Community Psychology

Community psychology is concerned with the community as the unit of study. This contrasts with
most psychology which focusses on the individual. Community psychology also studies the
community as a context for the individuals within it, and the relationships of the individual to
communities and society. Community psychologists seek to understand the functioning of the
community, including the quality of life of persons within groups, organizations and institutions,
communities, and society. Their aim is to enhance quality of life through collaborative research and
action.

Community psychology goes beyond an individual focus and integrates social, cultural,
economic, political, environmental, and international influences to promote positive change, health,
and empowerment at individual and systemic levels.

What Do Community Psychologists Do?

Depending on one’s training, experiences, and preferences, community psychologists can work
as educators, professors, program directors, consultants, policy developers, evaluators,
and researchers in community organizations, universities, or government agencies to promote mental
health and community well-being.

 We seek to expand “helping” beyond traditional psychotherapy to promote wellness.

 We engage in action-oriented research to develop, implement, and evaluate programs.
 We base our work on a scientific foundation to better understand the multiple influences of the social
environment on health and wellness
 We build collaborative relationships with community members, groups, and organizations to solve
social problems.
 We consult with and provide tools to organizations to build capacity to address social problems such
as exploitation and victimization.
 We analyze government, civic life, and workplace settings in order to understand and improve fair
and diverse participation.
 We fight oppression, work to reduce social inequalities, and work with marginalized people toward
their empowerment.

History of community psychology in the US:

In the 1950s and 1960s, many factors contributed to the beginning of community psychology in the
US. Some of these factors include:

 A shift away from socially conservative, individual-focused practices in health care and
psychology into a progressive period concerned with issues of public health, prevention and
social change after World War II and social psychologists' growing interest in racial and religious
prejudice, poverty, and other social issues.
 The perceived need of larger-scale mental illness treatment for veterans.
 Psychologists questioning the value of psychotherapy alone in treating large numbers of people
with mental illness.
 The development of community mental health centres and de-institutionalization of people with
mental illnesses into their communities.
Swampscott Conference
In 1965, several psychologists met to discuss the future of community mental health as well as discuss
the issue of only being involved with problems of mental health instead of the community as a whole.
The Swampscott Conference is considered the birthplace of community psychology. A published
report on the conference calls for community psychologists to be political activists, agents of social
change and "participant-conceptualizers.
At this meeting, those in attendance concluded that psychology needed to take a greater focus on
community and social change in order to address mental health and well-being. Since that time, the
field has continued to grow.
The goals of Community Psychology have been to examine and better understand complex
individual–environment interactions in order to bring about social change, particularly for those who
have limited resources and opportunities.

Community Psychology at Work

Due to the nature of this profession, people who work in this field often perform a range of duties and
take on a number of different roles. Some things that a community psychologist might do include:

 Researching problems within a community and assessing individual needs

 Finding ways to help disadvantaged or disenfranchised individuals feel more connected with
their local communities
 Understanding social issues among minority groups
 Developing, implementing and evaluating action-oriented community-based programs
 Building relationships between individuals and community groups
 Evaluate organizations, governments, and communities in order to promote participation and
diversity.

Types of Community:

Locality-Based
This is the traditional conception of community. It includes city blocks, neighborhoods, small
towns, cities, and rural regions. Interpersonal ties exist among community members (residents);
they are based on geographic proximity, not necessarily choice. When residents of a locality share
a strong sense of community, individuals often identify themselves by their locality, and friends
are often neighbors. In many nations, political representation, public school districts, and other
forms of social organization are delineated by locality.

