Perceived Efficacy and Control for Neighborhood Change: the Cross-Cutting Role of Collective Efficacy

Abstract

Background The premise of community advocacy is to empower residents by increasing their capacity to address and change neighborhood and structural factors that contribute to adverse health outcomes. An underlying assumption is that community residents will advocate for public policy and other changes. However, limited empirical evidence exists on community residents' perceived ability to advocate for neighborhood change. In this study, we characterized perceived neighborhood control and efficacy for neighborhood change and evaluated independent associations between efficacy and control beliefs and sociodemographic factors, community involvement, and perceptions of social environment. Methods Cross-sectional data from 488 African American adults were analyzed to describe efficacy and control beliefs and to characterize bivariate associations between these beliefs and sociodemographic factors, social environment, community involvement variables. Variables with significant relationships (p<.10) were included in a multivariate logistic regression model to identify factors having significant independent associations with efficacy and control beliefs. Results Overall, beliefs about neighborhood control and confidence were varied, yet approximately half of residents (49% and 55%, respectively) reported having a little control over things that happen in their neighborhood and a little confidence in their ability to change things where they live. The likelihood of reporting confidence to make neighborhood improvements increased with greater collective efficacy (OR=1.78, 95% CI=1.19-1.31, p=0.002). In addition, participants who were involved in a community organization were more likely to report confidence to improve their neighborhood (OR=2.03, 95% CI=1.21-3.42, p=0.01). Conclusion Efforts are needed to improve residents' ability to become positive agents of change in their community. Creating a research infrastructure within academic community partnerships that focus on strengthening advocacy and public policy may improve resident's efficacy and ability to seek and encourage neighborhood change.

A mutual process of healing self and healing the community: A qualitative study of coping with and healing from stress, adversity, and trauma among diverse residents of a midwestern city

“…Studies suggest associations between collective efficacy and greater life satisfaction (Driscoll et al, 2015), better self-reported health (Browning & Cagney, 2002), increased confidence in the ability to make neighborhood improvements (Rice et al, 2016), and protection against the effects of racial discrimination (Driscoll et al, 2015).…”

“…Also important are programs or initiatives that build social cohesion and collective efficacy (Driscoll et al, 2015;Johns et al, 2012), such as grassroots neighborhood associations and organizations that provide opportunities for residents to come together, organize, and develop their neighborhoods into vibrant, safe spaces (Rice et al, 2016).…”

How Do Community Planning Features Affect the Place Relationship of Residents? An Investigation of Place Attachment, Social Interaction, and Community Participation

“…In addition, high quality outdoor spaces and good community administration restraint residents toward community participation. In other words, perceived neighborhood problems that included planning factors of the physical environment have been shown to motivate residents into collective action [10,62,63]. In sum, the first canonical function suggests that outdoor space quality and community layout promote place relationships of the residents.…”

Technology as a means to address disparities in mental health research: A guide to “tele-tailoring” your research methods.

“…In order to provide debriefing and dissemination of the results of a research investigation to participants and targeted audiences, technology can also assist through the distribution of a podcast or youTube video of the investigator reporting the findings. Studies have assessed the preference of research participants in receiving research results and have demonstrated more likelihood of future participation when there is ongoing communication about the research product or conclusions (Hughes Halbert et al, 2014; Rice et al, 2016). Grand scale dissemination can also help with increasing awareness of new potential procedures and/or services.…”