The Correlation between Perceived Social Support and Mental Health among Adolescent Street Children

Abstract

This study was conducted to investigate the correlation between perceived social support and mental health among adolescent street children. Perceived social support measured by adapting Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) that developed by Zimet, Dahlem, Zimet, and Farley (1988) and mental health measured by Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF) that developed by Keyes (2002). Data was analyzed by using Pearson Correlation. A sample of 60 adolescent street children in Jakarta, Bogor, and Depok, cities in Indonesia participating in this study. The result shows positive and significant correlation between perceived social support and mental health (r = 0.377, n = 60, p < 0.01, two tailed). Most of participant have families and maintain contact with their families by returning home. Most of them assumed that parent as significant others of their life.

Full text

The Correlation between Perceived Social Support and Mental Health among Adolescent
Street Children
Septiana Arini1, Sri Redatin Retno Pudjiati2
1 Student, Faculty of Psychology, University of Indonesia
2 Lecturer, Faculty of Psychology, University of Indonesia
Abstract
This study was conducted to investigate the correlation between perceived social support and mental
health among adolescent street children. Perceived social support measured by adapting Multidimensional
Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) that developed by Zimet, Dahlem, Zimet, and Farley (1988) and
mental health measured by Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF) that developed by Keyes
(2002). Data was analyzed by using Pearson Correlation. A sample of 60 adolescent street children in
Jakarta, Bogor, and Depok, cities in Indonesia participating in this study. The result shows positive and
significant correlation between perceived social support and mental health (r = 0.377, n = 60, p < 0.01, two
tailed). Most of participant have families and maintain contact with their families by returning home. Most
of them assumed that parent as significant others of their life.
Keywords: mental health; perceived social support; street children; adolescent
Septiana Arini – Sri Redatin Retno Pudjiati
Faculty of Psychology, University of Indonesia, Kampus UI Depok, Indonesia 16424
septiana.arini@gmail.com
Introduction
Child is a bud who will grow become the next
generation of the nation. To become a good figure a
child certainly need to get proper support from their
environment especially started from their family. Role
of a family is truly a right that must be given to the
child as a protection. In fact, not all children get the
right which they deserve. It happens to those who are
poorly like the abandoned children, street children,
victims of children trafficking, children with low
economic status, etc. (Mangunsong, 2011).
Poor children phenomenon like the street children is
a problem which needs special concern because of the
great number of it. Social Ministry Data shows that in
2005 there were 46,800 street children who were
spread in 21 provinces in Indonesia (www.ilo.org).
Based on National Data from 2010, street children in
Indonesia reached 85,013 children who were spread in
33 provinces (Nugraha, 2013). Social Ministry Data
shows that street children in Indonesia reached
230,000 (Sutriyanto, 2011; The Jakarta Post, 2012).
Street children have many reasons why they finally
choose street as their home or workplace either for
temporary or forever. There are many street children
who leave from their home because of psychological,
physical, or sexual violence (UNICEF, 2005). Lalor
(1999) also mentioned that significant factor which
causes the children come to street is violence at home.
In Indonesia, the rise of street children happens and
almost of 70% of it escapes from their home because
poverty problem and violence at their family (Mulyadi,
2008).
The selection of the street as their home to avoid
negative condition which they get at home factually
can cause possibility for them to get any other negative
condition. When they are on the street, children are
susceptible to any kind of exploitation and act of
despising and also far away from ideal condition of life
like what Children Right Convention is hoped for
(UNICEF, 2005). They also susceptible to starving,
diseases, accident, and any kind of exploitation
(Kombarakaran, 2004). UNICEF (2005) explains that
street child cannot be a part of conflict to some parties
who should be protect them, like in some cases when
police or competent authorities did act of despising,
caning even arresting and murder that were done by
societies because of thinking the street children cause
problems even in this case often involve district
government or does not respected by their district
government. Lalor (1999) also stated the similar thing
that street children are very susceptible to violence and
become victim either police, other street children or
passerby.
Seeing the street life which is full of challenge is not

wondered if street children according Koller and Hutz
(2001) often face more risk than other normal children.
Koller and Hutz (2001) explain that bigger risk is
caused street children face not only physical, social,
and emotional negative factor at home but also on the
street. Some researches show that street children
getting high hopelessness level, susceptible to
depression and depressive disease (Woan, Lin, &
Auerswald, 2013). Most of street children feels like
they have no bright future and getting difficult life
(UNICEF, 2002).
The most interesting one, Aptekar (cited in Koller &
Hutz, 2001) stated that compare to their sibling who
decided to stay at home, street children is mentally
healthier. Observation which was done by Koller and
Hutz (cited in Koller & Hutz, 2001) found that street
children can live on the street even when it’s full of
risk because they can develop a coping strategy that
causes them to be resilient in facing conditions that are
susceptible of risk. Koller and Hutz (2001) mentioned
that to develop and survive in difficult environment,
street children implement effective strategy that is
joining in a group that exist at street called ‖gang‖.
