Neighborhood Stress and Life Satisfaction: Is there a Relationship for African American Adolescents?

Abstract

This study identified associations between perceived neighborhood stress and adolescents’ perceptions of life satisfaction. African American adolescents aged 13–18 (n=1,658) from four matched, mid-sized cities in the northeastern and southeastern USA, completed a self-report questionnaire using an audio computer-assisted self-interview (ACASI). Analyses examined relationships between perceived neighborhood stress and perceived life satisfaction, while controlling for socioeconomic status (SES). Life satisfaction was found to be related to neighborhood stress for both males and females, with variability in neighborhood stress characteristics and in the magnitude of associations by gender. Further research should identify the particular characteristics of youth and specific aspects of adolescent life satisfaction associated with perceived neighborhood stress to develop community-based and culturally-sensitive quality of life improvement/health promotion programs.

Introduction

Serious scientific concerns regarding the effects of residence in an economically challenged and disordered neighborhood on children and adolescents began with the publication, Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas (Shaw & McKay, 1942). Evolving and more current interests in neighborhood conditions on children and adolescent well-being come from a number of sources. Noteworthy is Wilson’s (1987) documentation of concentrated poverty in urban areas at the neighborhood level during the 1970s and 1980s that redirected the discussion of poverty from the individual to the neighborhood. Associated with the work of Wilson (1987), was the renewed interest among social and, behavioral scientists and urban scholars in community Social Disorganization Theory (Shaw & McKay, 1942) as a model for delinquency and crime, as well as other problem behaviors prevalent in many economically challenged urban neighborhoods (Bursik, 1988; Kornhauser, 1978; Sampson, 1992; Sampson & Groves, 1989; Sampson & Morenoff, 1997). Social Disorganization Theory suggests that neighborhood factors, such as economic deprivation, single parenthood, residential instability, vacant houses and business, crime, substance abuse and ethnic heterogeneity, are of prime importance in explaining behavior through their ability to thwart or promote neighborhood organization (formal and informal institutions), which maintains public order (Shaw & McKay, 1942).

The work in Ecological Systems Theory by Bronfenbrenner (1979) led to the use of contextual frameworks in developmental psychology, which enhanced interest in the study of neighborhood effects on children and adolescents. A human development perspective emphasizes viewing lives in context and the need for researchers to examine the multiple contexts that influence children, adolescents and families (e.g., schools/child care, peers, siblings, parents, neighborhoods, communities), as well as the relationships among these contexts. A concomitant theoretical development was the concept of bidirectional effects and person-context interactions (Bronfenbrenner, 1989). In this regard, not only do contexts influence individuals but also individual characteristics influence or often form, the contexts in which individuals interact (Aber, Gephart, Brooks-Gunn, Connell & Spencer, 1997; Garbarino & Sherman, 1980). Important components for contextual study are the psychological effects of living in an economically challenged, disenfranchised socially disordered neighborhood for adolescents.

Neighborhood disorder refers to a lack of social and physical control over one’s neighborhood surroundings (Perkins & Taylor, 1996), a condition reflected in indices such as noise pollution, public drunkenness, litter, substance abuse, criminal activity, and harassment by police. Perceptions of neighborhood disorder have been linked to a number of adverse self-reported health outcomes, even after controlling for objective measures of socioeconomic status (Feldman & Steptoe, 2004; Steptoe & Feldman, 2001). Challenged quality or “disordered” neighborhoods may endanger residents’ health by undermining their perceived ability to control important events in their everyday lives (Martin-Storey et al., 2012; Weden et al., 2008; Wen et al., 2006). Residents’ ratings of perceived neighborhood disorder are significantly associated with observer-rated neighborhood disorder at moderate levels (O’Neil et al., 2001; Perkins et al., 1992); both residents and observers notice the same manifestations of disorder however the residents’ perceptions embrace an experienced neighborhood not readily apparent to the visiting observer. Self-reported health outcomes and use of health care services have been predicted via perceptions of neighborhood disorder (Martin-Storey et al., 2012).

Social and behavioral scientists have suggested that unfavorable appraisals of personal and environmental resources may undermine health and well-being by frequently elicit negative emotions such as sadness, anxiety, and anger (Gallo & Matthews, 2003; Suls & Bunde, 2005). However a alternative possibility, suggested by Social Action Theory (Ewart, 1991), attributes certain adverse health effects to stress arousing motives that are instigated by challenging interpersonal realities of living in a disordered neighborhood. Economically challenged and threatening environments undermine social relationships and effectuate pursuit of interpersonal control (Conger & Elder, 1994). Striving to influence or control one’s family members, neighbors, or others can create a challenging neighborhood environment that becomes increasingly stressful by provoking hostile social encounters and continuing power struggles (Ewart et al, 2011). Declining SES, associated with increased perceptions of neighborhood disorder (Deng et al., 2006; Feldman & Steptoe, 2004), has been linked to higher levels of interpersonal conflict, spouse abuse, harsh parenting, and relationship and marital dissolution (Aldarondo & Sugarman, 1996; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Social Action Theory proposes that environmentally-induced striving for interpersonal control can foster hyper-vigilant mental states and instigate coercive exchanges that endanger physical and mental health (Ewart, 1991; Ewart, 2011; Ewart et al., 1991; Smith et al., 2007). In this view, perceptions of neighborhood disorder can damage health by arousing stressful motives. Invoked by this hypothesis is its corollary, the implication that neighborhood environments also can increase stress levels by blocking the ability to satisfy motives that the environment arouses. The numerous challenges of living in a disadvantaged and dangerous neighborhood can increase one’s need to exercise social control while also making it difficult to satisfy such striving by wielding social influence or power (Guinote & Vescio, 2010; Keltner et al., 2003). Unfavorable living conditions may increase one’s exposure to denigration, subordination, marginalization, and isolation, and foster negative self-appraisals and feelings of powerlessness (Bullock & Lott, 2010; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Social Action Theory proposes that such appraisals promote states of heightened psychological and physiological arousal against potential threats (Ewart et al., 2004; Tomaka et al., 1993). If frequent or sustained, such states may have damaging long-term health consequences (Miller et al., 2009; Sapolsky, 2005).

