Residents' Coping Strategies in An Extended-Stay Hotel Home

Purpose: Housing affordability has been a chronic problem for many low-income families even before the current economic crisis, which has resulted in an enduring season of housing foreclosures and evictions (Wardrip, Pelletiere, & Crowley, 2009). Many families have been displaced and are now moving from one motel or extended-stay hotel to the next as a housing solution (Eckholm, 2009; Jenkins, 2009; LeBlanc, 2008). The experience of shelter displacement is richly represented in the literature (Delaney, 2004; Manzo, Kleit, & Couch, 2008; Moorer, 2006). However, the experiences of families coping with residential stress in extended-stay hotels are not as well known.

When dwelling conditions cause stress, such as feeling crowded or unsafe, there can be disruptions in the positive functioning and well being of individuals and their families since housing and health are interconnected (Diez Roux, 2003; Fullilove & Fullilove, 2000). The relationship between residential stimulation and coping is depicted well in Bell, Greene, Fisher, and Baum's (2001) Eclectic Environment- Behavior Model. Other research has identified primary strategies as a more effective means of addressing problems (Compas, Connor-Smith, Saltzman, Thomsen, & Wadsworth, 2001; Connor-Smith, Compas, Wadsworth, Thomsen, & Saltzman, 2000). Secondary strategies, which are more passive and emotion-focused, are effective in the short-term but produce poorer outcomes on stress management over time (Compas, et al.; Connor-Smith, et al.). The current study contributes to this line of research by providing valuable insight into the coping strategies of low-income individuals living at an extended-stay hotel.

Method: Observations were collected to capture the hotel culture under study. In addition, ten hotel residents were interviewed for 52 to 120 minutes with questions like, “how do you feel about living here?” and “how have you changed the unit to fit your needs?” Residents also took photographs of hotel spaces and objects that represented “home.” Field notes and transcribed interviews were analyzed using a constant comparison method. Photographs were analyzed using a content analysis process.

Findings: Residents used both primary and secondary coping strategies to manage residential stressors. However, from residents' descriptions and photographs, it was clear that they relied more heavily on passive coping strategies that helped them escape from the cramped reality of their housing situation. Despite taking active steps to create a more “homey” residence, respondents had not made concrete plans for leaving the hotel. Such plans might have included getting housing counseling, applying to housing assistance programs, or getting social support assistance to move into stable housing.

Implications: Since families are struggling to create a temporary home at a hotel, it important for practitioners to help them employ effective coping strategies to minimize residential stress. Such interventions will help these precariously housed individuals focus on personal goals and restorative needs in a strained living environment. Results of this study suggest that interventions with this population should promote more primary coping strategies.