Coming home to college: Living arrangements and perceptions of adulthood for U.S. college students during COVID-19

Abstract

Place and time matter in people’s experiences with the transition to adulthood. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted both the location and timing of college attendance, as well as housing arrangements, learning experiences, and geographic mobility more broadly. Using online survey data from 339 college students ages 18–29 enrolled in U.S. universities and colleges in Fall 2020, we studied whether changes in living arrangements (especially in relation to a childhood home) affected students’ scores on five scaled variables measuring the likelihood to perceive a change in how “adult” their lives were when comparing Fall 2019 and Fall 2020. We performed a Welch one-way ANOVA to assess change in adulthood mean differences for four living situation groups that measure staying or leaving the childhood home. Despite being younger and less likely to have started college, students who left their childhood home in Fall 2020 showed the greatest perceived increase in adult experiences, especially when compared to students who had already left and returned home. Findings show that student experiences with adulthood transitions during COVID-19 are perceived in light of comparisons with others and with expected outcomes, and point to future research on student perception of the interplay between time and living spaces when studying paths toward adulthood.

Keywords:

• COVID-19
• transition to adulthood
• college students
• childhood home
• young adult living arrangements

PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

This survey research shows how social norms and expectations for U.S. college students can influence how they feel about their ability to successfully move into adulthood. The project focuses on experiences during COVID-19, which altered college students’ experiences with online learning, living arrangements, and paths toward adulthood. The findings suggest that what students perceive should be happening (moving into more adult-like roles and spaces over time) influences how much they identify themselves as adults, perhaps even more than what their actual experiences have been during the pandemic.

Pandemic or not, going to college today may involve living in residence at a college or university, commuting to college from home, or attending college online from any location (Strom & Strom, 2005). But with the mass closures of in-person learning at college and university campuses across the country due to the COVID-19 pandemic, things changed drastically for the nearly twenty million college students in the U.S. (National Center for Education Statistics, 2019). Student living arrangements were part of this upheaval. An unprecedented number of college students were forced to return to their childhood home after living away (Mont’Alvao et al., 2020). At the same time, others missed the opportunity to experience their first year of postsecondary education away from home when fall 2020 rolled around (Lederer et al., 2021). While some students remained on their college campuses or in off-campus housing with roommates, many moved back into parental homes to save money, maintain social connections, stay healthy, and wait out unstable employment conditions and confusion about the location and quality of college courses and living arrangements offered (Fry et al., 2020).

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted both the location and timing of college attendance. Place and time matter in people’s experiences with the transition to adulthood. The experience of becoming an adult is a placed experience, evidenced by the presence of “leaving home” in numerous collections of adulthood markers (e.g., Benson & Furstenberg, 2006; Mont’Alvao et al., 2020; Sassler et al., 2008). The temporal path to adulthood is not always a linear or standardized one, especially given demographic variation in how this path is accessed and experienced. Nonetheless, in contemporary U.S. society, going to college and leaving the parental home are commonly understood as temporally ordered markers of adulthood (Mont’Alvao et al., 2020; Sassler et al., 2008). Thus, where and when the transition to adulthood occurs is part of how and whether it occurs.

The perception of adulthood transitions varies between those just starting college and those who already attend, including the impact of living arrangements (Janning & Volk, 2017). We investigated what the housing and learning situations were like for students, with a focus on whether and how college student living arrangements impacted the experience of the transition to adulthood during Fall 2020.

1. Background

1.1. The transition to adulthood leading up to COVID-19

Even though the boundary between childhood and adulthood is socially constructed (Valentine, 2003; Zelizer, 1994), researchers across a variety of fields have identified ages and life stages that carry with them patterned norms and expectations in the transition to adulthood (Arnett, 2000, 2014; Furstenberg et al., 2004; Settersten et al., 2015). In the last several decades, adulthood has come to be defined as primarily requiring the completion of school, the establishment of an independent household via leaving the parental home, the establishment of romantic partnerships, full-time employment, the development of independence, responsibility, emotional and cognitive maturity, and self-perception of an adult identity (Arnett, 2000; Benson & Furstenberg, 2006; Furstenberg, 2010; Mont’Alvao et al., 2020; Settersten & Ray, 2010).

Importantly, the capacity to achieve adulthood markers is impacted by structural factors such as economic shifts, higher education costs, and demographic patterns, with particularly challenging experiences for low-income Black and Hispanic people (Kuperberg & Mazelis, 2021; Mont’Alvao et al., 2020; South & Lei, 2015). Despite the unusualness of the social world during 2020, this set of changes hearkened back to post-recession patterns of “boomerang” kids (Sassler et al., 2008) from a decade ago whose paths to adulthood were stalled (and relocated back at parents’ and guardians’ homes) due to economic instability, student loan debt, and other social factors (Bertogg & Szydlik, 2016; Fingerman, 2017). Young adults pre-pandemic were less likely than the same age group in the mid- to late twentieth century to achieve traditional markers of adulthood such as marriage, completion of education, moving out of the parental home, and securing a job with a livable wage, especially pronounced after the Recession (Vespa, 2017). Individuals who achieved such markers did so at later ages and with more support from their parents than in the recent past (Fingerman, 2017). In other words, leading up the pandemic in the U.S., young adults were already less likely to achieve traditional markers of adulthood as compared to decades ago. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has brought with it stalls in educational achievement, employment precarity, and reduction in the capacity to leave home and form or foster romantic relationships for young adults (Mont’Alvao et al., 2020).

