Subjective well-being and perceptions of safety

Children and Youth Services Review 44 (2014) 100–107

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Children and Youth Services Review journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth

Subjective well-being and perceptions of safety among Jewish and Arab children in Israel Asher Ben-Arieh ⁎, Edna Shimon The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 8 October 2013 Received in revised form 21 May 2014 Accepted 22 May 2014 Available online 2 June 2014 Keywords: Safety Subjective well-being Quality of life

a b s t r a c t As research has shown, safety is also a subjective phenomenon. Contemporary scholarship has also underscored the importance of subjective well-being among children as a vital component of overall well-being. Our paper explores the potential relationship between reported levels of safety in different settings and the subjective well-being of children. We conducted our study on 2238 children ages 10 and 12 with varying sociodemographic characteristics. Our findings support our hypothesis that safety in different settings is positively inter-correlated and that safety perceptions are positively correlated with subjective well-being. Furthermore, the correlations exist among different sociodemographic groups and in different settings. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Safety is a primary component of quality of life (QOL) (González, Casas, Figuer, Malo, & Viñas, 2012). Furthermore, safety and security form one of the basic levels (the second one) in Maslow's hierarchy of needs (Maslow, Frager, & Fadiman, 1970, pp. 35−51). Thus, safety and security are important aspects of the lives and well-being of children. The tradition of studying well-being in social sciences emerged with the social indicators movement in the 1960s. Many scholars consider Bauer (1966) the starting point of the Quality of Life movement. By the end of the 1960s, serious attempts to develop significant research on happiness, psychological well-being, or satisfaction with life initiated important scientific debates (Casas, 1989, 1991, 1996). Researchers have developed different theoretical conceptualizations and scientific models for well-being, trying to reconcile material (objective) and nonmaterial (subjective) aspects of the human and sociocultural environment. One of the more useful definitions for subjective well-being is presented by Campbell, Converse, and Rodgers (1976) who proposed including perceptions, evaluations, and aspirations of people regarding their lives. For the last 5–6 decades, major changes have characterized the physical and social environments in cities of the West (Prezza & Pacilli, 2007). In some countries in which violence and crime rates have been rising, young people feel unsafe. Those feelings are

⁎ Corresponding author at: Tel.: +972 77 515 0300; fax: +972 77 515 0304. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A. Ben-Arieh), [email protected] (E. Shimon).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.05.017 0190-7409/© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

considered a pervasive social and public health problems (Mijanovich & Weitzman, 2003). Some studies have examined children's exposure to violence, either directly or as witnesses (Spilsbury, 2005). Other studies have linked socioeconomic status and life in disadvantaged neighborhoods to dangerous lives and exposure to social and physical hazards. Violence has also become a major concern in school environments (Fu, Land, & Lamb, 2013; Raviv, Raviv, Shimoni, Fox, & Leavitt, 1999), even for very young children (Shahinfar, Fox, & Leavitt, 2000). Yet, safety perceptions and subjective well-being among children have seldom been studied. Furthermore, although perceptions of safety and actual safety are a crucial prerequisite for the well-being of children, only a few studies have examined the relationship between safety and well-being among children (Nayak, 2003; Prezza & Pacilli, 2007). Other studies focused on adults (González et al., 2012); however, studies have shown that the meaning and perception of well-being differ between children and adults. Furthermore, studies that have examined perceptions of safety and subjective well-being among children have focused only on one particular setting (e.g., home, school). Therefore, a thorough examination of the possible relationship between safety and well-being among children is warranted. The goal of our study is to explore perceptions of safety among children (ages 10 and 12), the relationship between perceptions of safety in different settings, and the relationship between perceptions of safety and subjective well-being. We begin with three hypotheses: (1) Perceptions of safety among children in different settings are positively correlated between themselves; (2) Perceptions of safety among children are positively correlated with their subjective well-being; and

A. Ben-Arieh, E. Shimon / Children and Youth Services Review 44 (2014) 100–107

(3) Any positive relationship between safety perceptions and subjective well-being among children will hold across different sociodemographic groups.

