Neighborhood Connectedness: Risk or Protection for Urban, Ethnically Diverse Adolescents?

Neighborhood research consistently shows that living in disadvantaged neighborhoods is associated with an increased likelihood of problem behavior and school problems among youth. Inherent in these investigations is a deficit model. Few studies focus on perceived positive neighborhood characteristics as distinct from neighborhood disadvantage. With a strengths-based perspective, identification of neighborhood assets that protect youth despite suboptimal circumstances may highlight targets for intervention. One possible asset is neighborhood connection.

Connection—feeling supported, respected, and safe as well as belonging and attachment—to family, school, and/or neighborhood is an important part of adolescents’ psychological well-being and healthy development. Youth connected to key contexts show less participation in deviant acts and better academic performance. Relatively few studies have examined the unique association between perceived neighborhood connectedness and youth behavior. The present study examines the degree to which neighborhood connectedness is associated with adolescents’ grades and deviance, after adjusting for neighborhood disadvantage.

Data were drawn from the Understanding Families, Adolescents, and Neighborhoods in Context Study (FAN-C), a mixed method study that includes adolescents and parents from 5 neighborhoods in a northeastern city of USA. Objective census neighborhood data and survey and focus group data from parents and adolescent were collected. Diverse adolescents (n = 121; 63% female) aged 11-17 years old (Mean = 13.31, sd = 1.86) were recruited from community agencies and schools. They self-identified as African American (71%), White (3%), Latino (11%) and other (15%). On average, youth lived in neighborhoods where 34% of the residents were below the federal poverty level.  Youth engaged in 1.04 (sd  = 1.41) deviant behavior and reported mostly “B” grades (Mean =3.09, sd =1.33).

Preliminary analyses showed that adolescents were somewhat connected (Mean = 2.60, sd = .79) to their neighborhoods. Unexpectedly, correlations indicated that neighborhood connectedness was marginally associated with self-reported grades (r = -0.15, p <.10), suggesting that those youth who were more connected to their neighborhoods reported lower grades. Neighborhood connectedness was unrelated to deviant behavior. Regression analyses showed a similar pattern, after adjusting for neighborhood disadvantage. Future analyses will explore predictors of neighborhood connectedness and whether neighborhood disadvantage moderates the association between neighborhood connectedness and youth outcomes. Preliminary findings suggest unpacking neighborhood connectedness’ relation to youth well-being and its viability as an intervention component.