Relational
These communities are defined by interpersonal relationships and a sense of community but are
not limited by geography. Internet discussion groups are communities completely without
geographic limits. Mutual help groups, student clubs, and religious congregations are defined by
relational bonds.
Although relational communities may be based only on friendships or recreation (e.g., sports
leagues, sororities), many are organizations bound by a common task or mission. Workplaces,
religious congregations, community organizations, chambers of commerce, labor unions, and
political parties are examples.
Locality-based and relational communities form a spectrum rather than a dichotomy. Many
primarily relational communities are seated in a locality (e.g., universities, religious
congregations). An Internet discussion group where the members have never actually met each
other face-to-face anchors the purely relational pole of the continuum; a town or neighborhood
represents the opposite locality-based pole. How do the communities discussed in the quotes at
the beginning of this chapter vary along this continuum?
  Levels of Communities

Communities exist at different ecological levels. As discussed in Chapter 1, these include:

Microsystems (e.g., classrooms, mutual help groups)
Organizations (e.g., workplaces, religious congregations, civic groups)
Localities (e.g., city blocks, neighborhoods, cities, towns, rural areas)
Macrosystems (e.g., the Filipino community, political parties, nations)

Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft

Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft, ideal types of social organizations that were systematically
elaborated by German sociologist Ferdinand Tönnies.

 Tönnies’s conception of the nature of social systems is based on his distinction between
the Gemeinschaft (communal society) and the Gesellschaft (associational society). In the
rural, peasant societies that typify the Gemeinschaft, personal relationships are defined and
regulated on the basis of traditional social rules. People have simple and direct face-to-face
relations with each other that are determined by Wesenwille (natural will)—i.e., natural and
spontaneously arising emotions and expressions of sentiment.

 The Gesellschaft, in contrast, is the creation of Kürwille (rational will) and is typified by
modern, cosmopolitan societies with their government bureaucracies and large industrial
organizations. In the Gesellschaft, rational self-interest and calculating conduct act to weaken
the traditional bonds of family, kinship, and religion that permeate the Gemeinschaft’s
structure. In the Gesellschaft, human relations are more impersonal and indirect, being
rationally constructed in the interest of efficiency or other economic and political
considerations.

THE ROLE OF PREVENTION

One of the primary characteristics of the Community Psychology field is its focus on preventing
rather than just treating social and psychological issues, and this can occur by boosting individual
skills as well as by engaging in environmental change. The example in the box below provides an
example of prevention directed toward saving lives at a beach, as drowning is one of the leading
causes of death.

This example highlights a key prevention theme in the field of Community Psychology, and in this
case, the preventive perspective involved getting to the root of the problem and then securing buy-in
from the community in order to secure resources necessary to implement the changes. As illustrated in
the textbox above, there are two radically different ways of bringing about change, which are referred
to as first- and second-order change.

 First-order change attempts to eliminate deficits and problems by focusing exclusively on

the individuals. When the lifeguard on the beach dove into the water to save one person after
another, this was an example of a first-order intervention. There was no attention to
identifying the real causes that contributed to people falling into the water and being at risk
for drowning, and this band-aid approach would not provide the structural changes necessary
to protect others on the beach or walking on the cliffs.
 A more effective approach involve second-order change, the strategy the lifeguard
ultimately adopted, and this involved installing railings on the cliff and the teaching of
swimming skills. Such changes get at the source of the problem and provide more enduring
solutions for the entire community. A real example of this approach involved low-income
African American preschool children who participated in a preventive learning preschool
 program (called the High/Scope Perry Preschool)—40 years later, participants in this
program were found to have better high school completion, employment, income, and lower
criminal behaviour.

Ecological Levels of Analysis:

