J Youth Adolescence (2012) 41:623–635

DOI 10.1007/s10964-011-9724-9

EMPIRICAL RESEARCH

The Role of Empowerment in Youth Development: A Study

of Sociopolitical Control as Mediator of Ecological Systems’
Influence on Developmental Outcomes
Brian D. Christens • N. Andrew Peterson

Received: 7 July 2011 / Accepted: 10 October 2011 / Published online: 26 October 2011
Ó Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Abstract Empowerment has become an influential con- Keywords Empowerment
Mental health
Resilience

cept and theoretical framework for social policy and Risk behaviors
Social support
Sociopolitical
practice. Still, relatively little is known about the roles that development
empowerment plays in the ecology of human development,
particularly among young people. This article reports
results of a study of psychological empowerment among Introduction
young people, using data from 629 high school students
(65.8% female; 96.5% non-white). Using a path analysis, As this article was being written (during the first half of
we examined the role of perceived sociopolitical control— 2011), the collective actions of young people were per-
an indicator of the intrapersonal component of psycho- manently reshaping the political futures of nations in North
logical empowerment—as a mediator between ecological Africa and the Middle East (Hanafi 2011; Khalidi 2011). At
support systems and developmental outcomes. Findings the same time, tens of thousands of young people were
confirmed that social support in family, peer, and school participating in non-violent social action in state capitals
settings, and family cohesion positively predict self-esteem around the United States (Aronowitz 2011; Nichols 2011),
and perceived school importance, which, in turn, have and many more were protesting in cities across Spain,
protective effects on psychological symptoms, violent Greece, and Portugal (Treanor 2011). As these current
behaviors and substance use. Sociopolitical control was examples make clear, despite being prevented from some
found to mediate the relationships between ecological forms of civic participation (e.g., voting), many young
supports and risk factors and developmental outcomes, people are highly cognizant of social and political issues,
leading to the conclusion that perceived efficacy in the and many are developing participatory competence through
sociopolitical domain, and youth empowerment, more direct involvement in efforts to change social and political
generally, should be considered as core elements of the systems. Yet, it is not unusual for scholarship on youth to
ecology of human development. Policy and practice aimed account only for the impacts of social and political issues
at promoting positive developmental outcomes and pre- on young people, neglecting the reality that youth are often
venting risk behaviors should take their relationship to active participants in the sociopolitical domain (Watts and
sociopolitical control into account. Flanagan 2007). The time is ripe for greater consideration
of youth and adolescents’ sociopolitical actions, including
the developmental precursors, capacities, and impacts of
B. D. Christens (&) civic participation.
School of Human Ecology, University of Wisconsin-Madison,
1300 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706, USA
Empowerment theory provides a promising framework
e-mail: [email protected] for understanding the processes and outcomes of the
actions of young people in the civic, or sociopolitical,
N. A. Peterson domain. Empowerment has often been defined as a
School of Social Work, Rutgers University, 536 George Street,
New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA
mechanism by which people, groups, and communities
e-mail: [email protected] gain control over their affairs (Rappaport 1987). Hence,

123
624 J Youth Adolescence (2012) 41:623–635

empowerment is not only beneficial for democratic func- role as mediator in the relationship between ecological
tioning at a societal level; it is also important for individ- supports and developmental outcomes.
ual wellness since agency in sociopolitical contexts can
prevent hopelessness and alienation (Prilleltensky Supportive Social Ecologies and Positive
2008; Zimmerman 1990). Empowerment has been theo- Developmental Outcomes
rized at the psychological level as a latent construct with
intrapersonal, interactional, and behavioral components Human ecological perspectives (e.g., Bronfenbrenner
(Christens 2011; Zimmerman 1995). Much of the empirical 1977; Huston and Bentley 2010) have emphasized the
research on empowerment has focused on the intrapersonal importance of the environments in which people live for
component of psychological empowerment, which refers to understanding developmental processes and outcomes.
self-perceptions of efficacy and control within the socio- Positive youth development—an umbrella term for a per-
political domain. Many of these studies have drawn on the spective emphasizing the promotion of well-being among
concept of sociopolitical control developed by Zimmerman young people—also has placed a particular focus on con-
and Zahniser (1991) to understand and assess the intra- texts and processes that lead to genuine flourishing and
personal component of psychological empowerment. thriving (Benson et al. 2006; Granger 2002). Scholars
Sociopolitical control has been theorized as a construct employing a positive youth development perspective are
that encompasses perceptions of self-efficacy, motivation, focused on the development of the future potential of
competence, and perceived control that are specific to the young people, including competence across many domains,
sociopolitical domain. Studies in health education (e.g., self-efficacy, resilience, and initiative (Damon 2004;
Holden et al. 2004, 2005; Ozer and Schotland 2011), youth Larson 2000). Positive youth development perspectives
development (e.g., Russell et al. 2009) and community frequently treat environments and settings as both predic-
psychology (e.g., Kohfeldt et al. 2011; Zimmerman et al. tors of developmental outcomes and as likely targets for
1999) have investigated sociopolitical control as a com- interventions. Consistent with this perspective, much of the
ponent of psychological empowerment among young empirical research on positive youth development has
people. Peterson et al. (2011) recently validated a measure employed an ecological epistemological approach to youth
of sociopolitical control in a sample of young people, development—scrutinizing various contexts and settings
finding support for the theorized two factor structure: for impacts on youth.
leadership competence and policy control. Leadership Differences in support and connection to social struc-
competence refers to self-perceptions of the skills and tures (family, neighborhood, peer group, school) have been
abilities necessary for leading a group, while policy control found to influence adolescent exposure to stress and access
refers to self-perceptions of the ability to exert influence on to resources, which in turn influence well-being, including
policy decisions in community and organizational settings. mental health and psychological symptoms (Aneshensel
In addition, Peterson et al.’s (2011) study found that young and Sucoff 1996; Bayer et al. 2006; Bond et al. 2007;
people who had greater perceptions of sociopolitical con- Dumont and Provost 1999), self-esteem (Paschall and
trol were more engaged in their communities and schools, Hubbard 1998), academic achievement (Bond et al. 2007),
and were less likely to use alcohol and drugs. Yet, rela- and risky behaviors including violence (Sampson et al.
tively little is known about the relationship of sociopolitical 2005) and substance use (Echeverrı́a et al. 2008; Stockdale
control and empowerment processes to developmental et al. 2007). Many studies have linked family structure and
outcomes and the other processes and settings that impact cohesion to positive developmental outcomes (Spoth et al.
development. 2002), psychological distress (Rivera et al. 2008), and risky
The current study’s primary aim was to ascertain whether behaviors including substance abuse (Zimmerman et al.
sociopolitical control functions as a mediator between 1995), and violence (Howard et al. 2010). It is clear that
ecological supports (family, school, and peer) and devel- family contexts often strongly influence adolescent devel-
opmental outcomes including psychological symptoms, risk opment processes.
behaviors, and self-esteem and perceived school impor- Non-familial contexts are also important context for
tance. The theoretical basis for the hypothesized mediating understanding developmental outcomes. For instance, in
role of sociopolitical control is drawn from theory and Chung et al.’s (2002) longitudinal study of criminal offense
previous research on empowerment, resilience and positive trajectories, the influence of family-oriented variables was
youth development. In the sections that follow, we first non-significant when considered alongside peer, school and
review the literature on the ecological support systems and neighborhood-oriented variables, all of which were sig-
their impacts on the developmental outcomes examined in nificant predictors of criminal activities. Social support
the current study. We then review the research on resilience from non-familial sources (e.g., peers and adult mentors)
and sociopolitical control, making a conceptual case for its has been linked with higher levels of school engagement

