Homework

Cultural Psyc

Your thoughtful questions:

1. [Please type your first question here. Remember to include a one-paragraph explanation of where your question is coming from (e.g., what you read that inspired your question, what you were thinking, why you were confused, etc.).]

2. [Please type your second question here. Remember to include a one-paragraph explanation of where your question is coming from (e.g., what you read that inspired your question, what you were thinking, why you were confused, etc.).]

Looking at your topic through the lens of this week’s readings:

3. How did this week’s readings affect your understanding of the topic you chose in Week 0?

Critical Social Studies •  No. 1  •  2008
67

Jaan Valsiner

Ornamented Worlds and Textures 
of Feeling: 

The Power of Abundance

Summary
Human development takes place in an ornamented – 
redundantly patterned and highly repetitive – world. 
The emergence of knowledge takes the form of epi-
sodic unpredictable synthetic events at the intersection 
of the fields of internal and external cultural meaning 
systems – through the mutually linked processes of con-
structive internalization and externalization. Patterns of 
decorations – ornaments – are relevant as redundant “in-
puts” into the internalization/externalization processes. 
Ornaments can be viewed not merely as “aesthetic ac-
cessories” to human activity contexts but as holistic 
devices of cultural guidance of human conduct that 
acts through the subjectivity of personal feelings. This 
guidance is peripheral in its nature – surrounding the 
ordinary life activities with affectively oriented textures 
of cultural meanings.

How do we make sense of our environments? 
In this paper I suggest a holistic view of human 
development on the basis of coordination of 
patterns – of the person’s environments, and 
of  one’s  interior  spaces  of  affective  think-
ing. The theoretical goal here is to take my 
theory of internalization/externalization (Law-
rence & Valsiner, 1993, 2003; Valsiner, 1997, 
2007b) and the hyper-generalization theory 
of affect (Valsiner, 2005, 2007a) to the field 
of our everyday life contexts. These contexts 
are saturated with highly repetitive patterns of 
visual and auditory kinds. They are patterns we 

encounter in our activities. All encounters of 
organisms with environments can be viewed 
as processes of coordinating patterns – cam-
ouflage of body patterns relating to patterns 
of biological environments, mating based on 
body display patterns, textures of surfaces for 
walking,  sucking,  swimming,  or  crawling. 
Life is patterned – rather than dependent on 
singular “stimulus”-“response” relationships. 
Of course that is understood in psychology 
since 1890s (Ehrenfels, 1890/1988), but its 
implications for our general knowledge have 
not been elaborated.
  In the case of human development, such 
double patterning of life – environmental and 
intra-mental – acquires a future-oriented flavor. 
Patterns are constructed for a purpose – guiding 
the person encountering those towards some 
goal orientation. Most of these constructed 
cultural patterns are peripheral in their relat-
ing with our personal worlds – we live among 
them rarely noticing them in the background. 
We even consider them “mere decorations” – 
or ornaments. Our lives are ornamented lives – 
and that nature of our activity contexts sets up 
new demands for psychology’s methodology 
(Diriwächter and Valsiner, 2008). Instead of 
continuing the practice of breaking complex 

72972_outlines_r01.indd 67 10-10-2008 09:04:02

Ornamented Worlds and Textures of Feeling •  Jaan Valsiner
68

wholes into analytic elementary constituents, 
our methodology leads us to field-theoretic 
method construction.

What are ornaments – 
and what do they do?
We  surround  ourselves  with  a  myriad  of 
seemingly useless things. Human beings cre-
ate decorations – patterns – largely following 
patterning examples from nature that for us 
look beautiful – while they for the species who 
use these patterns are of utilitarian value. The 
colorful feather patterns of birds look beauti-
ful to the human eye, while their functional 
value for the birds themselves may be in mat-
ing regulation or in merging with the envi-
ronment to confuse predators. Birdsongs can 
be models for human music – but music is a 
pattern created by humans with communica-
tive functions.
  Cultural constructions differ from nature’s 
patterns. While human-made ornaments may 
mimic nature, they abstract from natural pat-
terns and guide human meaning-making. The 
whole enterprise of cultural organization of 
human lives entails the construction of ways 
of distancing oneself from the here-and-now 
settings while remaining within the settings 
(Valsiner & Rosa, 2007). Ornaments lead such 
abstracting generalization efforts – they are re-
petitive patterns of some abstracted aspects of 
reality – rather than close to original “copies” 
of the reality. They trigger further psychologi-
cal generalization:

…consists in the subsequent naturalization of a 
pure ornament, i.e., an abstract form, and not in 
the subsequent stylization of the natural object. 
The crucial factor is contained in this antithesis. 
For it reveals that the primary element is not the 
natural model, but the law abstracted from it. It was 
therefore the artistic projection of the regularity 
of organic structure which, in consequence of the 
intimate organic connection of all living things, 
afforded the basis for the aesthetic experience of 

the spectator, and not concordance with the natural 
model. (Wörringer, 1963, p. 60)

Our contemporary – mostly empirically ori-
ented – anthropology and psychology that em-
phasizes human immersion in “situated activ-
ity contexts” has overlooked the centrality of 
the agency – of the person who, while being 
involved within a context, moves far beyond 
it in one’s psychological construction of one’s 
“inner infinity” (to use William Stern’s term 
here). The affective synthesis – generalization 
emphasized by Wörringer – is the center of 
human aesthetic experience (Vygotsky, 1971). 
Yet we need to know how such aesthetic ex-
perience is afforded, and how it functions in 
situated activity settings.
  Where do ornaments begin? Elementary 
graphic forms – points or their extensions – 
lines – by themselves do not amount to being 

Figure 1. The birth of the minimal ornament

A  B  C

Figure 2. Creating the field – ornament
emerging from combination of features
(Jones, 1856, p.190)

72972_outlines_r01.indd 68 10-10-2008 09:04:03

Critical Social Studies •  No. 1  •  2008
69

an ornament (Figure 1). It takes some form of 
repetition of the pattern to create an ornament. 
Such repetition of patterns can be woven to-
gether with that of other patterns and located 
in selected locations of human ordinary life 
(and death) environments. Thus, in his descrip-
tion of the basics of Moorish ornament, Jones 
(1856/2001, p. 190) explained the principle of 
combination (Figure 2)

In surface decorations, any arrangement of forms, 
as at A, consisting only of straight lines, is monoto-
nous, and affords but imperfect pleasure; but intro-
duce lines which tend to carry the eye towards the 
angles, as at B, and you have at once an increased 
pleasure. Then add lines giving a circular tendency, 
as at C, and you have now complete harmony. In 
this case the square is the leading form or tonic; the 
angular and the curved are subordinate.

Ornaments are patterns with order – a gram-
mar of forms (Salingaros, 1996).
  Yet the meaning of ornament – decoration – 
is often linked with the notion of a non-func-
tional or excessive kind of decoration. They 
are there – yet we may confess that their only 
function is aesthetic. But why are we so sure of 

that? Ornaments have been systematically cre-
ated by human beings long before the mean-
ing of beauty for its own – aesthetic – sake. 
There must exist some social reasons for creat-
ing decorated patterns for the ceilings of the 
homes of the dead (Figure 3) as well as those 
of the living (Figure 4)

Ceilings  as  places  for  ornamentation  are 
interesting.  It  is  obvious  that  most  human 
 everyday activity takes place within the verti-
cal plane – hence ornamentation located on 
our vertical surfaces is of primary function for 
our psychological environments. Thus, walls, 
screens, windows, etc. are often decorated by 
ornaments. Yet the history of recorded orna-
ments from Ancient Egypt to our days includes 
ceiling ornaments – leaving us with the func-
tional question of why would the horizontal 
structures – floors, ceilings – be ornamented. 
Such horizontal decoration can be parallel to 
the build-up of relevant buildings – churches, 
temples, or political monuments – upwards. 
When the mundane everyday activities en-
counter vertically layered environmental set-
tings, their transcendental counterparts are or-
ganized into horizontally located layers facing 
either upwards (ceilings, church towers, etc) 
or downwards (floors, catacombs).
  The habits of sleeping and waking bring 
the patterning of the ceilings to the field of at-

Figure 3. Ceiling ornament in an Ancient Egyptian tomb (A) and in a 20th century public
building (B)

A B

72972_outlines_r01.indd 69 10-10-2008 09:04:03

Ornamented Worlds and Textures of Feeling •  Jaan Valsiner
70

tention of architects and designers. Worries of 
parents who decorate the child’s sleeping envi-
ronments with different patterns are function-
ally examples of ceiling decorations – the need 
to consider what kind of visual patterns appear 
in front of the child’s eyes when s/he wakes 
up, is itself a tacit recognition of the function 
of ornaments in human development.

Ornaments as cultural arenas 
of meaning construction
Ornaments  are  omnipresent.  We  can  find 
ornaments below us (on the surfaces on which 
we move), on all sides (in between which we 
move) and above our heads – in the form of 
the  natural  clouds  and  cultural  decorations 
of  ceilings.  Such  holistic  patterning  of  our 
perceptual environment is obvious in every-
thing that surrounds us – architecture, textiles, 
wallpaper,  monuments,  etc.  They  are  also 
right on our bodies – in the form of tattoos 
and body painting, near our bodies in private 
(underwear) and public (costumes), and they 
envelope our immediate activity contexts of 
sleeping  (lace  decorations  on  pillows  and 
bedspreads), eating (patterned tablecloths and 
napkins). Furniture is often filled with orna-
ments – at home and in public settings. Walls 
are covered by wallpaper – ornamented – or 
made of ceramic tiles.

