Relations between Social Support, Life Satisfaction and Well-being

Document Sample
Relations between Social Support, Life Satisfaction and Well-being Powered By Docstoc
					    3rd International Conference of the
 International Society For Child Indicators

Relations between Social Support
 and Well-being in Adolescents
Jorge Castellá Sarriera, Lívia Maria Bedin, Eveline Favero,
    Daniel Abs, Mariana C. Benchaya & Tiago Z.Calza

     Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS, Brazil)
         Research Group in Community Psychology (GPPC)

              University of York, UK • 27–29 July 2011
   Social support:
   Is based on the social support concept proposed by Cobb
    (1976), and after used by Vaux (1988), who defines it as the
    information that makes someone believe that is cared and
    loved, esteemed and valued.
   Information of support can be transmitted through intimate
    situations involving mutual trust and it’s often referred to as
    emotional support.
   Positive relationship with support persons, such as parents,
    contribute to the improvement of the adolescents’ well-being
    (Ben-Zur, 2003).
   In the presence of social support there is a better well-being
    perception (Petito & Cummins, 2000).
Personal Well-Being

  ◦ It is conceptualized as feeling good or not, along the
    life cycle overall, not in occasional moments of life.

  ◦ It can be understood as a reciprocal relationship
    between internal aspects (psychological) and its
    external interactions with other people and the
    context (psychosocial).

       Casas (2010); Cummins, Eckersley, Pallant,Van Vugt & Misajon (2003)

   This paper aimed to verify possible differences
    between personal well-being and social support
    in adolescents considering age and gender and
    to explore relations between this variables in
    the sample.
   Sample:
     1,589 students (548 boys and 1,081 girls)
      from five cities in the state of Rio Grande do
      Sul (the capital state city and four other
      smaller cities of countryside).
     Ages ranged between 12 and 16 years old,
      with a mean of 14.13 (SD = 1.26).
 Social Support Appraisals Scale (SSA, Vaux et al.,
  SSA measures the adolescents’ perception of the social
   support provided by their family, friends and others in
   general. In this study, only items related to the family
   and friends subscales were used.
  It consists of 12 agree-disagree items ranging from 0 to
  In this study, the SSA’s Cronbach’s Alpha was 0.86.
 Personal Well-being Index (PWI)
  Assessment of people’s satisfaction with general
   aspects of life (Cummins, Eckersley, Pallant, Van Vugt,
   & Misajon, 2003).

  The PWI-7 consists of the following seven items:
    Satisfaction with health, living standards, what one
     has achieved in life, security, the groups of people
     one is part of, security about the future and the
     relationships one has with others.

  In this study, the PWI-7’s Cronbach’s Alpha was 0.78.
   Procedure
    ◦ The participants were contacted through public and
      private schools belonging to the cities in the sample.
    ◦ The selected schools were randomized from a list
      provided by the Department of Education of the State of
      Rio Grande do Sul.
    ◦ The final survey participants were volunteer students who
      returned a term of free and clear consent signed by them
      and by their parents or guardians.
    ◦ The questionnaires were applied collectively in a room
      provided by each school.
    ◦ All ethical requirements for research with human beings
      were followed.
Average and standard deviation for the Personal Well-being
Index by age and gender groups.
                       Well Being Index
      Age              Male           Female            Total
       12          80.48 (14.09)   85.43 (10.70)    83.69 (12.19)
       13          84.51 (09.59)   81.99 (12.27)    82.98 (11.34)
       14          83.21 (11.19)   81.36 (12.25)    81.95 (11.94)
       15          80.90 (10.62)   79.59 (12.36)    80.04 (11.79)
       16          82.70 (10.18)   79.41 (12.09)    80.51 (11.56)
      Total        82.56 (10.96)   81.17 (12.20)    81.65 (11.80)
   Interactions between age and gender and PWI.
Average and standard deviation for the SSA by age and
gender groups.
                       SSA Average
     Age            Male         Female          Total
      12         7.79 (2.06)   8.52 (1.33)    8.25 (1.67)
      13         8.32 (1.28)   8.42 (1.34)    8.38 (1.31)
      14         8.07 (1.36)   8.27 (1.47)    8.21 (1.44)
      15         8.07 (1.25)   8.18 (1.56)    8.14 (1.46)
      16         8.26 (1.39)   8.23 (1.39)    8.24 (1.39)
    Total        8.13 (1.43)   8.30 (1.44)    8.24 (1.44)
   Interactions between age and gender for:

   Family Social Support

                                        Friends   Social Support
 Analysis of variance of PWI and Friends and Family Social Support

  Source       Dependent     Sum of     df    Mean       F      Sig.
                Variables    Squares         Square

                  PWI        1850.547   4    462.637   3.387    .009

    Age         Friends SS    19.843    4     4.961    1.609    .169

                Family SS     15.692    4     3.923    1.449    .215

                  PWI        197.550    1    197.550   1.446    .229

  Gender        Friends SS    80.579    1    80.579    26.141   .000

                Family SS     1.194     1     1.194     .441    .507

                  PWI        1845.755   4    461.439   3.378    .009

Age * Gender    Friends SS    36.436    4     9.109    2.955    .019

                Family SS     14.841    4     3.710    1.371    .242
   Pearson correlations were performed and Significant
    correlations were found between the Personal Well-Being
    Index with all items of perceived friends’ and family’s social
    support (p < 0.001),
   It was performed a Confirmatory Factorial Analysis of the
    scales SSA and PWI with the entire sample. Adjusts
    presented satisfactory results according to the literature
    (Batista-Foguet & Coenders, 2000; Byrne, 2001),
   A final model was built using the Personal Well-Being Index
    as a factor related to social support.