2. Literature review 2.1. Well-being of children Definitions of well-being emphasize a desirable state of happiness, health, or prosperity. More specifically, well-being refers to subjective feelings and experiences as well as living conditions. Well-being is usually discussed from a subjective perspective yet many times it is measured with objective indicators. A number of tensions illustrate the challenges of theorizing well-being, including: (1) between subjective and objective well-being; (2) between the present and possible future consequences for children; and (3) between the individual and the macro level (Ben-Arieh, Casas, Frones, & Korbin, 2013). Well-being is even more complex with regard to children. Wellbeing influences children's lives in the present and the future, as the present influences shape children's development and future outcomes. Evaluating the well-being of children is also complex because children are developing and depend on caretakers on the micro level and other ecological levels (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Further, child development is not a delimited psychological issue but is related to characteristics at the societal level; various societies not only influence social and cognitive development but require different levels of competencies for members according to age and gender. Such norms are not detailed prescriptions. For example, general agreement on the principle that children should not be exposed to risk requires mutual understanding of what risk for children implies so that risk cannot be delimited by a purely objective or adult perspective standard (Ben-Arieh & Frones, 2011). In recent decades, research on the well-being of children and adolescents has begun to develop and test psychometric instruments to measure well-being. Indeed, a broad consensus that psychological wellbeing is a key component of QOL has arisen among researchers. Authors call this phenomenon subjective well-being (Diener, 1984; Huebner, 1991; Huebner, Laughlin, Asch, & Gilman, 1998), psychological wellbeing (Casas, 1998; Ryff, 1989), human well-being (Blanco, Rojas, & Corte, 2000), social well-being (Keyes, 1998) or subjective QOL (Cummins & Cahill, 2000). Another important and more cognitive dimension of well-being is “satisfaction” with life. Both the affective and the cognitive dimensions are considered indicators of good psychological conditions of living. Additionally, evidence in localized and crosscultural studies has suggested that well-being is correlated with other positive constructs such as self-esteem, perceived control, perceived social support (Casas et al., 2007; Huebner, 2004), and values (Coenders, Casas, Figuer, & González, 2005; Csikzentmihalyi, 1997; Diener & Fujita, 1995; Diener, Suh, & Oishi, 1998). Satisfaction with life is understood by many scholars to be a global evaluation of life (Veenhoven, 1994). Indeed, Andrews and Withey (1976) proposed a one-item life satisfaction index, which has since been widely used as a basic indicator of well-being, although in different formats (i.e. Cantril's ladder), and it has also been used with children and adolescents. Some authors consider this single-item index a better measure of well-being (Cummins, 1998) than the aggregated measures, and it is frequently combined in questionnaires with other multi-item scales. Overall life satisfaction (OLS) is considered “more than” satisfaction with a set of life domains. On the other hand, satisfaction with life domains and OLS can be explained using both individual and cultural differences (Diener, 1984). Others have emphasized the importance for personal well-being of satisfaction with specific life domains. In scientific literature, extensive discussions have addressed the most relevant life domains for an assessment of OLS. Cummins (1998) considered life-domain satisfaction a second-order level and proposed the Personal Well-Being Index to

101

evaluate life satisfaction with only seven primary life domains, which he hypothesized are the most cross-culturally relevant. However, research on children's QOL from their own perspective is limited. Research has tended to focus on the attribution of needs, or the perceptions of QOL from adult (expert or parental) vantage points. In many instances, this approach betrays the basic definition of QOL: people's own perceptions, evaluations, and aspirations. Therefore, in practice, what has been referred to as QOL of children does not adequately address the quality of young peoples' lives; rather, research has addressed adult perceptions or opinions about the QOL of children. Furthermore, disagreements between children and adults regarding aspects of children's lives are an important dimension of social life and of interpersonal and intergenerational relationships. For example, children (especially older ones) are generally more often risk-takers than adults are. New and exciting experiences are important for children, while for adults, “security” of children is often more important. As a result, security measures imposed by adults may be interpreted by children as limits on their freedom. 2.2. Safety of children The safety of children is an objective and a subjective phenomenon concerned with perceptions of safety and exposure to hazards or risk factors. Some scholars have defined the safety of children by examining their exposure to risk and their levels of protection. Others have defined the safety of children according to how children feel (Ben-Arieh, McDonell, & Attar-Schwartz, 2009). The research we report on focuses on children's perceptions of safety. Others would point at the importance of safety in the Israeli context of a high-stress, high-conflict sociopolitical environment. Our study included measures reported by children from each of the two primary adversary groups, yet we looked on perceptions of safety at home, at school, and in the neighborhood. We have done so since the literature taught us that children safety is overwhelmingly understood by them in their local context and not the sociopolitical one. A number of studies including children demonstrated the importance of safety in children's lives. Fattore, Mason, and Watson (2009) studied children's views of well-being, finding that security is one of three themes with independent importance for well-being. Children indicated that feeling safe and secure was important for well-being, allowing them to engage fully with life. Children identified three factors that provide a sense of safety: (1) being protected by parents, (2) having a personal safe place, and (3) having trusted people in their lives. Another study with young people ages 15 to 24 in Spain found that satisfaction with present safety was most highly correlated with optimism, a sense of humor, coherence, a sense of meaning in life, and enjoying life (González et al., 2012). Although these studies and others showed the importance of safety and notions of well-being from children's perspectives, most of the research concentrated on the fear of victimization in particular. For example, Mijanovich and Weitzman (2003) found that in economically distressed cities and their suburbs in the United States, 8% of the participants (ages 10 to 18) felt unsafe on the day prior to the interview and 15% reported feeling unsafe at school. As noted, safety and well-being should be studied in different settings. In literature on children's safety perceptions, three settings have been dominant: home, school, and neighborhood. 2.3. Safety at home Home is the environment in which children spend most of their time. Furthermore, most children regard home as the safest place. Fattore et al. (2009) reported that children saw parents as the most responsible for keeping them safe. Accordingly, children expect home to be a place without personal threats and with emotional and physical security. Similarly, the Good Life Report (The Children's Society, 2012)

102


found that three-fifths of children ages 10 to 15 felt safe at home. Only a small minority (3%) of children did not feel safe at home. Most children feel safe at home, and a high correlation exists between safety at home and well-being because – with the exception of child maltreatment and domestic violence – families and home are safe havens for children. A number of theories have presented the important role of a safe home for child development.

Nayak (2003) asked 11- to 16-years-olds in the USA about safety in their neighborhood and found that 62% believed that their area was safe and clean and that the majority of residents felt safe (82%). The youth were found to have place-specific knowledge and fear of crime and talked about issues of policing, youth gangs, car thefts, and drugs. A majority of children wanted increased police presence in their neighborhoods.

