Building Well-Being: Neighbourhood Flourishing and Approaches for Participatory Urban Design Intervention

Anderson, Jamie; Baldwin, Cathy

doi:10.1007/978-94-024-0878-2_17

Cited by 9 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…See Baldwin and Rawstorne (2019) for a description of the methodology behind the psychosocial model. The methodology proposed here has four steps: 1) a public information campaign; 2) asset-based community development workshops; 3) a questionnaire survey, and 4) community feedback and refinement workshops.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here we offer a summary of the model. A full explanation is available in Baldwin and Rawstorne (2019).…”

Section: The Psychosocial Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When a person first learns about a potential risk to their health, e.g. a proposed nuclear power station, their response is shaped by two factors internal to the human brain: 1) personality traits/dispositions (optimism/pessimism), and 2) their immediate psychological response to the specific risk, based on a combination of deliberative, affective and experiential psychological processes (see Baldwin and Rawstorne 2019). 3 These two internal factors mediate understandings of risk, which are then moderated by three categories of social and personal factors 1) personal experience, 2) information, and 3) contextual factors, e.g.…”

Section: How Does the Model Work?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is to prevent adverse incidental psychosocial health and well-being effects from occurring as a result of the survey's inquiry by using positive social relations cultivated during workshops as a buffer to cushion any after-effects of thinking and talking about challenging topics. It is also to gather reliable qualitative data on the public understanding of risk; narrow down a pre-existing list of potential external influences on public understandings to those which are locally pertinentas compiled from our literature review (see Baldwin and Rawstorne 2019); and as regards one of those influences -local socio-cultural factors that may impact on residents' understandings within affected geographic areasto identify relevant ones.…”

Section: Step 1: Conduct a Public Information Campaignmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Public understanding of risk 1 is a determinant of community mental and physical health and well-being (Birley 2015). We previously published a new model (Baldwin and Rawstorne 2019) that captures the psychosocial and socio-cultural influences on the psychological process by which people form, develop and change dynamic understandings of risk that inform their attitude towards a development planning proposal, with reference to a developed body of literature on nuclear reactors and waste facilities. These are generally identified as conjuring up the highest levels of 'fear and dread' of all the public risks analysed (Taylor 2012, p. 9).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Measuring the Impact of Public Understandings of Risk from Urban and Industrial Development on Community Psychosocial Well-Being: a Mixed Methods Strategy

Baldwin

Cave²,

Rawstorne

2019

Int. Journal of Com. WB

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the science of well-being moves towards an understanding of the influence of social experiences shared by many on individual and group-level well-being ('community well-being'), a new approach to measuring well-being is required. It needs to bridge the contextually-specific social experiences best uncovered by social research methods, and psychological diagnoses made using conventional psychometric scales and diagnostic interviews. We build on our previous work on a new psychosocial model of a major influence on contemporary community well-being, the process by which people form, maintain and change their understandings of risk from urban and industrial projects, and any subsequent effects on individual psychosocial well-being. We utilise this model, and propose a mixed qualitative and quantitative methodology to argue for; 1) the incorporation of the emic (subject's) perspective in the conceptual underpinnings of measurement scales; and 2) the synthesis of quantitative and qualitative assessments of well-being. This gives validity and contextual precision to scales which measure experiences of well-being that are geographically and socio-culturally-located. The resulting data offers both context of scale, and depth of insight. Additionally, our proposition combines theories and methods from psychology, social anthropology, sociology, social epidemiology, public health and community development. This evinces the importance of drawing on broad ranging perspectives to develop tools which capture the complex and multi-dimension nature of well-being -where psychological responses are shaped by collective social experiences.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here we offer a summary of the model. A full explanation is available in Baldwin and Rawstorne (2019).…”

Section: The Psychosocial Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: How Does the Model Work?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Step 1: Conduct a Public Information Campaignmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%