1.2. The parental home for college students during COVID-19

The experiences of young adults take place in particular physical settings that vary in their likelihood to be defined as adult-like (Janning). Thus, the acts of exiting and/or returning to a parental home are important to examine in any study about the transition to adulthood. While the pathway to adulthood for youth today is more varied than in the past, intergenerational coresidence has become the modal resident pattern for adults aged 18 to 34 in the United States, surpassing residing with romantic partners for the first time (Cohn & Passel, 2018; Fry, 2015). Thus, living with parents for young adults was already common before the COVID-19 pandemic (Sandberg-Thoma et al., 2015). At the same time, expectations to establish independent living arrangements remain present in normative beliefs that leaving home is a sign of the transition to adulthood (Mont’Alvao et al., 2020). It follows that assessment of one’s experiences is done in relation to perceived social norms about those experiences (Gürel et al., 2020).

The parental home may act not only as a safety-net for young adults who are navigating the challenges and unpredictability of independent living, but also may serve as a “home-base” to return to while encountering the changes and challenges that may occur at this stage of life (DaVanzo & Goldscheider, 1990). Failures (drop-out, divorce), crisis (economic, emotional), and positive completion of social behaviors (graduation) may lead a young adult to move back home (Sandberg-Thoma et al., 2015; South & Lei, 2015; West et al., 2017). Young adults who have a hard time gaining a foothold in the adult world may live with their parents in order to save money, get social support, receive food or help with child care, or receive other forms of everyday support (Fry et al., 2020), a pattern that was especially present during and after the Great Recession, including for college graduates (Sassler et al., 2008).

During 2020, 52% of all 18–29-year-olds in the U.S. lived with parents, surpassing Depression- and Recession-era residential patterns (Fry et al., 2020). For many college students in this age group, choice about living arrangements is constrained by structural and social factors that are beyond their control. For all students and their families, the COVID-19 pandemic and its accompanying mandates, public health concerns, and travel limitations removed numerous choices about living arrangements. In the midst of this change, social scientific research aimed at understanding college student development impacted by the pandemic rapidly emerged, including studies on mental health and the efficacy of institutional structures aimed at accommodating student learning needs in remote learning (Mucci-Ferris et al., 2021; Soria & Horgos, 2021). Our study adds to ongoing understanding about what the experiences of U.S. college students have been like during the pandemic, especially in terms of their perceptions during a time of change in social norms.

1.3. Social and temporal comparison in the assessment of life stage transitions

The students who completed our survey were asked to assess how “adult” their lives were during 2019 and 2020. Assessments that students make about their circumstances often come about via comparison with others, with expected or desired outcomes, and even with their own past experiences. Intrapersonal (rather than just interpersonal) comparisons are important to consider when individuals assess their opinions, abilities, and experiences (Gürel et al., 2020). Temporal comparison theory (Albert, 1977) suggests that a person may assess the efficacy of their present situation in terms of their own history, thus subjectively deciding whether their current self is different or better off than their past self (Gürel et al., 2020). This comparison can exist alongside an assessment of whether their situation diverges or converges with social expectations for their group, which is the primary focus of social comparison theory (Feistinger, 1954).

If a college student who leaves home perceives their path as aligning with group norms for young adults who are supposed to venture away from a parental home (social comparison), and if that student perceives leaving home as making sense in light of their own personal history as they move from childhood into adulthood (temporal comparison), then it is more likely that this student would consider their path to be normal and acceptable. Further, this student may perceive this path to be acceptable even in light of other more objective measures that may indicate a stall or movement backwards on the path toward adulthood, such as decreased household responsibilities. For a student who has left and then returns to a childhood home because their college shut down, they had health concerns, or they had financial strain, the same processes of social and temporal comparison apply. For these students, while they may not be objectively delayed as compared to the numerous others in their group who may also be returning home (due to the pandemic), they may perceive themselves to be delayed in terms of a normative idealized path to adulthood, as if they are going backwards to a moment in time in their own biographies that signifies childhood.

The perception of adulthood transitions varies between those just starting college and those who already attend, including the impact of change or stability of living arrangements (JanningJanning & Volk

2017). We ask how the transition to adulthood is perceived differently for students depending on their living situation. We frame our analysis in terms of how both social and temporal comparisons may play a role in those perceptions during COVID-19.