Living in a disordered neighborhood and being exposed to community violence and crime are common experiences for urban youth in the USA (Lambert, Nylund-Gibson, Copeland-Linder, & Ialongo, 2010; Voisin & Berringer, 2015) that tend to remain consistent throughout adolescence (Ewart & Suchday, 2002; Furr-Holden et al., 2011). Collectively, these experiences are referred to as neighborhood stress [NS] (Ewart & Suchday, 2002). Neighborhood disorder also refers to markers of physical and social decay (e.g., vacant houses, vacant schools, closed businesses) and exposure to community violence refers to learning about, or witnessing crimes of physical violence (e.g., mugging, stabbing) in one’s neighborhood or against one’s family or friends. Neighborhood stress places adolescents at increased risk for a number of psychological problems, including depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (Margolin & Gordis, 2000).

Gabarino (1995) suggests that risk-taking among youth is the by-product of socially toxic environments that lack developmental assets for youth. Excess opportunities for high-risk behavior (violence, drug abuse and sexual risk-taking) are also more prevalent in disordered environments [Furr-Holden et al., 2011; Lambert et al., 2010; Lang et al., 2010; Valois et al., 1997; Voisin & Berringer, 2015). Increased exposure to social toxins may negatively impact child and adolescent developmental trajectories giving rise to maladaptive coping that persist into adolescence (Furr-Holden et al, 2011).

Overall, NS influences (directly or indirectly) the well-being and LS of children, adolescents and families. However, while evidence confirming that low socioeconomic status (SES) and NS are associated with lower than average levels of well-being among adults (Ewart & Suchday, 2002; Shields, Wheately-Price & Wooden, 2009), evidence linking the social and emotional adjustment (including life satisfaction) of adolescents with the quality of the environment is sparse and equivocal (Proctor, Linley & Maltby, 2009; Wilson, Henery & Peterson, 1997; Wilson & Peterson, 1988).

Life satisfaction (LS) refers to the subjective appraisal of an individual’s quality of life as a whole (Diener, 1984). Life satisfaction is also designed as a global judgment of the degree to which an individual perceives that his or her own aspirations and needs are being met (Diener, Suh, Lucas, & Smith, 1999; Frisch, 2000). Life satisfaction can be understood as the cognitive component of subjective well-being, and involves a cognitive appraisal of the quality of one’s life as a whole (Antaramian, Huebner, Hills & Valois, 2010). Thus, an individual’s subjective well-being reflects their general frequency of positive and negative emotions and their judgment of overall LS (Deiner, Lucas & Oishi, 2002).

Historically, LS research has been focused on adults (Veenhoven, 1998). Recently, however, attention has been paid to the determinants, correlates, and consequences of individual differences in LS among children and adolescents (Gilman & Huebner, 2003; Ben-Arieh, 2008) because global LS of adolescents have been related to a variety of variables, including environmental variables (McCullough, Huebner, & Laughlin, 2000) socioeconomic status (Dew & Huebner, 1994; Huebner, Drane, & Valois, 2000) personality and temperament (Huebner, 1997; Huebner & Alderman, 1994). Life satisfaction has also been found to be related to, but distinct from, traditional measures of mental health (Deiner, Suh, Oishi, Lucas, & Smith, 1999; Huebner, 2004).

Efforts to measure LS have been consistent with the positive mental-health orientation that defines psychological well-being as more than the absence of psychopathological symptoms (Seligman & Csikszentmihaly, 2000; Gilman & Huebner, 2000). That is, an individual can be dissatisfied with life as a result of experiencing undesirable circumstances, yet not display symptoms of psychopathology. Similarly, an individual may be relatively satisfied with their life, but concurrently experience symptomatology (Seligson, Huebner, & Valois, 2003; Antaramian, Huebner, Hills, & Valois, 2010).

Life satisfaction can be employed as an indicator of subjective well-being because it extends beyond momentary affective experiences to include a reflective and evaluative perspective of life in its totality (Veenhoven, 1988; Veenhoven, 2006). Life satisfaction is of particular relevance due to its concurrent and long-term linkages to adaptive outcomes in adolescence, including higher academic efficacy and performance (Diseth, Danielsen, & Samdal, 2012; Ng, Huebner, & Hills, 2015; Suldo, Riley, & Shaffer, 2006), positive sociometric status (Martin, Huebner, & Valois, 2008; You et al., 2008), reduced problem behavior (Lyons, Otis, Huebner, & Hills, 2014; Sun & Shek, 2013), increased student engagement (Lewis, Huebner, Malone, & Valois, 2011) and increased social coping (Saha, Huebner, Hills, Malone & Valois, 2014).

