The Multilevel Factor Structure of Social Cohesion, Mutual Efficacy, and Informal Social Control: A Case for Practice-Informed Research.

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.

Mutual Efficacy, Self-Efficacy, and Collective Efficacy Theory: An Examination of Empowerment and Activism.

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.

Supportive Neighborhoods, Family Resilience and Flourishing in Childhood and Adolescence.

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.

Fear of Crime, Racial Bias, and Gun Ownership.

Firearm-related violence is a significant threat to public health and safety in America. However, research highlights a critical disparity in firearm-related deaths by race. Researchers often cite racial bias as a contributing factor for the racial disparity in firearm-related deaths. To provide a foundation for potential social work interventions, the present article discusses the results of an assessment of whether explicit racial biases toward four racial and ethnic groups (white, black, Asian, Hispanic/Latino), fear of crime, and the quantity and quality of interactions with neighbors of a different race are predictors of gun ownership. Findings suggest that explicit racial bias toward black, Asian, and Hispanic/Latino individuals is a significant predictor of gun ownership. Fear of crime and more frequent interactions with neighbors of a different race are also significant predictors of gun ownership. Taken as a whole, findings suggest that gun owners are more likely to be more vigilant toward people of color because of stereotypical assumptions that racial and ethnic minorities are more likely to be involved with crime. Social work practice and policy implications include developing interventions aimed at reducing implicit bias and identifying policies that are associated with lower levels of implicit bias among gun owners.

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

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.