123
J Youth Adolescence (2012) 41:623–635 625

and academic achievement, and lower levels of substance have shown strong, reciprocal relationships between vio-
abuse and violent behaviors (DuBois and Silverthorn 2005; lence and substance use (Ellickson et al. 1997; White et al.
Garcia-Reid et al. 2005). Neighborhood-oriented variables 1999; Xue et al. 2009). Moreover, recent work has found
including engagement and attachment to one’s neighbor- support for a causal linkage between alcohol use and
hood, or neighborhood social support also has been linked depressive symptoms (Fergusson et al. 2009). However, the
to both a number of positive developmental outcomes perception that school is important represents a form of
(Urban et al. 2009) and to the prevention of risk behaviors pro-social engagement that has been linked to positive
including violence and crime (Sampson 2004; Zeldin developmental outcomes and lower rates of risk behaviors
2004). The accumulated evidence convincingly demon- including substance use (Bryant et al. 2003; Eccles and
strates the importance of supportive and cohesive settings Barber 1999). Self-esteem has been found to play a similar
as positive influences on adolescent development and well- mediating role. For example, in testing Sandler’s (2001)
being and avoidance of risk behaviors. theoretical model of resilience, Prelow et al. (2006), found
that self-esteem and perceived competence mediated the
Positive Developmental Outcomes, Risk Behaviors, effect of ecological factors on psychological symptoms.
and Psychological Symptoms Similarly, Swenson and Prelow (2005) found that self-
esteem and perceived efficacy mediated the effect of sup-
The extant literature on positive youth development pro- portive parenting on psychological symptoms and problem
cesses and outcomes has employed a diversity of indica- behaviors. Hence, the theoretical model tested in this study
tors. Taken together, the most commonly cited components situates self-esteem and perceived school importance as
of positive youth development (confidence, competence, both outcomes of ecological supports and predictors of risk
caring/compassion, connection and character) have been behaviors and mental distress.
conceptualized as the behaviors and capacities that lead,
over time, to thriving (Lerner et al. 2003). Specific indi- Psychological Empowerment: A Possible Mediator
cators have varied, but typically have included measures
designed to indicate successful developmental self-regula- Akin to positive youth development in developmental
tions and wellness. psychology, empowerment theory has signaled a shift
Self-esteem—a measure of positive self-regard—is an toward strengths-based theory and practice (Rappaport
indicator that is frequently studied as an indicator of 1981, 1987). In contrast to scholarship and practice that
successful development (Fredericks and Eccles 2008; emphasizes treatment or prevention of disorder and risk
Zimmerman et al. 1997). Similarly, academic achievement behavior, empowerment proposes the promotion of well-
often has been studied as a positive developmental indi- being and citizen control at the psychological, organiza-
cator (Cammarota 2007; Ma et al. 2009). Other studies tional and community levels, particularly for marginalized
have employed measures of academic engagement and populations. Drawing on studies of self-efficacy (Bandura
perceived school importance for meeting one’s goals in life 1982) and locus of control (Levenson 1974), Zimmerman
(Chavous et al. 2008; Peterson et al. 2011). and Zahniser (1991) proposed sociopolitical control as a
The achievement of developmental assets simulta- way of understanding and measuring the intrapersonal
neously reduces susceptibility to mental distress and component of psychological empowerment.
problem behaviors (Larson 2000; Tebes et al. 2007). Sociopolitical control has been used in numerous studies
Hence, as some observers have noted, while a positive of psychological empowerment among adults (e.g., Chris-
youth development approach ‘‘resists conceiving of the tens et al. 2011a; Itzhaky and York 2000; Peterson et al.
developmental process mainly as an effort to overcome 2006). These studies have linked sociopolitical control with
deficits and risk’’ (Damon 2004, p. 20), the goals of posi- other key positive psychosocial and behavioral indicators,
tive youth development and prevention science actually including sense of wellbeing (Itzhaky and York 2000), self-
have tended to be fairly well aligned (Catalano et al. 2002). esteem (Itzhaky and York 2003), stress buffering, and
Commonly used indicators of developmental deficien- psychological and behavioral health outcomes (Israel et al.
cies—or contra-indicators of positive youth development— 1994). Moreover, psychological empowerment has been
include substance abuse, violent and other risky or anti- found to be associated with indicators of positive adult
social behaviors, and indicators of mental distress (Rhodes development, including employment status (Garcia-
et al. 2005; Vieno et al. 2010). Ramirez et al. 2005), social cohesion (Speer et al. 2001),
Much evidence exists for links between indicators of and involvement in empowering organizational settings
positive development. Likewise, links exist between con- (Speer and Hughey 1996). Yet, there is evidence that
tra-indicators of positive development including psycho- sociopolitical control is developed through many of the
logical symptoms and risk behaviors. For example, studies same ecological supports as other indicators of positive

123
626 J Youth Adolescence (2012) 41:623–635

adult development, including community participation 2001) and noted for its importance in reducing hopeless-
(Christens et al. 2011a) and sense of community (Hughey ness and depression and successfully adapting to stress
et al. 2008; Peterson and Reid 2003), raising questions (Seifer et al. 1992). Moreover, the perception that one has
concerning the specific role that empowerment plays in agency and the potential to achieve positive outcomes
ecological processes of development. For instance, when within the sociopolitical domain—sociopolitical control—
people have confidence in their ability to make change in has been specifically noted as a positive influence on
social and political systems, does this mediate the impacts mental health and other youth outcomes and has been
of those systems on people themselves? previously theorized and studied as part of frameworks of
Fewer studies have examined psychological empower- resilience (Banyard and LaPlant 2002; Diemer and Blu-
ment among young people. Chinman and Linney (1998), stein 2006; Holden et al. 2004).
drawing on Kieffer’s (1984) study and others, provided a
theoretical model for adolescent empowerment that inclu-
ded identity development, meaningful roles, bonding, and The Current Study
social control. Kim et al. (1998) also provided a conceptual
model for youth development and empowerment as The current study sought to address the question of whether
promising approaches to substance abuse prevention. sociopolitical control, a key indicator of psychological
Holden et al. (2004, 2005) adapted items from Zimmerman empowerment, could be empirically situated within an
and Zahniser’s (1991) sociopolitical control scale and ecological understanding of youth development. Despite
created new items to measure intrapersonal and interac- the appeal and influence of empowerment as a conceptual
tional empowerment among youth involved in local framework, few prior studies have examined sociopolitical
tobacco control efforts, arriving at a valid measure. As control among young people. Even fewer have examined
mentioned earlier, a recent study (Peterson et al. 2011) the roles that sociopolitical control and empowerment may
adapted a version of the sociopolitical control scale for an play in mediating ecological supports and risk factors and
urban high-school aged population, and confirmed the promoting positive developmental outcomes in adoles-
validity of the scale’s original two-factor structure: lead- cence. The previous study that provides the most direct
ership competence and policy control. Peterson and col- precedent for situating sociopolitical control as a mediator
leagues’ study also detected relationships between between environmental influences and developmental out-
sociopolitical control and other conceptually relevant comes is Zimmerman et al.’s (1999) study, which found
variables: community participation, neighborhood attach- that sociopolitical control played a role in limiting
ment, perceived school importance, and alcohol and drug depressive symptoms and anxiety and promoting self-
use. Yet, the specific roles that empowerment pro- esteem among African American adolescents. Their study
cesses play in youth development remain only vaguely similarly used a resilience framework for the hypothesized
understood. mediating role of sociopolitical control. The current study
The theoretical model for the current study situates extends this earlier work by using a sample of urban high
sociopolitical control as mediator of the impacts on eco- school students to investigate the roles of sources of sup-
logical systems on developmental outcomes. Resilience is port from multiple ecological settings on self-esteem and
the hypothesized mechanism for the meditational effect of perceived school importance as well as psychological
sociopolitical control on adolescent well-being. Resilience symptoms, violent behaviors and substance use.
is a framework that has been used to describe successful A path model was chosen for its ability to analytically
developmental outcomes that have been achieved in spite situate sociopolitical control as a mediator or mechanism
of risks through the mediating effects of personal and through which ecological supports impact youth develop-
environmental assets and protective factors (Fergus and ment. We specified a model including ecological supports
Zimmerman 2005; Fraser et al. 2004; Luthar et al. 2000; as predictors, sociopolitical control as mediator, and
Masten 2001). For example, in a study of adolescent developmental indicators (self-esteem, perceived school
mothers, Hurd and Zimmerman (2010) found that the importance, psychological symptoms and risk behaviors)
presence of natural mentors—an ecological support—in as outcomes. It was hypothesized that sociopolitical con-
the lives of adolescent mothers promoted resiliency that trol, a key indicator of psychological empowerment, would
allowed certain adolescents to more successfully adapt to arise from the same ecological support systems as other
the increased responsibilities and scarcity of resources positive developmental indicators, and would mediate the
associated with motherhood. Resilience therefore repre- impact of these ecological supports on, more proximally,
sents a key mediator of the relationship between supportive the attainment of developmental assets and, more distally,
environments and adolescent well-being. Perceived control the avoidance of mental distress and risky/problem
has been theorized as a component of resilience (Sandler behaviors.