For high school adolescents, lower levels of self-reported LS has been associated with a number of health risk behaviors including violent behaviors (Valois, Zullig, Huebner & Drane, 2001; MacDonald, Piquero, Valois & Zullig, 2005); substance abuse (Zullig, Valois, Huebner, Oeltmann & Drane, 2001; Farrell, Valois & Meyer, 2003); sexual risk taking behaviors (Valois, Zullig, Huebner, Kammermann & Drane, 2002); unhealthy dieting and weight perceptions (Valois, Zullig, Huebner & Drane, 2003); suicide ideation and behaviors (Valois, Zullig, Huebner & Drane, 2004a); reduced physical activity (Valois, Zullig, Huebner & Drane, 2004b); increased peer victimization (Kerr, Valois, Huebner & Drane, 2010); and perceived difficulty of performing HIV/AIDS preventive behaviors (Valois, Kerr, Hennessy, DiClemente et al, 2015).

Noteworthy in the extant adolescent LS literature are the observed differences among race and gender for studies on LS and health risk behaviors (Valois et al., 2001; Zullig et al., 2001; Valois et al., 2002; Valois et al, 2003; Valois et al., 2004a; Valois et al., 2004b; Kerr et al., 2010; Proctor et al., 2009; Valois et al., 2014), youth developmental assets (Paxton et al., 2006; Valois et al., 2009; Valois et al., 2014) and family structures (Zullig et al., 2005a). Life satisfaction for adolescents has also been shown to be associated with different family structures (Zullig, Valois, Huebner & Drane, 2005a), reduced health-related quality of life (Zullig, Valois, Huebner & Drane, 2005), opportunities for adult bonding and developing meaningful neighborhood roles (Paxton, Valois, Huebner & Drane, 2006b), and a number of youth developmental assets (Valois, Zullig, Huebner & Drane, 2009). In consideration of these recent studies, and the emerging use of the dual factor model of mental health for a more comprehensive understanding of adolescent functioning (Antaramian, Huebner, Hills, & Valois, 2010; Kelly, Hills, Huebner, & McQuillin, 2012; Lyons, Huebner, & Hills, 2013), researchers suggest that perceived quality of life/LS is a neglected component of adolescent health assessment, measurement and prevention/self-improvement intervention (Huebner, Valois, Suldo et al, 2004). One component of the neglect in adolescent research is the association between neighborhood stress (NS) and life satisfaction (subjective well-being).

An extensive review of the literature provides only a few studies that examine the relationship between adolescent LS and NS and only one study on LS and adult bonding and adolescents having a meaningful role in the neighborhood. In a study of low-income youth from rural Appalachia in the USA, Wilson and Peterson (1988) examined whether objective indicators of life conditions (e.g., status attainment variables, closeness to one’s childhood home, and community size) and subjective measures of life circumstances (e.g., self-esteem and frustrations regarding limited job opportunities) would predict LS. Data were acquired by questionnaires as part of a longitudinal project on 322 young people in their early twenties. Both subjective and objective conditions of life predicted LS. Although objective attainment variables (i.e., educational and occupational attainment) did not predict LS, financial resources, self-esteem, and proximity to one’s childhood home were positive predictors. Frustrations in regard to limited job opportunities and community size were negative predictors of LS (Wilson & Peterson, 1988).

A study conducted in Australia (Homel & Burns, 1989) examined the relationship between NS, LS, emotions and friendship patterns among children aged 9 to 11. This sample comprised 321 families that included a 9–11 year old child, drawn from 18 neighborhoods in Sydney. In this study, neighborhood social problem score and street-type, and some aspects of housing, predicted emotional and social adjustment. Before and after controls for family composition, social class and culture, children living in commercial streets, particularly in inner-city areas, reported greater feelings of loneliness, dislike of other children and feelings of rejection, worry, fear, anger and unhappiness (reduced LS).

Wilson, Henry and Peterson (1997) reported on results form a longitudinal study of rural adolescents from the Appalachian region. These results suggest that family SES, marital status, community size, perceived attainment in job and life goals, self-esteem, perceived disparity between job aspirations and job opportunities, educational demands, educational aspirations, desired residence and actual residence, desired children and actual number of children, to be predictors of LS among economically challenged adolescents (Wilson et al., 1997).

Shields, Wheatley-Price and Wooden (2009) investigated the empirical association between LS and neighborhood effects using data from the Household, Income and Labor Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey. These researchers utilized empirical models to predict individual differences in overall LS separately for male and female, adolescent and adult study participants. By using the clustered nature of their sample, these researchers observed individuals residing in 488 census collection districts (CDs) to establish the empirical importance of neighborhood stress on LS. Study results suggest that measures of social deprivation and exclusion were negatively correlated with LS and the factor most strongly and positively associated with LS was the extent of neighborly social interaction and support (Shields, Wheatley-Price & Wooden, 2009).

Overall, the extant studies have been conducted with mostly Caucasian adolescents in rural regions of the US and with youth in Australia. Therefore, an important purpose of this study was to determine if perceived LS among African American adolescents is associated with perceived NS in the USA. A second purpose was to determine associations between perceived LS and perceived NS by gender for African American adolescents in this study. This investigation and data analyses were guided by results observed in the general adolescent LS literature (Due & Huebner, 1994; Huebner, Drane & Valois, 2000) and the adolescent LS and risk behavior and developmental asset literature (Valois, 2012; Valois, 2013; Valois, Kerr & Kammermann, 2014) where results varied as a function of gender in each study.