Tension within the exaggerated
opposition PLAIN <> FANCY
The history of ornaments is usually elaborated 
in terms of a history of art and architecture 
(Hamlin, 1923). When cultural objects were 
constructed, the surfaces may remain as those 
functionally were (plain) – or become covered 
with add-ons the function of which is decora-
tive. The contrast to the decorated (A) state is 
its non-decorated (“PLAIN”) opposite (non-
A) – in line with the A-non-A perspective on 
meaning (Josephs, Valsiner, & Surgan, 1999). 
Here the dynamics of A-non-A acquires a new 

focus – a growth from A (decorated) to Hyper-
A (hyper-decorated – “FANCY” – Figure 4)
The latter can take the form of exaggera-
tion of selected parts of the figure, or through 
proliferation of the redundancy – by repetition 
of the pattern of its ground that is ornamented. 
By manifold replicating, a simple element of 
an ornament covers the sensory field of the 
person in full, thus “keeping the person within 
the field.”
  Differences in the trajectories of resolv-
ing the tension between PLAIN (non-A) <> 
FANCY (hyper-A) in the construction of the 
exteriors  of  the  building  between  different 
European societies – Spain, Italy, the Nether-
lands – demonstrate the prevailing need to 
strategically  regulate  the  activity  fields  of 
every day  public  worlds.  The  “war  against 
decorations” in churches around the Protestant 
Reformation in Europe is an example of how 
the meaning of excess in decorations was made 
into an ideological and political issue that led 
to destructive consequences like vandalism in 
churches. The “exaggerations” of these deco-
rations became viewed as breaches of visual 
piety – the {non-A}<>{hyper-A} opposition 
moved in the direction of a positive valuation 
of the non-A pole. The need to destroy Catho-
lic symbolic figures first – before turning to 
the human beings who revered these figures – 
was the first step. Likewise, pulling down the 
monument of a deposed dictator after the first 
entrance into a city – the full conquering of 
which may take years – indicates the rhetoric 
power of hyper-exaggerated symbols.
  The tension can lead also to an opposite 

Figure 4. The growth of a sign and escalation
of affective tension

ANon-A

Hyper-A
Escalated

tension

growing of A

72972_outlines_r01.indd 70 10-10-2008 09:04:03

Critical Social Studies •  No. 1  •  2008
71

build-up of symbols – on the hyper-exagger-
ated  side.  From  the  history  of  architecture 
we know of the emergence of the architec-
tural style of churriguresco in 18th century 
Spain (Hamlin, 1923, p. 291-293) that signi-
fies hyper-decoration of selected parts of the 
architectural space – described as frantically
Baroque (see Figure 5). Church architecture in 
the Spanish colonial domains in the Americas 
is filled with such abundance of decoration. 
From the very emergence, these hyper-deco-
rated objects were noticed as such – yet their 
function of exaggeration remained in place 
and regulated the social lives of people who 
may have found such ornaments worth talking 
about.
  Exaggeration guarantees redundancy – and 
redundancy is the only way to guide the direc-
tion of open systems – which (by definition) 
are unpredictable. As Edmund Leach pointed 
out – “the jumble is the message” (Leach, 
2000, p. 126) – yet which message, for whom, 

and how does it work? Ornamentation in its 
abundance – or its purposeful absence in the 
puritan worlds (i.e. “abundance of nothing”) – 
is an example of how human living takes place 
in a field of exaggerations that the person can-
not leave (Valsiner, 2006, 2007a).
  The imposing appearance of cathedrals to 
pilgrims arriving on their long walk would turn 
the excessive details of the architectural orna-
ments into images that link the mundane with 
the supernatural. The overwhelming impres-
sion of the grandiose pattern of abundantly 
decorated  building  feeds  into  the  meaning 
making facing the scene. Yet ornaments on 
buildings can be found anywhere (Figure 6). 
By proliferation of their pattern in space and 
time ornaments create an inescapable field 
structure. Anybody  who  is  passing  by  the 
house depicted in Figure 6 – without any goal 
of carefully examining the pattern – necessar-
ily is exposed to the pattern through at least 
peripheral vision.
  In the acoustic domain, the music playing 
in the background of an activity setting – shop-
ping, wedding, etc. – constitutes an all-encom-
passing auditory ornament for the activity. In 
child development that is exemplified by the 
Suzuki method in music education that begins 
from enveloping the child completely in the 
musical environment. Furthermore – the di-

Figure 5. A “frantic” cathedral – Santiago de
Compostela

Figure 6. Side ornament of a house – Santiago
de Chile

72972_outlines_r01.indd 71 10-10-2008 09:04:05

Ornamented Worlds and Textures of Feeling •  Jaan Valsiner
72

rect link of the auditory and visual-kinesthetic 
ornamentation of situated activity context is 
the tradition of singing while performing an 
activity (see Goodale, 1995). In the context of 
singing-while-doing, the actor establishes the 
unity of the internal affective sphere with the 
external socially canalized activity frames. For 
example, the song to be sung while collecting 
honey among hunters-gatherers of the Nilgiri 
Hills (Demmer, 1997) catalyzes the personal 
meaningfulness of the activity. Not surpris-
ingly, many social rituals – religious, politi-
cal, or life cycle transition linked – involve 
scripted mandatory singing. The move from 
background (external) ornaments to ornaments 
that catalyze the internalization of the mean-
ing system through fusing the action and its 
ornament (e.g., acting while singing) unites 
the ornamented and theatrical action worlds.
  Most of human living is theatrical – persons 
assume social roles and transform these (Turn-
er, 1974). In that context human role-assum-
ing involves selective and purposeful exagger-
ations – dramatizations – that create affective 
meaning tensions which lead to ruptures (Zit-
toun, 2006) and syntheses of new meanings. 

Through the unity of analogy and opposition 
(Foster, 1979) – by way of escalated opposi-
tions – we can see the emergence of novelty. 
It is as if the developing human being – in the 
act of experimenting with the meanings sys-
tem and driving the existing opposition to the 
breaking threshold – guides one’s own devel-
opment. Such rupture is a goals-oriented mo-
ment of chaos – often seen as affective tur-
moil – that becomes reconstituted into a new 
oppositional (B <> non-B) state that grows out 
of the (A<> non-A) contrast.

Temporal structure of
ornamented activity settings
The  use  of  ornaments  in  situated  activity 
contexts gives us a picture of ground/figure 
relations in the motion of the given activity. 
Most human activities entail a movement of 
the actor through some environmental struc-
tures – entrances from open to closed spaces 
(living  room  to  bedroom,  street  to  house; 
square to church or temple, etc.). The routes 
of such entries are often strategically deco-
rated by ornaments – as the entrances to most 
churches exemplify. External ornaments in our 

barrier A
barrier B

BACKGROUND
OF THE

GOAL

OBJECT

GOAL
OBJECT

PERSONAL
MOVING

TOWARDS
THE GOAL

OBJECT

Figure 7. Strategic locations of ornaments in a situated activity setting (a generic example)

72972_outlines_r01.indd 72 10-10-2008 09:04:06

Critical Social Studies •  No. 1  •  2008
73

life contexts are strategically situated to guide 
us towards the goal objects set up for us by 
goal-directed social institutions (Figure 7).
  Human  activities  are  organized  through 
movement – the goals-oriented agent moves 
through some environmental settings to reach 
the goal. In that movement, all the patterning 
of the setting is exposed as peripheral input to 
the sensory system of the actor. The access to 
the goal region (Figure 7) may be guided by 
various barriers that limit the actor’s move-
ment towards the goal (A and B in Figure 7). It 
is precisely the ornamentation of these barriers 
that functions as a peripheral cultural canaliza-
tion device targeting the acting person who is 
moving towards the goal.

Human activities are bounded by constraint 
structures (Valsiner, 1997) – and entail en-
trances (as well as exits) from these situated 
contexts. The tendencies to use ornaments for 
entrances – framing the surroundings of doors, 
or doors themselves – are present in architec-
tural spaces in human history. The ornamenta-
tion of the entrance can be contrasted with its 
absence further away from the boundary of the 
everyday activity that it marks (Figure 8).

Last – but not least – the goal object itself may 
be surrounded by an ornamented ground that 

frames it. The example of such ornamented 
guidance of affect is the mediaeval focus on 
Schaufrömmigkeit (piety of seeing – Morgan, 
1998, p. 59) – presentation of scenic images of 
the deity in contexts that, while giving primary 
focus to the image, surround the viewer with 
an affective tone that guides him or her to-
wards feeling into the event depicted. Through 
the processes of empathy and sympathy the 
meanings of the main visual (or acoustic) nar-
rative become internalized/externalized. They 
lead the formation of an internal value sys-
tem – of the subjective ornament of meanings. 
Values are internal subjective meaning fields 
that totally capture and guide the person who 
has constructed them. They can be labeled – 
but the labels never capture the holistic nature 
of their function.

Internalizing ornaments
My main point here is the parallel to external 
ornaments within the developing mind – in the 
form of the establishment of hyper-generalized 
affective fields (Valsiner, 2005 – and Figure 9 
below). These fields are semiotic – presenting 
the affective meaning for the meaning-maker.
  The actions of persons and social institu-
tions converge on the set-up and maintenance 
of such holistic promoter signs. Creating orna-
ments guarantees that the experience of these 
decorations  is  surrounded  by  such  signs  – 
hence keeping the person within the field – 
surrounded by general direction for ways
of feeling within the given environment. The 
affective domains of human existence are the 
primary domains for guiding human think-
ing – affective input is the basis for effective 
rationality.