2.4. Safety at school

2.6. Relationship between safety perceptions and different settings

Schools are likely the most studied environment with regard to children's safety. Researchers tend to agree that violence, bullying, and other victimization are issues that children at school have to manage on a regular basis (Noble, Sornberger, Toste, Heath, & McLouth, 2011). Although most of the studies focused on bullying and peer victimization, some studies measured safety more generally and explored levels and feelings of safety among children. The Good Life Report (The Children's Society, 2012) found that almost three-quarters of children ages 10 to 15 felt safe at school while only approximately 7% did not. Studies found similar results when surveying children in grade 1 through grade 6; 90% of students felt safe in most locations within the school. One exception was the playground, in which 31% of students felt unsafe. Surprisingly, the frequency of physical bullying was not significantly associated with children feeling unsafe at school, but name calling and harsh words were. Boulton et al. (2009) found negative associations between the level of bullying and perceived safety in primary school. Mijanovich & Weitzman (2003) found that participants from distressed inner-city neighborhoods were significantly more likely to feel unsafe at school than participants from suburbia. Children of single parents and from families with lower socioeconomic status were also more likely to feel unsafe at school. School characteristics are also important for a child's perception of safety. Children in highly disordered school environments (indicated by their agreement with the statement, “My schoolmates can get away with anything”) were more likely to feel unsafe than students in more orderly school environments. Twemlow, Fonagy, and Sacco (2002) pointed to 12 interacting factors that are likely to affect feelings of safety and well-being at school: (1) quality of the caregiver–child relationship; (2) levels of exposure to family and community violence; (3) presence of protective adults in life; (4) rules of the social system; (5) presence of drugs and alcohol; (6) media reports concerning safety in a community; (7) violence in media; (8) presence of a safe haven or retreat; (9) training in personal safety strategies; (10) positive relationships with peers and friends; (11) engagement in altruistic behaviors; and (12) a sense of belonging to a community. The authors claimed that the issue of safety at school can be explained from a psychodynamic point of view because children and teachers have attachment needs and developmental characteristics.

Proponents of the ecological theory of child development (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) have argued that child development is affected by different settings and that settings themselves interact and influence each other. Thus, perceptions of safety in different environments should be interrelated and influenced by each other. In other words, a child who feels safe at home will be more likely to feel safe at school, in the neighborhood, and in general and vice versa. However, to the best of our knowledge, these considerations, about safety perceptions in different settings, have rarely been studied. Researchers examining the safety of children focused on a few settings and generally excluded the subjective perspective of children. Our study provides a unique perspective on this question and explores the relationship between subjective perceptions of safety and different settings.

2.5. Safety in the neighborhood Although in the past children were absent from most of the research conducted on space and place in the community, recent research – particularly in the field of social geography – has shown that children are knowledgeable about fear and safety in their communities (Nayak, 2003). Fattore et al. (2009) found that most fears among children were centered in the community; they feared threats to personal safety, such as assault, victimization, and others. Accordingly, feeling unsafe was related to neighborhoods with low levels of social capital, neighborhoods that are not welcoming, and neighborhoods in which residents do not look after each other i.e. have low social capital. These kinds of neighborhood restricted children's capacity to engage in activities in their own way. On the other hand, children felt safe in neighborhoods when they were connected to the place and able to act autonomously within it (Spilsbury, 2005).

2.7. Safety and subjective well-being of children Studies examining safety (both its perception and actual presence) and subjective well-being of children are scarce. Hence, to explore this relation, one needs to relay also on findings relevant to safety such as risk behaviors and the quality of home. Risk behaviors are related to the safety of children, particularly to efforts to ensure that children are secure. The association between exposure, involvement in different kinds of violence and risk behaviors on one side and well-being, feelings of distress, and pathologies among children on the other side has been researched from different angles. Rees, Bradshaw, Goswami, and Keung (2010) and Rees, Goswami, and Bradshaw (2010) found that young people who have been bullied “often” or “sometimes” in the last 12 months had lower mean scores of subjective well-being across domains versus those who had been bullied “hardly ever” or “never.” The differences were statistically significant for all domains of well-being, indicating that bullying has pervasive effects on the lives of young people. Valois, Paxton, and Zullig (2006) found that engaging in a health risk behaviors may alter an individual's satisfaction with life. They researched children in Grade 6 through Grade 8, finding that involvement in physical fighting was associated with reduced levels of satisfaction with. Safety perceptions among children were found to be significantly associated with subjective well-being more clearly in a representative sample of children in Spain. Casas, Bello, González, and Aligué (2013) found that levels of feeling safe were significantly correlated with two scales of well-being: the OLS scale (Campbell et al., 1976) and the Student Life Satisfaction Scale (SLSS5) (Huebner, 1991). Children who completely agreed they felt safe displayed significantly higher subjective well-being versus all other children in the study. At the same time, children who completely disagreed they felt safe displayed lower subjective well-being versus all other children in the study. These significant relationships were also found regarding feelings of safety at home, at school, and while walking on the streets in the city in which they resided. In a study of 15- to 24-year-old youth, González et al. (2012) found a moderately significant correlation between satisfaction with personal safety and an overall measure of life satisfaction, which was slightly higher for females. OLS was also found as a strong predictor of satisfaction with present safety. Satisfaction with personal safety was also