Method

Participants

This study utilized baseline data from the NIMH-funded Project iMPPACS, a multilevel randomized trial for adolescent HIV prevention (Romer, Sznitman, DiClemente, et al., 2009; Hennessy, Romer, Valois, et al., 2013). Participants were 1,658 African American adolescents recruited in two matched northeast (Providence, RI and Syracuse, NY) and two matched southeast U.S. mid-sized cities (Columbia, SC and Macon, GA). The four selected cities are in regions of the U.S. with high rates of sexually transmitted infection (STI) that have similar population sizes and a high concentration of African-American youth living at or below poverty levels. Cities were matched according to these characteristics. All self-identified African-American adolescents age 13 to 18 who were able to speak and read English were eligible to participate. Youth were recruited through direct outreach of young people attending community based organizations that provide recreational, social and education services for African American youth (21%), participant referrals (29%), respondent driven sampling (15%), and referrals from adult community members (14%), school-based social workers (12%), and street outreach by the study team (9%). A detailed report of our experiences working with community partners for Project iMPPACS can be found elsewhere (Vanable, Carey, Bostwick, et al., 2007). Data were collected at baseline, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 36 months. The study utilized a randomized-control design to test the effects of mass media on HIV/STI health risk behavior among African American youth. Of the 2,145 adolescents invited to participate, 1,658 were consented/assented, assessed at baseline, and randomized to a treatment condition (77%). The 23% who did not participate included adolescents who reported having scheduling conflicts, parent/guardian disapproval of the program, or lack of interest in the program and those adolescents who could not be reached to schedule their baseline appointment.

The sample consisted of 60% females with 5% of participants reporting some Latino ethnicity. Mean age of participants was 15.1 years (SD = 1.1). Participants were from lower SES strata with 74% reporting eligibility for free or reduced-price school lunch, a proxy indicator of SES. Additional study sample demographics are presented in Table 1. Only baseline data were utilized for this study.

Table 1:

Sample Demographics

Characteristic	Number of Respondents (n = 1,658)
Age Group
13 years	14 (2.5%)
14 years	575 (34.7%)
15 years	466 (28.2%)
16 years	352 (21.2%)
17 years	220 (13.3%)
18 years	2 (0.1%)
Year in School
7th Grade	54 (3.3%)
8th Grade	247 (14.9%)
9th Grade	572 (34.5%)
10th Grade	429 (25.9%)
11th Grade	233 (14.1%)
12th Grade	96 (5.8%)
Ungraded or Other Grade	13 (0.8%)
I’m not in School	10 (0.6%)
Missing	4 (0.2%)
Sex
Male	667 (40.2%)
Female	990 (59.8%)
Self-Reported Grades (GPA)
Mostly As (90+)	182 (11.0%)
Mostly Bs (80–89)	781 (47.1%)
Mostly Cs (70–79)	555 (33.5%)
Mostly Ds (60–69)	96 (5.8%)
Mostly Fs (Below 60)	30 (1.8%)
Missing	14 (0.8%)
Eligibility for Free/Reduced Price Lunch at School (SES)
Yes	1,215 (73.4%)
No	260 (15.7%)
Unsure	168 (10.1%)
Missing	14 (0.8%)

Data Collection

Study protocols were approved by the Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) at the respective universities in the four study sites. After acquiring parental consent and youth assent, participants completed an audio computer-assisted self-interview (ACASI) on a laptop computer. The ACASI gathered data on participant’s demographic characteristics and NS, LS, and intervention-related knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy and behavior. ACASI procedures were preferred to optimize data quality when assessing data of a sensitive and private nature (Murphy, Durako & Muenz, 2000; Ghanem, Hutton, Zenilman & Zimba, 2005; Morrison-Beedy, Carey & Xin, 2006) and to minimize social desirability biases (Turner, Ku & Rogers, 1998; Des, Paone & Milliken, 1999). The auditory component of the ACASI, which recites question and response options, reduces literacy-related challenges (Ghanem, Hutton, Zenilman & Zimba, 2005). The ACASI took approximately 45 minutes to complete and study participants were compensated $30 for their time and effort.

Neighborhood Stress

Perceived NS has often been assumed to reflect objective quality (Wen, Hawkley, & Cacioppo, 2006). Empirically, independently rated neighborhood disorder predicts subjective perceptions of neighborhood quality (Ellaway, Macintyre, & Kearns, 2001) and neighborhood of residence has been associated with perceptions of neighborhood problems in an area (Sampson & Raudenbush, 2004). Other studies have utilized subjective assessments of neighborhood quality as an indicator of neighborhood disorder in exploring LS (Wilson et al., 1997) and perceived neighborhood quality impacts life satisfaction through direct and indirect pathways (Shields et al., 2009). In the current study, perceived NS was assessed using 10 items from the Neighborhood Stress Index (Ewart & Suchday, 2002). This validated scale assesses multiple dimensions of neighborhood stress, including experiences of crime, perpetuation of violence, and prevalence of vacant or abandoned buildings over the past year. Response options for crime and violence behavior questions were 1 (Never), 2 (Once), 3 (A Few Times), and 4 (Often). Response options for the perceived prevalence of vacant or abandoned buildings were 1 (None), 2 (Some), 3 (About Half), and 4 (Most). Possible scores ranged from 10 to 40. This scale is internally consistent at α = .85 (Ewart & Suchday, 2002). Neighborhood quality was dichotomized into “high” and “low” categories. Participants with scores ≤ 20 reflected relatively lower neighborhood stress, and those > 20 reflected relatively higher neighborhood stress.