2. Method

We conducted an online Qualtrics survey of 18–29-year-olds who were attending online and/or in-person classes as an undergraduate student during the Fall 2020 term at a U.S. college or university. The survey was administered between February 5 and March 4, 2021 via a panel created by Qualtrics. People who fit the age and college attendance criteria noted above were included. Quota sampling for racial-ethnic identity, socioeconomic status, and gender was implemented to build a more representative sample than if we had used our own professional and personal networks (using U.S. Census population proportions for the quotas). Survey respondents were informed of the study’s aims, risks, and benefits in a written informed consent page at the start of the survey. If a person completed a survey, they received $6. We include 339 responses in our analysis. We conducted an internal validity test to identify and omit responses that contained nonsensical college or university names in responses to the open-ended question asking for the name of their current institution, as well as responses that demonstrated inconsistencies for any individual respondent.¹

2.1. Sample and setting characteristics

Demographics of the 339 students who completed our survey are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Sample demographics

Age	18–20	44%
	21–23	26.8%
	24–26	18.9%
	27–29	10.3%
Parental Status	Have dependent children	17.6%
	Do not have dependent children	82.4%
Relationship Status	Not in a long-term relationship	46%
	In a long-term relationship but not living together	21.1%
	Living with long-term partner	12.8%
	Married	14.2%
	Divorce, separated, widowed, or something else	5.9%
Gender	Male	48.7%
	Female	49.3%
	Non-binary or third gender or preferred not to say	2.1%
Parents’/Guardians/ 2020 Pre-Tax Income	Less than $10,000	9.7%
	Between $10,000 and $50,000	23%
	Between $50,000 and $75,000	21.2%
	Between $75,000 and $100,000	13.3%
	More than $100,000	32.7%
Has at least one medical condition the CDC identifies as putting people at increased risk of COVID-19^1	Yes	25.1%
	No	74.9%
Race	White	71.6%
	Black or African American	15%
	American Indian, Native American, or Alaska Native	3.9%
	Asian or Asian American	6.1%
	Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander	0.8%
	Something not listed	2.5%
Ethnicity	Hispanic or Latino/a	11.5%
	Not Hispanic or Latino/a	88.5%

¹The list of conditions includes: Cancer; Chronic kidney disease; COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease); Down Syndrome; Heart conditions, such as heart failure, coronary artery disease, or cardiomyopathies; Immunocompromised state (weakened immune system) from solid organ transplant; Obesity; Severe Obesity; Pregnancy; Sickle cell disease; Smoking; Type 2 diabetes meilitus; Asthma (moderate-to-severe); Cerebrovascular disease (affects blood vessels and blood supply to the brain); Cystic fibrosis; Hypertension or high blood pressure; Immunocompromised state (weakened immune system) from blood or bone marrow transplant, immune deficiencies, HIV, use of corticosteroids, or use of other immune weakening medicines; Neurologic conditions, such as dementia; Liver disease; Overweight; Pulmonary fibrosis (having damaged or scarred lung tissues); Thalassemia (a type of blood disorder); Type 1 diabetes meilitus.

The college and university setting for students varied in several ways. Most students (71.4%) attended a 4-year college or university in Fall 2020, 22.1% attended a 2-year institution, and 6.5% attended some other kind of institution. Most were full-time students (71.1%). Just over half (51.8%) had started attending college before Fall 2020, and 48.2% started in Fall 2020. Most respondents (68.5%) lived in the same city or town as their college or university during Fall 2020. Just under one-fifth (19.2%) received their degree in 2020, with 18.3% anticipating their degree completion in 2021, 24.3% in 2022, 14.5% in 2023, 13.9% in 2024, and 3.6% after 2024. An additional 6.2% of students did not anticipate completing a degree from their Fall 2020 college or university.

Among the 149 respondents (44.4% of total sample) who were living in college/university owned buildings at the time of the survey, 60% lived in a large multi-unit building (which includes dormitories/residence halls) and 40% lived in part or all of a house, duplex or triplex. Among the 162 respondents (48.2% of the total sample) who lived in dwellings not owned by a college or university, 53% lived in multi-unit buildings and 47% lived in part or all of a house, duplex or triplex. A small proportion of the sample (25 people) noted that they lived in a type of dwelling different from those listed.

When asked what proportion of time was spent in online learning during Fall 2020, 31.7% of respondents (n = 334) said all, 33.8% said more than half, 29.3% said less than half, and 5.1% said none. The locations where students participated in online learning varied. Among students who had any online classes (n = 309), 19.4% attended classes somewhere besides at home. For those who attended online classes at home, the within-home locations also varied: 18.8% were in a living room or family room; 37.5% were in a bedroom; 6.5% were in a kitchen or dining room; 8.1% were in a separate home office or spare room used primarily for work/school; and 9.7% were somewhere besides these locations.

2.2. Measures

The independent variable measured whether the student left, stayed, or returned to their childhood home, which past scholarship (e.g., Janning & Volk,) has shown matters in terms of experiencing the transition to adulthood. The COVID-19 pandemic was disruptive in terms of living arrangements and college and university experiences (Mont’Alvao et al., 2020). A useful place to look to isolate the influence of the pandemic on the path to adulthood lies in where respondents identified a change in their experiences between 2019 and 2020, which is our dependent variable. In this way, when students who took our survey thought about whether any markers of adulthood were present or absent in their lives, they were required to think about Fall 2020 in relation to pre-pandemic experiences. Thus, our dependent variable, though made up of adulthood “markers,” is really a measure of people’s perception of the relative presence or absence of these markers in two time periods.