123
J Youth Adolescence (2012) 41:623–635 627

Methods leadership competence (a = .81), and policy control

(a = .83).
Participants
Social Support
Data were collected as part of a needs assessment con-
ducted in 2006 in one school district in a mid-sized city in a Social support was measured using four subscales derived
northeastern U.S. state. The needs assessment was from the School Success Profile (Garcia-Reid et al. 2005;
designed to assist planning and implementation of a fed- Rosenfeld et al. 2000) representing neighborhood, teacher,
erally mandated initiative to prevent substance abuse and parent and peer support. For each group in the social
promote sexual health (Reid et al. 2008). The school dis- support network, students responded to questions about the
trict was selected because it is among the poorest districts helpfulness of others, including how much fun they have
in the state, and also has some of the highest rates of with others, rated along Likert-type scales ranging from
substance abuse and crime in the state. Moreover, the 3-points (Not at all, Somewhat, A great deal) to 5-points
locale in which data were collected is noteworthy for its (Not at all helpful to Very helpful). For the participants in
racial and ethnic diversity, including its large proportion of this study, the mean score on overall social support (a
first and second-generation immigrants to the U.S. 629 composite scale with a max of 4) was 2.47 (SD = .53;
high-school students participated in the survey. 65.8% of a = .87).
study participants identified as female. At the time of data
collection, 38.7% were in 9th grade, 26.1% 10th grade, Family Cohesion
20% 11th grade and 15.2% were in 12th grade. 63.2% of
the sample identified as Hispanic or Latino/a, 35.2% Family cohesion was measured using a 6-item scale
identified as Black or African American, 11.6% identified derived from the Moos Family Environment Scale (1974).
as Asian, and 3.5% identified as White or Caucasian. Items contained statements (e.g., ‘‘Family members feel
Regarding family composition, 58.1% of participants spent close to each other’’; ‘‘I listen to what other family mem-
most of their time living in a household with a single parent bers have to say, even if I disagree’’) that were rated using
(51.3% mother; 6.8% father), while 33.8% lived in two- a 4-point Likert scale ranging from Not true to True a lot of
parent households. The remaining 8.2% lived with other the time. Among this study’s participants, the mean score
relatives or non-familial adults. As an indicator of the was 2.91 (SD = .67; a = .75).
socioeconomic status of the sample, 72.7% of participants
were receiving free or reduced school lunch. Self-Esteem

Self-esteem was measured using a 10-item scale derived

Measures from the Hare Self-Esteem Scale, which measures area-
specific (peer, family, school) self-esteem (Butler and
Sociopolitical Control Gasson 2005; Shoemaker 1980). Statements related to self-
concept in peer settings (e.g., ‘‘Other people think I am a
Sociopolitical control was measured using a 17-item ver- lot of fun to be with’’), family settings (e.g., ‘‘My parents
sion of the Sociopolitical Control Scale for Youth (Peter- believe I will be a success in the future’’), and school
son et al. 2011; Zimmerman and Zahniser 1991). Items settings (e.g., ‘‘I am an important person in my classes’’)
involved statements rated for agreement or disagreement were rated along a 4-point Likert type scale ranging from
along a 5-point Likert-type scale and represent two com- Strongly disagree to Strongly agree. Among this study’s
ponents: (a) leadership competence (e.g., ‘‘I find it very participants, the mean score was 3.09 (SD = .49; a = .75).
easy to talk in front of a group’’, ‘‘I can usually organize
people to get things done’’), and (b) policy control (e.g., School Importance
‘‘youth like me have the ability to participate effectively in
community or school activities and decision-making’’, Perceived school importance was assessed using a 4-item
‘‘Most school or community leaders would listen to me’’). scale developed by Stevenson et al. (1999). Respondents
Among this study’s participants, the mean score was 3.62 answered items such as ‘‘How important to you is finishing
(standard deviation [SD] = .63; a = .88). Peterson et al.’s high school?’’ and ‘‘How important is going to college in
(2011) study confirmed the two-factor structure of the obtaining your life goals?’’ using a 5-point Likert-type
Sociopolitical Control Scale for Youth, and the measure scale ranging from Not at all important to Very important.
showed similarly strong psychometric properties in this Among this study’s participants, the mean score was 4.57
sample, with high alpha reliabilities for both components: (SD = .88; a = .94).

123
628 J Youth Adolescence (2012) 41:623–635

Psychological Symptoms use marijuana?’’). Responses ranged from dichotomous

(Yes or No) responses about behaviors to Likert-type
Psychological symptoms were measured using a combined responses for frequencies of six to eight items ranging from
score from two scales: one assessing depressive symptoms Zero times to 40 times or more. The score was generated
and one assessing anxiety. Depressive symptoms were from an average of all items. With a max value of 6.4, the
measured using a six-item scale adapted from the Child mean score for this study’s participants was 1.46
Behavior Checklist (Achenbach and Edelbrock 1983). (SD = .98; a = .93).
Students rated statements dealing with how they felt about Violent behaviors were measured using an 11-item scale
themselves during the past 6 months (e.g., worthless, also derived from the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (CDC
inferior, guilty unhappy) along a 3-point Likert-type scale 2002). Students responded to questions regarding how
(i.e., Not true, Somewhat true, Very true). Among partici- frequently they were exposed to some type of violence-
pants in this study, the mean score was 1.41 (SD = .47; related behavior through either participation or victimiza-
a = .82). Anxiety was measured using an eight-item scale tion (e.g., During the past 12 months, how many times
dealing with feelings about self (e.g., nervous, suspicious, were you in a physical fight on school property?).
worried) during the past 6 months along a 3-point Likert- Responses ranged from dichotomous to 5-to-8-item Likert-
type scale, also derived from the Child Behavior Checklist type responses for frequencies. With a max value of 5.5,
(Achenbach and Edelbrock 1983). Among participants in among participants in this study, the mean score was 1.59
this study, the mean score was 1.45 (SD = .43; a = .82). (SD = .77; a = .90). To obtain the measure for risk
To obtain the measure for psychological symptoms, the behaviors, the scores on overall alcohol and drug use and
scores on depressive symptoms and anxiety, which were violent behaviors, which were highly correlated (r = .82)
highly correlated (r = .70), were combined by converting were converted to Z scores and then summated. For the
both scales to Z scores and summing them. For the com- combined measure, the mean score among participants in
bined measure, the mean score among participants in this this study was .012 (SD = 1.92). For all items from both
study was -.003 (SD = 1.84). For all items from both scales, Cronbach’s a = .95.
scales, Cronbach’s a = .89.

