological growth following divorce. Oxford, OH: Miami University.
Guio, A.-C. (2018). Monoparentalité = Précarité? Paper presented at the Café-scientific Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Härkönen, J., & Dronkers, J. (2006). Stability and change in the educational gradient of divorce: A comparison of seventeen countries. European Sociological Review,22, 501–517. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcl011.
Högnäs, R. S., & Carlson, M. J. (2010). Intergenerational relationships and union stability in fragile families. Journal of Marriage and the Family,72(5), 1220–1233. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00760.x.
Jalovaara, M. (2001). Socio-economic status and divorce in first marriages in Finland 1991–93. Population Studies,55(2), 119–133.
Jalovaara, M. (2002). Socioeconomic differentials in divorce risk by duration of marriage. Demographic Research. https://doi.org/10.4054/demres.2002.7.16.
Janssen, J. (2001). Do opposites attract divorce? Dimensions of mixed marriage and the risk of divorce in the Netherlands. Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen, Nijmegen.
Karlson, K. B., Holm, A., & Breen, R. (2012). Comparing regression coefficients between same-sample nested models using logit and probit. Sociological Methodology,42(1), 286–313. https://doi.org/10.1177/0081175012444861.
Kaya, N., & Weber, M. J. (2003). Cross-cultural differences in the perception of crowding and privacy regulation: American and Turkish students. Journal of Environmental Psychology,23(3), 301–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0272-4944(02)00087-7.
Killewald, A. (2016). Money, work, and marital stability. American Sociological Review,81(4), 696–719. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122416655340.
Kitson, G. C., & Morgan, L. A. (1990). The multiple consequences of divorce: A decade review. Journal of Marriage and the Family,52(4, Family Research in the 1980s: The Decade in Review), 913–924.
Krapf, S., & Wagner, M. (unpublished work). Housing affordability, housing tenure status and household density—Are housing characteristics associated with union dissolution?
Kurz, K., & Blossfeld, H.-P. (2004). Home ownership and social inequality in comparative perspective. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.
Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Interpretation of statistical relations as research operation. In P. F. Lazarsfeld & M. Rosenberg (Eds.), The language of social research. Glencoe: Free Press.
Lersch, P. M., & Luijkx, R. (2015). Intergenerational transmission of homeownership in Europe: Revisiting the socialisation hypothesis. Social Science Research,49, 327–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2014.08.010.
Lersch, P. M., & Vidal, S. (2014). Falling out of love and down the housing ladder: A longitudinal analysis of marital separation and home ownership. European Sociological Review,30(4), 512–524. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcu055.
Liefbroer, A. C., & Dourleijn, E. (2006). Unmarried cohabitation and union stability: Testing the role of diffusion using data from 16 European countries. Demography,43(2), 203–221.
Matysiak, A., Styrc, M., & Vignoli, D. (2014). The educational gradient in marital disruption: A meta-analysis of European research findings. Population Studies,68(2), 197–215.
Mikolai, J., & Kulu, H. (2018). Divorce, separation, and housing changes: A multiprocess analysis of longitudinal data from England and Wales. Demography,55(1), 83–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-017-0640-9.
Ministry of Housing. (2017). Observatoire de l’Habitat. http://observatoire.liser.lu/.
Mood, C. (2010). Logistic regression: Why we cannot do what we think we can do, and what we can do about it. European Sociological Review,26(1), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcp006.
Mulder, C. H. (2006). Home-ownership and family formation. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment,21(3), 281–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-006-9050-9.
Mulder, C. H., Dewilde, C., van Duijn, M., & Smits, A. (2015). The association between parents’ and adult children’s homeownership: A comparative analysis. European Journal of Population = Revue Europeenne de Demographie,31(5), 495–527. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-015-9351-3.
Nieuwenhuis, R., & Maldonado, L. (2018). The triple bind of single-parent families: Resources, employment and policies. In R. Nieuwenhuis & L. Maldonado (Eds.), The triple bind of single-parent families: Resources, employment and policies to improve well-being. Bristol: Policy Press.
Notten, G., & De Neubourg, C. (2011). Monitoring absolute and relative poverty: “Not enough” is not the same as “much less”. Review of Income and Wealth,57(2), 247–269. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4991.2011.00443.x.
O’Connor, T., Pickering, K., & Dunn, J. (1999). Frequency and predictors of relationship dissolution in a community sample in England. Journal of Family Psychology,13(3), 436–449.
Palisi, B. J. (1984). Household crowding and well-being: A cross-cultural analysis. International Journal of Sociology of the Family,14(1), 17–31.
Papp, L. M., Cummings, E. M., & Goeke-Morey, M. C. (2009). For richer, for poorer: Money as a topic of marital conflict in the home. Family Relations,58(1), 91–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2008.00537.x.
Poortman, A.-R. (2005). How work affects divorce: The mediating role of financial and time pressures. Journal of Family Issues,26(2), 168–195.
Sierminska, E., & Doorley, K. (2013). To own or not to own? Household portfolios, demographics and institutions in a cross-national perspective. SOEP papers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research, nr. 611. DIW Berlin.
Solari, C. D., & Mare, R. D. (2012). Housing crowding effects on children’s wellbeing. Social Science Research,41(2), 464–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2011.09.012.
Thomas, M. J., Mulder, C. H., & Cooke, T. J. (2017). Linked lives and constrained spatial mobility: The case of moves related to separation among families with children. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers,42(4), 597–611. https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12191.
UN Statistics Division. (2017). Demographic Yearbook 2015. Retrieved from https://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/products/dyb/dyb2.htm.
van Damme, M. (2019). The negative female educational gradient of union dissolution: Towards an explanation in six European countries. In: D. Mortelmans (Ed.), Divorce in Europe. Berlin: Springer (forthcoming).
Wagner, M., & Mulder, C. H. (2015). Spatial mobility, family dynamics, and housing transitions. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie,67(1), 111–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-015-0327-4.
Wells, N. M., & Harris, J. D. (2007). Housing quality, psychological distress, and the mediating role of social withdrawal: A longitudinal study of low-income women. Journal of Environmental Psychology,27, 69–78.
I would like to thank Matthias Kuepie and Laureen Vanni for their help with the data at various stages of the data manipulation and analyses. I would also like to thank Stéfanie André, Marie-Sophie Callens, Alessio Fusco, Amparo Nagore Garcia, Julien Licheron, Andrea Mercatanti, Javier Oliviera, and Alex Theloudis for their valuable comments and suggestions.
The author did not receive any funding for this study.
Conflict of interest
The author declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Maike van Damme: Research affiliation at LISER, Living conditions department, 11 Porte des Sciences, L-4366, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
See Table 4.
About this article
Cite this article
van Damme, M. Overcrowded Housing and Relationship Break-up. Eur J Population 36, 119–139 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-019-09523-2
- Union dissolution