2.2.1. Independent variable: living arrangement

Living arrangement was measured by asking respondents which of the following options best describes their Fall 2020 living arrangements: “I lived in my childhood home until Fall 2020, and then moved to live somewhere else for Fall 2020;” “I lived in my childhood home both before and during Fall 2020;” “I returned to live in my childhood home during Fall 2020 after having lived somewhere else;” “I lived somewhere besides my childhood home both before and during Fall 2020;” and “Something not listed here” (omitted from analysis). “Childhood home” was defined on the survey as “the primary place(s) you lived when you were a teenager.” The sample size for the bivariate analysis with living arrangement decreased because respondents who chose “something not listed” were omitted.

2.2.2. Dependent variable: change in adulthood

The dependent variable was a global index (Change in Adulthood) additively constructed from 27 separate measures of changes in adulthood experiences. These measures were created by first holding several group discussions wherein four undergraduate students reviewed current research where there were measures of adulthood included (Arnett, 2000; Benson & Furstenberg, 2006; Furstenberg, 2010; Mont’Alvao et al., 2020; Settersten & Ray, 2010). They also added their own experiences with various adulthood dimensions, extending the list. As the list was developed, the students conducted several further discussions to narrow down the list to make it both consistent with past research and aligned with their experiences during COVID-19. A full list of measures included in the indexes is shown in Table 2

Table 2. Respondent experience with change in adulthood from 2019 to 2020

			No Reported Change between Fall 2019/Fall 2020		Reported Change between Fall 2019/Fall 2020
Change in Adulthood Sub-Index	Individual Measure	Marker of movement toward (+) or away from (-) adulthood	Neither 2019 nor 2020	Both 2019 and 2020	More in 2019 than 2020	More in 2020 than 2019
Autonomy	I had a lot of freedom to do what I want	+	12.7%	47.3%	18.4%	21.7%
	I had control over the circumstances in my life	+	11.4%	47.0%	18.7%	22.9%
	I had control over my living spaces	+	18.7%	39.2%	19.6%	22.6%
	I made important decisions independently from my parents/guardians	+	16.9%	37.0%	22.0%	24.1%
	I lived separately from my parents/guardians	+	25.1%	35.0%	23.0%	16.9%^1
	My parents/guardians knew where I was most days	-	17.8%	46.1%	21.1%	15.1%
	I needed permission from parents/guardians to do things	-	38.3%	22.6%	24.4%	14.8%
	I had a curfew	-	47.9%	17.2%	20.2%	14.8%
Financial Independence	I worked in paid job at least 30 hours a week	+	30.0%	29.4%	24.3%	16.2%^1
	I had my own health insurance (not as a dependent)	+	45.6%	22.7%	16.0%	15.7%^1
	I paid for most or all of my own food	+	27.2%	32.0%	20.8%	19.9%^1
	I was financially independent	+	31.3%	25.9%	17.2%	25.6%
	My parents/guardians paid for most of all of my housing costs	-	26.5%	38.9%	20.5%	14.2%
	My parents/guardians paid for most or all of my food cost	-	28.7%	32.6%	23.0%	15.7%
	My parents/guardians paid for most or all of my tuition costs	-	31.7%	33.8%	19.9%	14.5%
Responsibility	I had adult responsibilities	+	10.2%	47.6%	17.2%	25.0%
	Cooking	+	13.1%	36.7%	26.6%	23.6%^1
	Cleaning	+	11.1%	45.9%	20.4%	22.5%
	Laundry	+	10.8%	47.4%	21.3%	20.4%^1
	Child care	+	48.0%	19.8%	18.0%	14.1%^1
	Providing care for older family members who cannot take care of themselves	+	40.5%	22.8%	19.2%	17.4%^1
	Paying bills	+	24.0%	25.2%	17.4%	25.2%
	Getting myself to medical or other appointments	+	16.5%	22.5%	19.5%	22.5%
	Pet care	+	31.8%	31.8%	18.0%	18.3%
Identity	I thought of myself as an adult	+	12.0%	47.0%	18.4%	22.6%
	My parents/guardians treated me like an adult	+	14.2%	41.0%	21.7%	23.3%
	My friends treated me like an adult	+	11.7%	48.5%	19.3%	20.5%

¹Indicates a decrease in this adulthood marker between 2019 and 2020.

N = 331–333.

. All 27 measures asked respondents to choose whether the experiences were present before and during Fall 2020, absent before and during Fall 2020, more present in 2019 than 2020, or more present in 2020 than 2019.