highly correlated with satisfaction with life achievements and statistically correlated with freedom of choice and control of one's life. The authors concluded that self-conceptualization is an important factor regarding evaluation of security and that evaluations of security are strongly related to personal well-being. Rees, Bradshaw, et al. (2010) and Rees, Goswami, et al. (2010) researched children ages 10 to 15 in England, finding a significant correlation between happiness with feelings of safety and measures of overall well-being. In the same series of surveys (by Rees and his colleagues), the Good Life Report (The Children's Society, 2012) showed more specifically the relationship between child safety in different contexts and the well-being of children. The report suggested, based on children's statements, that quality of the home environment contributes to overall well-being more than quality of family relationships. They found that more than 70% of the small group of children who did not feel safe at home had low levels of well-being versus the average of 10% in the rest of the survey participants. The authors suggested that children's concerns about their safety at home are a strong predictor of lower levels of well-being. This report (The Children's Society, 2012) also found that feeling safe at school is related to well-being but at lower rates. Thirty-five percent of the children who did not feel safe at school had low levels of overall well-being, compared with the average of 11% in the same survey overall participants population. This relationship was stronger regarding well-being at school: 59% of the children who did not feel safe at school were also unhappy at school. A study in Finland focused specifically on the relationship between safety in the family and a child's subjective well-being (Rask, Åstedt‐ Kurki, & Laippala, 2002). The researchers found, among seventh- and eighth-grade children, that safe family relations were a predictor of overall subjective well-being and lower ill-being. Finally, Prezza and Pacilli (2007) studied Italian adolescents, finding a relationship between aspects of safety feeling and fear of crime to loneliness. According to their broader model, greater autonomy in mobility and in play in childhood predicted less fear of crime, and this variable (together with neighborhood social capital and stronger sense of community) mediated and reduced feelings of loneliness during adolescence.

3. Methods Our study draws on data from a large international study of subjective well-being (ISCWeB), conducted in class rooms in schools, among children ages 8, 10, and 12, in the second, fourth, and sixth grades. We focus on the Israeli sample of the survey, which consisted of two ethnic and national groups: Jews from Israel (JI) and Arabs from Israel (PI). The survey asked participants to report their subjective well-being on a range of scales and in a series of questions on their daily activities, relationships, and attitudes. Our study used a structured, anonymous, self-report questionnaire filled out by the children in their classrooms (in Arabic for the Arab students and in Hebrew for the Jewish students). A research assistant was available for any questions. The ISCWeB was translated into Hebrew and Arabic, the primary languages spoken in Israel. Then the questionnaire was piloted with 262 children of different age groups and with various socioeconomic backgrounds. Based on the results of the pilot, the questionnaire was modified and adjusted. To ensure the questionnaire dovetailed with the ISCWeB, a back translation technique was used. The study was approved by the Hebrew University Internal Review Board and by the Israeli Ministry of Education. Passive consent procedure was used: before the study began, school principals were sent consent forms and letters for the parents informing parents of the study's questionnaire and goals. Letters requested parents to return the form if they denied permission for their child's participation in the study. Student assent was active, and they were free to withdraw from the study

103

at any time and for any reason. Confidentiality was ensured for all participants. 3.1. Sample The Israeli part of the international ISCWeb study was conducted in 24 primary schools (19 Jewish and 5 Arab). These schools were selected from a list of 90 Jewish and 8 Arab schools. For the purpose of this study, we used questionnaires for children ages 10 and 12 only (grades 4 and 6), as their questionnaires included a few more items on safety than the 8 years old questionnaire. We used a quota sampling method to select the schools (dividing the population into categories or strata and selecting a predetermined number of participants from each category). The schools were diverse, with a selection of secular and religious Jews and Christian and Muslim Arabs. Schools also included children from diverse socioeconomic statuses representing rural and urban locales. We recruited Jewish schools by directly approaching school principals, and we recruited Arab schools through the regional inspectors. This resulted in a higher recruitment rate of Arab schools (5 of 8) than Jewish schools (19 of 90). We achieved a high return rate (fewer than 5% refusals) among children (most refusals were parent refusals). The sampling procedure yielded responses from 2238 children: 1157 in the fourth grade (mean age = 9.83, SD = 0.84) and 1081 in the sixth grade (mean age = 11.49, SD = 2.37). The sample included 74.1% Jews and 25.9% Arabs; 50.9% were boys and 49.1% were girls. 4. Measures The dependent variables measured satisfaction with life. Independent variables included measures of children's safety in different settings. 4.1. Independent variables We used nine items regarding safety in different settings, grouped into three multi-item variables, and one additional item on overall satisfaction with safety in life. All items were part of the ISCWeB and were piloted and validated in earlier studies in Israel, in both in Arabic and Hebrew languages (Shimoni, 2012). Mean scores ranged from “completely dissatisfied” to “completely satisfied” on an 11-point scale (0 through 10) or from “completely disagree” to “completely agree” on a 5-point scale (0 through 4). We standardized the data into units of 0- to 100-point distribution. 4.1.1. Safety at home This variable included three items: (1) satisfaction with home safety, (2) whether home is considered a safe place to study, and (3) satisfaction with the house. Cronbach's α for the three items was moderate (α = .540). 4.1.2. Safety at school This variable included two items: (1) general safety at school and (2) satisfaction with school safety. Cronbach's α for the two items was strong (α = .723). 4.1.3. Safety in the neighborhood This variable included four items: (1) safety when walking in area of residence, (2) safety in places where child plays, (3) satisfaction with safety in outdoor areas, and (4) satisfaction with the general safety of the local area. Cronbach's α for the four items was strong (α = .716). 4.1.4. Overall safety in life This variable included one item about overall satisfaction with safety in life.

104


Table 1 Dependent variables: subjective well-being measures. Total M Satisfied life as a whole (0–100) Student Life Satisfaction Scale (0–20)

91.64 16.86

Boys SD 19.29 3.78

M

Girls SD

91.17 16.65⁎⁎

19.67 3.73

M

4th grade SD

92.13 17.08⁎⁎

18.90 3.82

M

6th grade SD

91.49 16.73

M

19.59 3.90

91.80 16.99

Jews SD

M

18.98 3.64

91.14⁎ 16.96⁎

Arabs SD

M

SD

19.40 3.75

93.05⁎ 16.58⁎

18.95 3.85

t Tests: ⁎p b .05, ⁎⁎p b .01.