Risk Behaviors Results

Risk behaviors were measured using a combined score Bivariate correlations are reported in matrix form in
from two scales: one assessing current and lifetime alcohol Table 1 for model replication purposes. As expected,
and drug use, and one assessing violent behaviors. Alcohol family cohesion and social support were significantly
and drug use were measured using survey items adapted positively correlated. Moreover, both of these measures of
from the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (Centers for Disease ecological support were significantly positively correlated
Control and Prevention 2002) and included both lifetime sociopolitical control and self-esteem. Family cohesion
and current drinking and drug use habits, age of onset of was significantly correlated with perceived school impor-
use, one’s access to alcohol and drugs, drinking on school tance. Both family cohesion and social support were sig-
property, and episodes of excessive alcohol consumption or nificantly negatively correlated with psychological
drug use (e.g., ‘‘During the past 30 days, on how many symptoms and risk behaviors. Sociopolitical control was
days did you have five or more drinks of alcohol in a row/ significantly positively correlated with self-esteem and

Table 1 Correlation matrix of study variables

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

1. Gender (female) –
2. Family cohesion .111* –
3. Social support .010 .309* –
4. Sociopolitical control .132* .254* .305* –
5. Self-esteem .120* .266* .246* .458* –
6. School importance -.174* .174* .025 .288* .434* –
7. Psychological symptoms -.005 -.198* -.140* -.250* -.560* -.375* –
8. Risk behaviors -.220* -.225* -.154* -.273* -.333* -.497* .342* –
* p \ .01

123
J Youth Adolescence (2012) 41:623–635 629

school importance and significantly negatively correlated mediational effects. They found that the test of joint sig-
with psychological symptoms and risk behaviors. Self- nificance exhibited the best balance of Type I error and
esteem and perceived school importance were significantly statistical power of the different methods that were exam-
positively correlated with each other and were each sig- ine. The test of joint significance approach involves
nificantly negatively correlated with psychological symp- inspection of the regression results estimating the coeffi-
toms and risk behaviors, which were significantly cients of paths in the model.
positively correlated. Finally, gender was included because The over-identified path model, which is presented in
an effect was detected in the structural model presented Fig. 1, shows only statistically significant paths. The path
below. Identifying as female was significantly positively coefficients in Fig. 1 represent statistically significant
correlated with family cohesion, sociopolitical control, and (p \ .01) standardized beta weights. Demographic vari-
self-esteem, and significantly negatively correlated with ables were all examined in preliminary analyses; however,
perceived school importance and risk behaviors. only gender contributed to the predictive model and was
We performed structural equation modeling (SEM) included in the main analysis. The fit indices indicate that
procedures with AMOS 16.0 (Arbuckle 2007) to test a path the model provided an adequate or marginal fit for the
model that included only observed variables. Maximum sample. The Chi-square, V2(16) = 70.14, p \ .001, and
likelihood estimation was used to analyze the variance– discrepancy-to-df ratio, 4.38, were greater than the values
covariance matrix. We interpreted several fit indices that considered for good model-to-data fit; however, the Chi-
are widely accepted and considered to be robust measures square statistic is sensitive to larger sample size, as was
of fit. These included the discrepancy Chi-square (V2), the obtained in this study, and is often considered an unreal-
discrepancy-to-df ratio, the Comparative Fit Index, the istic standard. The other fit indices generally indicated
Tucker-Lewis Index, and the Root Mean Square of Error adequate model-to-data fit. The Comparative Fit Index, .94,
Approximation. Non-significant V2 values and discrep- and the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation, .07,
ancy-to-df ratios less than 2.0 indicate acceptable fit. In were within the guidelines indicating adequate fit of the
addition, higher values (i.e., greater than .90) on the mode to the data, although the Tucker-Lewis Index, .85,
Comparative Fit Index and Tucker-Lewis Index and was lower than the .90 cutoff. The model accounted for
smaller Root Mean Square Error of Approximation values 36% of the variance in psychological symptoms, 26% of
are desirable. According to Browne and Cudeck (1992), the variance in risk behaviors, 19% of the variance in
guidelines for interpreting the Root Mean Square Error of school importance, 23% of the variance in self-esteem, and
Approximation include: \.05 = good fit; .05– 12% of the variance in sociopolitical control.
.08 = acceptable fit; .08–.10 = marginal fit; [.10 = poor As can be seen in Fig. 1, family cohesion was found to
fit. We used the test of joint significance (Kenny et al. have a direct, positive effect on self-esteem as well as an
1998) to determine mediation. MacKinnon et al. (2002) indirect effect through sociopolitical control. Youth who
conducted a study to assess various methods of evaluating reported greater family cohesion tended to have higher

Fig. 1 Path diagram for

structural equation model
predicting developmental
outcomes: all path coefficients
significant (p \ .01)

123
630 J Youth Adolescence (2012) 41:623–635

levels of self-esteem. Youth with greater family cohesion conclusion that we draw from these findings is that
also tended to have higher levels of sociopolitical control, empowerment is a critical, and often overlooked, element
and youth with higher sociopolitical control were more of successful human development.
likely to report higher levels of self-esteem. In addition, Agency and self-efficacy generally are considered to be
self-esteem was found to have direct and indirect effects on important for positive youth development (Benson et al.
psychological symptoms. Youth with higher self-esteem 2006). However, efficacy and perceptions of agency are not
tended to have fewer psychological symptoms, and youth generic capacities that extend uniformly across different
who reported greater self-esteem also tended to have higher contexts and life domains. Rather, perceptions of compe-
levels of school importance, which also was related nega- tence and control develop unevenly in different contexts,
tively with psychological symptoms. Similarly, school such that a person may possess the capacities to operate
importance also affected psychological symptoms indi- effectively in family or school settings, for instance, yet
rectly through its effect on risk behaviors. Youth with lack the necessary skills, perspectives, and confidence to
higher scores on school importance were more likely to operate effectively in larger social and political settings
report fewer risk behaviors, and youth with fewer risk (Zimmerman and Zahniser 1991). However, as the results
behaviors tended to have fewer psychological symptoms. of this study demonstrate, beliefs about one’s abilities to
Furthermore, Fig. 1 shows that social support was found to exercise agency in the sociopolitical domain may be
have an effect on risk behaviors. Youth who reported developed through many of the same ecological supports
higher levels of social support tended to have fewer risk that undergird positive development, more generally.
behaviors. In addition, social support had in indirect effect Likewise, sociopolitical control is itself a key variable for
on self-esteem through its effect on sociopolitical control. understanding other positive developmental outcomes, and
Youth who reported greater social support tended to report deficits of positive development. Thus, while the sociopo-
more sociopolitical control, and youth with more socio- litical domain is distinct and cannot be considered simply
political control were more likely to report higher levels of as an extension of other ecological settings, the participa-
self-esteem. tory competence and skills necessary for exercising agency
in the sociopolitical domain are elemental for understand-
ing how young people develop and thrive in a broader
Discussion sense.
The concept of resilience provides key insights for
Empowerment has been theorized as the mechanism by understanding the mechanisms by which perceptions of
which people gain greater control over their affairs (Rap- control in the sociopolitical domain likely influence
paport 1981, 1987). It has become an influential concept in developmental outcomes and well being. Young people are
practice and policy related to youth and adolescent devel- often not in control of their social and political environ-
opment (Altman and Feighery 2004; Cargo et al. 2003; ments, and this study demonstrates that perceptions of
Wilson et al. 2007). Yet, it remains the case that relatively control in the sociopolitical domain are associated with
little is known about youth empowerment’s role in devel- positive outcomes despite the presence of risk factors. This
opmental processes (Watts et al. 2003). Using a resilience study also provides evidence that the development of
framework (Sandler 2001; Zimmerman et al. 1999), this sociopolitical control can be explained in part by some of
study found support for the role of psychological empow- the same supportive environmental assets that support
erment as a mediator of the influence of ecological supports youth development more broadly. In particular, this study’s
on developmental outcomes, particularly through socio- results point to the role of a cohesive family environment in
political control’s mediating effect on the relationship promoting perceptions of sociopolitical control. Hence,
between family cohesion and self-esteem. The current when young people develop confidence that they can exert
findings add to a growing body of research demonstrating influence on the sociopolitical systems in which they take
that supportive environments are strongly associated with part, it can mediate the impact that those systems have on
indicators of individual well being (Huston and Bentley their perceptions of well being and their patterns of
2010; Shinn and Yoshikawa 2008; Stokols 1992; Trickett behavior. Yet, the development of confidence and percep-
2009). Yet, this study uniquely extends this previous work tion of control in the sociopolitical domain may depend, to
by locating psychological empowerment as a mediator of some extent, on the support a young person receives in
these associations. Therefore, a major contribution of this family, school, neighborhood and other social settings.
study is examining the specific role that sociopolitical These relationships between supportive ecological set-
control, which is an indicator of the intrapersonal compo- tings, empowerment, and positive developmental outcomes
nent of psychological empowerment, plays in the ecology might therefore be considered as a developmental cascade,
of development and overall well being. The main a term that Masten and Cicchetti (2010) use to describe