During subsequent discussions among two of the undergraduate students, the 27 measures were grouped into four sub-indexes measuring different elements of adulthood, for added dimension to the dependent variable and to help contextualize any variations within the global index of Change in Adulthood. Using a .70 threshold on a scale from 0 to 1.0 (Simon & Goes, 2013), Cronbach’s alpha was used as a reliability test for each sub-index to ensure that the questions included in any sub-index measured the same characteristic. The four sub-indexes, definitions, and α include: Autonomy (8 items measuring the capacity to be independent and to make decisions and do things on their own; α = .783 [.550 for reverse coded items, which we allowed because a curfew was uncommon and having parents know where a student may be was common, yet both stood as useful reverse measures of autonomy based on past research]); Financial Independence (7 items measuring having an income and taking care of expenses without help; α = .741 [.766 for reverse coded items]); Responsibility (9 items measuring household labor tasks and family responsibilities; α = .832); and Identity (3 items measuring self- and perceived other-identification as an adult; α = .765).

2.3. Data analytic technique

Scores on the dependent variables (global Change in Adulthood index and four sub-indexes created from 27 individual measures) for each respondent were calculated in the following manner: respondents scored −1 on an individual measure if they noted that the experience was less present in 2020 than 2019; they scored 0 if they noted no change; they scored +1 if they noted that the experience was more present in 2020 than 2019. Some measures that demonstrated less adult-like experiences (e.g., had a curfew) were reverse coded. Scores were added up for each respondent for the global index and sub-indexes, thus allowing for the calculation of means on the dependent variable. The higher the score, the greater the perceived increase in adulthood experiences in 2020 as compared to 2019.

We used Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 28 to create the indexes, calculate frequencies, perform cross-tabulations, and conduct bivariate analyses. We performed a Welch one-way ANOVA to assess change in adulthood mean differences for the four living situation groups that measure staying or leaving the childhood home. Details about these analyses and post-hoc tests are included in the Findings section.

3. Findings

Among the 337 people who answered the question about their living arrangements before and during Fall 2020, 115 (34%) lived in their childhood home until Fall 2020 and then moved to live somewhere else for Fall 2020 (represented as HA [home-then-away] in bivariate analyses), and 26 (8%) returned to live in their childhood home after having lived somewhere else (AH [away-then-home]). For many respondents, there was no change before and during Fall 2020, with 106 (32%) reporting that they lived in their childhood home both before and during Fall 2020 (HH [home-stay-home]) and 75 (22%) reporting that they lived somewhere besides a childhood home both before and during Fall 2020 (AA [away-stay-away]). An additional 15 people (4.5%) reported “something not listed here” (these respondents were excluded from bivariate analyses).

In order to measure our dependent variable (perceived changes in adulthood experiences between 2019 and 2020), we asked respondents to note how present 27 separate experiences of adulthood were in Fall 2019 and 2020, with 6 measures indicating adulthood delay (e.g., “I had a curfew”) and 21 measures indicating adulthood attainment (e.g., “I had control over the circumstances in my life” or “I was responsible for paying bills”). People noted whether there was any change in these experiences between Fall 2019 and 2020. If there was a change, it was noted as either more true/present in 2019 than 2020, or more true/present in 2020 than 2019 (see Table 2).

For all individual measures of adulthood, between 31.7% and 50.2% noted some sort of change between 2019 and 2020, indicated by their assessment of an experience as more present in 2019 than 2020 or more present in 2020 than 2019. Among those students who indicated a change in adulthood markers between 2019 and 2020, greater proportions of respondents indicated the presence of most of the adulthood elements more in 2020 than 2019. Specifically, among the 21 measures of adulthood attainment, 13 were more present in Fall 2020 than Fall 2019; among the 6 measures of adulthood delay, all were more present in Fall 2019 than Fall 2020. In other words, when looking at the 27 individual measures of adulthood, 19 adulthood elements were more present in 2020 than 2019 for those who noted a change between the two time periods. A move toward more perceived adult-like experiences seems to be present among those students who noticed a change over time.

In terms of the sub-indexes for students who indicated a change between 2019 and 2020, with the exception of a greater likelihood to live with parents or guardians in 2020, respondents who noted a change over time gained Autonomy along most indicators. Financial independence changes were mixed: on one hand, respondents paid for more things in 2020 than in 2019, but on the other hand they were less likely to work and have health insurance, two factors present in the overall population during the pandemic (Fry et al., 2020; Mont’Alvao et al., 2020). Responsibilities also varied, with more presence of overall adult responsibilities in 2020, but with individual household labor tasks varying.