4.1.5. Dependent variables Dependent variables included subjective measures of satisfaction with life. 4.1.6. OLS This variable is a single-item scale ranging on an 11-point scale (0 to 10) from “completely dissatisfied” to “completely satisfied” (Campbell et al., 1976). For purposes of analysis, this scale was standardized into units of 0- to 100-point distribution. 4.1.7. SLSS We used the shorter version SLSS5 based on Huebner's (1991) earlier SLSS7 scale, which was developed and tested in earlier studies (The Children's Society, 2012). The children's society authors found that removing two of the seven items did not substantially affected the reliability and stability of the scale (Rees et al., 2010). The scale includes five items, each with a range from “completely disagree” to “completely agree” (0 to 4). The scale consists of the following statements: (1) “My life is going well”; (2) “My life is just right”; (3) “I wish I had a different kind of life”; (4) “I have a good life”; and (5) “I have what I want in life.” The five SLSS scale items had a good level of reliability (0.778). The total score for SLSS was calculated by adding 5 of its 7 domains and dividing by 5 to a maximum of 20 (Huebner, 1991). 5. Data analysis Data analysis entailed: (1) descriptive analysis (means and standard deviations) for each of the measures in this study; (2) t tests to examine the differences between males and females, between Arab and Jews, and among age groups; (3) a correlation analysis between the subjective well-being measures (as detailed earlier) and safety variables; and (4) a simple linear regression analysis to examine the contribution of the background and independent variables to the children's subjective well-being. 6. Results

higher than for Arabs, (M = 16.58, SD = 3.85), t(2,017) = 1.969, p = .049, although the mean score of OLS was significantly higher for Arabs (M = 93.05, SD = 18.95) than for Jews, (M = 91.14, SD = 19.40), t(2,155) = −2.023, p = .043. 6.2. Safety Means and standard deviations were also computed for the safety variables. Data is presented on a scale ranging from 0 to 100 (see Table 2). The highest mean was for “overall safety in life” (89.00) and the lowest was for “safety in school (74.80).” The mean for safety at home was slightly lower (88.59), the mean for safety in the neighborhood was significantly lower (80.30), and the mean for safety at school was the lowest (74.80). 6.2.1. Safety at home Significant differences regarding gender, age (grade), and nationality were observed. The mean score for girls (M = 89.49, SD = 14.23) was higher than for boys M = 87.71, SD = 15.34, t(2,148.42) = −2.785, p = .005. The mean was also higher for children in the sixth grade (M = 91.29, SD = 12.45) than for children in the fourth grade, M = 86.04, SD = 16.36, t(2,063.43) = − 8.417, p b .001. Finally, the mean was higher for Arabs (M = 91.79, SD = 13.47) than for Jews, M = 87.48, SD = 15.12, t(1,069.70) = −6.286, p b .001. 6.2.2. Safety at school Gender and nationality were significantly different. The mean score for girls (M = 78.55, SD = 24.22) was higher than for boys, M = 71.12, SD = 29.12, t(2,067.05) = −6.395, p b .001. The mean score was also higher for Arabs (M = 79.10, SD = 26.94) than for Jews, M = 73.29, SD = 26.94, t(2,123) = −4.370, p b .001. 6.2.3. Safety in the neighborhood Our study found significant differences regarding nationality and age (grade). Jews (M = 81.22, SD = 19.87) were significantly more satisfied than Arabs (M = 77.66, SD = 23.23) with safety in their neighborhood, t(834.17) = 3.186, p = .001.

6.1. Subjective well-being The mean for the OLS was 91.64 (SD = 19.29) and for the total score of SLSS was 16.86 (SD = 3.78). As seen in Table 1, significant differences existed regarding subjective well-being measures between (1) Jews and Arabs and (2) males and females. The mean score for girls on the SLSS (M = 17.08, SD = 3.82) was higher than for boys, M = 16.65, SD = 3.73, t(2,017) = − 2.588, p = .01. The mean score for Jews (M = 16.96, SD = 3.75) on the total score of SLSS was significantly

6.2.4. Overall safety in life Our study found only significant differences regarding nationality. Arabs (M = 90.93, SD = 22.03) were significantly more satisfied than Jews (M = 88.32, SD = 19.14) with their overall safety in life, t(2,105) = −2.640, p = .008. In summary, significant differences were found in regard to nationality, gender and age/grade. Arab children were more satisfied than Jewish children with their home (91.79), their overall safety (90.93)

Table 2 Independent variables: safety in different settings. Total M Safety at home Safety at school Safety in the neighborhood Overall safety in life

88.59 74.80 80.30 89.00

t Tests: ⁎p b .05, ⁎⁎p b .01, ⁎⁎⁎p b .001.

Boys SD

M

14.82 27.05 20.84 19.97

87.71⁎⁎ 71.12⁎⁎⁎ 80.26 88.25

Girls SD

M

15.34 29.12 21.02 20.93

89.49⁎⁎ 78.55⁎⁎⁎ 80.33 89.78

4th grade SD

M

14.23 24.22 20.67 18.89

86.04⁎⁎⁎ 75.18 81.34⁎ 88.44

6th grade SD

M

16.36 27.23 20.47 20.47

91.29⁎⁎⁎ 74.41 79.19⁎ 89.60

Jews SD

M

12.45 26.88 21.18 19.40

87.48⁎⁎⁎ 73.29⁎⁎⁎ 81.22⁎⁎⁎ 88.32⁎⁎

Arabs SD

M

SD

15.12 26.94 19.87 19.14

91.79⁎⁎⁎ 79.10⁎⁎⁎ 77.66⁎⁎⁎ 90.93⁎⁎

13.47 26.94 23.23 22.03

A. Ben-Arieh, E. Shimon / Children and Youth Services Review 44 (2014) 100–107 Table 3 Independent variables: bivariate correlations.