Street children are joined in a ―gang‖ on the purpose of
protecting themselves (Lalor, 1999). ―Gang‖ becomes
a replacement of their family when they spend their
time on the street while they are far away from their
family. Agnelli (cited in Lalor, 1999) explains that in a
―gang‖ a child gets a status, happiness, admiration,
protection, and brotherhood from family replacement
also as need fulfillment of identity and sometimes
strengthen with language that just can be understood
by only member of that ―gang‖ or in other word
esoteric slang. Finding family replacement on the
street reflects that street children need to keep
emotional relationship with family member even
though seem that they enjoy free spirit with there is no
parental control but actually they need the warmth and
care of a family (Kombarakaran, 2004).
Besides joining in a group or famously called
―gang‖ as effective strategy that was done by street
children, according Koller and Hutz (2001) street
children also develop any kind of peer relationship that
is emotional group and business group. Emotional
group works when a street children want to spend their
night by having fun together. While business group is
functioned as protection and need fulfillment placed to
survive their life. The other strategy that are done by
street children is going to social organization for
getting food and make it as a protection placed.
Kombarakaran (2004) also explained about the usage
of facilities that are provided by non-government
organization is to fulfill street children needs. In
Indonesia, there are non-organization governments or
social organizations that are not just functioned to
fulfill needs of food and home but also education.
Demartoto (2012) explained that education has role as
socialization, selection, distribution, and social
integration media. Therefore, street children who take
that opportunity could possibly get social support
through social relationship which was made through
their ―gang‖ or peer relationships.
According Thoits (2010), social support refer to
emotional support, informational support, or simply
from significant others like family member, friends, or
job partner also can be a real support which is received
from other people (received social support) or
perception which is available support when it is
needed (perceived social support) is more beneficial.
Dunkel-Schetter and Bennet (1990) also Wethington
and Kessler (cited in Thoits, 1995) stated that
perceived social support has very strong influence to
mental health than received social support. People with
high perceived social support believe that their family
and friends are certifiable to give appropriate help in
difficult condition (Lakey, n.d.). This went accordingly
with Thoits research (cited in Taylor et al., 2004) stated
that real support (received support) is given by other
people can be different which is needed so according
Cohen and McKay (1984) also Cohen and Wills (cited
in Taylor et al., 2004) can cause failure to fulfill
receiver needs.
Besides more beneficial, perceived social support
has role in well-being which is mental health
component. Mental health according Keyes (2002)
describes how a people view or value positively their
life. Mental health has three components that consists
of emotional well-being, psychological well-being, and
social well-being (Lamers, Westerhof, Bohlmeijer, ten
Klooster, & Keyes, 2010). Perceived social support
role in well-being can be seen in some research result
below. Martinez, Aricak, Graves, Myszak, and Nellis
(2011) said that people who perceptions about existing
of social support from important person in their life is
one of basic factor which is related with psychological
well-being. From emotional well-being side, Turner
and Marino (1994) mentioned that perceived social
support related with emotional well-being.
Perceived social support role can be viewed in
adolescent. During adolescence there is fast and
unstable emotional change so perceived social support
role is very important in this age (Wenz-Gross et al.,
cited in Martinez, Aricak, Graves, Myszak & Nellis,
2011). Besides that, there are many research found that
perceived social support and depression have negative
relation (Keleckler & Waas, 1993; Ostrander Weinfurt,
& Nay, 1997; Pattern et al., cited in Demaray &
Malecki, 2002). This means when perceived social
support of a person increases so the depression level
will decreases. Depression problem can be found in
adolescence. Depression prevalence increase while
adolescence (Papalia & Feldman, 2012). Adolescent
street children have higher stress and depression level
than those who lives normally instead of living in the
street (Ayerst, 1999).
Problem which is also faced in adolescence is kids
who runaway from their home. Runaway is done
because adolescent think that their parents do not

understand them and too busy with themselves
(Santrock, 2014). He explained that runaway process is
a step in going on from reducing the time in home to
spend the time on the street further with their peer. A
peer group is social support source that is important in
adolescence when their parents attitude is
dissapointing (Papalia & Feldman, 2012).
The researches above shows that street children face
risky conditions that can impact their life but in other
side they can survive in street life because they can
develop an effective coping strategy so they will be
mentally healthy. Through that coping strategy, they
can get social support which also has role to their
mental health. Research about role of social support
especially perceived social support still see the
correlation between perceived social support to mental
health component separately or have not being
comprehensive. Therefore, this research is aimed to
know the correlation between perceived social support
and mental health comprehensively, especially
adolescent street children because there are many cases
about runaway from home to the street, also about
depression case number who is increased in
adolescence.
