↓ Skip to main content

Interplay wellbeing framework: a collaborative methodology ‘bringing together stories and numbers’ to quantify Aboriginal cultural values in remote Australia

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
6 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
138 Mendeley
Title
Interplay wellbeing framework: a collaborative methodology ‘bringing together stories and numbers’ to quantify Aboriginal cultural values in remote Australia
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12939-017-0563-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sheree Cairney, Tammy Abbott, Stephen Quinn, Jessica Yamaguchi, Byron Wilson, John Wakerman

Abstract

Wellbeing has been difficult to understand, measure and strengthen for Aboriginal people in remote Australia. Part of the challenge has been genuinely involving community members and incorporating their values and priorities into assessment and policy. Taking a 'shared space' collaborative approach between remote Aboriginal communities, governments and scientists, we merged Aboriginal knowledge with western science - by bringing together stories and numbers. This research aims to statistically validate the holistic Interplay Wellbeing Framework and Survey that bring together Aboriginal-identified priorities of culture, empowerment and community with government priorities including education, employment and health. Quantitative survey data were collected from a cohort of 842 Aboriginal people aged 15-34 years, recruited from four different Aboriginal communities in remote Australia. Aboriginal community researchers designed and administered the survey. Structural equation modeling showed good fit statistics (χ/df = 2.69, CFI = 0.95 and RMSEA = 0.045) confirming the holistic nature of the Interplay Wellbeing Framework. The strongest direct impacts on wellbeing were 'social and emotional wellbeing' (r = 0.23; p < 0.001), 'English literacy and numeracy' (r = 0.15; p < 0.001), 'Aboriginal literacy' (r = 0.14; p < 0.001), 'substances' (lack thereof; r = 0.13; p = 0.003), 'work' (r = 0.12; p = 0.02) and 'community' (r = 0.08; p = 0.05). Correlation analyses suggested cultural factors have indirect impacts on wellbeing, such as through Aboriginal literacy. All cultural variables correlated highly with each other, and with empowerment and community. Empowerment also correlated highly with all education and work variables. 'Substances' (lack thereof) was linked with positive outcomes across culture, education and work. Specific interrelationships will be explored in detail separately. The Interplay Wellbeing Framework and Survey were statistically validated as a collaborative approach to assessing wellbeing that is inclusive of other cultural worldviews, values and practices. New community-derived social and cultural indicators were established, contributing valuable insight to psychometric assessment across cultures. These analyses confirm that culture, empowerment and community play key roles in the interplay with education, employment and health, as part of a holistic and quantifiable system of wellbeing. This research supports the holistic concept of wellbeing confirming that everything is interrelated and needs to be considered at the 'whole of system' level in policy approaches.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 138 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 138 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 10%
Researcher 13 9%
Student > Master 11 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 8%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Other 24 17%
Unknown 57 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 16 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 7%
Psychology 8 6%
Environmental Science 7 5%
Other 28 20%
Unknown 57 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. 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 22 May 2023.
All research outputs
#755,892
of 24,294,767 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#86
of 2,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,005
of 314,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#4
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,294,767 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,075 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
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 314,781 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.