Dwelling Deeply with Less: An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) of Urban Minimalism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study explores the lived experiences of minimalists residing in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, focusing on their motivations, lifestyle practices, and perceived impacts on wellbeing and human flourishing. In response to the growing popularity of minimalism and the limited research in the Canadian context, this research addresses the question: What are the lived experiences of minimalists residing in Toronto and how they make sense of it? Using interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA), data was collected through in-depth, semi-structured interviews with nine highly educated participants of diverse gender identities and ethnic backgrounds. Findings reveal that participants were initially motivated by practical concerns such as financial hardship, life transitions, health crises, and environmental awareness. Over time, these motivations deepened to reflect spiritual, ethical, and philosophical values. Minimalist practices fostered autonomy, simplicity, intentional living, and community engagement, with participants frequently describing a strong sense of meaning and interconnectedness. The study’s use of VanderWeele’s (2017) six-domain flourishing framework reveals that urban minimalism supports holistic wellbeing and offers new insights into the intersection of lifestyle, meaning, spirituality, and sustainability. This research contributes to academic literature by filling a gap in Canadian-based studies and offers practical implications for psychotherapy, spirituality, lifestyle interventions, and urban policy. It challenges narrow conceptions of minimalism as purely aesthetic or decluttering-focused, highlighting instead its potential as a pathway to a more purposeful life and flourishing natural world.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".