Instrumentation

Brief Multidimensional Students’ Life Satisfaction Scale (BMSLSS)

The BMSLSS is based on 5 domains (satisfaction with: family, friends, school, self, living environment) from the Multidimensional Students’ Life Satisfaction Scale (Huebner, 1991; Huebner, 1994; Huebner et al., 1998; Huebner, Seligson, Valois & Suldo, 2006). The BMSLSS also contains a sixth, global, overall LS item. The BMSLSS has been validated for use with children/adolescents aged 8 to 18 (Seligson et al., 2005; Huebner et al., 2006) with internal consistency estimates ranging from .75 to .85 in studies with ethnically diverse adolescents (Valois et al., 2009; Kerr et al., 2010; Valois, 2012; Valois, 2013; Valois et al, 2014;) and African American adolescents (Valois, Kerr, Hennessy, et al., 2015; Valois, Zullig, Brown et al., 2017). The scale contained one item for each domain: “I would describe my satisfaction with my family life as;” “I would describe my satisfaction with my friendships as,” and so forth. Seven response options from the Terrible-Delighted response sequence (Andrews & Withey, 1976) were used for each question: 1 (Terrible); 2 (Unhappy); 3 (Mostly Dissatisfied); 4 (Mixed: about equally Satisfied and Dissatisfied); 5 (Mostly Satisfied); 6 (Pleased); and 7 (Delighted). Internal consistency for this sample was satisfactory (α= .83).

Data Analysis

Previous research utilizing correlational analysis indicated that the six variables for LS could be combined as a composite indicator (Valois et al., 2001; Valois et al., 2009; Kerr et al., 2010). After pooling the global variable with five other LS variables, all six were collapsed into one quasi-continuous dependent variable ranging in score from 6 (1×6) to 42 (7×6). All analyses were performed using Statistical Analysis System, PC SAS 9.4 statistical package (Statistical Analysis System, 2006). Lower LS scores indicated reduced LS and higher scores indicated increased LS. The pooled variable was divided into three outcome levels, dissatisfied, mixed, and satisfied. Mean Satisfaction Scores (MSS) ranging from 6–27 were classified as dissatisfied; MSS of 28–34 were mixed and MSS of 35 and higher were satisfied.

A polychotomous logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the likelihood of occurrence between variables of interest. Odds ratios (and 95% confidence intervals) were calculated to obtain the probability of being classified as dissatisfied (low LS) if a study participant self-reported experiences of neighborhood stress (high NS). Logistic regression was utilized due to its ability to use aggregated independent variables to estimate the likelihood of decreased LS, while controlling for other variables. Logistic regression analyses controlled for age and SES (eligibility for a free or reduced price school lunch). Participants were analyzed according to gender groups (male or female). These groups were examined at the “dissatisfied” level of response.

Responses to the individual NS variables were dichotomized as to whether or not adolescents had experienced any form of neighborhood stress (never/once vs. a few times/often) in the past 12 months for the ten variables. The summed NS variable was dichotomized by score (10–20 vs. 21–40). Adolescents who had not experienced NS were used as a referent group. The independent variables for this study were the NS variables that respondents experienced (over the past year): A family member was robbed or mugged; I heard neighbors complaining about crime in our neighborhood; A family member, friend or acquaintance was stabbed or shot; I saw strangers who were drunk or high hanging out near my home; There was a gang fight near my home; I saw people dealing drugs near my home; I heard adults arguing loudly on my street; A family member was attacked or beaten; A family member was stopped and questioned by the police; and How many houses or buildings in your neighborhood were vacant or unoccupied during the past year. Table 2 contains frequency and percent data for the neighborhood stress variables by gender.

Table 2:

Life Satisfaction Frequency and Percent by Level and Gender

	Low	Medium	High
Male	104(16%)	229 (35%)	314 (49%)
Female	193 (20%)	350 (36%)	419 (44%)

Results

Demographic characteristics are reported in Table 1. The sample was approximately 60% female and 40% male. (The parent project was an HIV prevention project for African American adolescents, and intentionally oversampled females owing to their increased risk for STIs and teen pregnancy; Romer et al., 2009; Hennessy et al., 2013.) Mean age was approximately 15 years old, and 73% of participants qualified for free or reduced price school lunch with an additional 10% reporting unsure (eligibility for a free/reduced price lunch is a proxy measure for SES).

LS data are summarized in Table 2 by gender. Females reported a higher percentage of low LS, males and females were evenly matched on medium LS, and males reported a greater percentage of high LS compared to females. These data are consistent with previous correlational studies of adolescent self-reports of LS (Valois et al, 2002; Valois et al, 2003; Valois et al, 2004a;Valois et al 2004b; Valois et al, 2015).

Neighborhood Stress data are presented in Table 3 by high and low prevalence and by gender. For eight out of ten NS characteristics the low NS category is higher in prevalence compared to the high NS category, with the exception of “Adults Arguing Loudly on My Street” and “Family Member Stopped and Questioned by the Police.” In addition, across all NS characteristics, Female participants reported a higher percentage for both high and low prevalence categories. The only exception is for “Family Member was Attacked or Beaten” with males and females both at 7% for the high prevalence category.

Table 3:

Neighborhood Stress Characteristics reported by High and Low Prevalence and by Gender^*

Characteristic*	Male	Female
Family member/friend robbed or mugged
Low	546 (34%)	844 (52%)
High	101 (6%)	118 (7%)
Heard neighbors complaining about crime in our neighborhood Low	383 (24%)	569 (35%)
High	264 (16%)	393 (24%)
Family member, friend or acquaintance was stabbed or shot
Low	437 (27%)	655 (41%)
High	210 (13%)	297 (18%)
Saw strangers who were drunk or high hanging out near my home
Low	363 (23%)	572 (36%)
High	284 (18%)	390 (24%)
There was a gang fight near my home
Low	435 (27%)	693 (43%)
High	212 (13%)	269 (17%)
Saw people dealing drugs near my home
Low	366 (23%)	582 (36%)
High	281 (17%)	380 (24%)
Heard adults arguing loudly on my street
Low	306 (19%)	473 (29%)
High	341 (21%)	489 (30%)
Family member was attacked or beaten
Low	539 (34%)	851 (53%)
High	108 (7%)	111 (7%)
Family member was stopped and questioned by the police
Low	345 (21%)	640 (40%)
High	302 (19%)	322 (20%)
Houses/Buildings in neighborhood were vacant or unoccupied
Low	580 (36%)	876 (54%)
High	67 (4%)	86 (5%)

^*Neighborhood stress characteristics reported on a past year (12 month) basis.