Final model of relation between
    Social Support and PWI
          Fit statistics for the factor structure a model
                                      DF       Sig.          RMSEA (CI)          CFI
 Factor Model for PWI        28.1      11    P < 0.001   0.031 (0.017 – 0.046)   0.993
  Factor Model for SSA      274.21     46    P < 0.001   0.056 (0.050 – 0.062)   0.978
 MultiGroup SEM Final
  Model: Unconstrained      3559.31   1505   P < 0.001   0.021 (0.020 – 0.022)   0.927
     factor loadings
 MultiGroup SEM Final
Model: Constrained factor   3674.91   1541   P < 0.001   0.021 (0.020 – 0.022)   0.924
   The perception of social support in adolescence can
    vary with time, since changes in relationship groups,
    such as parents and friends, often take place.
   Family and Friend’s influence has fundamental
    importance in this stage of life due to the processes of
    independence and autonomy, especially in regards to
    emotional support, loyalty, understanding and intimacy
    (Antunes & Fontaine, 2005).
   Also, trust of family and friends, both included in this
    research, are important to aid the development of the
    adolescent’s independence and autonomy.
   Family and friends still have a central role in the
    adolescent’s development (Pratta & Santos, 2007) and
    interventions that promote and strengthen the social
    support from these groups are important.
   The support system may also be develop beyond family
    and friends, and may constitute an important source of
    esteem, care, respect and affiliation to a group (López-
    Cabanas & Chacón, 1997; Gracia, 1998).
   To verify the relationship between perceived support in
    adolescents’ close relationships and their well-being in a
    theoretical model that can be applied to different age
    groups of teenagers, regardless of gender.
   This proper fit of the model is important for future
    research on the relationships and contexts of adolescents
    and their direct or indirect impact on their quality of life.
   Despite the good model fitting, it is considered that
    cultural differences can have an effect on the results and
    that more research can be undertaken in this respect, since
    these relations tend to be established differently in other
   Antunes, C., & Fountaine, A. M. (2005). Percepção de Apoio Social na Adolescência: Análise
    Fatorial Confirmatória da Escala Social Support Appraisals. Paidéia, 15(32), 355-366.
    Retrieved from
   Batista-Foguet, J. M. & Coenders, G. (2000). Modelos de Ecuaciones Estructurales. Madrid: La
   Ben-Zur, H. (2003). Happy adolescents: The link between subjective well-being, internal
    resources, and parental factors. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 32(2), 67-79. doi: 0047-
   Byrne, B.M. (2001). Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and
    Programming. New Jersey: LEA.
   Casas, F. (2010). El bienestar personal: Su investigación en la infancia y la adolescencia.
    Encuentros en Psicología Social, 5(1), 85-101.
   Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., & Rogers, W. L. (1976). The quality of American life: Perceptions,
    evaluations, and satisfactions. Nueva York. Russell Sage.
   Cobb, S. (1976). Social support as a moderator of life stress. Psychosomatic Medicine, 38(5),
    300-314. Retrieved from cgi/reprint/38/5/300.
   Cummins, R.A., Eckersley, R. Pallant, J. Van Vugt, J, & Misajon, R. (2003). Developing a
    national index of subjective wellbeing: The Australian Unity Wellbeing Index. Social
    Indicators Research, 64, 159-190.
   Diener, E., & Diener, M. (1995). Cross-cultural correlates of life satisfaction and self-esteem,
    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(4), 653–663. doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-2352-
   Gracia, E. (1998). El apoyo social en la intervención comunitaria. Barcelona: Paidós.
   Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (2005). Análise Multivariada de dados.
    Porto Alegre: Bookman.
   Kline, R. B. (1991). Latent Variable Path Analysis in Clinical Research: A Beginner’s Tour
    Guide. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 47(4), 471-484.
   López-Cabanas, M. & Chacón, F. (1997). Apoyo social, redes sociales e grupos de autoayuda.
    In López-Cabanas, M. & Chacón, F. (Eds.), Intervención psicosocial y servicios sociales. Un
    enfoque participativo (pp. 183-215). Madrid: Síntesis Psicológica.
   Petito, F., Cummins, R.A. (2000). Quality of life in adolescence: the role of perceived control,
    parenting style and social support. Behavior Change, 17(3), 196-207.
   Pratta; & Santos. (2007). Família e Adolescência: A Influência do Contexto Familiar no
    Desenvolvimento Psicológico de seus Membros. Psicologia em Estudo, 12(2), 247-256.
   Vaux, A. (1988). Social Support: Theory, research, and intervention. NY: Praeger.
   Vaux, A., & Wood, J. (1987). Social support resources, behavior, and appraisals: A path
    analysis. Social Behavior and Personality, 15(1), 105-109.
   Vaux, A., Phillips, J., Thomson, B., Holly, L., Williams, D. & Stewart, D. (1986). The social
    support perceptions (SSA) Scale: studies of reliability and validity. American Journal of
    Community Psychology, 14, 195-220.

    3rd International Conference of the
 International Society For Child Indicators

Relations between Social Support
 and Well-being in Adolescents
Jorge Castellá Sarriera, Lívia Maria Bedin, Eveline Favero,
    Daniel Abs, Mariana C. Benchaya & Tiago Z.Calza

     Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS, Brazil)
       Grupo de Pesquisa em Psicologia Comunitária (GPPC)

              University of York, UK • 27–29 July 2011

Shared By: