Analyzing Furniture Mediation of Everyday Practices in High-Density Student Dormitories

Authors

  • Ting Li Faculty of Art and Design,Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM), Kedah Branch, Merbok, Kedah, Malaysia , Lvliang Vocational and Technical College
  • Wan Noor Faaizah Wan Omar* Corresponding author | Faculty of Art and Design, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM), Kedah Branch, Merbok, Kedah, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24191/ijad.v10i2/tz66gv50

Keywords:

Dormitory furniture, Everyday practices, High-density student dormitories, Spatial order

Abstract

This study focuses on high-density student dormitories as a shared living environment and examines how dormitory furniture mediates students’ everyday practices in recurrent ways, participating in the formation of spatial order and adaptive practices under conditions of limited space. Adopting a human–furniture–environment perspective, the study draws on semi-structured interviews as the primary data source, supplemented by on-site spatial observations and photographic documentation for contextual validation. Through thematic analysis, four modes of furniture mediation are identified: furniture as spatial constraint, as bodily guide, as boundary mediator, and as trigger condition. The findings reveal that furniture mediates the formation of everyday practices through a chained process of “spatial redistribution–behavioral adjustment–relational reconfiguration,” highlighting an ongoing tension between spatial efficiency and individual agency. The study reconceptualizes dormitory furniture from passive facilities to active elements in the generation of practice, thereby extending practice-oriented interpretations of high-density shared living environments.

 

References

Altman, I. (1975). The environment and social behavior: Privacy, personal space, territory, and crowding. Brooks/Cole.

Amole, D. (2009). Residential satisfaction in students’ housing. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(1), 76–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.05.006

Aslanoğlu, R., Ulusoy, B., & Kazak, J. (2024). Air quality of private interiors during the COVID-19 pandemic: A case study of dormitory interiors as shared spaces. Sustainability, 16(2), 886. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16020886

Awal, S. (2020). Public, private & in-between spaces in student housing. https://doi.org/10.58837/chula.the.2020.15

Barrett, P., Davies, F., Zhang, Y., & Barrett, L. (2015). The impact of classroom design on pupils’ learning: Final results of a holistic, multi-level analysis. Building and Environment, 89, 118–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.02.013

Beder, D., & İmamoğlu, Ç. (2023). Correlates of dormitory satisfaction and differences involving social density and room locations. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-023-10040-2

Bickman, L., Teger, A., Gabriele, T., McLaughlin, C., Berger, M., & Sunday, E. (1973). Dormitory density and helping behavior. Environment and Behavior, 5(4), 465–490. https://doi.org/10.1177/001391657300500405

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. Sage.

Cao, H., Ye, H., Tian, Y., et al. (2025). Functional areas shape indoor microbial structure and potential risks in university dormitories. Frontiers in Microbiology, 16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2025.1604064

Castellucci, H. I., Arezes, P. M., & Molenbroek, J. F. M. (2014). Applying different equations to evaluate the level of mismatch between students and school furniture. Applied Ergonomics, 45(4), 1123–1132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2014.01.012

Clapham, D. (2018). Housing theory, housing research and housing policy. Housing, Theory and Society, 35(2), 163–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2017.1366937

Dizaj, M. D., & Khanghahi, T. H. (2021). Students’ residential preferences: A case study of dormitories. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 21(4), 1348–1363. https://doi.org/10.1080/13467581.2021.1941987

Frontczak, M., & Wargocki, P. (2011). Literature survey on how different factors influence human comfort in indoor environments. Building and Environment, 46(4), 922–937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.10.021

Ghani, Z., & Sulaiman, N. (2021). Drivers for off-campus students housing demand in Malaysia. Path of Science, 7(6), 6001–6013. https://doi.org/10.22178/pos.66-8

Gu, H., & Smith, D. P. (2020). ‘Living off the campus’: Urban geographies of change and studentification in Beijing, China. Urban Geography, 41(2), 205–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2019.1659071

He, W., & Zeng, N. (2025). The relationship between university dormitory environmental factors and students’ informal learning experiences: A case study of three universities in Guangdong Province. Buildings, 15(14), 2518. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15142518

Kaiser, K. (2009). Protecting respondent confidentiality in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 19(11), 1632–1641. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732309350879

Kelemen, P., & Lončar, S. (2024). How do students live in student housing? Etnološka istraživanja. https://doi.org/10.32458/ei.29.8

Li, Y., Cheng, F., & Wei, R. (2023). Optimization evaluation model of student dormitory design scheme based on multiple evaluation

Downloads

Published

25.10.2026

Issue

Section

Articles