Neighborhood Stress and Life Dissatisfaction

Males.

For males there was a significant negative relationship between lower levels of LS and high level of reporting that a family member or friend was robbed or mugged (OR=2.47); a family member, friend or acquaintance was stabbed or shot (OR=2.06); having a gang fight near their home (OR=1.76); having a family member attacked or beaten (OR=2.42); and having a family member stopped and questioned by the police (OR=1.64).

Males who reported a high level of having a family member or friend being robbed or mugged were 2.47 times more likely to report dissatisfaction with life compared to those reporting a low level for this neighborhood stress characteristic. For having a family member, friend or acquaintance being stabbed or shot, males who reported a high level for this neighborhood characteristic were 2.06 times more likely to report a low level of LS. This pattern continued for males who reported a high level of family member being attacked or beaten with the likelihood being 2.42 times greater for dissatisfaction with life. Males who reported a high level of a gang fight being near their home and having houses/buildings in the neighborhood as vacant/unoccupied were 1.76 and 1.64 times more likely to also report dissatisfaction with life respectfully, compared to those African American male adolescents reporting a low level for these NS characteristics. These data are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4:

Associated Perceptions of Neighborhood Stress by Gender Groups at the Dissatisfied Level of Life Satisfaction

Characteristic	Odds Ratio and 95% Confidence Interval
	Males	Females
Family member/friend robbed or mugged	2.47** (1.40–4.33)	3.64*** (2.13–6.22)
Heard neighbors complaining about crime in our neighborhood	1.01 (0.63–1.67)	2.20*** (1.55–3.12)
Family member, friend or acquaintance was stabbed or shot	2.06** (1.29–3.29)	2.32*** (1.61–3.34)
Saw strangers who were drunk or high hanging out near my home	1.25 (0.80–1.97)	3.25*** (2.28–4.63)
There was a gang fight near my home	1.76* (1.10–2.81)	3.10*** (2.12–4.54)
Saw people dealing drugs near my home	1.28 (0.81–2.00)	2.61*** (1.83–3.71)
Heard adults arguing loudly on my street	1.23 (0.79–1.92)	2.94*** (2.05–4.22)
Family member was attacked or beaten	2.42** (1.37–4.28)	3.54*** (2.07–6.08)
Family member was stopped and questioned by the police	1.64* (1.05–2.58)	1.78** (1.24–2.55)
Houses/Buildings in neighborhood were vacant or unoccupied	1.67 (0.87–3.20)	2.00** (1.18–3.39)
#Total Neighborhood Stress x Total Life Satisfaction	1.74* (1.11–2.72)	3.34*** (2.33–4.79)

^*p<.05

^**p<.005

^***p<.0005

^****p<.0001

^#Overall, higher levels of NS were significantly associated with lower levels of LS.

Females.

For females there was a significant negative relationship between lower levels of LS and a high level of reporting that a family member or friend was robbed or mugged (OR=3.64); hearing neighbors complaining about crime in their neighborhood (OR=2.20); a family member, friend or acquaintance was stabbed or shot (OR=2.32); seeing strangers drunk or high near their homes (OR=3.25); having a gang fight near their home (OR=3.10); seeing people deal drugs near their homes (OR=2.61); hearing adults arguing loudly on my street (OR=2.94); having a family member attacked or beaten (OR=3.54); and having a family member stopped and questioned by the police (OR=1.78); and having houses/buildings in their neighborhood vacant and unoccupied (OR=2.00).

Females who reported a high level of having a family member or friend robbed or mugged in their neighborhood were 3.64 times more likely to report dissatisfaction with life compared to those reporting a low level for this neighborhood stress characteristic. For having a family member, friend or acquaintance being stabbed or shot, females who reported a high level for this neighborhood stress characteristic were 2.32 times more likely to report a low level of LS, 3.54 times more likely to report low LS if a family member had been attacked or beaten multiple times and 3.10 times more likely to report low LS if they experienced high levels of gang fights near their home. Females who reported a high level of hearing neighbors complaining about crime in their neighborhood were 2.20 times more likely to report dissatisfaction with life compared to those reporting a low level for this neighborhood stress characteristic. For observing strangers drunk or high hanging out near their homes, females who reported a high level for this neighborhood stress characteristic were 3.25 times more likely to report a low level of LS, 2.16 times more likely to report low LS if they saw people dealing drugs near their home, 2.94 times more likely to report LS if they heard adults arguing loudly on their street, 1.78 times more likely to report low LS if their family member was stopped and questioned by the police, and 2.00 times more likely to report low LS if multiple houses/buildings in their neighborhood were vacant or unoccupied compared to those reporting a low level for this neighborhood stress characteristics. These data are summarized in Table 4.

Overall Neighborhood Stress and Life Satisfaction

For female adolescents there was a significant negative relationship between lower levels of LS and a high level of NS (OR=3.34). From an overall neighborhood stress perspective, females who reported a high level of NS were 3.34 times more likely to report dissatisfaction with life compared to those reporting a low level of NS.

For male adolescents there was a significant negative relationship between lower levels of LS and a high level of NS (OR=1.74). From an overall neighborhood stress perspective, males who reported a high level of NS were 1.74 times more likely to report dissatisfaction with life compared to those reporting a low level of NS. These data are summarized in Table 4.

