Premium
Counteracting “Not in My Backyard”: the positive effects of greater occupancy within mutual‐help recovery homes
Author(s) -
Jason Leonard A.,
Groh David R.,
Durocher Megan,
Alvarez Josefina,
Aase Darrin M.,
Ferrari Joseph R.
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
journal of community psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.585
H-Index - 86
eISSN - 1520-6629
pISSN - 0090-4392
DOI - 10.1002/jcop.20259
Subject(s) - occupancy , closing (real estate) , opposition (politics) , abstinence , psychology , portion size , demography , social support , social psychology , demographic economics , gerontology , medicine , sociology , political science , law , economics , psychiatry , engineering , architectural engineering , chemistry , food science , politics
Group homes sometimes face significant neighborhood opposition, and municipalities frequently use maximum occupancy laws to close down these homes. This study examined how the number of residents in Oxford House recovery homes impacted residents' outcomes. Larger homes (i.e., eight or more residents) may reduce the cost per person and offer more opportunities to exchange positive social support, thus, it was predicted that larger Oxford Houses would exhibit improved outcomes compared to smaller homes. Regression analyses using data from 643 residents from 154 U.S. Oxford Houses indicated that larger House size predicted less criminal and aggressive behavior; additionally, length of abstinence was a partial mediator in these relationships. These findings have been used in court cases to argue against closing down larger Oxford Houses. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.