A hierarchy of affective semiotic fields
The hierarchy of levels of semiotic mediation 
of affective processes is depicted in Figure 9. 
Level 0 is the universal – for all of the animal 
kingdom – physiological anticipation about 

Figure 8. An entrance to a building in
Dresden

72972_outlines_r01.indd 73 10-10-2008 09:04:07

Ornamented Worlds and Textures of Feeling •  Jaan Valsiner
74

the immediate next future event in life. Based 
on  that  level,  the  organisms  can  develop  a 
generalized, non-mediated “feeling tone” (or 
anticipatory affective state, a kind of undif-
ferentiated awareness of something – positive, 
negative, or ambivalent – that is about to hap-
pen). These Level 1 phenomena do not require 
semiotic mediation – they are generalizations 
based on imagery and activity. It is at this level 
where biological regulatory patterns – those 
of body patterning and coloring (Badyayev 
& Langdeen, 2007) that behavioral interactive 
events such as mating are organized. Semioti-
cally mediated (i.e., cultural) organization of 
the affective field has its roots at the move from 
Level 0 to Level 1. The examples of meanings 
that exist in the animal worlds – described by 
Jakob von Uexküll in his Bedeutungslehre 
(1940/1982) – are of Level 1. The person’s 
primary affective field is already oriented by 
the person’s previous experience.
  The quasi-differentiated affective complex 
of the affect-within-activity conglomerate be-
comes articulated at Level 2 – where a specific 
naming of emotions present “in” the experi-
encing person, by the person oneself, is taking 
place. The undifferentiated field of a particular 
directional quality (e.g., positive, negative, or 
ambivalent) becomes reflected upon through 
assigning the present state of the field a speci-
fying name for the emotion felt. So, the person 
can say “I am sad”, “I am disgusted”, “I am 
happy” or talk about emotions like HAPPI-
NESS, SADNESS, ANGER, SURPRISE, etc. 
The process of feeling-in-activity has been 
changed into a static depiction of “states of 
feeling” – de facto entities (“happiness”) based 
on states (“I am feeling something positive”) 
which on their side were based on the feeling-
while-acting.

Generalization of the entified signs (“happi-
ness”, “sadness”) proceeds in the direction of 
gradual loss of the categorical nature of the 
emotion terms and their immersion in the gen-

eralized field (Level 3). The person can refer-
ence one’s feeling in general direction terms 
(“I am feeling GOOD”) – yet it is a general-
ized vague category (“good”, “bad”) rather 
than the emerging first generalization (move 
Level 1à Level 2) of “I am feeling SOME-
THING positive”.
  The  sign-mediated  field  of  feelings  can 
reach the highest level of hyper-generaliza-
tion at Level 4. This entails the emergence 
of  feeling  fields  that  overtake  the  person’s 
psyche in its totality. The person “just feels” 
 something – but cannot put that feeling into 
words. Examples of aesthetic feelings – cathar-
sis experienced during a theatre performance, 
reading deeply moving poems or prose, or in 
an interpersonal situation of extreme beauty, 
indicate that the human affective field can be-
come undifferentiated as a result of extensive 
abstraction of the emotions involved, and their 
overgeneralization to the person’s general feel-
ings about oneself or about the world. Theo-
retically, that process entails internalization 
and abbreviation.
  Values are basic human affective guidance 
means that are ontogenetically internalized, 
but their externalization can be observed in 
any  aspect  of  human  conduct. Yet  as  they 
have reached such a hyper-generalized way 
of being, they are no longer easily accessible 
through verbally mediated processes. We can 
decisively act as directed by our values – but 
are ill at ease telling others what these values 
are. If we succeed, we have performed the 
Level 4→3 translation of a hyper-generalized 
semiotic field into general verbal statements 
(e.g., “I feel totally dedicated to science”) that 
may refer to the direction of the values but 
cannot capture them in their entirety. Values 
are not entities – but dynamic semiotic fields. 
In human life, affective fields of higher kind – 
as depicted in Figure 9 – regulate experience in 
its totality. Affective fields can be hyper-gen-
eralized meanings that have left their original 
context of emergence and flavour new experi-

72972_outlines_r01.indd 74 10-10-2008 09:04:07

Critical Social Studies •  No. 1  •  2008
75

ences. Thus, a person may develop the notion 
“life is unfair” from a series of life events of 
being mistreated.

How development happens – or: On
the importance of wallpaper
Ontogeny involves weaving together the pat-
terned flow of encounters with the textured 

world, and the internal subjective affective 
fields that are constantly under construction 
through hyper-generalization. As is usual, we 
can begin to understand the extraordinary na-
ture of very ordinary life events when there 
are ruptures in the ordinary.
  In around 1861 in a small country home of 
a former officer of the Russian army, far from 

Figure 9. Levels of affective fields (from Valsiner, 2007, p. 312)

72972_outlines_r01.indd 75 10-10-2008 09:04:11

Ornamented Worlds and Textures of Feeling •  Jaan Valsiner
76

St. Peterburg, repairs were being made to re-
furbish the house. It turned out there was not 
enough wallpaper brought from the capital – 
and the decision was made to use left-over 
paper to cover the children’s bedroom walls. 
By  coincidence,  lithographic  lecture  notes 
of the father on mathematics – found on the 
attic – were used. The retrospective account 
by a 11-year old girl captures the flavor of the 
new life this makeshift wallpaper created:

As I looked at the nursery walls one day, I noticed 
that certain things were shown on them which I had 
already heard mentioned by Uncle. Since I was in 
any case quite electrified by the things he told me, 
I began scrutinizing the walls very attentively. It 
amused me to examine these sheets, yellowed by 
time, all speckled over with some kind of hiero-
glyphs whose meaning escaped me completely but
which, I felt, must signify something very wise
and interesting. And I would stand by the wall
for hours on end, reading and rereading what
was written there. (Kovalevskaya, 1978, p. 215, 
added emphasis)

That this kind of encounter with the patterns 
on  such  makeshift  wallpaper  entails  social 
guidance – the mentioned Uncle, who had 
been regularly chatting with the girl:

Uncle used to tell me fairytales and teach me how 
to play chess. Then, unexpectedly carried away
by his own thoughts, he would initiate me into
the secrets of the various economic and social
projects through which he dreamed of benefitting
humanity. But more than anything else, he loved to 
communicate the things he had succeeded in read-
ing and learning in the course of his long life.
  It was during these conversations that I first 
had occasion to hear about certain mathematical 
concepts which made a very powerful impression 
upon me. Uncle spoke of “squaring the circle,” 
about the asymptote – that straight line which the 
curve constantly approaches without ever reach-
ing it – and about many other things which were
quite unintelligible to me and yet seemed mysteri-
ous and at the same time deeply attractive. (ibid, 
p. 214, added emphasis)

The girl – Sofia Kovalevskaya – became one 
of the most celebrated and original mathemati-
cians of the 19th century when there was no ed-
ucational discussion of few women in the hard 
sciences, or the “math phobia” in schools, etc. 
Women were simply not in academia – being 
forbidden to attend university courses – yet the 
highly dedicated and motivated ones prevailed 
and excelled. No social institution was offering 
to “help” them to “overcome” their supposed 
“inferiority” – rather, the unconditionally re-
pressive social system triggered various trajec-
tories of resilience. Some of these proved to 
result in excellence in the sciences.
  What emerges as an important point from 
this example is the role of episodic synthe-
sis (see Vygotsky, 1971) of the interpersonal 
(listening to the talkative uncle) and individ-
ual experiences (reading the wallpaper). The 
way in which development works is not that 
of active teaching-and-learning in the here-
and-now special setting (a school lesson), but 
rather a bricolage of moments of haphazard 
social suggestions and occasional links with 
environment through concentrated attention. 
Life is not an institutionalized training ground 
where the more experienced “social others” – 
teachers, parents, peers – do their utmost in 
the lesson framework to bring the “novices” 
to the ever-expanding horizons of new know-
ledge. Instead, knowledge is acquired in an 
ambivalent social maze of limitations, bogus 
value attributions, pretense of “help” to mask 
acts of appropriation, and so on. Developing 
ignorance – under the cover of “choice”, “op-
portunity”, and “right to know” is an important 
social goal orientation for any profit-oriented 
social institution in a globalizing consumer 
society.  Filling  our  lives  with  ornaments  – 
through the television commercials of our day, 
similar to church decorations in the pre-literate 
eras – is a vehicle amply used in implicit social 
guidance of human development.

72972_outlines_r01.indd 76 10-10-2008 09:04:11

Critical Social Studies •  No. 1  •  2008
77

General Conclusions
Ornaments are bases for holistic experienc-
ing – and holistic abstraction. Hence the power 
of abundance – including here its null case 
(absence of ornament) for the human psyche. 
An ornamented world keeps the experiencing 
person “within the field” – not letting him/her 
escape, while at the same time not particu-
larly demanding attention or goals-oriented 
actions in relation to the patterns. It is there-
fore not surprising that the function of orna-
ments has been viewed usually in terms of 
aesthetics, rather than those for psychological 
development.
  Both biological and cultural worlds create 
human life conditions in the form of multiple 
potentially infinite fields that are abundant. 
We  can  consider  human  development  as  a 
coordination – with qualitative ruptures – of 
two holistic fields of external and internal in-
finities of pattern transformation. Within these 
coordinated fields, the principle of redundancy 
guarantees multi-faceted canalization of the 
developing  organism  in  socially  desirable 
directions.

Acknowledgment
The pleasures of Chinese food in Copenha-
gen – and discussions with Marianne Hede-
gaard, Pernille Hviid, Jytte Bang, and Char-
lotte Mathiassen – set the foundation for this 
synthesis of architecture and human devel-
opment. I am grateful to Max Berkowitz for 
our recurrent discussions of the nature of sci-
ence, and for his provision of the lead for the 
Kovalevskaya example. Suggestions by two 
unknown editorial reviewers were helpful for 
bringing this article to its completion.

