Psychology RootsTable of Contents
Collective Efficacy – Chicago Neighborhood Study
Here in this post, we are sharing the “Collective Efficacy – Chicago Neighborhood Study”. You can read psychometric and Author information. We have thousands of Scales and questionnaires in our collection (See Scales and Questionnaires). You can demand us any scale and questionnaires related to psychology through our community, and we will provide you with a short time. Keep visiting Psychology Roots.
About Collective Efficacy – Chicago Neighborhood Study
Scale Name
Collective Efficacy – Chicago Neighborhood Study
Author Details
Robert J. Sampson, Stephen W. Raudenbush, and Felton Earls (1997)
Translation Availability
English
Background/Description
The Collective Efficacy – Chicago Neighborhood Study, developed by Robert J. Sampson, Stephen W. Raudenbush, and Felton Earls in 1997, is a resident-report questionnaire designed to measure informal social control, willingness to intervene, and social cohesion within a neighborhood. Targeting urban residents aged 18 and older, the scale was developed as part of the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN), a landmark study examining the social processes influencing crime and community well-being. Cited in Dahlberg et al. (2005), it aligns with social disorganization theory (Shaw & McKay, 1942) and collective efficacy theory (Sampson et al., 1997), assessing how shared expectations and mutual trust enable residents to maintain social order and reduce violence.
The scale comprises 10 items divided into two subscales: informal social control (5 items, e.g., “Neighbors would intervene if children were skipping school”) and social cohesion/trust (5 items, e.g., “People in this neighborhood can be trusted”). Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = “strongly disagree” to 5 = “strongly agree”). Scores are summed per subscale (range: 5-25 each) or combined (range: 10-50), with higher scores indicating greater collective efficacy. Validated in diverse urban samples, it is used to assess neighborhood dynamics, predict crime rates, and inform community-based interventions.
Psychologists, sociologists, and public health researchers use the scale to evaluate neighborhood social processes, study protective factors against violence, and design community interventions. Its strong psychometric properties and dual-subscale structure are strengths, though its focus on urban settings and English-only availability may limit generalizability and cross-cultural use.
Administration, Scoring and Interpretation
- Obtain a copy of the scale from authorized sources, such as Dahlberg et al. (2005) Measuring Violence-Related Attitudes, Behaviors, and Influences Among Youths or PHDCN publications, ensuring ethical use permissions.
- Explain the purpose to respondents, noting that it assesses neighborhood social processes to support community well-being, emphasizing anonymity and using clear, non-judgmental language.
- Provide instructions, asking residents to rate their agreement with statements about neighborhood control and cohesion over the past month, using the 5-point scale.
- Approximate time for completion is 3-5 minutes, given the 10-item format.
- Administer in a community, household, or research setting, using paper or digital formats, ensuring a private environment. Oral administration may be used for residents with reading difficulties.
Reliability and Validity
The Collective Efficacy – Chicago Neighborhood Study demonstrates strong psychometric properties, as reported by Sampson et al. (1997) and cited in Dahlberg et al. (2005). Internal consistency is excellent, with Cronbach’s alpha ranging from 0.80 to 0.91 across subscales, indicating robust item cohesion. Test-retest reliability is not reported, but stability is inferred to be moderate to high based on similar community measures (r ≈ 0.65-0.85 over months).
Convergent validity is supported by correlations with related constructs, such as reduced neighborhood crime (r ≈ -0.30 to -0.50) and increased community engagement (r ≈ 0.40-0.60). Discriminant validity is evidenced by weaker correlations with unrelated constructs, like individual socioeconomic status (r < 0.30). Criterion validity is demonstrated by its ability to predict lower violent crime rates in longitudinal studies. Factor analyses confirm the two-factor structure (informal social control, social cohesion/trust), supporting construct validity. The high reliability makes it robust, though multi-source data (e.g., observational measures) can enhance accuracy.
Available Versions
10-Items
Reference
Dahlberg, L. L., Toal, S. B., Swahn, M. H., & Behrens, C. B. (2005). Measuring violence-related attitudes, behaviors, and influences among youths: A compendium of assessment tools. Centers for disease control and prevention.
Important Link
Scale File:
Frequently Asked Questions
What does the Collective Efficacy – Chicago Neighborhood Study measure?
It measures informal social control and social cohesion in neighborhoods.
Who can use the scale?
Psychologists, sociologists, and public health researchers studying urban residents aged 18+.
How long does the scale take to complete?
It takes about 3-5 minutes.
Is the scale specific to certain groups?
It targets urban residents aged 18 and older.
Can the scale inform interventions?
Yes, it supports community interventions with strong reliability (α = 0.80-0.91).
Disclaimer
Please note that Psychology Roots does not have the right to grant permission for the use of any psychological scales or assessments listed on its website. To use any scale or assessment, you must obtain permission directly from the author or translator of the tool. Psychology Roots provides information about various tools and their administration procedures, but it is your responsibility to obtain proper permissions before using any scale or assessment. If you need further information about an author’s contact details, please submit a query to the Psychology Roots team.
Help Us Improve This Article
Have you discovered an inaccuracy? We put out great effort to give accurate and scientifically trustworthy information to our readers. Please notify us if you discover any typographical or grammatical errors.
Make a comment. We acknowledge and appreciate your efforts.
Share With Us
If you have any scale or any material related to psychology kindly share it with us at psychologyroots@gmail.com. We help others on behalf of you.
