Psychological Home, Clutter, and Place Attachment Predicting Life Satisfaction among Women of Color: Home is Beyond Physical Space

We examined psychological home, place attachment, clutter, and life satisfaction with adult women of color (n = 99; M age = 50.33 years old) drawn from a larger national sample of women who self-identified with clutter tendencies. We assessed resource (i.e., annual household income, homeownership status, and relationship status) and contextual (i.e., type of dwelling, number of people in household, and years in residence) variables, plus measures of psychological home, place attachment, and clutter, as predictors of life satisfaction among women of color. Hierarchical regression analyses revealed that psychological home was a significant predictor of life satisfaction over and above resource and contextual variables. Place attachment and clutter did not moderate the relationship between home and life satisfaction. However, clutter mediated the relationship between home and life satisfaction. Implications for women of color, study limitations, and future directions are discussed.


Introduction
To better understand the similarities and differences in how satisfied individuals are with their life, researchers studied how gender, ethnicity, and numerous other variables affect levels of life satisfaction (Giusta, Jewell, & Kambhampati, 2011;Kirmanoglu & Baslevent, 2014). Results were mixed about whether women experience higher levels of life satisfaction than men (Giusta, et al., 2011). However, ethnic minority members have lower life satisfaction levels, such that persons belonging in a minority ethnic group tend to experience stressful life events more frequently than the majority population (Kirmanoglu & Baslevent, 2014). Consequently, it is important to investigate these differences to better understand the predictors and processes that contribute to life satisfaction. The current study focused on examining life satisfaction among women of color.
Life satisfaction is considered a component of subjective well-being (SWB), a cognitive process through which individuals evaluate the quality of their life according to their own criteria (Diener Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985). Diener, Suh, Lucas, and Smith (1999) suggested even though different components of SWB generally were inter-correlated, each component should be studied independently. Judgements of satisfaction depend on how individuals compare their present life circumstances to a standard they have set for themselves, not an externally imposed standard (Diener et al., 1985). This approach is an important distinction from other global measures of SWB or criterion deemed important by researchers. In fact, this view of life satisfaction is especially the case when the focus is on people of diverse ethnic backgrounds, who may have different values and perceptions of what defines a "good life" (Hart & Ben-Yoseph, 2005;Kirmanoglu & Baslevent (2005).
Life satisfaction seems to be heavily influenced by factors used to evaluate one's life, such as health, income, and the quality of one's work. Additionally, research suggested personality, personal circumstances, and external environments might influence life satisfaction (Giusta et al., 2011). Standards for life satisfaction vary across cultures, but these standards are associated with an individual's needs and salient cultural values (Arellano-Morales, Liang, Ruiz, & Rios-Oropeza, 2016). Discrimination and other processes affect an individual's life satisfaction. African American and Latinos, for instance, report less life satisfaction than European Americans because of discrimination (see Arellano-Morales et al., 2016). As previously mentioned,

The Meaning of Home: An Ecological Perspective
An ecological approach to one's place attachment that is experienced by most people is understanding psychological home. Home might include considering contextual and environmental variables when investigating factors that underlie life satisfaction Hart & Ben-Yoseph, 2005). More specifically, how contextual variables contribute to the meaning and interpretation of home across varied populations may facilitate community-based interventions (Ferrari, Roster, & Crum, 2018). For instance, increasing health by investigating contextual factors that foster well-being and protect individuals is of interest to community psychologists (Gattino, et al., 2013). Further, individuals' perception of their living environment reflects the initial questions of life satisfaction and overall well-being . As mentioned earlier, minority compared to majority racial groups experienced more stressful life events that might impact their life satisfaction (Kirmanoglu & Baslevent, 2014). Additionally, women compared to men evaluated life satisfaction differently.