References
Badyaev, A. V. and Landeen, E. A. (2007). Devel-

opmental evolution of sexual ornamentation: 
model and a test of feather growth and pigmen-
tation. Integrative and Comparative Biology,
47, 2, 221-233.

Demmer, U. (1997). Voices in the forest: The field 
of gathering among the Jenu Kurumba. In P. 
Hockings (Ed.), Blue Mountains revisited: Cul-
tural studies on the Nilgiri Hills (pp. 164-191). 
Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Diriwächter,  R.  and  Valsiner,  J.  (Eds)  (2008). 
Striving towards the whole. New Brunswick, 
N.J.: Transaction Publishers.

Ehrenfels, C. von (1890/1988) On Gestalt quali-
ties. In B. Smith (Ed)., Foundation of Gestalt
theory. München: Philosophia Verlag.

Foster,  M.  L.  (1979).  Synthesis  and  antithesis 
in Balinese ritual. In A. L. Becker and A. A. 
Yengoyan (Eds.), The imagination of reality:
Essays on Southeast Asian coherence systems 
(pp. 175-196). Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.

Goodale, J. C. (1995). To sing with pigs is human:
The concept of person in Papua New Guinea. 
Seattle,  Wa.:  University  of  Washington 
Press.

Hamlin, A. D. F. (1923). A history of ornament –
Renaissance and modern.  New  York:  The 
Century.

Jones, O. (1856/2001). The grammar of ornament. 
New York: Ivy Press.

Josephs, I. E., Valsiner, J., & Surgan, S. E. (1999). 
The  process  of  meaning  construction.  In  J. 
Brandtstätdter and R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Action
& self development (pp. 257-282). Thousand 
Oaks, Ca.: Sage.

Kovalevskaya, S. (1978). A Russian childhood. 
New York: Springer.

Lawrence, J. A., & Valsiner, J. (1993). Concep-
tual roots of internalization: From transmis-
sion to transformation. Human Development,
36, 150-167.

Lawrence, J. A., & Valsiner, J. (2003). Making 
personal sense: An account of basic internal-
ization and externalization processes. Theory
& Psychology, 13, 6, 723-752.

Leach, E. (2000/1983). The gatekeepers of heaven. 
In S. Hugh-Jones & J. Laidlaw (Eds.), The es-
sential Edmund Leach. Vol. 2. Culture and

72972_outlines_r01.indd 77 10-10-2008 09:04:11

Ornamented Worlds and Textures of Feeling •  Jaan Valsiner
78

human nature (pp. 119-140). New Haven, Ct.: 
Yale University Press.

Morgan, D.(1998).  Visual piety: a history and
theory of popular religious images. Berkeley, 
Ca.: University of California Press.

Roche, D. (1996). The culture of clothing. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press.

Salingaros, N. A. (1996). The “life” of a carpet: 
an application of the Alexander rules. Paper 
presented at the 8th International Conference 
on Oriental Carpets, Philadelphia, Pa. Novem-
ber.

Turner, V. (1974). Dramas, fields and metaphors. 
Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.

Valsiner, J. (1997). Culture and the development of
children’s action. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley.

Valsiner,  J.  (2005).  Affektive  Entwicklung  im 
kulturellen Kontext. In J. B. Asendorpf (Ed.), 
Enzyklopädie der Psychologie. Vol. 3. Soziale,
emotionale und Persönlichkeitsentwicklung 
(pp. 677-728). Göttingen: Hogrefe.

Valsiner,  J.  (2006).  The  overwhelming  world: 
Functions of pleromatization in creating di-
versity in cultural and natural constructions. 
Keynote lecture at International School of Se-
miotic and Structural Studies, Imatra, Finland, 
June, 12.

Valsiner, J. (2007a). Culture in minds and societ-
ies. New Delhi: Sage.

Valsiner, J. (2007b). Constructing the internal in-
finity: dialogic structure of the internalization/
externalization process. International Journal
of Dialogical Science, 2, 1, 207-221. [http://
ijds.lemoyne.edu/journal/2_1/index.html]

Valsiner, J., & Rosa, A. (2007). Contemporary 
socio-cultural research: uniting culture, soci-
ety, and psychology. In J. Valsiner & A. Rosa 
(Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Sociocul-
tural Psychology (pp. 1-20) New York: Cam-
bridge University Press.

von Uexküll, J. J. (1982). The theory of meaning.
Semiotica 42, 1, 25-82. (Original Bedeutungs-
lehre from 1940).

Vygotsky, L. S. (1971). Psychology of art. Cam-
bridge, Ma.: MIT Press.

Wisse, G. (1994). Manifold beginnings: single-
sheet papers.. In L. Hoskins (Ed.), The papered
wall (pp. 8-21). New York: Harry Abrams.

Wörringer, W. (1963). Abstraction and empathy:

A contribution to the psychology of style. New 
York: International Universities Press.

Zittoun, T. (2006).  Transitions. Stamford, Ct,: 
 InfoAge Press.

72972_outlines_r01.indd 78 10-10-2008 09:04:11

A Cross-Cultural
Analysis of Homes

Mary Gauvain & Irwin Altman
University of Utah
205, Orson Spencer Hall
Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA

Abstract

This paper proposes a conceptual framework for analyzing social-
psychological features of homes. Homes from various cultures are described
in terms of two dialectic dimensions: (1) identity/communality, or the
degree t o which homes display the bonds between residents and their
community and culture, and the uniqueness o r distinctiveness of people
from one another; (2) openness/closedness, or the degree t o which homes
portray how residents are open and accessible and also how they are closed
and out of contact with others.

Resume

Cet article propose un cadre conceptuel pour analyser les caractkris-
tiques socio-psychologiques des maisons. Des habitations de diverses
cultures sont decrites dans les termes d’une double dimension dialectique :
(1) identitb/communaut6, ou point jusqu’ou les maisons donnent a voir
les liens entre les residents et leur communaut6 ou leur culture, et l’uni-
cite ou la distinction des gens entre eux; (2) ouverture/fermeture, ou
point jusqu’ou les maisons signifient tantbt combien les habitants sont
ouverts ou disponibles et aussi combien ils sont renfermes sur eux-memes
ou exclus du contact avec autrui.

1. Introduction
This paper1 analyzes the home, an important environmental setting

that has received relatively little attention in psychological research.
Although considerable research is available for a variety of institutional
settings, such as prisons, schools and hospitals, it is difficult t o find sys-
tematic programs of environment-behavior research on the home as a
social psychological setting. In this paper we propose a conceptual frame-
work for analyzing social-psychological features of homes. The basic idea

‘We are indebted to Lynn Liben, Nora Newcombe and Barbara Rogoff for their comments
on earlier versions of this paper. This paper is based on a lengthier chapter, Altman, I. &
Gauvain, M., A cross-cultural and dialectic analysis of homes, which appeared in L. Liben,
A. Patterson & N. Newcombe (Eds.), Spatial Representation & Behavior across the Life
Span Theory and Application. New York: Academic Press, 1981, 283-319. Readers inter-
ested in a more extensive discussion of the issues raised in this paper should refer t o this
chapter.

M a r y Gauvain a n d I r w i n Altrnan

is that homes reflect the dialectic interplay of individuality and society,
meaning that people are linked with and influenced by the larger com-
munity and, a t the same time, people are separate from and independent
of societal influences. We will propose that the individual/society dialectic
is manifested in two subordinate dimensions that appear in home design
and use, namely, identity/communality and openness/closedness. We will
then apply this framework t o the comparative cross-cultural analysis of
homes. In so doing we hope t o illustrate the possibility for systematic
analysis of similarities and differences among cultures in the design and
uses of dwelling spaces. Aside from Rapoport’s analysis (1 969a) of homes
in relation t o environmental factors and cultural variables, systematic
comparisons of homes across cultures are rare.

2. Dialectic Dimensions of Homes

An assumption of our analysis is that homes mirror a wide variety
of environmental and cultural influences, and that dwelling forms evolve
in response t o a variety of interactive forces. In this paper, however, we
will restrict ourselves t o the ways in which dwellings reflect the degree
t o which cultures and their members deal with the oppositions of individ-
ual needs, desires, and motives versus the demands and requirements of
society at large. Individual forces are represented by the attempts of
people t o be unique and distinct, independent and free of the influences
of others. At the same time, there are factors operating t o make the per-
son part of and a t one with society, and that facilitate his o r her identifi-
cation with the community.

While societies probably vary in the extent t o which individual
versus societal factors predominante, we expect that b o t h will exist t o
some extent in all cultures. Thus, it is not likely that one will find
a viable culture in which there is total societal control of the lives of in-
dividuals, nor is it likely that one will find a society with complete indi-
vidual feeedom. We d o not assume, however, that social systems strive
toward perfectly balances relationships between individual and societal
forces. A range of possible relationships exist, any of which may be quite
viable, as long as some amount of b o t h oppositional processes exists in
the system. Finally, we assume a dynamic and changing relationship be-
tween individual and societal factors. Thus, by virtue of external and
internal factors (political, economic, social and environmental), there are
likely t o be shifting emphases of individual versus societal forces, o n b o t h
a long- and short-term basis.

The individuality/society dialectic has many specific forms, aspects
of which have been researched in social psychology, although n o t within
a dialectic framework, e.g., independence versus conformity, competition
versus cooperation self gain versus altruism. We propose that homes in a
variety of cultures reflect in their design and use two specific aspects of
the general individuality/society dialectic : (1) identity/communality, and
(2) openness/cIosedness. We will illustrate these dimensions by discussing

three general areas of homes in different cultures : sitings and exteriors:
entranceways and thresholds, and interlor layouts and use.