As individuals, we live within webs of social relationships. Urie Bronfenbrenner (1979) proposed a
levels of analysis framework (describing levels of social contexts) that is influential in developmental
psychology and community psychology. Our discussion of ecological levels is partly based on
Bronfenbrenner’s approach, but our frame of reference is the community, not just the developing
individual. Thus, we differ in some details from his approach. Historically, community psychology
has used ecological levels as a way of clarifying the different values, goals, and strategies for
intervention associated with each level of analysis. In addition, this approach helps us focus on the
interactions between systems. Thinking in terms of ecological levels of analysis helps clarify how a
single event or problem has multiple causes. For example, factors that contribute to a child’s problems
in school may include forces at multiple levels. Powerful adults at school, in the local community, and
at national and global levels make policy decisions that affect the resources that determine the quality
of education the child receives. Family members, friends, and teachers have a great impact, but even
their thinking and values are influenced by the school system; the local community; and cultural,
societal, and even global levels. Thinking in terms of ecological levels of analysis also helps illustrate
multiple ways to address an important question for community psychology: What is a community?
While originally tied to place or a locality, “community” has come to refer to sets of relationships
among persons at many levels—whether tied to place or not. Thus, a classroom, sorority, religious
congregation, online community, or cultural group (e.g., the Mexican American community) may be
considered a community. Figure 1.1 illustrates our typology of ecological levels of analysis for
community psychology. The most proximal systems, closest to the individual and involving the most
face-to-face contact, are closer to the center of the diagram. The more distal systems, less immediate
to the person yet having broad effects, are toward the outside of the diagram. As you can see in the
diagram, some of these systems overlap; for example, some organizations, such as small businesses or
community groups, are so small that they have many of the psychosocial qualities of microsystems.
The examples in italics in Figure 1.1 are illustrative and do not represent all groups at each level.
Individuals, societies, and the levels between them are interdependent, and their contributions
to behavior and social problems may overlap in different ways. Indeed, community
psychology is based on that interdependence of persons in contexts. It is at the point where
these systems link that community psychology interventions can often have their greatest
impact: the point where community members have identified an issue and where multiple
people, groups, and community resources must be brought together in an intentional way to
address it. It is for this reason that community psychology is referred to as a linking science
(see Chapter 2).
Individuals
The concept of the individual in this model encompasses all of a person’s experiences,
relationships, thoughts, and feelings. Consider the individual person, nested within the other
levels. The person chooses their relationships or environments to some extent and influences
them in many ways; likewise, these influence the person. Each person is involved in systems
at multiple ecological levels (e.g., family and friends, workplace, neighborhood). Much
research in community psychology concerns how individuals are interrelated with social
contexts in their lives.
Community psychologists and others in related fields have developed individually oriented
preventive interventions to increase personal capacities to address problems in communities.
These interventions have been documented to be effective in reducing such problems as
difficulties in the social and academic development of children, adolescent behaviour
problems and juvenile delinquency, adult physical health and depression, HIV/AIDS,
difficulties during family transitions such as parenting and divorce, and family violence (we
discuss these in detail in Chapters 10 and 11). Many preventive approaches promote social-
emotional competence and skills for adapting to challenging contexts or ecological transitions
from one context to another, such as entering school or becoming a parent (Weissberg et al.,
2003).
Microsystems
Microsystems are environments in which a person repeatedly engages in direct, personal
interaction with others (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, p. 22). They include families, classrooms,
friendship networks, athletic teams, musical groups, neighbourhoods, residence hall wings,
and self-help groups. In microsystems, individuals form interpersonal relationships, assume
social roles, and share activities (Maton & Salem, 1995). Microsystems are more than simply
the sum of their individual members; they are social units with their own dynamics. For
example, family therapists have long focused on how families function as systems beyond
their individual members (Watzlawick et al., 1974). Members have roles, differential power
in making decisions, reactions to the actions of other members, and so on.
Microsystems can be important sources of support for their members but also sources of
conflict and burdens. The concept of a setting is important in community psychology (see
Chapter 5). In this psychological usage of the term, setting is not simply a physical place but
an enduring set of relationships among individuals that may be associated with one or several
places. A chapter of a self-help group is a setting, even if its meeting place changes. Physical
settings such as playgrounds, local parks, bars, or coffee shops may provide meeting places
for microsystems. The term “setting” is applied to microsystems and to larger organizations.
Organizations