Discussion

Results indicate that a substantial number of African American adolescents report dissatisfaction with their lives (Table 2), and that they are experiencing high levels of NS (Table 3). Most importantly, this study demonstrated a meaningful linkage between two distinct adolescent health research literatures: the NS (level of neighborhood disorder) and quality-of-life (LS). Research efforts bridging the two areas have been scarce; however, we observed significant relationships between self-reported LS and NS (Table 4). Furthermore, this study demonstrated the importance of a contextual factor as a moderator of the relationships between LS and specific characteristics of NS. That is, the nature and magnitude of the relationship between NS and LS was significantly influenced by participant gender for African American adolescents in this study.

Objectives for this study were to examine associations between African American adolescents’ perceived LS and their perceptions of NS, and to determine whether or not these potential associations differed by gender, while controlling for SES. Results identified statistically significant associations between perceived LS and all ten NS variables with all of these associations influenced by gender. Data in Table 2 note that females reported a higher percentage of low LS while males reported a higher percentage of high LS. Data in Table 3 depict a trend where female percentages for high levels of NS charactersitics are consistently higher than those of males. In addition, the data summarized in Table 4 portray a consistent pattern of increased Odds Ratios (with 95% CIs) for females markedly greater than males for associatons between low LS and high prevalence of NH stress.

Review of the adolescent life satisfaction literature depicts mixed results for gender differences. Large scale studies of life satisfaction and various risk behaviors and developmental assets show mixed results by gender for African American adolescents (Proctor et al, 2009). For example, state level cross-sectional studies using the CDC Youth Risk Behavior Survey to investigate the relationship between LS and violence behaviors (Valois et al, 2001), substance abuse (Valois et al, 2001), sexual risk-taking behaviors (Valois et al, 2002), dieting and perceptions of body weight (Valois et al, 2003), suicide ideation and behaviors (Valois et al, 2004) and reduced physical activy behaviors (Valois et al, 2004), family structure (Zullig et al, 2005) and health related quality of life (Zullig et al, 2005) found African American males reporting higher levels of life satisfaction compared to African American females. To the contray, a large cross-sectional study of LS and youth developmental assets in a large school district in a southern state found African American females reporting higher levels of life satisfaction compared to African American males (Valois et al, 2009). Two studies investigating the relationship between LS and peer victimization among high school adolescents in a southern state (Kerr et al, 2010) and among younger adolescents (Valois et al, 2012) in large school districts found African American females reporting higher levels of LS compared to African American males.

Examination of the adolescent neighborhood stress literature depicts mixed results for gender differences. Assari, Smith, Caldwell, et al (2015) found gender differences in the role of perceived neighborhood stress/safety. Following 513 older adolescents (235 males and 278 females) from age 20–23, these researchers found that an increase in perceived neighborhood stress (fear) was associated with an increase in depressive symptoms among males but not females. The Moving to Opportunity (MTO) study determined that the benefits associated with change in neighborhood is stronger for adolescent females than for males (Osypuk, Tchetgen, Acevedo-Garcia, et al, 2012). Clampet-Lundquist et et (2011) found that moving to low-poverty neighborhoods lowered the risk behavior of adolescent females but not for males. Daily routines, fitting in with neighborhood norms, neighborhood navigation strategies, interactions with peers, friendship making, and distance from father figures were noted as potential explanatory factors that may explain why the benefits associated with moving to a better neighborhood is stronger for adolescent females than for adolescent males.

One possible explanation for the gender differences in this study is fear of neighborhood. This would be consistent with findings reported by Gonçalves, González, Araújo et al. (2010), who studied associations between quality of life and gender, maternal education at birth, and changes in socioeconomic position in their longitudinal sample of 5,249 early adolescents. They found that fear of neighborhood was more prevalent in females, perhaps because females are more susceptible to, or bothered by, violence (Gonçalves, González, Araújo et al., 2010). In the current study, females reported a greater sense of community (emotional commitment) which appears to increase stress levels and fear of neighborhood (Zani, Cicognana & Albanesi, 2001). The relationship between sense of community and fear of crime (Zani et al., 2001), suggests that a stronger emotional investment in the community might lead to a more critical attitude towards what happens within it, and may possibly become a source of unsatisfaction and stress when ones’ expectations are not met. It is also possible that adolescents may become desensitized to effects of their neighborhood (Morgan, Vera, Gonzales et al., 2011). In addition, being desensitized or disconnected from community (i.e., not perceiving the negativity in one’s environment) may serve a protective function for adolescents (Brodsky, 1996) and this dynamic may vary by gender, where males are more emotionally desensitized/disconnected from a stressed neighborhood environment (Morgan, Vera, Gonzales et al., 2011) however this area is in need of further research.

NS places youth at increased risk for a number of psychological problems, including depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (Margolin & Gordis, 2000). NS is also a risk factor for increased health-risk behaviors among adolescents (Albus, Weist, Perez-Smith, 2004; Voisin et al., 2007). Increased levels of adolescent health risk behaviors, in particular, sexual risk-taking (Valois, Zullig, Huebner, Kammermann et al., 2002), substance abuse (Zullig, Valois, Huebner, Oeltmann et al., 2001), peer victimization (Kerr, Valois, Huebner, & Drane, 2010), violence and aggression (Valois, Zullig, Huebner & Drane, 2001), suicide and suicide ideation (Valois, Zullig, Huebner & Drane, 2004), and others (Valois, 2012) are associated with low levels of LS and lower levels of emotional self-efficacy (Hessler & Fainsibler-Katz, 2010; Valois, Zullig, Kammermann & Kershner, 2013; Valois, Zullig & Hunter, 2014; Zullig, Teoli, Valois, 2014; Valois, Zullig & Revels, 2017).