2.1. Identity/Communality
The home depicts the uniqueness and individuality of its occupants,

i.e., their personal identity as individuals and as a family, along with their
ties, bonds and affiliations with the community and larger culture of which
they are part. Identity has often been used t o describe modern American
suburban homes, where people are depicted as searching for dwellings t o
meet thier particular individual and family needs, where they display their
status, and where they decorate homes so as t o make themselves distinct
from others. Cooper (1976) emphasized the identity facet of homes in
o u r society :

In the contemporary English speaking world, a premium is put on originality, on
having a house that is unique and somewhat different from others on the street, for
the inhabitants who identify with these houses are struggling t o maintain some sense
of personal uniqueness in an increasingly conformist world. On the other hand, one’s
house must not be t o o way-out, for that would label the inhabitant as a nonconform-
ist, and that, for many Americans, is a label t o be avoided. (p. 437)

Although emphasizing personal identity, Cooper suggests that the dis-
play of uniqueness operates within the bounds set by community norms.
Thus, while features of American suburban homes may vary a great deal,
they fall within the appropriate limits defined by the culture. We expect
t o find that homes in many cultures vary in t h extent t o which they dif-
ferentially emphasize identity and communality, although b o t h identity
and communality should be present t o some extent.

American middle-case suburban tract homes are usually located in
t h e middle or rear part of a lot, with some separation between the home
and a public street.2 In may respects the location of the home and certain
features of the front and exterior present o t others the unique, idiosyn-
cratic and individual qualities of the residents. F o r exemple, landscaping
t h e front yard is a traditional American vehicle for a achieving individu-
ality and uniqueness. In addition, holiday and seasonal decorations are
displayed in t h e f r o n t ; the upkeep and personalization of the front
is carefully done; trash and gardening equipment are usually stored in the
rear, vegetable gardens rarely appear in the front yard, and so on. The
identity theme is clearly illustrated by considering new American suburban
communities where homes are often initially quite similar in design. Very
quickly one sees homes repainted in different colors, decorations and
facings that have no functional value are added t o the exterior, and land-
scaping is individualized.

The fronts of American homes and vards n o t only express identity,
but they also depict the bonds of a family with the community. This is
especially evident in formal and informal projects involving neighborhoods,

I Analyses o f middle-class homesare based o n o u r own informal observations and experiences with a limited range of such dwellings.

30 1 Mary Gauvain and Irwin Altman

I

Fig. 1. F r o n t facades of American suburban homes with planting, grillwork, decorations, awnings,
and other displays. (Photographs by Jim Hoste).

A C r o s s – C u l t u r a l A n a l v s i s of H o m e s

such as cooperative gardening projects, and holiday decorating contests.
Thus, the exterior of the home and the lot n o t only permit American sub-
urbanites t o achieve identity and uniqueness, but they also facilitate the
display of community ties.

In some cultures bonds with the community are evident in the clus-
tering of dwellings around a central courtyard o r plaza. Pueblo Indians of
the southwestern United States often live in terraced dwellings arranged
on t o p of one another and face a central plaza (Rapoport, 1969a,b). Work,
community activities and religious events take in the plaza, and the overall
design of the pueblo reflects the unity of the residents with the community.
At the other extreme, homes in parts of the Middle East and Asia portray
few community bonds. These homes often present a blank wall t o public
thoroughfares. The absence of windows and the bare wall suggest little
communality with t h e public a t large o r even with immediate neighbors.

There is evidence for b o t h identity and communality in the home
of other cultures. In Tarong, a kin-based hamlet in northern Luzon,
Philippines (Nydegger and Nydegger, 1966), positioning a house away
from the shared community yard would be considered antisocial and
would deprive occupants of social interaction. People are proud of their
shared yard, they sweep it thoroughly and keep materials and tools neatly
arranged under their houses. As such, the residents of Tarong express their
involvement with and pride in the community. However, the uniqueness
and identity of a family is often reflected in the construction of individ-
ual homes. Although size is dictated almost solely b y number of occupants,
t h e quality of construction materials directly reflects a family’s wealth.

As another example, nomadic North African Berbers pitch their
tents in a sacred order – the douav, or circle – around which related fam-
ilies gather (Faegre, 1 979). Wealthier and more important families have
larger and more elaborate tents, thereby reflecting status and personal
identity. Regardless of its size, however, the front of each tent faces the
center of the d o u a r , where the mosque tent is located. So, there is evi-
dence of b o t h identity and communality in the location and exterior
qualities of homes in this culture.

Another example appears in the community design of the South Nias
villages of Indonesia (Fraser, 1968). The chief’s home is located a t the
upper end of the village and the commoners’ dwellings are situated at the
lower end, in accord with their conception of the universe as having an
upper world and an underworld. In the center of the single streeet is a
community plaza, which is a sacred place, and which is chosen by the
religious leader as a central site around which the rest of the village is built.
So, communality is represented in overall village design and in the location
of dwellings. But so is individual identity. For example, the chief’s dwell-
ing is the largest and its exterior is richly decorated. Although most other
homes are similar t o one another, individualized totems and markers in
front of dwellings reflect the unique qualities of their occupants. So, with
respect t o location and general exterior, we can see the interplay of ident-
ity and communality.

Mary Gauvain and Irwin Altrnan

T U R K M E N – d m & o n d u d W C ~ ~ C ( wnn b a d UZBEK – b l d p l t roof wtth wh&
b&. ~ e t d m,u &.

CONTEMPORARY MONGOLIAN – CMWM covmd tOpmtect IhtJlt.

I A ~t -M k $xed oYtr mf FLU pa” 4 f l m . 3. Fittd c a + w cover jon o v w f t ~ t J
n ticd dolm

Fig. 2. Decorative coverings of yurts for different tribal groups.

A similar pattern appears with respect t o the exterior of homes.
Certain nomadic tribes of Central Asia live in dome-like structures called
yurts that are covered by layers of felt (Faegre, 1979). These self-support
ing structures have a woven tension band of felt tied around the top of
the dwelling. Some yurt dwellers weave intricate patterns on the band t o
denote a particular family, thereby reflecting unique identity. Tribes also
decorate their yurts differently from one another. For example, the Kirgiz
design includes a brown felt trim which is sewn t o the border of a white
felt cover, whereas the Uzbek yurt is covered with a black felt roof with
white bands. Thus, the exterior facade of the yurt communicates both
attachment t o the larger community, and individual uniqueness.

Another example comes from the Bedouin nomads of Saudi Arabia
and other parts of the Middle East (Dickson, 1969; Faegre, 1979). These
people live in tents made of large strips of cloth woven from goat hair or
wool. Communality and identity are reflected in several ways on the
exterior of the Bedouin tent. Although the number and name of each
strip is the same from group t o group, the length of the strip depends
upon the importance and status of the individual owner. The strips have

designs that are associated with a particular tribe or clan, b u t they also
reflect the unique talents and embellishments of t h e women who weave
the material. In addition, the gata – a curtain that separates women’s
and men’s areas of t h e tent – contains elaborate woven designs. The front
of this curtain extends beyond the tent opening and is positioned t o face
outward for all t o see. Its design depicts tribal patterns, as well as the
unique ideas of its weavers. So, again, one sees the interplay of b o t h identity
and communality in the exterior of dwellings.

One final example comes from the fronts of homes in the old section
of Bergen, Norway, a traditional fishing port. Here homes are built of
wood, are of similar style, and face directly o n t o narrow streeets. It is
common for front windows t o display attractive curtains and decorative
items. Home ofter home has a similar display, perhaps reflecting com-
munity norms. However, one also sees considerable individualization of
exteriors. Houses are painted different colors, some have ornate trimming
around windows, t h e curtains are made of different fabric and have
different designs, and front windows differ in what specific items are
displayed.

In summary, the positioning and general exteriors of homes in a
variety of cultures simultaneously reflect identity or uniqueness, and the
bonding of people with t h e larger community. However, the examples
presented above also suggest that cultures differ in t h e relative strength
of identity o r communality in home exteriors.

2.2. Entranceways and Thresholds
Throughout history thresholds and entranceways have had mytho-

logical and religious significance. Gateways and entranceways t o the pal-
aces of the rulers and t o religious places often symbolized the boundary
between the secular, profane world and the sacred, holy world (Raglan,
1964). According t o Raglan (1 9 6 4 ) thresholds t o homes habe also assumed
a sacred quality, as if they too were a separation between the harshness
of the world and t h e warm protective haven of the home. Even today,
many Jews afflux a mezuzah or paper scroll t o the doorway of their
homes and, upon entering, a pious Jew will touch the mezuzah in recog-
nition of the sacred and holy quality of the place. Raglan observed that
Teutons, Finns, Syrians, Egyptians, Persians and members of other cultures
have held t h e belief that one must never step o n the threshold of a home,
b u t must always step over it. The reasons for such practices are numerous
and include beliefs that spirits, souls, fairies, dieties o r mysterious beings
live under the threshold.

On the whole there are few religious or cosmological values regarding
entranceways o r thresholds in the suburban American culture. Of course,
t h e decoration of front dooers a t Thanksgiving, Halloween, o r Christmas
may symbolize earlier religious and cosmological values, but many such
practices now have a secular and commercial basis. However, the American
threshold and entranceway seem t o reflect the interplay of identitylcom-

-.
I Mary Gauvain and I r w i n A l t m a n

munality. For example, one is apt t o find several indicators of uniqueness
and identity at the entrance t o the suburban home in t h e form of carefully
landscaped pathways, lamposts, decorative nameplates, elaborate door-
knobs, knockers, lighting fixtures, large and elaborate doors, and some-
times a family initial decoratively scrolled on a storm door. At the same,
time, entranceways and thresholds also reflect community ties of the
family with its neighbors and frieds. The care with which entranceways
are treated symbolizes respect for visitors, who usually enter a home
through its most important front door, whereas the family often uses side
and rear entrances (Altman, Nelson, and Lett, 1 972). Furthermore, the
entranceway may be lighted at night, there is often a welcome mat at the
doorway, and sometimes there are special decorations t o symbolize the
hospitality of the family toward friends and the community. Thus, the
threshold of the American home simultaneously reflects identity and
communality.