Nevertheless, home is an abstract concept with a wide set of meanings and associations (see Hart & Ben-Yoseph, 2005;Moore, 2000). The field of environmental psychology studied the meaning of home for over two decades, focusing on home as a physical structure, territory, as locus in space, as reflective of self and selfidentity, and as a social and cultural unit see (Moore, 2000). In psychological research, the emotional bonds between people and the places they consider home is the primary focus. There are many psychological benefits of home. Home provides comfort, social needs and physiological needs (Hart & Ben-Yoseph, 2005). People's relationship to their living environment plays a key role in their well-being Gattino et al., 2013). Therefore, it is important to better understand how contextual variables impact life satisfaction, and in this study, we explored home among women of color to understand their life satisfaction. The present study was an initial assessment of SWB among this racial minority gender group. Sigmon, Whitcomb, & Snyder (2002) defined psychological home as a sense of belonging in which selfidentity is tied to a place. Therefore, an individual's interaction with their physical space might reflect their self-identity, leading them to create a psychological home that they will benefit from on multiple levels (Roster, Ferrari, & Jurkat, 2016). Furthermore, psychological home reflects an underlying motive that is driven by an individual's psychological need to identify a sense of self with a physical location (Sigmon et al., 2002). The word "home" is widely used in most vernaculars, yet it takes on many meanings and interpretations dependent upon one's culture and ethnicity (see Hart & Ben-Yoseph, 2005;Moore, 2000). The commonalities between the meanings are an emotional experience in conjunction with energy expressed towards one's physical surroundings .
Many different disciplines have looked at "home" through a variety of lenses. Environmental psychology, social psychology, and consumer sciences have explored the meaning of home to better understand the importance of home for individuals. Taking that into consideration, there is an underlying psychological process happening when one uses the word "home." Psychological home considers the cognitive, affective, and behavioral aspects of an individual (Roster et al., 2016). Sigmon et al. (2002) claimed that the cognitive components of psychological home include attributions about self in relation to the environment, the meaning and beliefs about home, and one's self theory in relation to home (cf., . They also noted that the affective components of psychological home include feelings of security, warmth, attachment, consistency, identity, and familiarity. Furthermore, they claimed the behavioral components of psychological home include the actions of construction, manipulation, flexibility, maintenance, and personalization of an individual's surroundings (cf., Moore, 2000).
Psychological home also encompasses manifestation (i.e., how psychological home is expressed) and functional (i.e., the benefits and liabilities of psychological home) components, noted Sigmon et al. (2002). These researchers noted that individuals express psychological home by expending more time and energy surrounding themselves with things that reinforce who they are and may quickly re-establish home-like environments. In turn, psychological home provides security, safety, protection, and privacy (Hart & Ben-Yoseph, 2005). Both manifestation and functional components offer a thorough explanation for how an individual's level of psychological home affects multiple levels of their life. Yet, although psychological home explains how an individual may interact and manipulate their physical space, it does not predict time, circumstances, or specific behaviors.
Currently, only two published studies specifically explored psychological home in relation to subjective well-being and place attachment, namely: Cicognani (2011) and Roster et al. (2016). These two studies suggested individuals who have higher levels of psychological home reported higher levels of subjective wellbeing and lower negative affect. In addition, individuals who have higher levels of place attachment tend to also have higher levels of psychological home. We extended these two studies by focusing on women of color and their sense of home, as well as the impact of excessive possessions, clutter, on their subjective well-being.
Impact of clutter on home. Individuals suffering from chronic clutter issue have a history of disorganization, which self-help efforts to change have failed, a diminished quality of life due to disorganization, and the expectation of future disorganization (Institute for Challenging Disorganization, 2017). In extreme cases, excessive disorganization and clutter are indicative of hoarding disorder, yielding persistent acquisition of and failure to discard possessions regardless of the value attributed to the possessions (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Furthermore, individuals with excessive clutter or hoarding disorders have difficulty parting with possessions and the resulting clutter that interferes with the ability to use rooms in one's home (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). These behaviors cause significant distress and impairment. Frost and Hartl (1996) found that individuals with excessive clutter were unable to use the living areas of their homes for intended purposes due to excessive clutter, had limited access to furniture, difficulty preparing food, and unsanitary living conditions (Frost, 2010). Roster et al. (2016) found that clutter impacts negatively on one's sense of home and security, and Roster and Ferrari (2019) found that in office settings, abundant clutter impacts on work productivity and adds to work stress.  reported that older adults have greater negative impact on psychological adjustment from clutter than younger adults (see also Crum & Ferrari, 2019). Additionally, clutter is associated with low subjective and objective quality of life measures (Saxena et al., 2011). The present study examined the potentially negative impact of clutter on psychological home and life satisfaction, with women of color. We explored two sets of variables: resource (i.e., annual household income, homeownership status, and relationship status) and contextual (i.e., type of dwelling, number of people in household, and years in residence), and how they impact perceptions of home, place attachment, and life satisfaction by women of color.