123
J Youth Adolescence (2012) 41:623–635 631

‘‘the cumulative consequences for development of the study adds to the small but growing body of research that
many interactions and transactions occurring in developing has measured sociopolitical control in samples of young
systems that result in spreading effects across levels, people. Like other studies, this study found strong psy-
among domains at the same level, and across different chometric properties, as well as significant relationships
systems or generations’’ (p. 491). Considered from this with other important developmental outcomes. Specifi-
perspective, the current findings suggest that strategies for cally, findings from this study indicate that sociopolitical
improving developmental outcomes should consider both control is developed, in part, through supportive family,
how to improve the quality environmental supports in the peer, school, and neighborhood environments. Moreover,
lives of young people and how to involve young people sociopolitical control has strong relationships with devel-
themselves in transactional community improvement opmental successes across other domains (e.g., self-
processes (e.g., Christens and Dolan 2011; Kirshner esteem), and likely functions as an inhibitor of risky and
2009), thus starting a chain reaction of sociopolitical maladaptive behaviors (e.g., reducing illegal drug and
development. alcohol use and violent behaviors), while promoting posi-
Several limitations of the current study should be con- tive mental health (e.g., buttressing against anxiety and
sidered. First, using cross-sectional, rather than longitudi- depression).
nal data, limits our ability to test causal relationships. A Rapidly changing or disorderly sociopolitical times offer
second limitation concerns generalizability. Nearly all of reminders that the contexts of youth development include
this study’s participants were non-white high school stu- not only the more youth-specific contexts that are addres-
dents living in a low-income urban area. While this pro- sed in many studies (e.g., families, schools), but also the
vides important insights regarding a vulnerable population, macro-ecological and community-level contexts—many of
which have often been the focus of empowerment theory which contain contradictions, irrationalities, and injustices
and research (Russell et al. 2009), it remains to be seen (Larson 2011). One perhaps well-intentioned reaction to
whether the results from this study could be replicated in chaotic or disorderly sociopolitical contexts is to attempt to
other samples including members of less vulnerable pop- shield youth from social issues, political decision-making,
ulations. Third, by using sociopolitical control as an indi- and the attendant uses and abuses of social power. Such
cator of youth empowerment, the current study is limited to attempts are generally unsuccessful. As the events in
understanding the intrapersonal (or, emotional) component 2011—such as the Arab Spring (Kinsman 2011)—continue
of the broader latent construct of psychological empower- to demonstrate, young people are keenly, at times even
ment, as previously theorized (Zimmerman 1995). In fact, surprisingly, aware of their social and political contexts and
sociopolitical control is likely only a toehold for under- capable of taking action to change them.
standing youth empowerment processes and outcomes. A contrasting instinct is to move toward greater
Much work remains. Other studies, of adult populations, involvement of young people in civic and community
specifically have addressed the interactional (i.e., cogni- issues (Camino and Zeldin 2002; Ginwright and James
tive) component of psychological empowerment (Christens 2002). Arguments for greater involvement of young people
et al. 2011b; Speer 2000). To date, only one line of in communities and organizations are often advanced
research (Holden et al. 2004; Holden et al. 2005) has according to three themes: (1) that young people should be
measured the interactional component of psychological involved to enhance the inclusivity and diversity of orga-
empowerment among young people, using measures spe- nizations and democratic processes, (2) that excluding
cific to the context of local tobacco control efforts. The youth is an unjust form of age segregation, and (3) that in
development of additional measures of interactional rapidly changing times, there is a heightened need for
empowerment of youth in other contexts is an important members of younger generations to gain experience and
direction for future research. Indeed, Watts and Flanagan civic competence (Christens and Zeldin, in press). This
(2007) theoretically situate a sense of sociopolitical agency study’s results suggest that, in addition to these rationales,
(i.e., sociopolitical control) as a moderating variable in a shielding or excluding youth from involvement in com-
process of social involvement that begins with worldview munity and political issues denies them an opportunity for
and critical social analysis. Future research should examine sociopolitical development, and that this is a key domain
the interplay between different components of youth for overall developmental success. Indeed, experiences of
empowerment over time, as well as the roles of age and social and political participation are not only important for
other demographic characteristics. learning (Rogers et al. 2007), but also for developing
While sociopolitical control is an incomplete indicator capacities that are critical for wellness (Prilleltensky 2010)
for youth empowerment and sociopolitical development, it and positive youth development.
is nevertheless an important concept and measure for This study’s findings, which include significant associ-
understanding a key component of that construct. This ations between supportive ecologies (family cohesion and

