↓ Skip to main content

Social Cohesion and Self‐Rated Health: The Moderating Effect of Neighborhood Physical Disorder

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Community Psychology, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
Title
Social Cohesion and Self‐Rated Health: The Moderating Effect of Neighborhood Physical Disorder
Published in
American Journal of Community Psychology, September 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10464-013-9595-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eileen E. S. Bjornstrom, Margaret L. Ralston, Danielle C. Kuhl

Abstract

Using data from the Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey and its companion datasets, we examined how neighborhood disorder, perceived danger and both individually perceived and contextually measured neighborhood social cohesion are associated with self-rated health. Results indicate that neighborhood disorder is negatively associated with health and the relationship is explained by perceived cohesion and danger, which are both also significant predictors of health. Further, individually perceived cohesion emerges as a more important explanation of self-rated health than neighborhood-level social cohesion. Finally, neighborhood disorder and perceived cohesion interact to influence health, such that cohesion is especially beneficial when residents live in neighborhoods characterized by low to moderate disorder; once disorder is at high levels, cohesion no longer offers protection against poor health. We interpret our findings as they relate to prior research on neighborhoods, psychosocial processes, and health, and discuss their implications for intervention efforts that address disorder in urban communities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Iceland 1 1%
Unknown 81 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 24%
Researcher 13 16%
Student > Master 11 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 12%
Other 3 4%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 16 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 21 25%
Psychology 15 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 21 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 November 2013.
All research outputs
#16,801,619
of 24,712,008 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Community Psychology
#894
of 1,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,866
of 207,703 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Community Psychology
#7
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,712,008 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,116 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 207,703 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.