Literature Review
Mental Health
Lamers, Westerhof, Bohlmeijer, ten Klooster, and
Keyes (2010) explained that mental health concept in
the earlier is more defined as there is no
psychopathology, but at the last few years has changed
by referring to more positive condition. One of figure
who describe that mental health refer to positive
condition is Corey L. M. Keyes.
According Keyes (2002, 2005) mental health is
defined as ―symptoms of hedonia and positive
functioning, operationalized by measures of subjective
well-being—individuals’ perceptions and evaluations
of their lives and the quality of their functioning in life
(p. 540)‖. Based on that definition can be known that
mental health is individual positive feelings to their
own life (hedonia) (Keyes, 2005) and individual
positive function that was operationalized in subjective
well-being column that is individual appraisal to their
life quality (Keyes & Simoes, 2012). This went
accordingly with what Keyes ever mentioned (Keyes,
2002) that in last 40 years, mental health was
operationalized and measured for subjective well-
being research. Subjective well-being measurement
can be done by measuring emotional symptoms that is
emotional well-being and functional well-being that
consists of psychological well-being and social well-
being (Keyes, 2002). In other words, mental health can
be detected by measuring emotional well-being,
psychological well-being, and social well-being.
To describe mental health, Keyes (2002) introduced
flourishing and languishing terminology. Flourishing is
used to describe mentally healthy individual or
presence of mental health (Keyes, 2002). Flourishing
individual has high well-being that can be earned if he
or she has positive emotion and well functioned
psychologically or socially (Keyes, 2002) or in other
words he or she has high emotional well-being,
psychological well-being, and social well-being
(Keyes, 2005). While, languishing shows there is no
mental health (absence of mental health) (Keyes,
2002). The languishing individual has low well-being
level because he or she feel emptiness and stagnation
hopelessness (Keyes, 2002). Keyes (2002) also
explained that individual who is in between flourishing
and languishing in their life is belong to moderately
mentally healthy. In 2002, Keyes developed mental
health measurement that is called Mental Health
Continuum to know whether an individual belongs
flourishing, languishing, or moderately mentally
healthy.
Mental Health Component
Lamers, Westerhof, Bohlmeijer, ten Klooster and
Keyes (2010) stated that there are three components
that form mental health that are emotional well-being,
psychological well-being, and social well-being.
Emotional well-being is a group of symptoms that
described there is or no positive feeling about life
(Keyes, 2002), consist of three dimension that are
positive affect, happiness, and life satisfication (Keyes,
2003). Psychological well-being is how far someone is
functioned in their own life (Robitschek & Keyes,
2009), consist of six dimension that are self-
acceptance, positive relations with others, personal
growth, purpose in life, environmental mastery, and
autonomy (Keyes, 2002). Social well-being is one’s
evaluation of her or his function in the society (Keyes,
1998), there are five dimensions that are social
coherence, social actualization, social integration,
social acceptance, and social contribution (Keyes,
2002).
Factors that Influence Mental Health
Horwitz (2010) explained that social factor
influences mental health level. That factor consists of
social integration, social stratification, social
inequality, and cultural values. First, social integration
is active involvement in social relationship, activities,
and roles like parents, friend, neighbor, and others
(Papalia & Feldman, 2012). Social integration has
correlation with positive mental health (Horwitz,
2010). This is can be seen from Thoits and Hewitt
explanation (cited in Horwitz, 2010) that people who
often keep contact with other people like family,
friend, and neighbor and also often involved in an
organization has better mental health than they who is
socially isolated. Beside mentally healthy, people who
is socially integrated is more capable in coping with
the stress they face because of through the social
network that they have, they get more social support,

helping hand and sympathy compared to isolated
people (Horwitz, 2010). Second, social stratification is
difference between one person to another including
authority, status, and resources. Social stratification
also has influence to mental health. Third, Link, and
Phelan (cited in Horwitz, 2010) mention that gap of
social class status like wealth, knowledge, authority,
influence and prestige has strong influence to the
mental health. McLeod and Nonnemaker (cited in
Horwitz, 2010) explain that bad mental health of
someone is caused by poverty. Fourth, mental health
can be reached on culture that implant the solidarity
value in a group (group cohesion), meaningfulness,
and life purpose.
Besides that, McCulloch and Goldie (cited in
Goldie, Dowds, & O’Sullivan, n.d.) stated that there
are something that determine mental health, such as
equality and discrimination in society, un-employment
number, social coherence, education, medical
infrastructure, neighborliness, family structure, family
dynamic, parenting, lifestyle (such as smoking and
alcohol consumption habits), financial, physical health.
The other important thing in determining mental health
is age, gender and ethnic (Barry cited in Goldie,
Dowds, & O’Sullivan, n.d.).