Thresholds and entrances t o homes occur in different configur-
ations across cultures. For examples, thresholds in family compounds in
India and Mexico extend forward into the public domain and they often
have a visible barrier, such as a gate o r courtyard door, that sharply separ-
ates public and family spaces. Even in parts of the United States and
Europe, in congested suburbs and cities, fences, hedges and gateways are
used t o extend the threshold and t o distinguish clearly the boundaries of
the home from the community.

Entranceways t o yurts, the dwellings of certain nomadic tribes of
Asia, clearly depict identity/communality. The door, originally made of
felt, was often elaborately decorated with detailed applique designs, and
served as an important status symbol (Faegre, 1979). In more recent
times, wooden doors have been frequently used and many are finely
carved or are panelled. On the communality side of t h e dialectic it is con-
sidered impolite t o step on the threshold o r t o touch the tent ropes when
entering a y u r t . This custom emphasizes the importance of the entrance-
way t o the family and reinforces a community belief that the dwelling is
a symbolic representation of the universe. As such, the yurt threshold
conveys the sanctity of its inhabitants and of the community as a whole.

The Tlingit Indians of the northwestern American continent place
carved totem poles with figures of animals, humans and mythological
creatures in the front of their dwelling, often near entranceways. In some
cases, the entranceway itself may contain detailed carvings. The figures
on totems can represent symbolic and historical events unique t o the life
of the dwellers, indicating personal identity, and they also often portray
events that apply t o the clan o r larger culture, thereby signifying com-
munality.

Homes in Bergen, Norway, also reflect communality in that most
people decorate their entranceways with large carved doors, shiny brass
knockers and door handles, stone or wood carvings on the doorframes,
and have potted plants and flowers flanking the entranceway and steps
leading up the main door. Identity is evident in the fact that people

A Cross-Cultural Analysisof Homes

decorate and arrange their front area displays in rather different ways,
with individualized flower arrangements, different types of door panel-
ling and knockers, etc. Numerous examples of the display of identity/
communality in and around entranceways can be found in other cultures.

Fig. 3. Front facade of North American Tlingit Indian home with carvings of animals, humans
and mythical figures (National Museum of man, National Museums of Canada).

Mary Gauvain and Irwin Altman

Fig. 4. Front facades and doorvvays of nineteenth century Danish homes with elaborate archways
amd doors, window decorations, and displays. (Photographs by Irwin Altman).

2.3. Interior ofHornes
Individuality is a pervasive feature of American homes. People seek

spatial arrangements that are distinctive vis a v i s their neighbors and that
satisfy their individual family needs. Uniqueness is also reflected in the
specialization of room functions. In fact, a family’s identity is often sym-
bolized by the number and variety of rooms in its home. It is also a prac-
tice for American suburbanites t o decorate bedrooms in ways that display
the sex, interests and individuality of the occupants (Rheingold and Cook,
1975). Individuality of family members is also evident in t h e primary
users of certain rooms, e.g., a father often has a special room such as a
study or workshop that he controls and that he may decorate o r person-
alize (Altman, Nelson and Lett, 1972).

The decor and furnishings of American homes also symbolize the
desire of occupants t o differ from others. Many people organize t h e
interior decor of their home around an ethnic o r national theme. Further-
more, considerable time, energy and money is spent in decorating and
cleaning the home, so as t o present the image of order, friendliness and
and uniqueness of t h e family’s home environment.

Communality, is also present in homes in relation t o family members
and in respect t o outsiders. Not only are there places that distinguish the
individuality of family members from one another, b u t there are also com-
munal areas where members come together as a family unit, e.g., the
dining room, kitchen o r family room. Sometimes family areas have decor-
ations that display the family as a unit, for example, in the living room
o r family room one might see photographs of family members and rela-
tives. While such places illustate the uniqueness of t h e family t o outsiders,
they also portray the bonds of family members with one another.

The interior of the American home also illustrates a family’s ties with
the community. For example, t h e role of societal norms is shown in t h e
use o f rooms for generally accepted functions. American suburbanites d o
not usually sleep in kitchens o r dining rooms, nor d o many people sleep
in a single room. Furthermore, while considerable variation in decor is
permissible, most middle class homes have similar furnishings and arrange-
ments (Altman, et a l , 1972). People also use certain places when enter-
taining outsiders. F o r example, living rooms and formal dining areas are
used for special guests, not only t o enable the family t o preseri1 itself as
a unique entity, b u t also t o symbolize the importance of the guest of the
family.

Although size, arrangement, decor and use of homes differ cross-
culturally, identity and communality are evident in the interiors of homes
of many cultures. In the village of Tarong in the Philippines (Nydegger
and Nydegger, 1966), floor plans of homes are similar in the number and
orientation of rooms. Furthermore, most households have t h e same
amount and types of furnishings. However, individual wealth and personal
identity are indicated by the quality of interior furnishing and, even
though decorations in the main living room are limited, it is very import-
ant t o a Tarongan that this place be attractive and comfortable, since this

Mary Gauvain and Irwin Altrnan

is where guests are served. This area of the home is also a place of individual
display. Walls often have photographs of family events and of family
members, as well as certificates of achievement and pictures of political
o r other famous people. Therefore, along with communality there is evi-
dence of individual identity in the Tarongan home.

In some cultures where homes are quite similar and reflect com-
munit y norms, there are often subtle details that portray a family’s
uniqueness. Families in Justlahuaca, Mexico (Romney and Romney, 1966 )
live in similar one-room houses made of adobe. The interiors of some
houses, however, are plastered and painted white, with a strip of color
painted around the bottom. While this adornment is minor compared t o
t h e eleborate decor of American homes, it nevertheless is an expression
of family identity and is especially significant since community bonds
are so pervasive in home design and in other household practices.

The Japanese hamlet of Taira (Maretzki and Maretzki, 1 9 6 6 ) has
two types of houses : one is simple and small; t h e other is larger and more
eleborate. However, t h e basic floor plan of b o t h types is uniform. In spite
of such communality, families express individuality by unique decorations
of walls, such as the addition of paintings, scrolls, and photographs.

In another context, Dickson (1969) noted that the interior layouts
of Bedouin tents are identical. The men’s part of the tent, where guests

A THREE-POLED BEDOUIN TENT
FOR THE WELL-TO-DO

. MENS QUARTERS I C _ O F E E-MAKING
:!..:! *- ID ; r L U L t SADDLE X.,- TENT POLE! /[-/7 MATTRESS 0 ‘.

I
I

CLOSED SIDE VJOMEN’S QUARTERS : OPEN SIDE
:
\

‘
TENT POLE

CHILDS HAMMOCK

I

0 CINDERS
Fig. 5 . Interior layout of t h e Bedouin tent.

I A C r o s s – C u l t u r a l Analysis o f Hornes 1 39
are entertained, is always at t h e eastern end. Although it is common t o
have carpets and pillows o n t h e floor, a fireplace in the center, and t h e
man’s camel saddle displayed prominently, identity is apparent in the
elaborateness of the area and its decor, which reflects a man’s wealth. The
women’s area it a t the western end of t h e tent and is used t o store food and
cooking utensils. Even though women rarely see visitors and are usually
working inside t h e t e n t , their decorated saddles are placed in a prominent
position so as t o be seen by passers-by. So, even in nomadic communities,
one sees peoples expressing community bonds and individual uniqueness
through the vehicle of the home environment.

A similar pattern occurs among the Tuareg, a nomadic people who
dwell in the southern Sahara Desert. Most Tuareg skin tents are similar in
color and shape, with low flat roofs t o withstand sand storms (Faegre,
1979). But the interior of the tent epitomizes the blend of individual
expression and community bonds. Almost every interior surface is decor-
ated with displays of the weaving and leatherwork skills of the women.
The fact that all the women work a t adorning their tents suggests the
community’s acknowledgement of the importance of the inside of the tent.

This section of t h e paper described how a variety of cultures reflect
the identity, distinctiveness and uniqueness of homes, along with com-
munality, bonding and ties of people t o their neighbors, community and
culture. The existence of identity/communality is reflected in different
facets of dwellings-location, exteriors, entranceways and thresholds, and
interiors. In addition, the examples suggest that cultures differ with regard
t o t h e relative importance of identity and communality and t h e specific
mechanisms for displaying identity and communality.

2.4. Openness/Closedness
A second facet of the individuality/society dialectic involves the

degree t o which homes emphasize the openness o r closedness of occupants
t o outsiders. This dialectic draws o n recent theorizing about privacy as a
boundary regulation process (Altman, 1975, 1976, 1977); Altman &
Chemers, 1980, a,b). According t o Altman, privacy is a dialectic boundary
process whereby a person is differentially accessible o r inaccessible t o
others. This framework states that privacy is regulated by a range of behav-
ioral mechanisms which include verbal and paraverbal communications,
nonverbal behavior, and environmental behaviors such as personal space
and territoriality.

We will propose that the home also serves as a behavioral mechanism
that is used t o regulate openness/closedness. Once again, we will assume
that t h e home serves b o t h openness and closedness, but t o different
degrees in different cultures.

