Preventing Neighborhood Disorder: Comparing Alternative Models of Collective Efficacy Theory Using Structural Equation Modeling

Abstract

Highlights• Develops mutual efficacy to make "efficacy" an explicit component within collective efficacy theory • Compares three models of collective efficacy theory using structural equation modeling • Summarizes conceptual and empirical critiques of collective efficacy theory Abstract Collective efficacy is a widely studied theoretical framework. Originally operationalized as the combination of social cohesion and informal social control, collective efficacy theory is a predictor of multiple positive outcomes. Conceptual and empirical critiques of collective efficacy theory suggest that social cohesion and informal social control should be modeled as unique constructs. Further, the current model of collective efficacy theory does not include an explicit measure of efficacy. Mutual efficacy, defined as community members' beliefs that collective action will be successful at attaining group goals, will be developed in this manuscript. The purpose of mutual efficacy was to make efficacy an explicit component within collective efficacy theory. Three models of collective efficacy theory are compared in this study: (a) a one-factor model of collective efficacy that combines social cohesion and informal social control, (b) a two-factor model of collective efficacy that models social cohesion as a predictor of informal social control, and (c) a mutual efficacy model where the relationship between social cohesion and informal social control is mediated by mutual efficacy. Results suggest that the two-factor model and the mutual efficacy model both fit the data better than the current model of collective efficacy.

Testing Predictors of Mutual Efficacy

“…In psychology, collective efficacy is a construct that focuses on a group's shared beliefs in its ability to organize, act, and achieve shared goals (Bandura, ). Gearhart and Joseph developed a construct called mutual efficacy, defined as “Group members’ beliefs that collective action will be successful at attaining group goals” (2018:5) to create a bridge between the sociological and psychological conceptualizations of collective efficacy (Gearhart, in press, ; Gearhart and Joseph, ).…”

“…Mutual efficacy makes the psychological conceptualization of efficacy an explicit component of collective efficacy theory (Gearhart, in press, ; Gearhart and Joseph, ). The construct is rooted in community practice literature because it emphasizes the role of leveraging the strengths of communities to create positive change (Gearhart and Joseph, ).…”

“…The construct is rooted in community practice literature because it emphasizes the role of leveraging the strengths of communities to create positive change (Gearhart and Joseph, ). Mutual efficacy also establishes a link between collective efficacy theory and empowerment (Gearhart, ). Empowerment is the process by which groups and individuals gain greater control over their lives (Maton, ; Perkins, ).…”

“…Further, incorporating mutual efficacy into collective efficacy theory addresses a key gap in the empowerment literature, namely the absence of theoretical models that explain how and why groups act once they are empowered (Perkins, ). As a result, mutual efficacy increases collective efficacy theory's utility in terms of informing efforts aimed at facilitating collective action in communities (Gearhart, ; Gearhart and Joseph, ).…”

“…Prior mutual efficacy research has focused on the relationships among social cohesion, mutual efficacy, and informal social control (Gearhart in press, ; Gearhart and Joseph, ). However, a key limitation of prior research on mutual efficacy is the absence of explicitly conceptualizing and testing predictors of mutual efficacy.…”