Safety at school Safety in neighborhood Overall safety in life

Safety at home

Safety at school

Safety in neighborhood

.331⁎⁎ .384⁎⁎ .414⁎⁎

– .341⁎⁎ .392⁎⁎

.341⁎⁎ – .450⁎⁎

t Tests: ⁎p b .05, ⁎⁎p b .01, ⁎⁎⁎p b .001.

Table 4 Correlations of safety in different settings and subjective well-being. Setting

OLS

SLSS

Overall safety Safety in the neighborhood Safety at home Safety at school

0.495 0.358 0.329 0.298

0.582 0.407 0.410 0.368

and their school (79.10). However, in relation to their neighborhood, they were significantly less satisfied than Jewish children (77.66). The gender differences in relation to safety at home and safety at school were also significant. Girls were more satisfied in these two settings (home: 89.49, school: 78.55). In relation to grade, while children in 6th grade felt significantly more satisfied at home (91.29), children in 4th grade felt more satisfied in the neighborhood. 6.2.5. Safety in different settings As illustrated in Table 3, safety perception in the three different settings was related with medium correlation, implying that although a relationship existed, room for independence existed as well. Furthermore, the data in Table 3 show that the strongest relationships were between the safety perceptions in the different settings and the overall safety perception, implying that the overall safety perception is composed of the different perceptions in different settings. 6.2.6. Safety and subjective well-being Table 4 shows correlations between the different safety variables and the two dependent variables. The safety variables are shown in order of strength of association with SLSS. In the table the third column provides an indication of the influence of each domain on overall well-being while holding the other domains constant. A larger “β” score shows a greater influence. The domains have been ranked in descending order. Overall safety in life had the strongest association with both subjective well-being measures, but the association with SLSS was stronger (β = 0.582). Although safety in the neighborhhod was ranked second in association with OLS (β = 0.358) and safety at home was ranked third (β = 0.329), the rankings shifted for SLSS. Safety at home was ranked second (β = 0.410) and safety in the neighborhhod was ranked third (β = 0.407). In both subjective well-being measures, safety at school had the weakest association (OLS = 0.298, SLSS = 0.368). To understand the relative importance and influence of the three safety variables, we used regression analysis (Table 5). The standardized β score in Table 5 shows the contribution of each safety variable in

105

descending order. The largest contribution to subjective well-being measures was overall safety in life (SLSS = 0.435, OLS = 0.365). Safety in the neighborhood ranked second for OLS (0.135) but its influence on SLSS was the weakest (0.114). The contribution of all safety variables was significant (p b .001). All safety items together explained 40.2% of SLSS and 27.6% of OLS. To better understand the contributions of settings to subjective wellbeing measures, we omitted the “overall safety” item from the regression model (Table 6). Although the standardized β scores showed stronger contributions of settings to both SWB measures, the total variance declined from 40.2% to 26.9% regarding the SLSS measure and was relatively stable regarding the OLS measure (from 27.6% to 18.4%). The largest contribution to SLSS was safety at home (β = 0.254) and safety in the neighborhood (β = 0.238). Safety at school made the smallest contribution to SLSS (β = 0.193). Regarding OLS, safety in the neighborhood made the strongest contribution (β = 0.240), followed by safety at home (β = 0.179), and safety at school made the weakest contribution (β = 0.145). The contribution of all safety variables was significant (p b .001). 6.2.7. Well-being, safety and sociodemographic variables Exploring variations in overall well-being by sociodemographic factors (gender, nationality, and age/grade) did not reveal significant contribution to OLSs. Adding these sociodemographic factors to the SLSS measure revealed a statistically significant but weak association between nationality and well-being. Overall, the influence of sociodemographic factors improved the total explained variation in SLSS (combined with safety variables in different settings) by less than 1% (from 40.2% to 41.0%). 7. Discussion Our study finds significant differences in subjective well-being among different sociodemographic groups, particularly by nationality, warranting further investigation of such variables and the well-being of children. Indeed the differences by themselves are interesting, but they explain little of the variance in subjective well-being, as the regression analyses reveal. Similarly, Rees, Bradshaw, et al. (2010) and Rees, Goswami, et al. (2010) found little to no association between several sociodemographic factors – including ethnicity, religious affiliation, number of siblings, and country of birth – and well-being and that sociodemographic factors only account for a small proportion of the variation in subjective well-being. Seligson, Huebner, and Valois (2002) also found that relationships between satisfaction with life and demographic variables (i.e., age/grade, race, or gender) are relatively weak, suggesting these variables make weak contributions to OLS among adolescents. A number of other studies (Dew & Huebner, 1994; Gilman, Huebner, & Laughlin, 2000) also align with our findings. Our study contributes new knowledge to the field by addressing children's perceptions of safety in different settings. We document differences between Arab and Jewish children regarding perceptions of safety, concluding that Jews feel safer in most settings except in their neighborhood. These findings reinforce knowledge about more conservative communities and their stronger social ties, which may lead to