Organizations are larger than microsystems and have a formal structure: a title, a mission,
bylaws or policies, meeting or work times, supervisory relationships, and so on.
Organizations studied by community psychologists include human service and health care
settings, treatment programs, schools, workplaces, neighborhood associations, cooperative
housing units, religious congregations, and community coalitions. These important forms of
community affect whom people associate with, what resources are available to them, and how
they define and identify themselves. Employed persons often introduce themselves by where
they work.
Organizations often consist of sets of smaller microsystems. Classes, activities, departments,
staff, administrators, and boards make up a school or college. Departments, shifts, or work
teams make up a factory or restaurant. Religious congregations have choirs, religious classes,
and prayer groups. Large community organizations usually work through committees.
However, organizations are not simply the sum of their parts; the dynamics of the whole
organization, such as its organizational hierarchy and its informal culture, are important. In
turn, organizations can be parts of larger social units. A local congregation may be part of a
wider religious body, or a retail store part of a chain. A neighbourhood association offers a
way for citizens to influence city government. The largest organizations (e.g., international
corporations, political parties, religious denominations) are macrosystems, which are
discussed later.
Localities
Although the term “community” has meanings at many levels of analysis, one prominent
meaning refers to geographic localities, including rural counties, small towns, urban
neighbourhoods, or entire cities. Localities usually have governments; local economies;
media; systems of social, educational, and health services; and other institutions that influence
individual quality of life. Localities may be understood as sets of organizations or
microsystems. Individuals participate in the life of their shared locality mainly through
smaller groups. Even in small towns, individuals seldom influence the wider community
unless they work alongside other citizens in an organization or microsystem. An association
of neighborhood residents is an organization, while the entire neighborhood is a locality. That
neighborhood may also host microsystems of teen friends, adults who meet for coffee, and
parents and children who gather at a playground. However, a locality is not simply the sum of
its citizens, microsystems, or community organizations. Its history, cultural traditions, and
qualities as a whole community surround each of those levels. An example of the linkage
between organizations and localities is the development of community coalitions, composed
of representatives of various community groups and organizations and formed to address
wider community issues such as drug abuse or health concerns. While community coalitions
may be a new concept for many of you, they are important elements of community
psychology practice and have been shown to be effective in increasing and mobilizing
community resources to achieve community goals.
Macrosystems
Macrosystems are the largest level of analysis in our system. While Figure 1.1 portrays only
one macrosystem, in fact individuals, microsystems, organizations, and localities are all
continually influenced by multiple macrosystems. Macrosystems include societies, cultures,
political parties, social movements, corporations, international labor unions, multiple levels of
government, international institutions, broad economic and social forces, and belief systems.
Community psychology’s perspective ultimately needs to be global. Macrosystems exercise
influence through policies and specific decisions, such as legislation and court decisions, and
through promoting ideologies and social norms. Ideals of individual autonomy greatly
influence U.S. culture and the discipline of psychology. Mass media communicate subtle
forms of racial stereotyping and cultural expectations for thinness, especially for women.
Macrosystems also form contexts within which the other levels function, such as how the
economic climate affects businesses. But systems at other levels can influence macrosystems
through social advocacy or through actions such as buying locally grown foods. An important
level of analysis that we include under macrosystems is the population. A population is
defined by a broadly shared characteristic (e.g., gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, income,
religion, sexual orientation, ability or disability status). Populations can be the basis of a
broad form of community (e.g., the Jewish community, the gay community). However, not all
individuals within a population will identify with it as a community. Many studies in
community psychology concern more than one level of analysis. For instance, a study of
children in Head Start programs investigated neighborhood-, family-, and individual-level
factors related to educational success. The researchers found that neighborhood-level factors
(including the number of families of low or high socioeconomic status and the number of
homes in which English was a second language) had significant direct effects on the cognition
and behavior of children in Head Start (Vanden-Kiernan et al., 2010). These direct
neighborhood-level effects were not mediated by such family-level factors as family
structure, income, ethnicity, or family processes (e.g., amount of social support available to
parents, parents’ involvement in their children’s education). What this means, for example, is
that living in a neighborhood marked by concentrated poverty had a significant negative
effect on the cognitive and behavioral development of children, even if those children lived in
a two-parent home with high income and parents who were highly involved in their
education. The negative neighborhood-level effects were strong enough to overwhelm any
positive effects the children received from their parents.

