Michael C. Gearhart

The present study tests power as a resident, a Japanese measure of empowerment, as a predictor of neighbourhood activism in a sample of Americans. Confirmatory factor analysis identified two factors that comprise the power as a resident scale: the perceived ability and desire to create change, and a shared responsibility for problems. Results from multiple regression analyses show that social cohesion and self-efficacy are predictors of both factors. Further, both factors of the power as a resident scale were significantly associated with neighbourhood activism. Findings suggest that building relationships in communities plays a critical role in empowering communities to participate in neighbourhood activism.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the importance of historical context in social work practice, research, and teaching. Understanding the evolution of racist policies and practices is necessary for developing antiracist practices that promote racial equity. Using St. Louis as a case study, the manuscript describes how racist policies and practices evolved over time between the 1900s and 1970s. These policies and practices will be examined at three levels: individual, local governance, and federal policy. The discussion section describes the implications of this history for contemporary social work research, practice, and education. In practice, understanding our history is necessary so we can identify when using racialized practices and hoping for different results. Understanding the historical context of our research can identify when our results provide support that racist policies and practices are working as designed. The interconnectedness of racist policy and practice necessitates re-thinking social work education, particularly as it relates to the divide of micro and macro social work practice.

Collective efficacy is the process by which social cohesion is activated as informal social control. Mutual efficacy, the perceived capability of the community, mediates the relationship between the two constructs. Interventions based on collective efficacy have a positive impact on individuals but are limited in their ability to affect the broader community. A possible explanation for this finding is that community-level theories operate differently at the individual and neighborhood levels. The present study contributes to the literature by testing the multilevel factor structure of social cohesion, mutual efficacy, and informal social control. Findings suggest that multiple-factor structures demonstrate adequate model fit. However, the three-factor model is most consistent with social work theory and practice. Social workers can foster constructive dialogue to build social cohesion, authentically engage residents to build mutual efficacy, and train residents in skills necessary to institute informal social control.

Empowerment refers to the ways in which individuals and groups gain greater control over their lives. To date, the majority of studies focus on empowerment at the individual level. Further, research typically focuses on how to make people feel empowered and not how communities exercise their power. The present study utilizes collective efficacy, a community-level theory, to explore community characteristics that may empower individuals to engage in household activism, and communities to participate in neighborhood activism. The findings suggest that mutual efficacy and social cohesion are key drivers of participation in both household and neighborhood activism. Self-efficacy is associated with household activism only. Findings suggest that it is important to use individual-level skill-building opportunities as a method for fostering a collective identity and train community members to recruit others. In addition, community-building initiatives are more likely to result in activism if they focus on building mutual efficacy in the community.

The current climate surrounding policing in the United States indicates a need to develop more community-based solutions to crime in order to create a more just society. Collective efficacy theory is a widely studied framework that explores how communities mobilize to address crime through informal social control. Though collective efficacy is associated with lower levels of crime, research suggests that developing effective interventions based on the theory is difficult. The present study examines collective efficacy through the lens of empowerment and tests mutual efficacy and self-efficacy as predictors of informal social control among community members, and within respondents’ households. Findings from the study increase our understanding of how and why empowered individuals and communities mobilize to prevent crime, and identify practice behaviors that make collective efficacy theory more actionable for social work practice.

Flourishing is linked with health and well-being in childhood and adulthood. This study applied a promotive factors model to examine how neighborhood assets might benefit child and adolescent flourishing by promoting family resilience. Using data from the combined 2018 and 2019 National Survey of Children’s Health, structural equation models tested direct and indirect relationships between neighborhood physical environment, neighborhood social cohesion, family resilience, and flourishing among 18,396 children and 24,817 adolescents. After controlling for multiple covariates that may influence flourishing, the models supported that higher levels of neighborhood social cohesion were directly associated with higher levels of flourishing adolescents, and indirectly by positive associations with family resilience for both children and adolescents. No indirect effects between neighborhood physical environments and flourishing were supported by the data for either children or adolescents. However, neighborhood physical environments were positively associated with adolescent flourishing. Understanding social environmental factors that strengthen and enhance child and adolescent flourishing are critical toward designing prevention, intervention, and policy efforts that can build on the existing strengths of families and their communities.

Mutual efficacy refers to group members’ beliefs that collective action will be successful at achieving group goals. The primary purpose of mutual efficacy is to increase the effectiveness of interventions aimed at facilitating collective actions in communities. The present study builds on previous mutual efficacy research by examining the psychometric properties of a mutual efficacy scale. Findings suggest that the mutual efficacy scale represents a single construct, though some of the items correlate with each other. Mutual efficacy is positively correlated with neighborhood activism and not correlated with neighborhood disorder. The implications for practice and research are discussed.