We analyzed whether staying, leaving, returning, or continuing to stay away from a childhood home impacted the degree to which students saw their adulthood experiences increase or decrease between pre-Fall 2020 and Fall 2020. Four living arrangement groups (defined in the Methods section) were included in the analysis, represented with these acronyms:

1. HA (Home-then-Away: pre-Fall 2020 in childhood home, Fall 2020 away from home)

2. HH (Home-stay-Home: in childhood home both pre-Fall 2020 and Fall 2020)

3. AH (Away-then-Home: pre-Fall 2020 away from childhood home, Fall 2020 return to childhood home)

4. AA (Away-stay-Away: away from childhood home both pre-Fall 2020 and Fall 2020)

We calculated the means of change in adulthood scores along the global index and four sub-indexes for each of the four living arrangement groups (see Table 3)

Table 3. Global change in adulthood index and sub-index means by living arrangement group

		HA (n = 110–112)	HH (n = 103–105)	AH (n = 26)	AA (n = 75)	Total Sample
Global Change in Adulthood		.5636	−.5728	−2.000	−1.720	−.5669
Sub-Indexes
	Autonomy	.6937	.1905	−.7692	.2000	.2902
	Financial Independence	.1892	.1553	−.1538	.2667	.1683
	Responsibility	−.4286	−1.0286	−.8077	−2.2800	−1.0943
	Identity	.0893	.1238	−.2692	.0933	.0723

N = 314–318.

. Negative means indicate a perceived decrease in adulthood experiences over time; positive means indicate a perceived increase.

As the global index means show (row 1), only students who were home in 2019 and left in 2020 (HA) reported an increase in overall adulthood experiences. The only group who reported a decrease in adulthood experiences between 2019 and 2020 in Autonomy, Financial Independence, and Identity were students who lived away from home and then returned (AH). All four groups perceived decreased responsibility as indicated by the large negative scores in that sub-index, likely explaining the primarily negative global index scores. Using just the means, it appears as if the students who lived away from home and then returned to a childhood home (AH) were most likely to report experiencing a decline in adulthood markers, whereas the students who lived at home and then moved away (HA) for Fall 2020 experienced an increase in adulthood markers.

Because the sample sizes of the four groups varied, we performed a Levene’s test of homogeneity of variances, which showed that the variances for two sub-indexes were not equal, F(3,313) = 4.543, p = .004 (Autonomy); F(3, 314) = 3.998, p = .008 (Identity). We thus performed a Welch one-way ANOVA test and a Games-Howell post hoc test to assess statistical significance when comparing the effects of living arrangements on change in adulthood scores (see Table 4)

Table 4. Welch ANOVA: Living arrangement on change in adulthood global index and sub-indexes

			Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	P
Global Change in Adulthood Index		Between Groups	293.717	3	97.906	3.010	.030*
		Within Groups	10083.378	310	32.527
		Total	10377.096	313
Sub-Indexes
	Autonomy	Between Groups	48.908	3	16.303	3.304	.021*
		Within Groups	1544.391	313	4.934
		Total	1593.300	316
	Financial Independence	Between Groups	3.490	3	1.163	.373	.772
		Within Groups	968.593	311	3.114
		Total	972.083	314
	Responsibility	Between Groups	157.668	3	52.556	4.420	.005*
		Within Groups	3733.501	314	11.890
		Total	3891.170	317
	Identity	Between Groups	3.377	3	1.126	.609	.609
		Within Groups	579.960	314	1.847
		Total	583.336	317

*p < .05

. Statistically significant group differences are present in the Global Change in Adulthood Index, as well as in the Autonomy and Responsibility sub-indexes (p < .05). Groups did not statistically significantly differ in Financial Independence and Identity.

A Games-Howell post hoc test (used when variances cannot be assumed to be homogeneous) showed that there was a statistically significant mean difference at p < .05 between groups in Autonomy and Responsibility, and at p < .10 between groups in the Global Change in Adulthood index (see Table 5

Table 5. Living arrangement group mean differences

	Living Arrangement Group A	Living Arrangement Group B	Mean Difference (A-B)	Std. Error	P
Global Change in Adulthood	HA	HH	1.136	.799	.487
		AH	2.584	1.082	.096*
		AA	2.284	.883	.051*
Autonomy	HA	HH	.503	.318	.391
		AH	1.463	.482	.020**
		AA	.494	.327	.434
Responsibility	HA	HH	.600	.461	.563
		AH	.379	.788	.963
		AA	1.851	.516	.003**

*p < .10.

**p < .05.

).² Specifically, in the Global Change in Adulthood index, there was a significant mean difference at p < .10 between HA (Mean = .5636) and AA (Mean = −1.720) (p = .051), and between HA and AH (−2.000) (p = .096). In the Autonomy sub-index, there was a significant mean difference (p = .020) between HA (Mean = .6937) and AH (Mean = −.7692). In the Responsibility sub-index, there was a significant mean difference (p = .003) between HA (Mean = −.4286) and AA (Mean = −2.280). For the rest of the analyses, post hoc tests showed that the mean values were not statistically significantly different between any pairs of living arrangement groups.

As Tables 4 and 5 reveal, the Global Change in Adulthood index and the sub-indexes of Autonomy and Responsibility showed statistically significant mean differences. For the Global Change in Adulthood index, this is primarily due to the statistically significant (p < .10) mean differences between HA and AH, as well as between HA and AA. Overall, students who started at home and went away (HA) perceived an increase in adult experiences between 2019 and 2020, whereas students who were away and then returned home (AH) and students who were away and stayed away (AA) perceived a decrease. In terms of Autonomy, students who started at home and went away (HA) perceived an increase in adult experiences between 2019 and 2020, whereas students who were away and then returned home (AH) perceived a decrease (p < .05). Finally, in terms of Responsibility, students who started at home and went away (HA) and students who were already away and stayed away (AA) both perceived a decrease, but the latter group perceived a greater decrease (p < .05). There was no statistically significant difference between any other groups.