123
632 J Youth Adolescence (2012) 41:623–635

social support) and sociopolitical control, an indicator of Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of
youth empowerment, manifest several implications for human development. American Psychologist, 32(7), 513–531.
doi:10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513.
policy and practice. Significant paths between these vari- Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing
ables and developmental outcomes including self-esteem, model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230–258.
perceived school importance, psychological symptoms and doi:10.1177/0049124192021002005.
risk behaviors also were detected. Programs and policies Bryant, A. L., Schulenberg, J. E., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., &
Johnston, L. D. (2003). How academic achievement, attitudes,
that seek to promote positive developmental outcomes and behaviors relate to the course of substance use during
should include opportunities for sociopolitical develop- adolescence: A 6-year, multiwave national longitudinal study.
ment of young people, including direct and meaning- Journal of Research on Adolescence, 13(3), 361–397. doi:
ful involvement in community change processes. More 10.1111/1532-7795.1303005.
Butler, R. J., & Gasson, S. L. (2005). Self esteem/self concept scales
broadly, governmental and nongovernmental institutions for children and adolescents: A review. Child and Adolescent
dealing with sociopolitical issues should seek to increase Mental Health, 10(4), 190–201. doi:10.1111/j.1475-3588.
the involvement of younger people in their work. These 2005.00368.x.
initiatives should seek to engage young people in efforts to Camino, L., & Zeldin, S. (2002). From periphery to center: Pathways
for youth civic engagement in the day-to-day life of communi-
improve social and political systems. Policy changes and ties. Applied Developmental Science, 6(4), 213–220. doi:
programs should be evaluated for their influences on youth 10.1207/S1532480XADS0604_8.
empowerment. Finally, future studies should investigate Cammarota, J. (2007). A social justice approach to achievement:
sociopolitical control, other indicators of empowerment, Guiding Latina/o students toward educational attainment with a
challenging, socially relevant curriculum. Equity & Excellence
and other developmental outcomes among adolescents in Education, 40(1), 87–96. doi:10.1080/10665680601015153.
across different contexts. Cargo, M., Grams, G. D., Ottoson, J. M., Ward, P., & Green, L. W.
(2003). Empowerment as fostering positive youth development
and citizenship. American Journal of Health Behavior, 27(Sup-
plement 1), 66–79.
Catalano, R. F., Hawkins, J. D., Berglund, M. L., Pollard, J. A., &
References Arthur, M. W. (2002). Prevention science and positive youth
development: Competitive or cooperative frameworks? Journal
Achenbach, T. M., & Edelbrock, C. (1983). Manual for the child of Adolescent Health, 31(6), 230–239. doi:10.1016/S1054-
behavior checklist and revised child behavior profile. Burling- 139X(02)00496-2.
ton, VT: Queen City Printers. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2002). Surveillance
Altman, D. G., & Feighery, E. C. (2004). Future directions for youth summaries. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 51(SS-4).
empowerment: Commentary on application of youth empower- http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/ss/ss5104.pdf.
ment theory to tobacco control. Health Education & Behavior, Chavous, T. M., Rivas-Drake, D., Smalls, C., Griffin, T., & Cogburn,
31(5), 641–647. doi:10.1177/1090198104268683. C. (2008). Gender matters, too: The influences of school racial
Aneshensel, C. S., & Sucoff, C. A. (1996). The neighborhood context discrimination and racial identity on academic engagement
of adolescent mental health. Journal of Health and Social outcomes among African American adolescents. Developmental
Behavior, 37(4), 293–310. Psychology, 44(3), 637–654. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.44.3.637.
Arbuckle, J. L. (2007). Amos 16.0 user’s guide. Spring House, PA: Chinman, M. J., & Linney, J. A. (1998). Toward a model of
Amos Development Corporation. adolescent empowerment: Theoretical and empirical evidence.
Aronowitz, S. (2011). One, two, many Madisons: The war on public The Journal of Primary Prevention, 18(4), 393–413. doi:
sector workers. New Labor Forum, 20(2), 15–21. doi:10.4179/ 10.1023/A:1022691808354.
NLF.202.0000004. Christens, B. D. (2011). Psychological empowerment. In K. Dowding
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of power (pp. 539–540). Thousand Oaks,
American Psychologist, 37(2), 122–147. doi:10.1037/0003- CA: Sage.
066X.37.2.122. Christens, B. D., & Dolan, T. (2011). Interweaving youth develop-
Banyard, V. L., & LaPlant, L. E. (2002). Exploring links between ment, community development, and social change through youth
childhood maltreatment and empowerment. Journal of Commu- organizing. Youth & Society, 43(2), 528–548. doi:10.1177/00441
nity Psychology, 30(6), 687–707. doi:10.1002/jcop.10026. 18X10383647.
Bayer, J. K., Sanson, A. V., & Hemphill, S. A. (2006). Parent Christens, B. D., Peterson, N. A., & Speer, P. W. (2011a). Community
influences on early childhood internalizing difficulties. Journal participation and psychological empowerment: Testing recipro-
of Applied Developmental Psychology, 27, 542–559. doi: cal causality using a cross-lagged panel design and latent
10.1016/j.appdev.2006.08.002. constructs. Health Education & Behavior, 38(4), 339–347. doi:
Benson, P. L., Scales, P. C., Hamilton, S. F., & Sesma, A., Jr. (2006). 10.1177/1090198110372880.
Positive youth development: Theory, research, and applications. Christens, B. D., Speer, P. W., & Peterson, N. A. (2011b). Social class
In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child as moderator of the relationship between (dis)empowering
psychology, vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development processes and psychological empowerment. Journal of Commu-
(6th ed., pp. 894–941). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. nity Psychology, 39(2), 170–182. doi:10.1002/jcop.20425.
Bond, L., Butler, H., Thomas, L., Carlin, J., Glover, S., Bowes, G., Christens, B. D., & Zeldin, S. (in press). Community engagement. In
et al. (2007). Social and school connectedness in early secondary R. J. R. Levesque (Ed.), Encyclopedia of adolescence. New
school as predictors of late teenage substance use, mental health, York: Springer.
and academic outcomes. The Journal of Adolescent Health, Chung, I. J., Hill, K. G., Hawkins, J. D., Gilchrist, L. D., & Nagin, D.
40(4), 357.e9–357.e918. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.10.013. S. (2002). Childhood predictors of offense trajectories. Journal

123
J Youth Adolescence (2012) 41:623–635 633

of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 39(1), 60. doi: Holden, D. J., Crankshaw, E., Nimsch, C., Hinnant, L. W., & Hund,
10.1177/002242780203900103. L. (2004). Quantifying the impact of participation in local
Damon, W. (2004). What is positive youth development? The Annals tobacco control groups on the psychological empowerment of
of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, involved youth. Health Education & Behavior, 31(5), 615–628.
591(1), 13–24. doi:10.1177/0002716203260092. doi:10.1177/1090198104268678.
Diemer, M. A., & Blustein, D. L. (2006). Critical consciousness and Holden, D. J., Evans, W. D., Hinnant, L. W., & Messeri, P. (2005).
career development among urban youth. Journal of Vocational Modeling psychological empowerment among youth involved in
Behavior, 68(2), 220–232. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2005.07.001. local tobacco control efforts. Health Education & Behavior,
DuBois, D. L., & Silverthorn, N. (2005). Natural mentoring 32(2), 264–278. doi:10.1177/1090198104272336.
relationships and adolescent health: Evidence from a national Howard, K. A., Budge, S. L., & McKay, K. M. (2010). Youth exposed
study. American Journal of Public Health, 95(3), 518–524. doi: to violence: The role of protective factors. Journal of Community
10.2105/AJPH.2003.031476. Psychology, 38(1), 63–79. doi:10.1002/jcop.20352.
Dumont, M., & Provost, M. A. (1999). Resilience in adolescents: Hughey, J., Peterson, N. A., Lowe, J. B., & Oprescu, F. (2008).
Protective role of social support, coping strategies, self-esteem, Empowerment and sense of community: Clarifying their
and social activities on experience of stress and depression. relationship in community organizations. Health Education &
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 28(3), 343–363. doi: Behavior, 35(5), 651–663. doi:10.1177/1090198106294896.
10.1023/A:1021637011732. Hurd, N. M., & Zimmerman, M. A. (2010). Natural mentoring
Eccles, J. S., & Barber, B. L. (1999). Student council, volunteering, relationships among adolescent mothers: A study of resilience.
basketball, or marching band: What kind of extracurricular Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20(3), 789–809. doi:
involvement matters? Journal of Adolescent Research, 14(1), 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00660.x.
10–43. doi:10.1177/0743558499141003. Huston, A. C., & Bentley, A. C. (2010). Human development in
Echeverrı́a, S., Diez-Roux, A. V., Shea, S., Borrell, L. N., & Jackson, societal context. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 411–437.
S. (2008). Associations of neighborhood problems and neigh- doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100442.
borhood social cohesion with mental health and health behav- Israel, B. A., Checkoway, B., Schulz, A., & Zimmerman, M. (1994).
iors: The multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis. Health & Place, Health education and community empowerment: Conceptualiz-
14(4), 853–865. doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2008.01.004. ing and measuring perceptions of individual, organizational, and
Ellickson, P., Saner, H., & McGuigan, K. A. (1997). Profiles of community control. Health Education Quarterly, 21(2),
violent youth: Substance use and other concurrent problems. 149–170. doi:10.1177/109019819402100203.
American Journal of Public Health, 87(6), 985–991. doi: Itzhaky, H., & York, A. S. (2000). Sociopolitical control and
10.2105/AJPH.87.6.985. empowerment: An extended replication. Journal of Community
Fergus, S., & Zimmerman, M. A. (2005). Adolescent resilience: A Psychology, 28(4), 407–415. doi:10.1002/1520-6629(200007)
framework for understanding healthy development in the face of 28:4\407:AID-JCOP3[3.0.CO;2-R.
risk. Annual Review of Public Health, 26, 399–419. doi: Itzhaky, H., & York, A. S. (2003). Leadership competence and
10.1146/annurev.publhealth.26.021304.144357. political control: The influential factors. Journal of Community
Fergusson, D. M., Boden, J. M., & Horwood, J. (2009). Tests of Psychology, 31(4), 371–381. doi:10.1002/jcop.10054.
causal links between alcohol abuse or dependence and major Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in
depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 66(3), 260–266. social psychology. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey
Fraser, M. W., Kirby, L. D., & Smokowski, P. R. (2004). Risk and (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed.,
resilience in childhood. In M. W. Fraser (Ed.), Risk and pp. 233–265). New York: Oxford University Press.
resilience in childhood: An ecological perspective (2nd ed., Khalidi, R. (2011). The Arab spring. The Nation, March 21 edition.
pp. 13–66). Washington, DC: NASW. Retrieved from: http://www.thenation.com/article/158991/arab-
Fredericks, J. A., & Eccles, J. S. (2008). Participation in extracur- spring.
ricular activities in the middle school years: Are there develop- Kieffer, C. H. (1984). Citizen empowerment: A developmental
mental benefits for African American and European American perspective. In J. Rappaport, C. Swift, & R. Hess (Eds.), Studies
youth? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37(9), 1029–1043. in empowerment: Steps toward understanding and action (pp.
doi:10.1007/s10964-008-9309-4. 9–36). New York: The Haworth Press.
Garcia-Ramirez, M., Martinez, M. F., Balcazar, F. E., Suarez- Kim, S., Crutchfield, C., Williams, C., & Hepler, N. (1998). Toward a
Balcazar, Y., Albar, M., Domı́nguez, E., et al. (2005). Psycho- new paradigm in substance abuse and other problem behavior
social empowerment and social support factors associated with prevention for youth: Youth development and empowerment
the employment status of immigrant welfare recipients. Journal approach. Journal of Drug Education, 28(1), 1–17.
of Community Psychology, 33(6), 673–690. doi:10.1002/ Kinsman, J. (2011). Democracy rising: Tunisia and Egypt, when
jcop.20072. idealists got it right. Policy Options, 2011(April), 37–43.
Garcia-Reid, P., Reid, R. J., & Peterson, N. A. (2005). School Kirshner, B. (2009). Power in numbers: Youth organizing as a
engagement among Latino youth in an urban middle school context for exploring civic identity. Journal of Research on
context: Valuing the role of social support. Education and Urban Adolescence, 19(3), 414–440. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2009.
Society, 37(3), 257–275. doi:10.1177/0013124505275534. 00601.x.
Ginwright, S., & James, T. (2002). From assets to agents of change: Kohfeldt, D., Chhun, L., Grace, S., & Langhout, R. D. (2011). Youth
Social justice, organizing, and youth development. New Direc- empowerment in context: Exploring tensions in school-based
tions for Youth Development, 96(Winter), 27–46. doi:10.1002/ yPAR. American Journal of Community Psychology, 47(1–2),
yd.25. 28–45. doi:10.1007/s10464-010-9376-z.
Granger, R. C. (2002). Creating the conditions linked to positive Larson, R. W. (2000). Toward a psychology of positive youth
youth development. New Directions for Youth Development, development. American Psychologist, 55(1), 170–183. doi:
2002(95), 149–164. doi:10.1002/yd.20. 10.1037//0003-066X.55.1.170.
Hanafi, S. (2011). Lessons of the jasmine revolution. Al Jazeera Larson, R. W. (2011). Positive development in a disorderly world.
English, January 23. Retrieved from: http://english.aljazeera.net/ Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21(2), 317–334. doi:
indepth/opinion/2011/01/201111985641326468.html. 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00707.x.

