Neighborhood poverty and children's exposure to danger: Examining gender differences in impacts of the Moving to Opportunity experiment
University of Pittsburgh, School of Social Work, 2117 Cathedral of Learning, 4200 Fifth Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, United States. Social Science Research
(Impact Factor: 1.27).
07/2012; 41(4):788-801. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.01.005
The Moving to Opportunity (MTO) program offered public housing residents in distressed communities a chance to move to low-poverty neighborhoods. The present study examined whether the resulting decline in neighborhood poverty led to lower levels of exposure to danger among children and youth ages 8-19years old (n=4606), and specifically, if there was a gender difference that matched the pattern of more beneficial program effects for girls and more adverse affects for boys. The study goes beyond previous research by using fixed effects to control for family factors that may influence moving behavior and confound estimates of gender differences in program impacts. Results showed that children experienced a decline in exposure to danger, with one key gender difference. Models based on brother-sister comparisons indicated that MTO had a more beneficial impact on exposure to drug activity for females than males. The findings suggest that neighborhood poverty is tied to children's exposure to danger. Moreover, exposure to drug activity may help explain the gender differences in impacts on children's mental health and risky behavior.
Available from: Roberta Woodgate
- "A few studies have identified how neighborhood characteristics influence youth behavior. The condition of neighborhoods has been shown to impact children's mental health and risk behaviors (Zuberi, 2012). Westley et al. (2013) found that the perceptions of parents regarding neighborhood safety can influence their children's health behavior, specifically related to their use of parks, active transportation to parks and screen time. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Drawing on qualitative data generated from an ethnographic study exploring Canadian youth's understanding of health, this paper examines youth's perspectives of the relationships between health and environment. Seventy-one youth (12 to 19 years of age) took part in individual and focus group interviews, as well as in photovoice interviews. Although initial discourse about health mainly focused on healthy eating and exercise, youth were more enthused and able to share their thoughts and feelings about the relationships between health and environment during the photovoice interviews. For these youth, good health was defined and visualized as "being outside" in a safe, clean, green, and livable space. Youth talked about conditions contributing to healthy environments and how healthy environments contributed to a strong sense of place. Overall, the conversations about the environment evoked many feelings in the youth. Results are discussed in the context of current research and in relation to youth, but also more broadly in relation to research on health and environment.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Health & Place 12/2014; 31C:100-110. DOI:10.1016/j.healthplace.2014.11.008 · 2.81 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The literature on neighborhood effects frequently is evaluated or interpreted in relation to the question, "Do neighborhoods matter?" We argue that this question has had a disproportionate influence on the field and does not align with the complexity of theoretical models of neighborhood effects or empirical findings that have arisen from the literature. In this article, we focus on empirical work that considers how different dimensions of individuals' residential contexts become salient in their lives, how contexts influence individuals' lives over different timeframes, how individuals are affected by social processes operating at different scales, and how residential contexts influence the lives of individuals in heterogeneous ways. In other words, we review research that examines where, when, why, and for whom do residential contexts matter. Using the large literature on neighborhoods and educational and cognitive outcomes as an example, the research we review suggests that any attempt to reduce the literature to a single answer about whether neighborhoods matter is misguided. We call for a more flexible study of context effects in which theory, measurement, and methods are more closely aligned with the specific mechanisms and social processes under study.
Annual Review of Sociology 07/2014; 40(1):559-579. DOI:10.1146/annurev-soc-071913-043350 · 4.44 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Ecologic and cross-sectional multilevel analyses suggest that characteristics of the places where people live influence their vulnerability to HIV and other sexually-transmitted infections (STIs). Using data from a predominately substance-misusing cohort of African-American adults relocating from US public housing complexes, this multilevel longitudinal study tested the hypothesis that participants who experienced greater post-relocation improvements in economic disadvantage, violent crime, and male:female sex ratios would experience greater reductions in perceived partner risk and in the odds of having a partner who had another partner (i.e., indirect concurrency). Baseline data were collected from 172 public housing residents before relocations occurred; three waves of post-relocation data were collected every 9 months. Participants who experienced greater improvements in community violence and in economic conditions experienced greater reductions in partner risk. Reduced community violence was associated with reduced indirect concurrency. Structural interventions that decrease exposure to violence and economic disadvantage may reduce vulnerability to HIV/STIs.
AIDS and Behavior 08/2014; 19(6). DOI:10.1007/s10461-014-0883-z · 3.49 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.