Social Support
Goebert and Loue (cited in Tonsing, Zimet, & Tse,
2012) explain that social support consist of two
components that are structural support and functional
support. Canty-Mitchell and Zimet (cited in Tonsing,
Zimet, & Tse, 2012) said that structural support
includes social network, how often an individual get in
touch with member of that network, reciprocal support,
and the quality of support. Functional support is
individual perception related with received support
level like emotional support, affirmative support and
tangible support (House & Kahn, 1985; Kahn &
Antonucci cited in Tonsing, Zimet, & Tse, 2012)
Concept of structural and functional support in
general is also well known with received and
perceived social support terminology (Tonsing, Zimet,
& Tse, 2012) Therefore, it can be understood that
structural support is received social support while
functional support is perceived social support. It is
different with perceived social support that is more
concerned at cognition aspect, received social support
is more concerned in attitude aspect. Received social
support is behavior component of social support
because of needing interpersonal relation role (Dunkel-
Schetter & Benner cited in Coventry, Gillespie, Heath,
& Martin, 2004). Someone can get social support from
any parties. According Zimet, Dahlem, and Farley
(1988) social support source can be from family,
friends, and significant others.
Family. Family is an environment where a child get
nurturance, love, and any chances that can be earned
(Berns, 2013). Family role does not only give
economic support but also emotional support (Berns,
2013). He explains that economic support is like
providing safe and healthy home, clothes, and food for
children while emotional support can be done by
making interaction with each others. Emotional
support can also means awareness and involvement in
each others. This is very important to emotional well-
being of family member (Berns, 2013).
Friend. According Santrock (2014), friends is
smaller part of peer group, a place where they can feel
friendship, support, and intimacy that benefits each
other. In adolescence, almost part of time was spent
with friends is more than in other age of life (Papalia
& Feldman, 2012). Role of friendship in adolescence
can be seen from longitudinal research that was done
by Wentzel, Barry, and Caldwell (cited in Santrock,
2014) that is student that have no friend is more
possible getting emotional distressed like depression
and low well-being, less involved in prosocial
activities, and having low value. Positive impact that
can be get from making friends certainly must be
supported with the good quality of friendship. This is
fit in with the explanation that adolescent who getting
supportive, stable, and close friendship will be easier
to socialize, showing good performance in school, and
also does not show hostile behavior to others, worried
and getting depression (Berndt & Perry, 1990;
Buhrmester, 1990; Hartup & Stevens cited in Papalia
& Feldman, 2012).
Significant Others. In this research significant
others is anyone who is important by someone in their
life. Canty-Mitchell and Zimet (2000) explains that
significant others or special person is relevant thing
that is used on adolescence which is the time when is
started to making relationship with girlfriend or
boyfriend and the increase influence of adult people
besides parents. The adult beside parents (non-parental
adults) that can be relied on adolescent for getting
support and have significant influence for them can be
from different people like extended family, teacher,
employer, trainer, or older friends (Chen, Greenberger,
& Farruggia, 2003).
Street Child
The most general definition related with street child
based on Inter-NGO at Switzerland in 1985 (UNICEF,
2002) ―any girl or boy who has not reached adulthood,
for whom the street (in the broadest sense of the word,
including unoccupied dwellings, wasteland, etc.) has
become her or his habitual abode and/or sources of
livelihood, and who is inadequately protected,
supervised or directed by responsible adults‖ (p. 89).
Refer to that definition, street child is the child who
has not reach adult age either boy or girl who make the
street as their daily home and/or earn a livelihood, also
getting less protection, control, or instruction from
adults that should be have responsibility over them.
UNICEF (2002) categorizes street children in two
categories, that are ―children of the street‖ and
―children on the street‖. That category based on the

relation between street children with adult who are be
responsible of them and their home (Harju, 2013).
―Children of the street‖ is they who placed and sleep at
town street because of homeless so that it may be they
do not get nurturance that should be get because of less
emotional and psychological support (UNICEF, 2002).
Lalor (1999) mentioned that street is main home for
children of the street but they are possible occasionally
contact interfacing with their family and visit their
home rarely. In the street, they stay with other street
children or homeless adult street (UNICEF, 2002).
―Children on the street‖ is they who earn a living or
begging for getting money on the street but at night
they back to their home (UNICEF, 2002). In other
words, they just work but not stay and sleep on the
street. Therefore, they still have contact with their
family (UNICEF, 2002).
Street children categorization in two groups is
useful, but in other side there are some that overlaps
and in grey area (UNICEF, 2002). Muchini (cited in
UNICEF, 2002) explains that there are ―children of the
street‖ that totally lost contact with their family but
there are also some who still keep contact. Muchini
added that some ―children of the street‖ visit their
mother or siblings before finally back to their ―home‖
in the street. Besides, street children who in grey area
sometimes sleep at home and sometimes sleep on the
street are classified to the ―children on the street‖.
Research Methodology
Participant
Participant of this research is 60 adolescent street
children consist of boys (n = 55) and girls (n = 5) who
come from Jakarta (n = 16), Depok (n = 30) and Bogor
(n = 14). Age range of participant is based on
definition of adolescent according Peterson (cited in
Schmied & Tully, 2009). The participants were taken
with non probability sampling method, to be exact
convenience sampling or accidental sampling. Data
was taken once in each participant (one shot study
design). Then, data were processed using Pearson
Correlation statistic method for knowing how
significant the correlation between perceived social
support and mental health.