123
634 J Youth Adolescence (2012) 41:623–635

Lerner, R. M., Dowling, E. M., & Anderson, P. M. (2003). Positive Prilleltensky, I. (2010). Child wellness and social inclusion: Values
youth development: Thriving as the basis of personhood and for action. American Journal of Community Psychology,
civil society. Applied Developmental Science, 7(3), 172–180. 46(1–2), 238–249. doi:10.1007/s10464-010-9318-9.
doi:10.1207/S1532480XADS0703_8. Rappaport, J. (1981). In praise of paradox: A social policy of
Levenson, H. (1974). Activism and powerful others: Distinctions empowerment over prevention. American Journal of Community
within the concept of internal–external control. Journal of Psychology, 9(1), 1–25. doi:10.1007/BF00919275.
Personality Assessment, 38(4), 377–383. doi:10.1080/00223 Rappaport, J. (1987). Terms of empowerment/exemplars of preven-
891.1974.10119988. tion: Toward a theory for community psychology. American
Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of Journal of Community Psychology, 15(2), 121–148. doi:
resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. 10.1007/BF00919275.
Child Development, 71(3), 543–562. doi:10.1111/1467-8624. Reid, R. J., Garcia-Reid, P., Klein, E., & McDougall, A. (2008).
00164. Violence-related behaviors among Dominican adolescents:
Ma, L., Phelps, E., Lerner, J. V., & Lerner, R. M. (2009). The Examining the influence of alcohol and marijuana use. Journal
development of academic competence among adolescents who of Ethnicity in Substance Abuse, 7(4), 404–427. doi:10.1080/
bully and who are bullied. Journal of Applied Developmental 15332640802508028.
Psychology, 30(5), 628–644. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2009.07.006. Rhodes, J. E., Reddy, R., & Grossman, J. B. (2005). The protective
MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & influence of mentoring on adolescents’ substance use: Direct and
Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation indirect pathways. Applied Developmental Science, 9(1), 31–47.
and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, doi:10.1207/s1532480xads0901_4.
7(1), 83–104. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.83. Rivera, F. I., Guarnaccia, P. J., Mulvaney-Day, N., Lin, J. Y., Torres,
Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in M., & Alegrı́a, M. (2008). Family cohesion and its relationship
development. American Psychologist, 56(3), 227–238. doi: to psychological distress among Latino groups. Hispanic Journal
10.1037//0003-066X.56.3.227. of Behavioral Sciences, 30(3), 357–378. doi:10.1177/
Masten, A. S., & Cicchetti, D. (2010). Developmental cascades. 0739986308318713.
Development and Psychopathology, 22, 491–495. doi:10.1017/ Rogers, J., Morrell, E., & Enyedy, N. (2007). Studying the struggle:
S0954579410000222. Contexts for learning and identity development for urban youth.
Moos, R. (1974). Family environment scale preliminary manual. Palo American Behavioral Scientist, 51(3), 419–443. doi:
Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. 10.1177/0002764207306069.
Nichols, J. (2011). The spirit of Wisconsin. The Nation, March 21 Rosenfeld, L. B., Richman, J. M., & Bowen, G. L. (2000). Social
edition. Retrieved from: http://www.thenation.com/article/1589 support networks and school outcomes: The centrality of the
90/spirit-wisconsin. teacher. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 17(3),
Ozer, E. J., & Schotland, M. (2011). Psychological empowerment 205–226. doi:10.1023/A:1007535930286.
among urban youth: Measure development and relationship to Russell, S. T., Muraco, A., Subramaniam, A., & Laub, C. (2009).
psychosocial functioning. Health Education & Behavior. Pub- Youth empowerment and high school gay-straight alliances.
lished online ahead of print as doi:10.1177/1090198110373734. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38(7), 891–903. doi:
Paschall, M. J., & Hubbard, M. L. (1998). Effects of neighborhood 10.1007/s10964-008-9382-8.
and family stressors on African American male adolescents’ self- Sampson, R. J. (2004). Networks and neighborhoods: The implica-
worth and propensity for violent behavior. Journal of Consulting tions of connectivity for thinking about crime in the modern city.
and Clinical Psychology, 66(5), 825–831. doi:10.1037/0022- In H. McCarthy, P. Miller, & P. Skidmore (Eds.), Network logic:
006X.66.5.825. Who governs in an interconnected world? (pp. 157–166).
Peterson, N. A., Lowe, J. B., Hughey, J., Reid, R. J., Zimmerman, M. London: Demos.
A., & Speer, P. W. (2006). Measuring the intrapersonal Sampson, R. J., Morenoff, J. D., & Raudenbush, S. (2005). Social
component of psychological empowerment: Confirmatory factor anatomy of racial and ethnic disparities in violence. American
analysis of the sociopolitical control scale. American Journal of Journal of Public Health, 95(2), 224–232. doi:10.2105/
Community Psychology, 38(3–4), 287–297. doi:10.1007/s10464- AJPH.2004.037705.
006-9070-3. Sandler, I. (2001). Quality and ecology of adversity as common
Peterson, N. A., Peterson, C. H., Agre, L. A., Christens, B. D., & mechanisms of risk and resilience. American Journal of Com-
Morton, C. M. (2011). Measuring youth empowerment: Valida- munity Psychology, 29(1), 19–61. doi:10.1023/A:100523711
tion of a sociopolitical control scale for youth in an urban 0505.
community context. Journal of Community Psychology, 39(5), Seifer, R., Sameroff, A. J., Baldwin, C. P., & Baldwin, A. (1992).
592–605. doi:10.1002/jcop.20456. Child and family factors that ameliorate risk between 4 and
Peterson, N. A., & Reid, R. J. (2003). Paths to psychological 13 years of age. Journal of the American Academy of Child and
empowerment in an urban community: Sense of community and Adolescent Psychiatry, 31(5), 893–903. doi:10.1097/000045
citizen participation in substance abuse prevention activities. 83-199209000-00018.
Journal of Community Psychology, 31(1), 25–38. doi:10.1002/ Shinn, M., & Yoshikawa, H. (Eds.). (2008). Toward positive youth
jcop.10034. development: Transforming schools and community programs.
Prelow, H. M., Weaver, S. R., & Swenson, R. R. (2006). Competence, New York: Oxford University Press.
self-esteem, and coping efficacy as mediators of ecological risk Shoemaker, A. L. (1980). Construct validity of area-specific self-
and depressive symptoms in urban African American and esteem: The Hare self-esteem scale. Educational and Psycho-
European American youth. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, logical Measurement, 40(2), 495–501. doi:10.1177/00131644
35(4), 506–516. doi:10.1007/s10964-006-9068-z. 8004000231.
Prilleltensky, I. (2008). The role of power in wellness, oppression, Speer, P. W. (2000). Intrapersonal and interactional empowerment:
and liberation: The promise of psychopolitical validity. Journal Implications for theory. Journal of Community Psychology,
of Community Psychology, 36(2), 116–136. doi:10.1002/jcop. 28(1), 51–61. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1520-6629(200001)28:1\51:
20225. AID-JCOP6[3.0.CO;2-6.

