Community violence is a complex phenomenon, and many theories have been put forth to explain the causes of community violence and disparities in community violence across neighborhoods. One notable theory, collective efficacy theory (CET), posits that collective efficacy (i.e., a neighborhood's social cohesion and informal social control) mediates the association between concentrated disadvantage and community violence. As CET theorizes an inverse feedback loop between collective efficacy and community violence, collective efficacy could mitigate the link between neighborhood disadvantage and community violence. The current study examines the reciprocal association between collective efficacy and community violence exposure using data from 604 low-resourced, urban African American ninth-grade students from a large Midwestern city. Data were collected at 6-month intervals over 2 years. Significant cross-sectional associations were found between each of the collective efficacy constructs (social cohesion and informal social control) and community violence exposure, although no significant longitudinal cross-lagged associations were found. There were positive cross-sectional associations between (a) collective efficacy and community violence exposure and (b) informal social control and community violence exposure; however, the association between social cohesion and community violence exposure was negative. Associations between overall collective efficacy, as well as its subscales, and community violence exposure were consistent with hypothesized directions for social cohesion, but not for collective efficacy or informal social control. Findings support the use of collective efficacy as two constructs, rather than a single construct as proposed by Sampson et al. Implications for expanding original assumptions of CET are discussed.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7676433 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0886260519844281 | DOI Listing |
Technology-facilitated abuse (TFA) describes the misuse or repurposing of digital systems to harass, coerce, or abuse. It is a global problem involving both existing and emerging technologies. Despite significant work across research, policy, and practice to understand the issue, the field operates within linguistic, conceptual, and disciplinary silos, inhibiting collaboration.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFInj Epidemiol
January 2025
UC Davis Violence Prevention Research Program, Sacramento, CA, USA.
Background: In 2022, a nationally representative longitudinal survey in the USA found concerningly high prevalences of support for and personal willingness to engage in political violence, but those prevalences decreased in 2023. This study examines changes in those prevalences from 2023 to 2024, an election year in the USA.
Methods: Participants were members of Ipsos KnowledgePanel.
J Gen Intern Med
January 2025
School of Public Health, Division of Health Policy and Management, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Background: External incentives increasingly encourage hospitals to address health-related social needs, yet limited evidence exists about whether social needs interventions are associated with quality indicators like potentially preventable admissions.
Objective: We analyze whether four hospital interventions-meal delivery, transportation to health services, mobile clinics, and community-oriented violence prevention programs-are associated with potentially preventable hospitalizations.
Design: Cross-sectional analysis of survey-based and claims-based data.
PLoS One
January 2025
Institute for Human Development, Aga Khan University, Nairobi, Kenya.
Introduction: Children growing up in arid and semi-arid regions of Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) face heightened risks, often resulting in poor developmental outcomes. In Kenya, the arid and semi-arid lands (ASAL) exhibit the lowest health and developmental indicators among children. Despite these risks, some children grow up successfully and overcome the challenges.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFThe Problem: People use social media platforms to chat, search, and share information, express their opinions, and connect with others. But these platforms also facilitate the posting of divisive, harmful, and hateful messages, targeting groups and individuals, based on their race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or political views. Hate content is not only a problem on the Internet, but also on traditional media, especially in places where the Internet is not widely available or in rural areas.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!