The Influence of Participation, Gender and Organizational Sense of Community on Psychological Empowerment: The Moderating Effects of Income

Abstract

This study explored the influence of participation, gender and organizational sense of community (SOC) on both the intrapersonal and interactional components of psychological empowerment (PE). Participants were residents (n = 562) involved in community organizing efforts in five U.S. communities. Measures of participation and SOC were tailored to community organization contexts. SOC assessed three dimensions: (1) connection of members to the organization; (2) perceptions about the organization as a bridge to other groups and organizations in the broader community; and (3) bond or attachment to the community at large. Income (low, middle and high-income) was tested as a moderator of these relationships. Results showed significant moderating effects of income on the relationship between participation, gender and SOC on both components of PE. Participation was positively related with intrapersonal empowerment across income levels, but positively related with interactional empowerment only for low-income individuals. Gender was only associated with intrapersonal empowerment, and only for low-income individuals. SOC, as expressed through bridging to the broader community, was positively related with interactional PE for all income levels, but with intrapersonal PE for only low and middle-income individuals. In contrast, member connection to the organization was not related to interactional empowerment and significantly related to intrapersonal empowerment only for individuals with higher income. The importance of participation, gender and SOC for different types of empowerment and the impact of income on the SOC-empowerment relationship are discussed.

Pathways to Effectiveness in Substance Abuse Prevention: Empowering Organizational Characteristics of Community-Based Coalitions

“…Some of our findings regarding SOC, however, were not consistent with previous studies. Prior research found SOC to be an important predictor of intrapersonal PE Peterson & Reid, 2003;Speer, Peterson, Armstead, & Allen, 2013). In the present study, participants' SOC was not found to be a unique predictor of intrapersonal PE.…”

“…Several studies have been conducted on the OE model, but tested only certain components (Griffith et al, 2008(Griffith et al, , 2010Hardina, 2011;Ohmer, 2008;Perkins et al, 2007;Speer et al, 2013). The complete model of OE (Peterson & Zimmerman, 2004) remains largely untested and provides an opportunity to test the processes and outcomes within the three components of OE.…”

“…In a recent study on participation and SOC, Speer and colleagues (2013) included gender, income, and both interactional and intrapersonal components of PE in their investigation. Their findings included nuances between emotional or interactional PE and cognitive or interactional PE in relation to gender and income as well as SOC (Speer et al, 2013). It might be important to look at the relationships between the different components of PE within different subgroups of coalition members.…”

Factors Influencing Farmers’ Participation in Water Management: A Community Development Perspective

“…Likewise, some of the researchers shared same results, indicated contributing factors on participation. It was indicated that participation was influenced by income levels [33]; [37]; [39]; [32]; [38]; [34]; [45]. However, the study did not gather the information of income of the farmers, as respondents were reluctant to share their earnings.…”

“…In a study, where the farmers were involved in cleaning of irrigation channels, concluded that the participation level was associated with plot size while the farmers of larger plots were particularly active in water management [32]. Participation positively communicates to intra-personal empowerment across earnings levels, but optimistically related to interactional empowerment only for lowincome individuals [33]. In Nepal, the participation of farmers is influenced by the education level and amount of trainings, while farm size and gross farm income are dominant economic variables influencing participation [34].…”