2.5. Locations and Exteriors o f Homes
The readily visible front yard of American homes makes publicity

accessible part of t h e family’s life and values, as displayed in their land-
scaping and general exterior. Yet the home is located toward the middle

Vlary t i a u v a ~ n a n d Irwin A l t m a n

o r rear of the lot, somewhat separate and private from public thorough-
fares. Furthermore, there are strong norms not t o walk o r even enter
yards without permission. So, simultaneous with the openness and
accessibility of family homes there is an element of separation and inac-
cessibility. Compare this with parts of Canada and England (Cooper, 1976),
where many homes are blocked from view by high shrubbery, trees and
fences in the front yard, and where there is often a sharp demarcation
between public thoroughfares and private property. Similarly, homes in
t h e Middle East and elsewhere often present a blank wall t o public
thoroughfares, and information about family life is almost totally inac-
cessible t o passers-by.

In many respects the rear area of the American suburban home is a
place for t h e family t o avoid contact with outsiders. Rear areas are often
treated as the personal domain of t h e family. Rarely is the rear area visible
from t h e public street and it is frequently kept from public view through
the use of high fences or hedges that surround the yard. Some suburbs
even locate houses o n adjacent lots in ways so as t o prevent neighbors
from seeing i n t o one another’s yards. A similar practice occured in 1 4 t h
Century Moslem communities in West Africa (Prussin, 1974). Building
codes required that entranceways t o homes o n either side of a road could
n o t be directly across from one another. In addition, windows of upper
stories had t o be positioned so that people would not be able t o see i n t o
neighboring dwellings.

Openness and closedness occur in a variety of forms in other cultures.
Among t h e Nyansongo of Kenya, homestead separation and autonomy
are highly valued, and neighbors are treated with suspicion (LeVine and
LeVine, 1 9 6 6 ) . Homes are organized in clusters around kinship groups,
and are separated from other clusters of homes by boundaries, hedges and
trees. Individual homes within t h e group are dispersed t o ensure separ-
ation, b u t the network of paths in the cluster makes it easy t o get from
one house t o another. However, paths between homestead groups are less
accessible. From the yards of each homestead cluster one can see and be
seen by passers-by o n the main road and one can watch people of another
cluster o n the opposite hill. Thus, some accessibility exists, while t h e
overall design of the community ensures residential separation.

In Tarong (Nydegger and Nydegger, 1 9 6 6 ) , a community described
previously, neighborhood living groups are connected b y footpaths, making
homes readily accessible t o almost anyone in the community. However,
the paths near houses are under the control of residents and passersby are
obliged t o greet the houseowner by requesting the right t o pass. Thus there
is simultaneous access of homes along with individual ownership and t h e
control over accessibility.

During the hot summer months nomadic Bedouins of the Middle
East pitch their tents close together around limited water sources and
leave the tents completely open, yielding close contact among neighbors.
However, it is also customary t o hang u p wall curtains for privacy and t o
keep out wind and sand during stormy weather. An additional privacy

I A Cross-Cultural Analysis o f Homes
mechanism concerns rules about exposure of women t o male outsiders. A
visitor must approach a tent from the front and always on the men’s o r
eastern side of the tent. In this way women can avold being seen or can
adjust their facial veils (Dickson, 1969; Faegre, 1979). Furthermore, when
male visitors are served food, women pass supplies over the tent divider
without being seen (Cole, 1975).

In the small Okinawan hamlet of Taira, houses are so close that
neighbors can hold conversations without leaving their homes (Maretzki
and Maretzki, 1966). Furthermore, houses are easily accessible from the
street and there are n o formal rules about trespassing, so that people freely
cross each other’s property. Yet, some privacy is achieved since homes
are often surrounded by trees, hibiscus hedges and fences. In addition,
there are strong norms regarding personal property and stealing is almost
unheard of in the community. So, even in an extremely open community,
mechanism exist t o permit control of access t o individuals and t o their
homes.

Similar mechanisms have also evolved in certain Sea Dayak com-
munities of Indonesia (Patterson and Chiswick, 1979), where many
families live in a communal dwelling. In front of family apartments are
a covered public gallery and an open deck that extend along the entire
length of the long house. These areas are used by everyone, yielding exten-
sive social contacts among residents. Yet, there are compensatory practices
whereby people can regulate their dealings with others. For example,
whenever possible, relatives occupy adjoining apartments, which permits
people t o regulate at least part of their daily lives in relation t o outsiders.
In addition, the deck and gallery are used differently during the day and
evening. Although readily accessible during the daytime, gallery and deck
areas become the territorial domain of apartment residents during the
evening hours.

Thresholds and Entranceways
As discussed earlier, thresholds and entranceways have often had

religious o r mythological significance, and sometimes represent the junc-
ture of the personal life of a family with the public world of a society. In
the United States there is a strict privacy norm and visitors rarely cross
the threshold of a home unless they are invited t o do so. Inviting o r not
inviting entry t o a home therefore serves as a clear indicator of the occu-
pants’ desire for more or less contact.

In some cultures the doorway assumes differential importance
depending upon time of day. In the Colville Lake community of north-
western Canada, inhabited by the Hare Indian tribe (Savishinsky, 1974),
house doors are never locked during the day and people freely enter one
another’s homes without knocking or asking permission. A similar prac-
tice occurs in the Javanese culture studied by Geertz (cited in Westin,
1970). However, a t night, the doors of Colville Lake houses are locked,
curtains are drawn, and the absence of chinmey smoke is a signal t o not
disturb the household.

Similar practices occur in several cultures. For example, in the village
o f Khalapur, India, members of the Rajput caste exhibit a blend of open-
ness and closedness in relation t o thresholds, entranceways, and their
general living environment (Minturn and Hitchcock, 1966). Men’s and
women’s quarters are physically separated, sometimes by large distances.
Men’s houses are typically located on a platform, away from pathways,
and a roof porch is used for sleeping. Even though the platform can be
seen by outsiders, it is a private that is used primarily by the occupants
and their friends and kin.

Among the Rajput, women live in secluded kin groups, in courtyard
areas surrounded by walls, with only a single entranceway into the court-
yard. Except for the general entranceway there are n o exterior windows
or openings t o individual dwellings. Each woman sleeps and sometimes
eats in a small cubicle that opens o n t o the courtyard. Daily activities take
place in the courtyard, so that women are continually observed by others.
However, women can control their accessibility t o others by going into
their cubicles, or by other mechanisms. For example, eating takes place
alone, either in a cubicle o r in a corner of the courtyard, where it is per-
fectly acceptable t o turn one’s back t o others while eating.

Another example is from the village of Tarong in the Philippines
(Nydegger and Nydegger, 1966). Here, the front porch of the home serves
as a focus of daily activity, and it is in constant use by family, neighbors
and visitors. The porch is approximatively five t o six feet off the ground
and is reached by a bamboo ladder. In the evening o r when n o one is
home, the ladder is pushed away from the porch, thereby discouraging
visitors. Thus the ladder, a formal entranceway or threshold, provides
cues t o the community regarding the accessibility of a family t o outsiders.
A similar practice was exhibited by the Iroquois Indians of the United
States, who wrote an extensive political constitution and code of personal
behavior (Parker, 1968). One of their laws stated :

42

Certain signs shall be known t o all people of the five nations which shall be noted that
the owner or occupant of the house is absent. A stick or pole in a slanting or leaning
position shall indicate this and be the sing. Every person not entitled t o the house by
right of living within upon seeing such a sign shall not enter the house either by day
or night, b u t shall keep as far away as his business shall permit. (p. 57)

Mary Gauvain and Irwin Altman I

In Justlahuaca, Mexico, a similar cue at the entranceway t o a house
communicates family accessibility (Romney and Romney, 1966). In this
community, kin groups live together in a compound that consists of dwell-
ings surrounding a common courtyard. Individual homes have small
boards o r fence-like partitions for doorways. These are open during the
day, but at nicht o r when the family is away the partition is raised, reflecting
the inaccessibility of the family t o outsiders.

2.7. The Interior o f Homes
In a variety of ways the American suburban home involves an inter-

play of openness/closedness. For example, family members usually have
a primary territory (Altman, 1975), such as a bedroom, over which they

1 have considerable control. Doors can be closed to avoid contact, people
d o not usually intrude into others’ spaces without permission, and there
are strong norms about ownership and privacy (Altman, e t al., 1972).

The home is also used t o regulate contacts with outsiders. In an
analogy with the theatre, Goffman (1 959) used the idea of front regions
and back regions in homes. Front regions are like a stage, where actors
present images they wish t o convey. So i t is in homes, where visitors are
presented with certain styles of behavior by their hosts and where guests
are restricted t o certain parts of the home e.g., living room, guest bath-
room, or the family room. Back regions of the home, such as bedrooms,
are often unavailable t o outsiders. These rooms are typically remote from
public places and are often located in the rear or on the upper level of
multi-story homes. It is acceptable that the back region, which is hidden
from guests, may be in disarray and not a t all congruent with the residents’
front area presentation of orderliness.

There are examples from several other cultures that illustrate how
homes are organized into front and back regions. Errington (1 978) noted
that the front area of the Buginese house was a public place where guests
were entertained. The rear door and rear area were used by family mem-
bers, and the front and rear areas were separated by a partition of woven
cane or rattan and sometimes even had a sign above the doorway t o the
rear that essentially stated “off limits t o guests.” Gulick (1964) found a
similar division in the homes of a Lebanese village. Here, the rear quarters
were separated from the front by tall cabinets and curtains and, once
again, guests were not permitted access t o the back region. And, in Taira,
Okinawa (Maretzki and Maretzki, 1966), the living room is located in the
front of the house and can be opened t o the outside by sliding panels
along the entire front wall. However, even the simplest houses have a thin
wall which separates the rear bedroom and kitchen areas from the front
area. Alexander (1969) described homes in Peru as having a systematic
gradation of accessibility. Formal guests were either kept at the front
door or were permitted entry t o the formal parlor, whereas friends were
permitted t o use the more informal living areas, such as the kitchen.
Finally, in the case of American suburbia, the living room is usually access-
ible t o visitors. It is typically centrally located, readily accessible t o the
front door of the home, and often faces the public street.