Participants
The current study was derived from a previous community sample data set of 1,394 adults (see Roster et al., 2016) residing across the United Sates examining the relationship between home, clutter, and well-being. For the current study, however, 99 U.S.A. women of color with mild to severe issues with clutter were extracted as the sample. Participants ranged in age from 21 to 81 years old (M age = 50.33 years; SD = 11.99). Participants were U.S. citizens self-identified as African American (n = 28; 28.3%), American Indian (n = 5; 5.1%), Asian American (n = 17; 17.2%), Latina (n = 27; 27.3%), and Other/non-white (n = 22; 22.2%). Because the sample used in this study is from a previous data set, a post hoc power analysis was conducted using G*Power 3.1 (Faul, Erdfelder, Lang, & Buchner, 2007). With an alpha level of 0.05, a sample size of n = 99, six predictors, and a desired large effect size of 0.35 (Cohen, 1988), achieved power for the study was 0.995. We choose this effect size standard to insure a conservative level for analysis.
Data were collected by the Institute for Challenging Disorganization (ICD). ICD is a non-profit organization whose mission is to provide resources for people challenged by chronic disorganization. Chronic disorganization describes disorganization that poses a problem for an individual that may be lifelong or brought on by a life event. ICD is primarily made up of professional organizers who typically own their own businesses and work with clients in their homes, helping them manage their disorganization and the complications that have arisen because of it. Additionally, ICD offers educational programs and training to become a "Certified Professional Organizer in Chronic Disorganization."

Psychometric Scales
Life satisfaction. Diener et al.'s (1985) 5-item Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) is a widely used onedimensional measure of global life satisfaction. The SWLS measured how an individual evaluates their life in terms of global judgment (i.e., life satisfaction or feelings of fulfillment) by evaluating the domains of their life (e.g., work) or their ongoing feelings about what is happening to them (e.g., pleasant emotions, which arise from positive evaluations of their experiences). Participants indicated the extent to which they agreed with each item along a 7-point scale anchored by 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Sample items include "The conditions of my life are excellent" and "I am satisfied with my life." Reliability studies by the scale's authors yielded Cronbach's alpha ranging from 0.82 to 0.87. Participant life satisfaction scores were calculated by summing the scores across the 5-item SWLS (range = 5 to 35).
Psychological home. Sigmon et al.'s (2002) 8-item Psychological Home Scale is a one-dimensional measure assessing the level of psychological home an individual possesses. The psychological home scale measured the level of psychological home expressed in an individual's' environment and the benefits or liabilities a person receives from a relationship with a physical space. Participants indicated the extent to which they agreed with each item along a 7-point scale anchored by 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Sample items include "I put a lot of time and effort into making a home my own" and "I add personal touches to the place where I live". Reliability studies by the scale's authors yielded a Cronbach's alpha ranging from 0.84 to 0.90. Participants level of psychological home was calculated by summing the scores (range = 8 to 56).
Place attachment. Williams and Roggenbuck's (1989) 13-item Place Attachment Scale is a two-dimensional measure assessing the level of place identity and place dependence an individual associate with a specific place. The place attachment scale measured the intensity of the emotional bond between a person and a specifically targeted place. Participants indicated the extent to which they agreed with each item along a 5-point scale anchored by 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Sample items include "I feel like this place is a part of me" and "If I had been in another area my experience would have been the same.". Reliability studies yielded Cronbach alpha values ranging from 0.81 to 0.94 (see Williams & Vaske, 2003). Place identity calculated by summing the scores on the place identity subscale and place dependence calculated by summing the scores on the place dependence subscale.