Instruments
Perceived Social Support. Perceived social support
was measured using Multidimensional Scale of
Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) which was
developed by Zimet, Dahlem, Zimet, and Farley in
1988 on purpose to asses the perception of the social
support availability which come from family, friend,
and significant others. This instrument has been
validated on any kind of sample include adolescent
(Cheng & Chan, 2004). MSPSS which was used on
this research is the adaptation result which has been
done by Trifilia (2013) from English to Bahasa and
change seven scales become four scales. The result of
MSPSS four scales test showed that this instrument
reliable with 0.817 in reliability coefficient and valid
with item-validity coefficient on range 0.295-0.625.
Mental Health. Mental health measurement was
done using Mental Health Continuum-Short Form
(MHC-SF), an instrument with 14 items which was
developed by Keyes (2002) and has been translated in
Bahasa. MHC-SF is functioned to measure mental
health which involved emotional, psychological, and
social well-being in one questionnaire (Lamers, 2012).
Through this instrument, individual position can be
known, whether he or she belongs in flourishing
(complete mental health), languishing (incomplete
mental health) or moderately mentally healthy. MHC-
SF has very good internal consistency value which is
more than 0.8 and also very good discriminant validity,
one of it when it was tested on adolescent in 12-18
years old (C.L.M. Keyes, personal communication,
April 7th, 2015). Like the statistic calculation result
before which showed MHC-SF is good in measuring
the mental health, the probation test result on this
research also showed that MHC-SF reliable with
0.841 in reliability coefficient and valid with 0.335-
0.578 in validity item.
Variable
This research is consists of two variables which are
perceived social support and mental health. Perceived
social support is subjective evaluation of someone that
other people will give support if it is needed, also feel
that she or he is loved and valued (Lakey & Lutz,
1996). According Keyes (2002, 2005) mental health is
―symptoms of hedonia and positive functioning,
operationalized by measures of subjective well-
being—individuals’ perceptions and evaluations of
their lives and the quality of their functioning in life‖
(p. 540).
Result
Statistically, result shows that there is significant
correlation between perceived social support and
mental health, r = +0.377, n = 60, p < 0.01, two tails.
Analysis shows that perceived social support has
significant positive relation with mental health. It
means the increase of individual perceived social
support will make the increase of mental health
(flourishing) and conversely. Thereby can be said that
more trust an individual to other person will give
support when it is needed and she or he will feel that is
loved and worth or more positive to view their life, and
conversely.

Table 1. The General Outlook of Participant based on
Gender and Getting School or Not
Aspect
Frequency
%
Gender
Boy
55
91.7
Girl
5
8.3
Getting School or Not
Getting School
27
45
Not (but ever)
25
41.7
Not (no information)
8
13.3
Based on table 1, it is known that boy participant
(91.7%) is more than girl participant (8.3%). This is fit
in with Lalor (1999) who state that in around the world
boy street children are more than girl street children.
Based on getting school or not aspect nowadays,
almost of participant are not getting school (55%) with
detail almost participant who do not getting school
nowadays ever getting school before (41.7 %). The
other participants are still in school. This result is fit in
with research before which was done in Indonesia by
www.ilo.org that more that 50% of street children or
on other words most of them still in school age.
Table 2. The General Outlook based on Having Family
or Not and What was Done During on the Street
Aspect
Frequency
%
Having family or Not
Still having family and
return home/meet up with
them after from the street
48
80
Still having family but
does not return home/meet
up with hem after from the
street
9
15
Have no family
2
3.3
Unfilled
1
1.7
What Was Done on The
Street
Just Work
53
88.3
Work and live/sleep
3
5
Work and sometimes
live/sleep
3
5
Others
1
1.7
Most of participants still have family and return
home/meet up with family after from the street (80%).
This result is fit in with UNICEF (2005) that there are
many street children who still keep contact with their
family. On the street, mostly participant who still
having family and return home/meet up with their
family after from the street stay in the street just to
work, so can be concluded that mostly street children
include in ―children on the street‖ category while the
others is ―of the street ― and ―grey‖ category. Grey
category means they who their role is overlap, for
example they sometimes live or sleep on the street but
sometimes this category is classified in ―children on
the street‖ category (Muchini cited in UNICEF, 2002).
Table 3. The General Outlook based on Reason Why
on The Street and Involved in Group/‖Gang‖ or Not.
