Residential Mobility of a Cohort of Homeless People in Times of Crisis: COVID-19 Pandemic in an European Metropolis

Most vulnerable individuals are particularly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This study takes place in a large city in France. The aim of this study is to describe the mobility of the homeless population at the begin-ning of the health crisis and to analyze its impact in terms of COVID-19 prevalence. From June to August 2020 and September to December 2020, 1272 homeless people were invited to be tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and virus in and completed questionnaires. Our data show that homeless populations are sociologically dif-ferent depending on where they live. We show that people living on the street were most likely to be relocated to emergency shelters than other inhabitants. Some neighborhoods are points of attraction for homeless peo-ple in the city while others emptied during the health crisis, which had consequences for virus circulation. People with a greater number of different dwellings reported became more infected. This first study of the mo-bility and epidemiology of homeless people in time of pandemic provides unique information about mobility mapping, sociological factors of this mobility, mobility at different scales and epidemiological consequences. We suggest that homeless policies need to be radically transformed since actual model exposes people to infection in emergency.

Relationship Seekers Versus Relationship Selectors: Influence of Residential Mobility on How to Evaluate Others

The present study examined the effect of residential mobility on impression formation. In the study, participants were first engaged in a residential mobility priming task where they were asked to imagine and describe either frequent moving life (high-mobility condition) or less frequent moving life (low-mobility condition). They then evaluated their attitudes toward four types of target persons: competent vs. incompetent and warm vs. cold. As a result, in the high-mobility condition, the effect of competence was observed only when participants evaluated a warm person, whereas in the low-mobility condition, it appeared only when participants evaluated a cold person. The potential influence of individual residential mobility on the relationship formation is also discussed.

You Mean the World to Me: The Role of Residential Mobility in Centrality of Romantic Relationships

Integrating the suffocation model of marriage with research on residential mobility, the current studies examined for the first time whether long-term romantic relationships are more central for residentially mobile (vs. stable) individuals (total N across three studies = 5,366; age range = 18–95). In Study 1, individuals who moved away from their place of birth (vs. not) were more likely to first confide in their spouse over other network members on important matters. In Study 2, history of frequent residential moves was associated with greater importance ascribed to romantic partners in the attachment hierarchy. In Study 3, the slope of perceived partner responsiveness predicting eudaimonic well-being got steeper as residential mobility increased. By showing the role of residential mobility in romantic relationships, our findings highlight the importance of studying socioecological factors to gain a deeper understanding of how relationship processes unfold.

DETERMINANT FACTORS OF NEIGHBOURHOOD QUALITY INFLUENCING RESIDENTIAL MOBILITY BEHAVIOUR IN PENANG ISLAND

Residential mobility behaviour is about people’s choices and preferences whether to remain at the present house and neighbourhood, or to move out. Moving to another house or neighbourhood entails a deliberate decision that require various considerations by the residents involved especially in dealing with housing adjustments, life neccesities and financial matters. Residents’ perceptions of their housing and neighbourhood can be indicative of their intention to stay in or move out. The act of moving is often asssociated with lower levels of satisfactions with residents’ current housing and neighbourhood environment, thus activating selfpreference and residential mobility. This study aims to identify the determinant factors of neighbourhood quality that influence residential mobility behaviour in neighbourhoods in Penang Island. The nine attributes of neighbourhood quality dimensions included in this study are dwelling features, dwelling utility, neighbourhood facilities, greenery, accessibility, public transportation, environment, economic livelihood, and neighbourhood interaction and attachments. A total of 717 heads of households residing in Penang Island were involved in the questionnaire survey. Using logistic regression method, the study findings reveal that four factors of dwelling features, facilities, neighbourhood environment, and neighbourhood interaction and attachments are significant in influencing residents’ intention to move. Moreover, both internal and external factors of housing and the neighbourhood can influence the residents’ decision to stay in or to move out, thus implying important policy measures for local housing.

Housing Expenditure and Income Inequality

The trend of rising income inequality in Germany since the mid-1990s is strongly amplified when considering income after housing expenditure. The income share of housing expenditure rose disproportionally for the bottom income quintile and fell for the top quintile. Factors contributing to these trends include declining relative costs of homeownership versus renting, changes in household structure, declining real incomes for low-income households, and residential mobility towards larger cities. Younger cohorts spend more on housing and save less than older cohorts did at the same age, which will affect future wealth accumulation, particularly at the bottom of the income distribution.

Social capital dimensions are differentially associated with COVID-19 vaccinations, masks, and physical distancing

Background Social capital has been associated with health outcomes in communities and can explain variations in different geographic localities. Social capital has also been associated with behaviors that promote better health and reduce the impacts of diseases. During the COVID-19 pandemic, social distancing, face masking, and vaccination have all been essential in controlling contagion. These behaviors have not been uniformly adopted by communities in the United States. Using different facets of social capital to explain the differences in public behaviors among communities during pandemics is lacking. Objective This study examines the relationship among public health behavior—vaccination, face masking, and physical distancing—during COVID-19 pandemic and social capital indices in counties in the United States. Methods We used publicly available vaccination data as of June 2021, face masking data in July 2020, and mobility data from mobile phones movements from the end of March 2020. Then, correlation analysis was conducted with county-level social capital index and its subindices (family unity, community health, institutional health, and collective efficacy) that were obtained from the Social Capital Project by the United States Senate. Results We found the social capital index and its subindices differentially correlate with different public health behaviors. Vaccination is associated with institutional health: positively with fully vaccinated population and negatively with vaccination hesitancy. Also, wearing masks negatively associates with community health, whereases reduced mobility associates with better community health. Further, residential mobility positively associates with family unity. By comparing correlation coefficients, we find that social capital and its subindices have largest effect sizes on vaccination and residential mobility. Conclusion Our results show that different facets of social capital are significantly associated with adoption of protective behaviors, e.g., social distancing, face masking, and vaccination. As such, our results suggest that differential facets of social capital imply a Swiss cheese model of pandemic control planning where, e.g., institutional health and community health, provide partially overlapping behavioral benefits.