Possession clutter. agree with each item along a 7-point scale anchored by 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Sample items include "I don't get to use spaces in my home the way I would like because of clutter" and "I feel guilty when I think about the clutter in my home." Participants possession clutter scores were calculated by summing the scores (range = 18 to 126). The scale's authors reported a coefficient alpha of 0.90. Social desirability. Reynolds' (1982) 13-item, true/false short form of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (MCSD) used as a control variable to ascertain if respondents over-report desirable and under-report undesirable traits and behaviors across a wide range of contexts (Leite & Beretvas, 2005). Participants responded about how they perceive themselves, such as: "I sometimes feel resentful when I don't get my way" and "I'm always willing to admit it when I make a mistake." Social desirability scores were calculated by summing the scores across the 13 item MCSD (range = 0 to 13, with higher scores representing an increased sense of social desirability in responding).
Demographic questionnaire. At the end of the survey, respondents were asked to answer several demographic questions, including age, relationship status, and annual household income. Age will also be used as control variable.

Procedure
Data were collected by an online survey posted on ICD's website. An invitation from the researchers with a link to the survey was distributed by ICD to professional organizers who work with individuals affected by chronic disorganization, Additionally, ICD-affiliated professional organizers were asked to promote the study to their clients by posting the link on their business webpages and/or forwarding the link to their clients through email or social media. Respondents were not compensated, and the survey was voluntary. The survey was available for five months.
After clicking on the link for the survey, respondents completed a consent form. Consenting respondents answered two eligibility questions (i.e., age and country of residence). The body of the survey contained five questions block. To avoid order effects, each question block was randomized in appearance to the respondents. At the end of the survey, respondents answered several demographic questions, including gender, age, location, and whether or not they own or are renting their current residence. Respondents remained anonymous and forced answering was not used on any questions except for the consent form and eligibility questions. Table 1 provides descriptive statistics for the measures used in the present study, namely: mean scores on each measure and the zero-order correlations (with Cronbach alpha levels) for each psychometric scale in the study. As noted from the table, socially desirable response tendencies were not significantly related to most of the scale sum scores. Nevertheless, we used a series of hierarchical regression analyses entering social desirability in a step within the analyses.

Preliminary Analyses
We predicted that psychological home, after controlling for resource variables (i.e., annual household income, homeownership status, and relationship status) would be an indicator for life satisfaction over and above resource variables. Results including values of change in R 2 (ΔR 2 ), along with unstandardized regression coefficients (B), standard errors (SE B), and standardized coefficients (β) for the predictor variables at each step, are presented in Table 2. In the first step (see Table 2) of the regression analysis, age and social desirability were entered as control variables. Each of steps 2 (annual household income), 3 (homeownership status), and 4 (relationship status) were not significant. In step 5 however, psychological home was a significant predictor of life satisfaction R = .50, R 2 = .25, ΔR 2 = .17, F (6, 90) = 3.74, p < .01.
Next, we ascertained if psychological home predicted life satisfaction, after accounting for contextual variables (i.e., type of dwelling, number of people in household, and years in residence). We expected that psychological home was an indicator of life satisfaction over and above environmental variables. Our results included values of change in R 2 (ΔR 2 ), along with unstandardized regression coefficients (B), standard errors (SE B), and standardized coefficients (β) for the predictor variables at each step and are presented in Table 3. In the first step (see Table 3) of the regression analysis, age and social desirability were entered as control variables. Each of steps 2 (type of dwelling), 3 (number of people in household), and 4 (years in residence) were not significant. In step 5, however, psychological home was a significant predictor of life satisfaction R = .50, R 2 = .26, ΔR 2 = .14, F (6, 90) = 5.13, p < .001.