Table 5 Regression analysis of safety variables and SLSS and OLS. SLSS b Overall safety Safety at home Safety at school Safety in neighborhood

OLS β

0.853 .435 0.039 .148 0.015 .109 0.021 .114 Adjusted R2 = .402

p Value b.01 b.01 b.01 b.01

b Overall safety Safety in neighborhood Safety at home Safety at school

β

0.354 .365 0.121 .135 0.120 .093 0.046 .067 Adjusted R2 = .276

p Value b.01 b.01 b.01 b.01

106


Table 6 Regression analysis of safety variables and SLSS and OLS (without overall safety). SLSS b Safety at home Safety in neighborhood Safety at school

OLS β

0.067 .254 0.043 .238 0.027 .193 Adjusted R2 = .269

p Value b.01 b.01 b.01

feeling safer (Spilsbury et al., 2009). We also document differences between boys and girls regarding their perceptions of safety at home and in school. Children are capable of reliably reporting their perceptions of safety in different settings. Our first hypothesis is correct: children's perceptions of safety in different settings are positively correlated. The fact that safety in different settings is correlated is natural and adheres with ecological theory. The fact that the correlations are only moderate warrants careful consideration of each setting separately. Our analysis yields clear results that show overall safety in life is correlated, resulting – to some degree – from safety perceptions in different settings. Our findings validate the results. Safety is an overarching theme in the lives of children that must be considered in individual settings—not just overall. When examining the results in the different domains, differences in reported safety among children cannot be avoided. Moreover, school is the least safe place, which may be partially explained by the growing body of knowledge concerning bullying and violence at school, as well as increasing public discourse about the dangerous conditions at schools (Fu et al., 2013). However, when looking at the safety perceptions in different settings and their contributions to subjective well-being, our findings about the significant role of safety in neighborhoods are very important, particularly with regard to the differences between Jewish and Arab children. Although some large-scale attempts to restructure communities and use neighborhoods as tools to improve children's well-being exist, rarely has this issue been addressed with regard to subjective perceptions and reported well-being among children. If we want to improve the well-being of children, we must focus on making neighborhoods safer, a task complicated by our failure to clearly identify neighborhoods or communities and the different perceptions and definitions for neighborhoods (including geographical definitions) that children provide (Spilsbury, Korbin, & Coulton, 2009, 2012). The primary goal of this study was to explore potential relationships between safety perceptions and subjective well-being, which we achieved. We have proven our second hypothesis that safety perceptions and subjective well-being among children are positively correlated. Furthermore, our findings clearly show that safety perceptions explain many of the variations in the subjective well-being of children. We have also proven our third hypothesis. The positive relationship between safety perceptions and subjective well-being among children are relatively unaffected by sociodemographic variables, and these relationships hold across different groups. As many have claimed (Ben-Arieh et al., 2013), the subjective wellbeing of children is a central part of their overall well-being and a legitimate goal for public policy. Our study lays a foundation for improving the subjective safety among children as a means for improving their well-being. In that regard, one must acknowledge that perceptions of safety among children are different than those for adults, even regarding the same place or institute (Ben-Arieh et al., 2009). Thus, we must carefully examine reports of safety in different settings in order to improve the safety and well-being of children, thereby reaching our goal of making children safe and happy. References Andrews, F. M., & Withey, S. B. (1976). Social indicators of well-being: American's perceptions of life quality. New York, NY: Plenum Press. Bauer, R. A. (Ed.). (1966). Social indicators. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

