There is increasing evidence of a direct association between unaffordable housing and poor mental health, over and above the effects of general financial hardship. Type of housing tenure may be an important factor in determining how individuals experience and respond to housing affordability problems. This study investigated whether a relationship exists between unaffordable housing and mental health that differs for home purchasers and private renters among low-income households. Data from 2001 to 2010 of the longitudinal Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey were analysed using fixed-effects linear regression to examine change in the SF-36 Mental Component Summary (MCS) score of individuals aged 25-64 years, associated with changes in housing affordability, testing for an interaction with housing tenure type. After adjusting for age, survey year and household income, among individuals living in households in the lower 40% of the national income distribution, private renters in unaffordable housing experienced somewhat poorer in mental health than when their housing was affordable (difference in MCS = -1.18 or about 20% of one S.D. of the MCS score; 95% CI: -1.95,-0.41; p = 0.003) while home purchasers experienced no difference on average. The statistical evidence for housing tenure modifying the association between unaffordable housing and mental health was moderate (p = 0.058). When alternatives to 40% were considered as income cut-offs for inclusion in the sample, evidence of a difference between renters and home purchasers was stronger amongst households in the lowest 50% of the income distribution (p = 0.020), and between the 30th and 50th percentile (p = 0.045), with renters consistently experiencing a decline in mental health while mean MCS scores of home purchasers did not change. In this study, private renters appeared to be more vulnerable than home purchasers to mental health effects of unaffordable housing. Such a modified effect suggests that tenure-differentiated policy responses to poor housing affordability may be appropriate.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 November 2023.
All research outputs
#5,147,622
of 29,994,169 outputs
Outputs from Social Science & Medicine
#4,721
of 13,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,518
of 217,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Social Science & Medicine
#25
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,994,169 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,110 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 217,615 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