Aspect
Frequency
%
Reason on the Street
Helping parents financially
34
56.7
Runaway from home
3
5
Looking for pocket money
16
26.7
Friends allurement
3
5
Others
4
6.7
Group/”Gang”
Yes
26
43.3
No
34
56.7
Involvement of The Activity
Involved
48
80
Uninvolved
12
20
Having Problems
Ever
49
81.7
Never
10
16.7
Majority of reason which deliver them to feel street
life is for helping parents financially (56.7%). During
on the street number participant who have group/gang
on the street is less than who does not have group/gang
(56.7%). Majority of the participant involved in
activity which was done in their surrounding
environment (80%). During work or live and sleep on
the street, majority participant gets into problems
(81.7%). Problem which was faced by participant are
driven from street, chased after or caught by
government apparatus and security like police, Social
Department, even the army. Other problem which was
faced by participant is forced to give money, chased
out by society surrounding, suspect as thieve also fight
with other ―pengamen‖ (non-professional street
musician), society, and public transportation driver,
etc. Problems which was faced by participant shows
suitability with what UNICEF was stated in 2005, that
street children also had conflict with parties who
should have protect them, and also what stated by
Lalor (1999) that street children is very susceptible
with violence and become victim of police, other street
children also passerbies.
Table 4. Mental Health Category
Category
Frequency
%
Flourishing
33
55
Moderate
18
30
Languishing
9
15
From the categorization above, mental health can be
known that almost participant belongs in mentally
healthy (flourishing) (55%). This result does not fit in

with some research who shows that street children
getting high hopelessness level, susceptible of
depression and depressive symptoms (Woan, Lin, &
Auerswald, 2013) also most of street children feel have
no bright future and having difficult life (UNICEF,
2002).
Conclusion
Based on the result and analysis that has been done
can be concluded that there is significant positive
correlation between perceived social support and
mental health of adolescent street children. This result
can be understood as perceived social support of
adolescent street children increases, mental health of
them increases. Conversely, the decrease of perceived
social support of adolescent street children will
decrease their mental health. Besides, it can be
concluded that most of adolescent street children are
mentally healthy.
Discussion
Participant shows that most of them are more
mentally healthy (flourishing) (55%) which means
adolescent street children think and value positively
their life. This result does not fit in with some research
that shows street children is getting high hopelessness
level, susceptible of depression and depressive
symptoms (Woan, Lin, & Auerswald, 2013) also most
of them feel they have no bright future and difficult on
their life (UNICEF, 2002).
The more number of adolescent street children
whose mentally healthy can be caused by some
reasons below.
1. Most of research participant still have family and
return back home or keep contact with their family
(80%). According family function that was stated
by Berns (2013), one of it was that emotional
support that can be done by making interaction,
caring, and involved in each other. This is
important to the emotional well-being of family
member (Berns, 2013) including child, and not an
exception for adolescent street children. This is
also can be related with probing result that was
done, most of participant mentioned family
especially their parents as significant others or
special person for them which means they believe
that their parents will give helping hand when they
need and cause they feel be loved and worth.
2. Most of them involved in surrounding society
activities (80%), it means they still keep contact
with other people. Horwitz (2010) stated that
social integration has relation with positive mental
health. This is later explained by Thoits and
Hewitt (cited in Horwitz, 2010) that people who
often keep contact with other people like family,
friend, and neighbor also often involved in an
organization has better mental health than they
who is socially isolated. Beside mentally healthy,
people who is socially integrated is more capable
in coping with the stress they face because through
the social network that they have, they get more
social support, helping hand, and sympathy than
isolated people (Horwitz, 2010). Adolescent street
children who most of them involved in social
activity can be seen as a characteristic that appear
in adolescence. This is fit in with relation concept
according Cameron and Karabanow (cited in
Schmied & Tully, 2009) that adolescent making
relation with wider social network.
Although this research shows mentally healthy
participant but there are something which need to be
considered in understanding that result.
1. Researchers do not differentiate participant, who
was found on the street and foundation or
community. Participant was found on the street is
31 children while that was found either in
foundation and community is 29 children.
2. Instrument that was used in this research used
positive items which are abstract and describe
more about current feelings (here and now) like
instrument of mental health, not about actual
feeling so this can influence the result.
3. This participant could possibly have emotional
problems at home so they decide to come to the
street. When on the street they can get happiness
because they feel free from unsupporting family
condition, and also get many friends. This can
cause them to think their life is more positive or
mentally healthy.
4. There are more participant who dropped out of
school, this means they do not have rules
righteously that is implemented at school. There is
no rules that must be obeyed or in other words
they had complete freedom which is felt by
participants can be one of causal factor they think
positively their life.
5. Refer to most of participant reason that they
decide come to the street is help parents financial,
participant sees what they do as a right thing (to
help and the ability of them to earn money) so
they view positively their life whereas indirectly
they do the role that have been not proper for them
or it should be done by their parent even less until
cause they out of school.
6. Freedom from parents control and there is no
discipline during on the street also need to be
calculated as factor that maybe cause the
participant view their life as a positive thing.