In some cultures, where extended families share a dwelling space and
where contact with others is extensive, there are mechanisms that allow
for control of social contact. In the Bedouin tent, the men’s and women’s
sides are divided by a decorated curtain, the gata. The women work in
their section, which is further subdivided among wives, so that a woman
controls her area (Cola, 1975). Male guests and older sons sleep in the
men’s section or outside the tent. Through these practices the accessibility
of women t o men outside their conjugal unit can be controlled.

Among the Nyansongo of Kenya (LeVine and LeVine, 1966) there
are many proverbs indicating the importance of regulation of openness/
closedness, e-g., “He who enters doors will be found with a swollen intes-

tine,” and “Homesteads are secret hiding places.” In this polygamist com-
munity, the homes of co-wives are separated from one another by at least
one agricultural field. Inside the dwellings wives have a secluded area where
the wife cooks and where t h e husband, wife and small children sleep. The
house also has a public area that the usband uses t o entertain guests and
t o store personal possessions. There is a separate entrance t o the public
room that keeps outsiders away from the wife’s area. Thus this culture
has an interior design that helps regulate the social accessibility of home-
stead members t o others.

Among the Hare Indians extended families share a house which has
only a single large room (Savishinsky, 1974). There is little opportunity
t o avoid others, yet there are rules which manage interaction. F o r example,
family members rarely use each others’ sleeping areas and the articles used
t o personalize these areas are never removed b y anyone except the owner.
Thus, by strict respect for personal territories some control of self-other
accessibility is achieved. Similar practices occur in many communal living
societies (Altman, 1977).

Taken together, the illustrations of home siting and location,
exteriors, thresholds and interiors indicate how the dwelling is used t o
regulate t h e openness/closedness of residents. Thus, not only does the
home serve as a vehicle for expressing the self as an individual and in
relation t o t h e community, but the dwelling serves as an important
vehicle f o r people in cultures around t h e world t o regulate their open-
ness and closedness t o others.

3. Directions for Future Research and Application
Social psychological research on homes is sorely lacking. Within the

orientation of this paper there are four types of research that can be pur-
sued : descriptive research and analysis, diagnostic studies, theoretical
research, and applied research.

3.1. Descriptive Research and Analysis
While scattered information about homes is available in a variety of

fields, data have not been collected in a systematic fashion, nor has
research been sensitive t o the dimensions of identity/communality and
openness/closedness. Descriptive studies are needed t o catalog indicators
of these processes in homes of different cultures. Methodological tech-
niques are also required t o quantify oppositional processes and t h e relative
strength of opposites. By so doing one can compare aspects o f homes
within and across cultures on their degree of openness/closedness and
identity/communality.

3.2. Diagnostic Studies
Individuals, families and cultures exhibit many changes over time.

Children grow, mature socially and eventually go off on their own, people

I A Cross-Cultural Analysis o f H o m e s
move t o new environments, family members die, and extended kin groups
come t o live in a family dwelling. Cultures also undergo changes, some-
times gradually and sometimes suddenly, as in cases of forced resettlement
of people by virtue of government policy, or rapid introduction of ad-
vances technology.

Diagnostic questions relevant t o social change are numerous. For
example, are there aspects of design and use of homes that differentiate
successful and unsuccessful adaptation t o new circumstances? Do differ-
ent characteristics of these dimensions in the home contribute t o success-
ful o r unseccessful adaptation t o new settings?

3.3. Theoretical Research
There are several facets of our approach that give rise t o basic

theoretical questions. For example, how d o homes in different cultures
vary in the relative strength of oppositions on these dimensions? In what
ways d o other aspects of a cultural system tie in with home design and
use vis a vis these dimensions? An even more fundamental set of ques-
tions concerns the amount of variance accounted for by the proposed
dimensions. Are some oppositions more important than others? Are there
other dimensions that should be used t o study homes?

Other theoretical questions concern the relationship of the socializ-
ation process in a culture t o its expression of identity/communality and
openness/closedness. Also of importance is how families and cultures
respond t o normal life cycle changes. To what extent does the adaptive
o r maladaptive family o r culture emphasize adjustments t o one o r the
other dimension and t o various poles of these dimensions? Is there an
orderly process of adjustment t o life cycle or cultural changes in terms of
these dimensions?

3.4. Applied Research
Finally, there are a variety of applied research topics that can be

studied from the perspective of this paper. In what ways should the design
of homes in our own and in other cultures be guided by the processes
discussed in this chapter? Specifically, in instances of planned environ-
mental change is it possible t o create alternative designs for housing
according t o these dimensions that will enhance adaptation t o new cir-
cumstances? Are there educational and training programs that can be
developed in connection with environmental design programs t o heighten
sensitivity t o these processes?

It is fitting that this paper ends with research questions for the future,
rather than with detailed studies and hypotheses. So it is that our approach
should be viewed as primarily illustrative and heuristic. Our goal was t o
explore the possibilities and potentialities of a cross-cultural dialectic
analysis of homes, and not t o demonstrate unequivocally its worthiness.

46 1 Marv Gauvain a n d Irwin Altrnan i
BIBLIOGRAPHIE

ALEXANDER, C. (1969), “Houses Generated by Patterns” (Center for Environmental Structure,
Berkeley, CA).

ALTMAN, I. (1975), “The Environment and Social Behavior” (Brooks/Cole, Monterey, CA).
ALTMAN, I. (1976), Privacy : A Conceptual Analysis, Environnzent and Be/?avior, 8 (1976) 7-29.
ALTMAN, I. (1977), Privacy : Culturally Universal o r Culturally Specific?, J. o f Soc. Issues, 3 3

(1977) 6 6 – 8 4 .
ALTMAN, I. & CHEMERS, M.M. (1980a), Cultural Aspects of Environment-behavior Relation-

ships, Handbook o f Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. I V (Triandis, H.C. & Brislin, R.W. Eds.)
(Allyn & Bacon, New York).

ALTMAN, I. & CHEMERS, M.M. (1980b), “Culture and Environment” (Brooks/Cole, Monterey,
C A).

ALTMAN, I., NELSON, P.A. & LETT, E.E. (1972), T h e Ecology of Home Environments, Catalog
o f Selected Documents in Psychology (Am. Psychol. Assoc., Washington, D.C.).

COOPER, C. (1976), T h e House as a Symbol of t h e Self, Environmental Psychology (Proshansky,
H.; Ittelson, W.H. & Rivlin, L.G., Eds.) (Holt, Rinehart &Winston, New York).

COLE, D.P. (1975), “Nomads of t h e Nomads” (Aldine, Chicago).
DICKSON, H.R.P. (1969), T h e Tent and Its Furnishings, Peoples and Cultures o f the Middle East

(Shiloh, A., Ed.) (Random House, New York).
ERRINGTON, S. (1978), “The Buginese House” (Unpublished manuscript, University of Califor-

nia, Santa Cruz).
FAEGRE, T. (1979), “Tents : Architecture of t h e Nomads” (Anchor Books, New York).
FRASER, D. (1968), “Village Planning in t h e Primitive World” (Braziller, New York).
GOFFMAN, E. (1959), “The Presentation o f Self in Everyday Life” (Doubleday, New York).
GULICK, J . (1969), T h e Material Base of a Lebanese Village, Peoples and Cultures o f the Middle

East (Shilon, A,, Ed.) (Random House, New York).
LEVINE, R.A. & LEVINE, B. (1966), “Nyansongo: A Gusil Community in Kenya” (Wiley, New

York).
MARETZKI, W. & MARETZKI, H. (1966), “Taira: An Okinawan Village” (Wiley, New York).
MINTURN, L. & HITCHCOCK, J.T. (1966), “The Rajputs of Khalapur, India” (Wiley, New York).
NEDEGGER, W.F. & NYDEGGER, C. (1966), “Tarong: An Ilocos Barrio in the Philippines”

(Wiley, New York).
PARKER, A.C. (1968), Constitution of t h e Five Nations League, Parker o n the Iroquois (Fenton,

W.N., Ed.) (Syracuse University Press, Syracuse, New York).
PATTERSON, A.H. & CHISWICK, N.R. (1979), “Privacy and t h e Environment of t h e Sea Dayaks

(Iban): A Cross-cultural Report” (Unpublished manuscript).
PRUSSIN, L. (1974), Fulani Architectural Change, Paper presented at the Conference o n Psycho-

logical Consequences o f Sedentarization (Los Angeles, U.C.L.A., 1974).
RAGLAN, L. (1964), “The Temple and t h e House” (Routledge & Kegan Paul, London).
RAPOPORT, A. (1969a), “House Form and Culture” (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.).
RAPOPORT, A. (1969b), T h e Pueblo and t h e Hogan: A Cross-cultural Comparison of T w o

Responses t o an Environment, Shelterarzd Society (Oliver P., Ed.) (Barrie & Jenkins, London).
RHEINGOLD, H.L. & COOK, K.V. (1975), T h e Contents of Boys’ and Girls’ Rooms as an Index

of Parents’ Behavior, Child Development, 4 6 (1975) 4 5 9 – 4 6 4 .
ROMNEY, K. & ROMNEY, R. (1966), “The Mixtecans of Juxtlahuaca, Mexico” (Wiley, New

York).
SAVISHINSKY, J.S. (1974), “The Trail of t h e Hare: Life and Stress in an Arctic Community”

(Gordon & Breach, New York).
WESTIN, A. (1970), “Privacy and Freedom” (Atheneum, New York).