Then, we assessed whether place identity moderated the relation between psychological home and life satisfaction. We expected that higher levels of place identity increased the strength of the positive relationship between psychological home and life satisfaction. Age and social desirability were entered in Step 1. In step 2, psychological home score was entered. In step 3, place identity score was entered. In step 4, a two-way interaction between psychological home score and place identity score were entered. It was found that place identity did not serve as a moderator in the relationship between psychological home and life satisfaction. Subsequently, we explored if place dependence moderated the relation between psychological home and life satisfaction. We expected that higher levels of place dependence increased the strength of the positive relationship between psychological home and life satisfaction. Age and social desirability were entered in Step 1. In step 2, psychological home score was entered. In step 3, place dependence score was entered. In step 4, a two-way interaction between psychological home score and place dependence score were entered. We found that place dependence did not serve as a moderator in the relationship between psychological home and life satisfaction. In addition, we examined whether possession clutter moderated the relation between psychological home and life satisfaction. It is expected that higher levels of possession clutter decreased the strength of the positive relationship between psychological home and life satisfaction. Age and social desirability were entered in Step 1. In step 2, psychological home score was entered. In step 3, possession clutter score was entered. In step 4, a two-way interaction between psychological home score and possession clutter score were entered. It was found that possession clutter did not serve as a moderator in the relationship between psychological home and life satisfaction.
Finally, to address the impact of clutter on the relationship between psychological home and life satisfaction, a mediational analysis was conducted (see Figure 1). There was a significant indirect effect of psychological home on life satisfaction through possession clutter, B = 0.121, BCa CI [0.041, 0.241]. Figure 1 shows the mediated relationship of possession clutter on psychological home and life satisfaction.

Discussion
The current study investigated the relationships between psychological home, place attachment, possession clutter, and life satisfaction in women of color. This study was unique since little research examined the role of ethnicity and gender among psychological home and life satisfaction (e.g., Cicognani, 2011;Roster et al., 2016). Psychological home predicted life satisfaction after accounting for resources variables (i.e., annual household income, homeownership status, and relationship status). Income (Diener et al., 2002;Diner & Ryan, 2008), relationship status (Helliwell et el., 2009), and homeownership (Diaz-Serrano, 2009) contributed to higher levels of subjective well-being. However, in the present study with women of color these three variables did not account for a significant amount of variance in the model. Psychological home, in contrast, was a significant predictor of life satisfaction, over and above income, relationship status, and homeownership. Psychological home also predicted life satisfaction after accounting for contextual variables (i.e., type of dwelling, number of people in household, and years in residence). Type of dwelling (Cicognani, 2011), social interaction (Diener & Ryan, 2008;Kahneman & Krueger, 2006), and length of time in a home (Shenk et al., 2004) contributed to higher levels of subjective well-being. However, in the present study with women of color these variables did not account for a significant amount of variance in the model. Psychological home alone, however, was a significant predictor of life satisfaction. Taken together, results from these two findings are consistent with previous research reporting a positive relation between psychological home and life satisfaction (Cicognani, 2011;Roster et al., 2016) yet extends those results with women of color. These findings suggested that within ethnic and gender samples psychological home is a better predictor of life satisfaction than specific resource and contextual variables. Results indicated the importance of better understanding psychological home and the role it plays in life satisfaction.
We also proposed that place identity moderated the relation between psychological home and life satisfaction. This hypothesis was not supported in the present study. Moreover, we expected place dependence would moderate the relation between psychological home and life satisfaction; our prediction was not supported with the current sample of women of color. Taken together, place attachment does not seem to influence the relationship between psychological home and life satisfaction for women of color. We also expected that psychological home and place attachment were similar yet different concepts with distinct underlying processes. Previous studies showed a positive relationship between place attachment and life satisfaction (Roster et al., 2016). In our study, there was a positive relationship with place identity, yet no significant relationship between place dependence and psychological home. Subsequently, neither place identity or place dependence affected the relationship between psychological home and life satisfaction. These results suggested that with women color, the relationship between psychological home and life satisfaction is not affected by one's place attachment. Perhaps, these results suggest a distinction between psychological home and place attachment, at least with this adult population.