Further Research
1. Street children in this research can be categorized
to special population because the uniqueness of
them compare to the population in general. In this
research we did something different since the
street children are considered as special
population, such as building rapport and explain
what is the purpose of involving them as

participant to built their trust, so they could
seriously answer the questionnaire, and the most
important is they are not just an object but also
have role on this success of research. Besides, it
needs maintaining in instrument filling (if using
instrumentation like questionnaire) and probing
for getting deeper information of the answer that
they give like how the problem they faced look
alike during on the street so it was suggested to do
individual administration. We suggest the other
researcher who wants to dwelve on the topic to
conduct the same method.
2. On the next research it is hoped that there will be
greater sample number from other district or area
so it will represent more street children in
Indonesia especially adolescent.
3. Research related with street children can also be
done on street children in age of range around less
of 12 years old or adult because on the field
researcher found the big number of street children
who fit in with those criteria.
4. It will be better if longitudinal research is
conducted, related to adolescent street children
mental health to know how far the consistency of
result which shows that there are more adolescent
street children include in mentally healthy
category (flourishing).
5. The result shows that there is no fit in between
participant number who have mentally healthy
with they who joined in a gang (group on the
street) can be made for next research to know
influence of gang existing to mental health of
street children or what does the factor that cause
street children mentally healthy.
6. Instrument that is used on this research especially
mental health has positive items and tend to be
abstract that can cause participant (even less with
uniqueness that is had by street children)
differently mean it form the truth purpose.
Besides, the items describe more about current
feelings (here and now) because asking feel during
last one month so it is still uncertain the truth
feeling of participant. This needs to be considered
to use instrumentation that can measure negative
feeling from participant so can be known negative
or positive feeling that they have.
References
1) Ayerst, S. L. (1999) Depression and stress in street youth.
Adolescence, 34 (135), 567-575
2) Berns, R. M. (2013) Child, family, school, community:
Socialization and support (9th ed.). California: Wadsworth,
Cengage Learning
3) Canty-Mitchell, J. and Zimet, G. D. (2000) Psychometric properties
of the multidimensional scale of perceived social support in urban
adolescents. American Journal of Community Psychology, 28, 391–
400
4) Chen, C., Greenberger, E., and Farruggia, S. (2003) Beyond parents
and peers: The role of important non-parental adults (vips) in
adolescent development in China and the United States. Psychology
in the Schools, 40 (1), 35-50. doi: 10.1002/pits.10068
5) Cheng, S-T. and Chan, A. C. M. (2004) The multidimensional scale
of perceived social support: dimensionality and age and gender
differences in adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences,
37, 1359–1369. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.01.006
6) Coventry, W. L., Gillespie, N. A., Heath, A. C., and Martin, N. G.
(2004). Perceived social support in a large community sample. Soc
Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol, 39, 625–636. doi: 10.1007/s00127-
004-0795-8
7) Demaray, M. K. and Malecki, C. K. (2002). Critical levels of
perceived social support associated with student adjustment. School
Psychology Quarterly, 17 (3), 213–241
8) Demartoto, A. (2012) Need-Based Street Children Management in
Surakarta City of Central Java Province of Indonesia. Asian Social
Science, 8 (11), 107-118. doi:10.5539/ass.v8n11p107
9) Goldie, I., Dowds, J., and O’Sullivan, C. (n.d.) Mental health and
inequalities. Mental Health Foundation, 1-11
10) Harju, E. S. (2013) ―Growing big in the streets‖: Lusaka´s street
youths´ voices of poverty in the streets (Master´s Thesis, University
of Helsinki, Finlandia). Retrieved from
http://www.nuorisotutkimusseura.fi/sites/default/files/Harju.pdf
11) Horwitz, A. V. (2010). An overview of sociological perspectives on
the definitions, causes, and responses to mental health and illness.
In T. L. Scheid and T. N. Brown, A handbook for the study of
mental health: Social contexts, theories, and systems (2nd ed.) (p.
6-19). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
12) International Labour Organization (ILO). (2009) Street children in
Indonesia at glance. Retrieved from
http://www.ilo.org/jakarta/areasofwork/WCMS_126134/lang--
en/index.htm
13) Keyes, C. L. M. (1998) Social well-being. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 61 (2), 121–140
14) Keyes, C. L. M. (2002) The mental health continuum: From
languishing to flourishing in life. Journal of Health and Social
Behavior, 43, 207–222
15) Keyes, C. L. M (2003) Complete mental health: An agenda for the
21st century. In C. L. M. Keyes and J. Haidt, Flourishing: Positive
psychology and the life well-lived (p. 293-312). Washington DC,
US: American Psychological Association
16) Keyes, C. L. M (2005) Mental illness and/or mental health?