Seven Core Values of Community Psychology:

Values enable community psychologists to clarify their choices of social problems for
research and action.
• Values help community psychologists to question the dominant cultural narratives and
worldviews that seek to maintain the status quo.
• Values guide community psychologists to avoid a discrepancy between actions and values.
That is, values help community psychologists to “walk the talk”.
• Values help community psychologists to engage with a culture of a community.
• Values provide community psychologists with a unifying spirit and a shared commitment
for their work.

1. Individual and family wellness:

This value seeks to uphold the physical and psychological well-being of community
members at the individual and family levels. Wellness involves resilience, life
satisfaction, and competent social skills among family members.
– Community psychologists, therefore, aim at promoting individual and family wellness
by designing community-based interventions to prevent maladaptive behaviours,
individual and family social problems, and illness.
Community psychologists strengthen social competence, emotional competence, healthful
behaviours, social support, and mutual help groups among family members. Efforts to
strengthen family wellness promotes individual wellness as well.
– Prilleltensky (2001) argues that the promotion of individual and family wellness gives
rise to “collective wellness”, which reflects the health of communities and societies.
2. Sense of community:
It refers to the feeling of togetherness, belongingness, and interdependence that
community members perceive in a community in which they live. This is one of the most
important concepts for community psychology.
– If environments and individuals are well matched, a more optimal community as well
as one with a sense of spirit and a sense of “we-ness” can be created.
 – Having a sense of community is the feeling of the relationship an individual has with
his/her community. Sense of community is sometimes referred to as “community spirit”
or sense of belonging in a community.
When people lack sense of community, they would not be involved in any activity in their
community. Lack of sense of community therefore slows down community development.
Community psychologists focus on promoting sense of community in the communities
where they work.
3. Respect for human diversity:
This value upholds the various communities and social identities that exist in
communities. This diversity may result from gender, ethnicity, nationality, race, sexuality,
and social economic status.
– In other words, respect for diversity refers to the view that people have the right to be
different, where being different does not mean being inferior. – If difference or diversity
is accepted as a fact of life, then resources ought to be equitably distributed to everyone
regardless of other considerations.
– Besides, research on human diversity focuses on strengths and resources within
communities and how these can be used in promoting quality of life.
4. Citizen participation:
This value involves the use of democratic processes in decision-making at the community
level such that all members of a community can actively participate in taking decisions
regarding the social problems that affect their lives.
Citizen participation also refers to peaceful, respectful, collaborative processes of making
decisions that involve all members of a community. – Thus, community psychologists
ensure the inclusion of community members in decisions that impact on community
members’ lives. In this way, it is assumed that community members would be much more
willing to get involved in community life and help bring about change in their
communities.

5. Collaboration and community strengths:

This value involves relationships between community psychologists and citizens with
whom they work. It is one of the most distinctive values of community psychology. –
Traditionally, psychologists carry themselves as experts (researchers, clinical
professionals, educational professionals, consultants etc.) in their relationship with
community members . – This posture creates an unequal relationship hierarchy of experts
and clients, which may not be useful for community work. Though community
psychologists have expertise, they also seek to identify and appreciate the life experiences
and wisdom of citizens. – Thus, community researchers aim at achieving participatory or
collaborative partnership with community members.
6. Empirical grounding:
This value refers to the need to for community research to inform community action and
interventions. In other words, community action ought to be grounded in meaningful
community research. – To initiate change in communities, community psychologists must
first conduct research, findings of which must be acted upon to promote quality of life.
No community problem can be addressed without proper research. – Empirical grounding
includes the use of both qualitative and quantitative research methods in understanding
community life. Community members should participate in defining the problems or
issues that affect them and in deciding how to resolve them.

7. Social justice: This value refers to the transparent, equitable, and fair allocation of power,
opportunities, obligations, and resources in a community (Prilleltensky, 2001). – There
are two types of social justice that guide the work of community psychologists. These are:
(a)distributive justice, and (b)procedural justice.