In sum, neither financial independence nor seeing one’s identity as adult-like showed any statistically significant differences between the four living arrangement groups. With the exception of students who lived away and then returned home, students across groups saw slight increases in Financial Independence when moving from 2019 to 2020. The same pattern holds for Identity (seeing oneself as an adult and believing that others see oneself as an adult). Thus, even though the living arrangement group means were not statistically significantly different, it appears as if students who lived away and then returned home perceived a loss in adulthood markers in terms of financial responsibility and perception of an adult identity when compared with other groups.

The Global Change in Adulthood index and the sub-indexes of Autonomy and Responsibility showed statistically significant group mean differences. The significant differences all occurred when comparing the group of students who started at home and then went away in Fall 2020 (HA) with other groups. Despite being younger and less likely to have started college, students in the HA group showed the greatest perceived increase in adult experiences (or the least perceived decrease, in the case of Responsibility), especially when compared to students who left and returned home and when compared to students who went away and stayed away. The students who remained home in both 2019 and 2020 did not significantly differ from any other group along these indexes, though they showed the smallest decrease in the Global Change in Adulthood index among groups who showed a decrease.

4. Discussion

Young adults were already delaying entry into adulthood before the pandemic, due in part to economic precarity and changing expectations of people in their late teens and early twenties (Fingerman, 2017; Fry, 2016; Vespa, 2017). COVID-19 perpetuated and exacerbated these patterns (Mont’Alvao et al., 2020). Consistent with research about the impact of the pandemic on young adults, our findings point to delayed transitions to adulthood among college students. But, as our findings detail, our study also suggests that these students’ pandemic-induced experiences with remaining or returning to a childhood home complicate these patterns.

4.1. The importance of comparative rather than static assessment of living arrangements

To uncover what social processes may explain our findings, we focus primarily on two groups whose living arrangements changed between 2019 and 2020: those who started at home and then went away, and those who were already away and returned to a childhood home. In doing so, the application of Albert’s (1977) temporal comparison theory and Feistinger’s (1954) social comparison theory prove useful.

Students who left home in Fall 2020 saw themselves as experiencing more adulthood markers than other groups. This was the only group of students who followed a normative path toward adulthood that was embedded within our living arrangements variable: leaving home. It is not surprising that a survey that asks whether one’s experiences and perceptions became more adult-like over time was answered affirmatively by those whose responsibilities and independence increased alongside the fulfillment of a role that society affirms as adult-like in that time frame. Importantly, the questions asking about whether there was a change in adulthood markers between 2019 and 2020 required a comparative assessment across time and space. What someone thinks about where they live now may be impacted by whether they compare their living situation with a previous residence, rather than a static assessment isolated from past conditions. While the survey did not make an explicit link between living arrangement and adulthood experiences, any student who had undergone a change in living arrangements between Fall 2019 and 2020 would likely consider the impact of that arrangement on their roles, responsibilities, identities, and experiences. For students who left home, then, they saw themselves as fulfilling more of an adult role than in the past. For students who were already away from home and stayed away, it may be that the stresses of the pandemic such as economic hardship and incapacity to work, could have made them perceive a decline in adulthood during the year.

Comparative assessment is also relevant for the students who went away and then returned home, a group who showed the biggest perceived decline in adulthood markers. This could be due in part to the challenges of familial role renegotiation that occur when there is a mismatch between self-perception and others’ perceptions of a household role. Strengthening of bonds between young adults and their parents often follows a loosening of rules, which renders the parent/child relationship more chosen and voluntary in nature as children get older (Fingerman, 2017; Fingerman et al., 2015). This set of role and relationship changes take place in physical settings that matter, where freedom of movement and time co-occur with increased control over physical spaces and tasks associated with those spaces (Janning, 2017; Janning & Volk, 2017). While students were trying to navigate online school, home responsibilities, and online social connections, parents were forced to come to terms with their child’s need for autonomy and independence (Oliveira et al., 2020), particularly salient for parents whose children returned to a childhood home. This coming to terms may have been challenging for families, because trying to create new roles in a household with people perceiving their own roles differently than in the past takes energy and time to figure out. This may have been less challenging for students who remained at home in both time periods since their role negotiations did not include comparison to something they had already experienced.

In essence, students who returned home after being away were disrupting their trajectory toward adulthood by virtue of going “backwards” into a parental home. This reversal, along with challenging role negotiations and the violation of a social ideal, likely had a powerful impact on students’ belief that they were moving less into adulthood because of returning home. That they were a year older or had gained autonomy as a result of moving away from home before the pandemic did not add up to enough adult-like currency to counteract the relative impact of moving back home, which was likely seen as taking a step backwards on the path toward adulthood.

