Negative Psychological Sense of Community: Development of a Measure and Theoretical Implications

Abstract

are met by each other in the community; and third, the desire to invest and contribute to both the conservation and the innovation of such a collectivity. Research in PSOC has made progress in three directions: the development of evidence-based models and reliable measures, the testing of models and measures across different domains/targets, and the identification of associated outcomes.In terms of theory, the one that has withstood the test of time is the four-component model proposed by McMillan and Chavis (1986), which remains the reference model in the field almost 30 years after its formulation. According to the four-component model, PSOC reflects the concurrent presence of membership (i.e., a sense of belonging that marks the boundary between those who are part of a community and those who are not), mutual influence (i.e., a sense of bearing upon the community and the awareness of being influenced by the community itself), integration and need fulfillment (i.e., expectations about the possibility of having one's needs met by a community), and shared emotional connection (i.e., the feeling of being deeply involved in collective experiences). With few exceptions

Individual and perceived community determinants of sense of community: The role of universalistic values

“…The brief sense of community scale by Peterson, Speer, and McMillan () was used, consistent with the McMillan and Chavis () PSoC model. The scale had been used in previous Italian studies, showing good psychometric properties (Mannarini, Rochira & Talò, ; Mannarini, Talò, Mezzi & Procentese, ; Mannarini et al, ). This 8‐item scale has four response modalities (from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree).…”

“…A brief overview of PSoC research shows that it has developed mainly in four areas: (a) Theory and models (multiple sense of community: Brodsky, Loomis, & Marx, ; negative sense of community: Brodsky, ; Mannarini, Rochira & Talo, ; sense of community responsibility: Nowell & Boyd, ); (b) positive outcomes (well‐being: Mak, Cheung, & Law, ; Obst & Stafurik, ; quality of life and life satisfaction: Gattino, De Piccoli, Fassio, & Rollero, ; Hombrados‐Mendieta, Gómez‐Jacinto, Dominguez‐Fuentes & Garcia‐Leiva, ; active participation: Mannarini et al, ); (c) drawbacks (or negative outcomes, such as prejudice and rejection of diversity: Mannarini, Talò, & Rochira, ; Neal & Neal, ; Townley, Kloos, Green, & Franco, ); and (d) individual and contextual determinants (see detailed references in the next sections).…”

Validation of the Brief Sense of Community Scale among youth of color from an underserved urban community

“…Neighborhood SOC is based in concepts of collective efficacy and neighboring (i.e., sharing neighbors and mutual assistance; Perkins & Long, ) and has been broadly defined as perceived feelings of belongingness and a shared belief that community members will meet one another's needs through these relationships (McMillan & Chavis, ). Scholars agree that neighborhood SOC not only has a positive influence on communities and individuals but also shapes how people participate within and among the collective toward broader social change (Chavis, Hogge, McMillan, & Wandersman, ; Elfassi, Braun‐Lewensohn, Krumer‐Nevo, & Sagy, ; Long & Perkins, ; Mannarini, Rochira, & Talò, ; McMillan & Chavis, ; Peterson, Speer, & McMillan, ; Sarason, ). McMillan and Chavis () defined the following four dimensions to neighborhood SOC: Membership–feeling of belongingness or relatedness to the organization or community. Influence–the feeling of making a difference in the group and mattering as a member. Needs fulfillment–the perception that members will meet one another's needs, and resources will be shared through these relationships. Emotional connection–a shared emotional connection or experience, through history or common places. …”

“…Needs fulfillment is the perception that one's community will meet their needs, which suggests that social credentials and resources are transformed between individuals and groups to both meet needs and fulfill the needs of the broader collective (Elfassi et al., ; Nowell & Boyd, ). Last, shared emotional connection is based on those common experiences shared among individuals and the collective and how these experiences strengthen social ties among members (Mannarini et al., ). As McMillan and Chavis () note, these constructs work together to create and maintain overall neighborhood SOC.…”

“…While the study goals were interesting, in an attempt to tease apart differences in racial groups’ experiences of SOC, these authors found that the SCI was invariant across White non‐Hispanic and Black participants and that SOC loaded onto only a single‐factor solution. Hence, such limitations and varying outcomes have motivated scholars to improve upon the SCI, the measurement of SOC, and its context‐dependent nature (Mannarini et al., ). Measures more recently developed and examined are as follows: Multidimensional Territorial Sense of Community Scale (Prezza, Giuseppina Pacilli, Barbaranelli, & Zampatti, 2009); Italian Sense of Community Scale (Tartaglia, 2006); and Psychological Sense of Community Scale (Jason et al., ); however, the Brief Sense of Community Scale (BSCS) can be identified as the most widely used (Peterson et al., ).…”