In sum, the present study suggested psychological home and place attachment are similar, yet different concepts. That is, place attachment is a two-dimensional construct and primarily involves geographical location and characteristics (Williams & Vaske, 2003). Place attachment is referring to the larger surrounding area, whereas psychological home is confined to an intimate space. In comparison to psychological home, place attachment is a broader construct. Psychological home is a limited, more defined space that can be more easily accessed and manipulated by an individual. Also, place attachment is fixed to a location whereas psychological home is mobile and flexible based on the context. The relationship between psychological home and place attachment should continue to be explored.
Perhaps, the relationship between psychological home and life satisfaction might be explained by one's amount or type of clutter. The level of clutter may impact an individual's response to organization. For example, if the clutter an individual has reflects their identity it may not be as distressing as other types of clutter. Perhaps, it is not the amount of stuff, but what the stuff is that matters. It is important to note, clutter does not have to be present for the relationship between psychological home and life satisfaction to exist (Roster et al., 2016). However, the perception of clutter may help explain the relationship between psychological home and life satisfaction. If one has higher levels of psychological home, the person may perceive the clutter in their home to be less negative. In turn, they report higher levels of life satisfaction. Further research on possession clutter is warranted.
A primary concern for community psychologists is individual and family wellness. Prilleltensky (2008) suggested one of the main missions of community psychologist should be "to enhance wellness for all" (p.133). Psychological home provides insight into one way of enhancing life satisfaction and well-being. Although psychological home tends to be an individual level factor (Sigmon et al., 2002), perception of home may affect interpersonal and community level factors. Individuals who feel safe and secure in their environment, for instance, may be more satisfied in their interpersonal relationships and engage more in their communities.
Understanding psychological home may contribute to an individual's resiliency, especially in women of color. Research has shown gender (Giusta et al., 2011) and discrimination (Arellano-Morales et al., 2016) impact life satisfaction and ultimately well-being. Conceivably, psychological home may mitigate the negative effects of these factors. Further, if one was forced to leave a place they had a strong attachment to, the departure might be disruptive in many ways. Psychological home has applications for military families (e.g., Finkel et al., 2003), the elderly population, children in the foster care system, homeless individuals, refugees, and other transient populations, to name just a few target groups. If families were assessed for levels of psychological home, it might provide insight into ways to make transitions easier. Understanding psychological home might help to identify the needs of individuals that impact their life satisfaction and the systems in which they interact.
Of course, the present study is limited in several ways. For instance, it is a correlational, cross-sectional design, relying upon self-report data, which may or may not be an accurate representation of reality. Additionally, the present study included a small subset of a convenience sample of adults who self-identify as having an issue with clutter, all U.S. or Canadian members of the Institute for Challenging Disorganization (ICD). These individuals were seeking help from professional organizers. Theoretically, the two-dimensional model of place attachment may not adequately explain the relationship between individual identity and place in women of color. Although, the two-dimensional model of place attachment may be valid and reliable, research suggests there may be additional factors to consider. Raymond, Brown, and Weber (2010) highlighted the importance of considering social, cultural, and community level factors when assessing place attachment. Components of culture may better explain how identity impacts place attachment in minority populations, especially considering cultural values (Arellano-Morales, Liang, Ruiz, & Rios-Oropeza, 2016). These additional factors may help to better explain the relationship between psychological home and life satisfaction.
The construct of psychological home has only begun to be examined and explored by community psychologists (Sigmon et al., 2002;Roster et al., 2016;, especially within gender and ethnic identity. Nevertheless, the construct of psychological home may provide an understanding of the relationship between one's self-identity and physical space. Understanding a person's sense of home may help scholars understand what makes an individual feel more satisfied in their life and contribute to their overall well-being (Hart & Ben-Yoseph, 2005). Better understanding how an individual's sense of self interacts with