Investigating axioms of the complete state model of health. Journal
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73 (3), 539–548. doi:
10.1037/0022-006X.73.3.539
17) Keyes, C. L. M. (2015) Overview of the mental health continuum
short form (mhc-sf). Accepted via email from Keyes on April 7,
2015
18) Keyes, C. L. M. and Simoes, E. J. (2012) To flourish or not:
Positive mental health and all-cause mortality. American Journal of
Public Health, 102 (11), 2164-2172
19) Koller, S. H. and Hutz, C. S. (2001) Street children: Psychological
perspectives. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral
Sciences. Elsevier Science Ltd
20) Kombarakaran, F. A. (2004) Street children of Bombay: Their
stresses and strategies of coping. Children and Youth Services
Review, 26 (2004), 853–871. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2004.02.025
21) Lakey, B. (n.d.). Social Support and Social Integration
22) Lakey, B. and Lutz, C. J. (1996) Social support and preventive and
therapeutic interventions. In G. R. Pierce, B. R. Sarason, and I. G.
Sarason, Handbook of social support and the family (p. 435-465).
New York: Springer & Business Media
23) Lalor, K. J. (1999) Street children: A comparative perspective.
Child Abuse & Neglect, 23 (8), 759–77
24) Lamers, S. M. A. (2012) Positive mental health: Measurement,
relevance and implications. Enschede, Netherlands: University of
Twente
25) Lamers, S. M. A., Westerhof, G. J., Bohlmeijer, E. T., ten Klooster,
P. M., and Keyes, C. L. M. (2010) Evaluating the psychometric
properties of the mental health continuum-short form (MHC-SF).
Journal of Clinical Psychology. Wiley Periodicals, Inc
26) Mangunsong, F. (2011) Psikologi dan pendidikan anak
berkebutuhan khusus. Jilid kedua. Depok: LPSP3 UI

27) Martınez, R. S., Aricak, O. T., Graves, M. N., Myszak, J. P., and
Nellis, L. (2011) Changes in perceived social support and
socioemotional adjustment across the elementary to junior high
school transition. Youth Adolescence, 40, 519–530. doi:
10.1007/s10964-010-9572-z
28) Mulyadi, S. (2008) Anak jalanan. Jurnal Psikologi, 21 (1), 82-92
29) Nugraha, P. (2013, March 29). NTB home to 12,000 street
children. Retrieved from
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/03/29/ntb-home-12000-
street-children.html
30) Papalia D. E. and Feldman, R. D. (2012) Experience Human
Development. New York: McGraw Hill
31) Robitschek, C. and Keyes, C. L. M. (2009) Keyes’s model of
mental health with personal growth initiative as a parsimonious
predictor. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 56 (2), 321–329. doi:
10.1037/a0013954
32) Santrock, J. W. (2014) Adolescence (15th ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill Education
33) Schmied, V. and Tully, L. (2009) Effective strategies and
interventions for adolescents in a child protection context. Ashfield
NSW: Centre for Parenting & Research Service System
Development Division NSW Department of Community Services
34) Sutriyanto, E. (2011, August 25) Jumlah anak jalanan 230 ribu di
Indonesia. Retrieved from
http://www.tribunnews.com/nasional/2011/08/25/jumlah-anak-
jalanan-230-ribu-di-indonesia
35) Taylor, S. E., Sherman, D. K., Kim, H. S., Jarcho, J., Takagi, K.,
and Dunagan, M. S. (2004) Culture and social support: Who seeks
it and why. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 87 (3),
354-362
36) The Jakarta Post. (2012, April 18) Long road to solving
problem of street children: Minister. Retrieved from
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/04/18/a-hundred-miles-
go-street-children-problems-social-affairs-minister.html
37) Thoits, P. A. (1995) Stress, coping, and social support processes:
Where are we? What next?. Journal of Health and Social Behavior,
53-59
38) Thoits, P. A. (2010) Stress and health: Major findings and policy
implications. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 51(S) S41–
S53. American Sociological Association. doi:
10.1177/0022146510383499
39) Tonsing, K., Zimet, G. D., and Tse, S. (2012) Assessing social
support among South Asians: The multidimensional scale of
perceived social support. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 5 (2012),
164–168. doi:10.1016/j.ajp.2012.02.012
40) Trifilia, E. (2013) Hubungan antara perceived social support dan
self-esteem pada mahasiswa psikologi jenjang sarjana
(Undergraduate’s thesis). Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia
41) Turner, R. J. and Marino, F. (1994). Social support and social
structure: A descriptive epidemiology. Journal of Health and Social
Behavior, 35 (3), 193-212
42) United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF). (2002) A study on
street children in Zimbabwe. Retrieved from
http://www.unicef.org/evaldatabase/files/ZIM_01-805.pdf
43) United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF). (2005) The state of the
world's children 2006: Excluded and invisible. New York: UNICEF.
44) Woan, J., Lin, J., and Auerswald, C. (2013) The health status of
street children and youth in low- and middle-income countries: A
systematic review of the literature. Journal of Adolescent Health,
53, 314-321
45) Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., Zimet, S. G., and Farley, G. K. (1988)
The multidimensional scale of perceived social support. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 52, 30-41