What the survey data in our study reveal is that a temporal comparison not only consists of assessing one’s current situation with a past one; it may also consist of assessing one’s current situation with an imagined current situation that would signify a preferred temporal trajectory and a preferred spatial transition: moving from childhood toward adulthood over time and in spaces that move away from a childhood home, and not the other way around. As Mont’Alvao et al. (2020) reveal, “delay in family related transitions interferes with adult identity formation and fosters feelings of being ‘off time’ in acquiring markers of adulthood. Thus, those who perceive themselves as ‘late’ with respect to family-related markers have difficulty thinking of themselves as adults” (18). Recent research from McMillan and Feng (2020) highlights this, showing that students who returned to their family home in the spring of 2020 may have communicated more often with their parents/guardians than those who did not return home, but also that privacy and autonomy—two important markers of adulthood—were diminished.

Because comparative assessments of living situations help explain perceived trajectories toward adulthood, examining the impact of change in living arrangements over time became crucial in our analysis. More precisely, analyzing what students think about where they lived, especially when they compare the arrangements from one year to the next in terms of a childhood home (and, by extension, they compare their current selves with both past selves and idealized current selves that develop from past selves), adds nuance to existing knowledge about college student living experiences, the boundary between childhood and adulthood, and COVID-19 social impacts. More practically, findings like ours can help parents understand why their pandemic-induced “boomerang” kids may be feeling out of sorts. Our findings can help both students and parents understand why role renegotiation that was already challenging became even more harrowing in a world filled with social disruption and confusion.

4.2. Limitations and future directions

The survey asked respondents to reflect retrospectively on both Fall 2019 and 2020 rather than capturing experiences in real time. This could potentially have led to inaccurate memories and thus inaccurate markers of actual experience. However, the research question centers around perception of change. Since perceptions of past experiences can not only shape one’s overall memory of a large event, but also influence future assumptions and behaviors (Gullestad, 1996), retrospective data about relative experience across two time periods provides a unique way to get at how the COVID-19 may have impacted the transition to adulthood experience. In addition, the survey was long, yet response times were not excessive. This means that some respondents may not have read each question carefully or may have straight-lined the matrix questions. We did account for straight-lining by checking for internal contradictions and removing respondents who had at least two contradictions or nonsensical answers to an open-ended question about which college or university they attended, but there is always a chance that respondents simply marked answers quickly to get through the survey rather than reading each question. Finally, it is important to note the rapid changes that have occurred (and continue to occur) surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of this survey capture a moment in time (early spring 2021, when vaccine rollouts were just beginning in the U.S.), and circumstances surrounding public health, higher education, geographic mobility, and family life are continually changing.

Both real and imagined reference points for time and space have been turned upside down during the COVID-19 pandemic. Feelings about this can have a poignant impact on future assessments of life stage transitions, which is why it is crucial to study the perceptions themselves. Beyond the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on college student experiences, as we have studied, it is worthwhile to examine the power of comparative assessments—both interpersonally with a larger group, and intrapersonally with one’s past (or idealized imagined present) self—when trying to understand what students subjectively think of their circumstances. It will be worthwhile for future research on college student experiences with COVID-19 to include temporal and spatial dimensions in analyses that get at perceptions, whether they be about roles, relationships, or adult identities. The same can be said when examining the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on any social outcome, which we hope continues in future research dedicated to understanding college student development and the socially constructed boundary between childhood and adulthood.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This project was funded by the Raymond and Elsie Gipson DeBurgh Endowment at Whitman College.

Notes on contributors

Michelle Janning

The authors conducted this work as part of ongoing research in the Department of Sociology at Whitman College. The first author is the Raymond and Elsie Gipson DeBurgh Chair of Social Sciences and Professor of Sociology; the co-authors for this project contributed as undergraduate research assistants. The project is part of the ongoing work of the first author on spatial and material boundaries in social relationships, with a particular emphasis on the social construction of homes and life stage categories. Her work can be viewed at www.michellejanning.com.

Notes

1. Qualtrics conducted this panel study by targeting 18–29-year-olds in the U.S. via advertisements within gaming apps and social media outlets; embedded in the recruitment was IP verification and duplication prevention. The sampling occurred in two rounds, wherein our internal validity checks eliminated several responses, which were replaced with new survey takers (and the previous ones were not compensated). The inconsistencies for the removed respondents were identified by running cross-tabulations on similar measures, flagging contradictions in single respondents’ responses. We identified impossible outcomes in responses that primarily referenced living arrangements and online classes (e.g., if they responded that they lived alone for one question and lived with other people for another; if they responded that they took online-only courses for one question and took in-person classes for another). We allowed respondents with one contradiction to remain in the study to account for human error. We removed and replaced 46 respondents that had two or more contradictory responses.

2. A one-way ANOVA (not Welch) with a Tukey HSC post hoc test was also performed on these data and the statistically significant mean differences did not differ from the Welch ANOVA with Games-Howell post hoc test, except that the difference between HA and AH in Global Change in Adulthood was not significant, and the difference between HA and AA in Global Change in Adulthood was significant at p < .05 (p = .039).