Positive psychology may play a key role in the identification of protective factors that prevent youth from developing psychopathology, reduce risk factors, build resiliency, and increase life satisfaction (Greenburg et al., 2001). The Search Institute postulates that youth developmental assets (YDA) build resiliency and thriving in adolescents (Leffert et al., 1998; Scales et al., 2000). Elements of empowerment, such as bonding to positive adults and bonding to the community, are thought to provide youth with positive traits, positive labels, and in general, a positive identity (Erickson, 1968; Bem, 1978; Rosenburg, 1998). The Search Institute found these aspects of empowerment to be predictive of adolescent thriving, school success, helping others, delaying gratification, overcoming adversity, valuing diversity, and maintaining good health habits (Scales et al., 2000). Paxton, Valois, Huebner et al (2006) investigated the relationship between adolescent LS and the external (YDA) of bonding to positive adults and developing meaningful roles in the neighborhood using the CDC Middle School Youth Risk Behavior Survey in a mostly rural southern state in the USA. In particular, Paxton et al (2006) asked adolescents to rank on a five-point Likert scale (strongly agree to strongly disagree): My neighborhood involves youth in important decisions; I am given lots of chances to make my neighborhood better; I am given chances to work with other young people and adults in my neighborhood to make it better; Young people of my age are able to make a difference in my neighborhood; and If I feel strongly about an issue, I would talk to people in power (such as mayor, school board, city council, etc) about my opinion. After adjusting for SES and family structure, differential associations were determined between adolescent LS and bonding to adults/developing meaningful roles in the neighborhood by four race-gender groups. Opportunities for adult bonding and having meaningful roles in the neighborhood related to increased LS more strongly for Caucasian students than African-American students. Post-Hoc analyses suggest that the explanation for these differential relationships by race and gender may involve SES. Socioeconomic status is related to family structure, marital disruption (Larson et al 1995), parent education (Zill et al., 1995; Zill, 1996), personal responsibility (Haskins, 2010), job skills, job opportunities and job security, among other complex dynamics (Bartick, 2000; Smith et al., 1992).

Limitations

The findings of this study should be interpreted in light of its limitations. First, despite recruitment from four midsized cities in two geographical regions of the U.S., the sample may not be representative of the entire population of African American adolescents. Second, we do not know whether our findings are specific to African Americans as our sample did not include youth from other racial backgrounds. Future studies should examine whether results generalize to other racial and ethnic groups or those from other SES levels. Third, additional indicators of SES would have provided a more precise estimation of participants’ SES. However, eligibility for the free/reduced-price school lunch program has been correlated with other indicators of SES (Scarinci et al., 2002). Fourth, the data were cross-sectional, limiting causal inference. Finally, the data are from a single source, which could lead to shared method and source variance bias. Nonetheless, data were collected using ACASI, known to be reliable among adolescents and demonstrate decreased socially desirable responding for sensitive topics (Romer et al., 1997).

Study strengths include the large sample (n=1,658) for data analysis; data collection from adolescents via ACASI; the sampling technique; the reliability of the LS and NS scales; the number and types of NS variables used; and the stratified data analysis by gender.

Conclusion

Results have implications for the design of interventions to improve the LS, and reduce NS for adolescents, in particular, the use of a theoretical framework to guide development and implementation. For example, Proctor et al. (2011) used a positive youth development approach with a focus on Values-In-Action – Inventory of Character Strengths (Peterson, 2006; Peterson & Seligman, 2004). Froth (2008) used a positive affect/gratitude framework and Marques et al. (2011) utilized Snyder’s (2002; 2003) Hope Theory to improve LS and well-being of adolescents. Suldo et al. (2014) used Seligman’s (2002; 2005) framework for happiness and a combination of intervention components for improvement from previous subjective well-being/LS intervention studies (Marques et al., 2011; Rashid & Anjum, 2008; Proctor et al., 2011; Suldo et al., 2014; Froh et al., 2008). For school-based interventions for improving LS and reducing neighborhood stress, an ecological model (Huebner et al., 2004), a coordinated school health model (Valois & Hoyle, 2000), a social-emotional learning model (Payton, Wardlaw, Graczik et al., 2000) or a healthy school community framework could be utilized (Valois, Lewallen, Slade & Tasco, 2015; Valois, Slade & Ashford, 2011).

Interventions to improve LS should be adaptive and assist adolescents to reach goals, cope with life challenges, manage stress for effective problem solving, discern what others feel and to respond sympathetically as a situation is presented, and recognize how communication and self-presentation affect relationships (Buckley et al., 2003). More importantly, in regard to effective learning for improved LS is skill development to the degree where an adolescent can begin to trust their ability to reach their goals when faced with social and neighborhood stress when interacting with others (Buckley et al., 2003; Halberstadt et al., 2001; Saarni, 1999; Saarni et al., 1998).

Community and school-based interventions to improve LS should began early in the teen years, focus on life skill development and be culturally sensitive and developmentally appropriate. Adolescent NS reduction intervention research should consider enhancing the perceived ability in performing safer, responsible and preventive behaviors for male and female adolescents of all racial/ethnic backgrounds. These findings suggest that upstream interventions designed to improve neighborhood social and physical conditions as well as proximal interventions focused on a reduction in adolescent health risk behavior and an increase in LS, may promote well-being.

Abbreviations:

LS

Life Satisfaction

NS

Neighborhood Stress

SES

Socio-Economic Status

ACASI

Audio Computer Assisted Self-Interview