123
J Youth Adolescence (2012) 41:623–635 635

Speer, P. W., & Hughey, J. (1996). Mechanisms of empowerment: White, H. R., Loeber, R., Stouthame-Loeber, M., & Farrington, D. P.
Psychological processes for members of power-based commu- (1999). Developmental associations between substance use and
nity organizations. Journal of Community & Applied Social violence. Development and Psychopathology, 11(4), 785–803.
Psychology, 6(3), 177–187. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1298 Wilson, N., Dasho, S., Martin, A. C., Wallerstein, N., Wang, C. C., &
(199608)6:3\177:AID-CASP368[3.0.CO;2-N. Minkler, M. (2007). Engaging young adolescents in social action
Speer, P. W., Jackson, C. B., & Peterson, N. A. (2001). The through photovoice: The Youth Empowerment Strategies (YES!)
relationship between social cohesion and empowerment: Support project. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 27(2), 241–261. doi:
and new implications for theory. Health Education & Behavior, 10.1177/0272431606294834.
28(6), 716–732. doi:10.1177/109019810102800605. Xue, Y., Zimmerman, M. A., & Cunningham, R. (2009). Relationship
Spoth, R. L., Kavanagh, K. A., & Dishion, T. J. (2002). Family- between alcohol use and violent behavior among urban African
centered preventive science: Toward benefits to larger popula- American youths from adolescence to emerging adulthood: A
tions of children, youth, and families. Prevention Science, 3(3), longitudinal study. American Journal of Public Health, 99(11),
145–152. doi:10.1023/A:1019924615322. 2041–2048.
Stevenson, W., Maton, K. I., & Teti, D. M. (1999). Social support, Zeldin, S. (2004). Preventing youth violence through the promotion of
relationship quality, and well-being among pregnant adolescents. community engagement and membership. Journal of Community
Journal of Adolescence, 22(1), 109–121. doi:10.1006/jado. Psychology, 32(5), 623–641. doi:10.1002/jcop.20023.
1998.0204. Zimmerman, M. A. (1990). Toward a theory of learned hopefulness:
Stockdale, S. E., Wells, K. B., Tang, L., Belin, T. R., Zhang, L., & A structural model analysis of participation and empowerment.
Sherbourne, C. D. (2007). The importance of social context: Journal of Research in Personality, 24(1), 71–86. doi:
Neighborhood stressors, stress-buffering mechanisms, and alco- 10.1016/0092-6566(90)90007-S.
hol, drug, and mental health disorders. Social Science and Zimmerman, M. A. (1995). Psychological empowerment: Issues and
Medicine, 65(9), 1867–1881. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2007. illustrations. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23(5),
05.045. 581–599. doi:10.1007/BF02506983.
Stokols, D. (1992). Establishing and maintaining healthy environ- Zimmerman, M. A., Copeland, L. A., Shope, J. T., & Dielman, T. E.
ments: Toward a social ecology of health promotion. American (1997). A longitudinal study of self-esteem: Implications for
Psychologist, 47(1), 6–22. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.47.1.6. adolescent development. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
Swenson, R. R., & Prelow, H. M. (2005). Ethnic identity, self-esteem, 26(2), 117–141. doi:10.1023/A:1024596313925.
and perceived efficacy as mediators of the relation of supportive Zimmerman, M. A., Ramı́rez-Valles, J., & Maton, K. I. (1999).
parenting to psychosocial outcomes among urban adolescents. Resilience among urban African American male adolescents: A
Journal of Adolescence, 28(4), 465–477. doi:10.1016/j.adole study of the protective effects of sociopolitical control on their
scence.2004.09.005. mental health. American Journal of Community Psychology,
Tebes, J. K., Feinn, R., Vanderploeg, J. J., Chinman, M. J., Shepard, 27(6), 733–751. doi:10.1023/A:1022205008237.
J., Brabham, T., et al. (2007). Impact of a positive youth Zimmerman, M. A., Salem, D. A., & Maton, K. I. (1995). Family
development program in urban after-school settings on the structure and psychosocial correlates among urban African-
prevention of adolescent substance use. The Journal of Adoles- American adolescent males. Child Development, 66(6), 1598–
cent Health, 41(3), 239–247. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007. 1613. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1995.tb00954.x.
02.016. Zimmerman, M. A., & Zahniser, J. H. (1991). Refinements of sphere-
Treanor, J. (2011). Portugal edges towards ‘inevitable’ bailout from specific measures of perceived control: Development of a
EU partners. The Guardian, March 22. Retrieved from: http:// sociopolitical control scale. Journal of Community Psychology,
www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/mar/22/portugal-edges-towards- 19(2), 189–204. doi:10.1002/1520-6629(199104)19:2\189:AID-
eu-imf-bailout. JCOP2290190210[3.0.CO;2-6.
Trickett, E. J. (2009). Community psychology: Individuals and
interventions in community context. Annual Review of Psychol-
ogy, 60, 395–419. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163517.
Urban, J. B., Lewin-Bizan, S., & Lerner, R. M. (2009). The role of Author Biographies
neighborhood ecological assets and activity involvement in
youth developmental outcomes: Differential impacts of asset Brian D. Christens PhD, is Assistant Professor of Interdisciplinary
poor and asset rich neighborhoods. Journal of Applied Devel- Studies in Human Ecology at the University of Wisconsin–Madison.
opmental Psychology, 30(5), 601–614. doi:10.1016/j.appdev. His research is focused on participation and empowerment in
2009.07.003. different community and organizational settings, with applications
Vieno, A., Nation, M., Perkins, D. D., Pastore, M., & Santinello, M. to practice in youth development, community development, and
(2010). Social capital, safety concerns, parenting, and early health promotion.
adolescents’ antisocial behavior. Journal of Community Psy-
chology, 38(3), 314–328. doi:10.1002/jcop.20366. N. Andrew Peterson PhD, is an Associate Professor with the School
Watts, R. J., & Flanagan, C. (2007). Pushing the envelope on youth of Social Work at Rutgers University. His research examines the
civic engagement: A developmental and liberation psychology mechanisms through which community organizations promote
perspective. Journal of Community Psychology, 35(6), 779–792. empowerment and community-level change.
doi:10.1002/jcop.20178.
Watts, R. J., Williams, N. C., & Jagers, R. J. (2003). Sociopolitical
development. American Journal of Community Psychology,
31(1/2), 185–194. doi:10.1023/A:1023091024140.

123