b Safety in neighborhood Safety at home Safety at school

β

0.215 .240 0.231 .179 0.100 .145 2 Adjusted R = .184

p Value b.01 b.01 b.01

Ben-Arieh, A., Casas, F., Frones, I., & Korbin, J. (2013). The multifaceted concept of child well-being. In A. Ben-Arieh, F. Casas, I. Frones, & J. Korbin (Eds.), Handbook of children well-being (pp. 1–28). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. Ben-Arieh, A., & Frones, I. (2011). Taxonomy for child well being indicators: A framework for the analysis of the well being of children. Childhood, 18, 460–476. Ben-Arieh, A., McDonell, J., & Attar-Schwartz, S. (2009). Safety and home-school relations as indicators of children's well-being: Whose perspective counts? Social Indicators Research, 90, 339–349. Blanco, A., Rojas, D., & Corte, L. (2000). La Psicología y su compromiso con el bienestar humano. In J. M. Peiró, & P. Valcarcel (Eds.), Psicología y sociedad (pp. 9–43). Valencia: Real Sociedad Económica de Amigos del País. Boulton, M. J., Duke, E., Holman, G., Laxton, E., Nicholas, B., Spells, R., et al. (2009). Associations between being bullied, perceptions of safety in classroom and playground, and relationship with teacher among primary school pupils. Educational Studies, 35(3), 255–267. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., & Rodgers, W. L. (1976). The quality of American life: Perceptions, evaluations and satisfactions. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation. Casas, F. (1989). Técnicas de investigación social: Los indicadores sociales y psicosociales. Teoría y práctica. BarcelonaEspaña: PPU. Casas, F. (1991). El concepto de calidad de vida en la intervención social en el ámbito de la infancia. III Jornadas de Psicología de la Intervención Social, 2, 649–672. Casas, F. (1996). Social representations of childhood. Annali dell'Instituto di Diritto e Procedura Penale, 1, 75–89. Casas, F. (1998). Infancia: Perspectivas psicosociales. Barcelona, España: Paidós. Casas, F., Bello, A., González, M., & Aligué, M. (2013). Children's subjective well-being measured using a composite index: What impacts Spanish first-year secondary education students' subjective well-being? Child Indicators Research, 1–28. Casas, F., Figuer, C., González, M., Malo, S., Alsinet, C., & Subarroca, S. (2007). The wellbeing of 12- to 16-year-old adolescents and their parents: Results from 1999 to 2003 Spanish samples. Social Indicators Research, 83(1), 87–115. Coenders, G., Casas, F., Figuer, C., & González, M. (2005). Relationships between parents' and children's salient values for future and children's overall life satisfaction: A comparison across countries. Social Indicators Research, 73(2), 141–177. Csikzentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life. New York, NY: Basic Books. Cummins, R. A. (1998). The second approximation to an international standard of life satisfaction. Social Indicators Research, 43, 307–334. Cummins, R. A., & Cahill, J. (2000). Avances en la comprensión de la calidad de vida subjetiva. Intervención Psicosocial, 9(2), 185–198. Dew, T., & Huebner, E. S. (1994). Adolescents' perceived quality of life: An exploratory investigation. Journal of School Psychology, 32, 185–199. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 542–575. Diener, E., & Fujita, F. (1995). Resources, personal strivings, and subjective well-being: A nomothetic and idiographic approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 926–935. Diener, E., Suh, S., & Oishi, S. (1998). Recent studies on subjective well-being. Indian Journal of Clinical Psychology, 24, 25–41. Fattore, T., Mason, J., & Watson, E. (2009). When children are asked about their wellbeing: Towards a framework for guiding policy. Child Indicators Research, 2, 57–77. Fu, Q., Land, K. C., & Lamb, V. L. (2013). Bullying victimization, socioeconomic status and behavioral characteristics of 12th graders in the United States, 1989 to 2009: Repetitive trends and persistent risk differentials. Child Indicators Research, 6, 1–21. Gilman, R., Huebner, E. S., & Laughlin, J. E. (2000). A first study of the Multidimensional Students' Life Satisfaction Scale with adolescents. Social Indicators Research, 52, 135–160. González, M., Casas, F., Figuer, C., Malo, S., & Viñas, F. (2012). Satisfaction with present safety and future security as components of personal well-being among young people: Relationships with other psychosocial constructs. Subjective well-being and security (pp. 253–290). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. Huebner, E. S. (1991). Initial development of the Students' Life Satisfaction Scale. School Psychology International, 12, 231–240. Huebner, E. S. (2004). Research on assessment of life satisfaction of children and adolescents. Social Indicators Research, 66(1–2), 3–33. Huebner, E. S., Laughlin, J. E., Asch, C., & Gilman, R. (1998). Further validation of the multidimensional student's life satisfaction scale. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 16(2), 118–134. Keyes, C. L. M. (1998). Social well-being. Social Psychology Quaterly, 61(2), 121–140. Maslow, A. H., Frager, R., & Fadiman, J. (1970). Motivation and personality, Vol. 2, New York, NY: Harper & Row. Mijanovich, T., & Weitzman, B. C. (2003). Which “broken windows” matter? School, neighborhood, and family characteristics associated with youths' feelings of unsafety. Journal of Urban Health, 80(3), 400–415.

A. Ben-Arieh, E. Shimon / Children and Youth Services Review 44 (2014) 100–107 Nayak, A. (2003). Through children's eyes': Childhood, place and the fear of crime. Geoforum, 34(3), 303–315. Noble, R. N., Sornberger, M. J., Toste, J. R., Heath, N. L., & McLouth, R. (2011). Safety first: The role of trust and school safety in non-suicidal self-injury. McGill Journal of Education/Revue des Sciences de l'Éducation de McGill, 46(3), 423–441. Prezza, M., & Pacilli, M. G. (2007). Current fear of crime, sense of community, and loneliness in Italian adolescents: The role of autonomous mobility and play during childhood. Journal of Community Psychology, 35(2), 151–170. Rask, K., Åstedt‐Kurki, P., & Laippala, P. (2002). Adolescent subjective well‐being and realized values. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 38(3), 254–263. Raviv, A., Raviv, A., Shimoni, H., Fox, N. A., & Leavitt, L. A. (1999). Children's self-report of exposure to violence and its relation to emotional distress. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 20(2), 337–353. Rees, G., Bradshaw, J., Goswami, H., & Keung, A. (2010). Understanding children's wellbeing: A national survey of young people's well-being. London, UK: The Children's Society. Rees, G., Goswami, H., & Bradshaw, J. (2010). Developing an index of children's subjective well-being in England. London, UK: The Children's Society. Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069–1081. Seligson, J., Huebner, E. S., & Valois, R. F. (2002). Preliminary validation of the brief multidimensional students' life satisfaction scale (BMSLSS). Social Indicators Research, 61, 121–145.

107

Shahinfar, A., Fox, N. A., & Leavitt, L. A. (2000). Preschool children's exposure to violence: Relation of behavior problems to parent and child reports. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 70(1), 115–125. Shimoni, E. (2012). Children subjective well-being in Israel. Thesis submitted to the. Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Spilsbury, J. (2005). ‘We don't really get to go out in the front yard’—children's home range and neighborhood violence. Children's Geographies, 3(1), 79–99. Spilsbury, J., Korbin, J., & Coulton, C. (2009). Mapping children's neighborhood perceptions: Implications for child indicators. Child Indicators Research, 2(2), 111–131. Spilsbury, J., Korbin, J., & Coulton, C. (2012). “Subjective” and “objective” views of neighborhood danger & well-being: The importance of multiple perspectives and mixed methods. Child Indicators Research, 5, 469–482. The Children's Society (2012). The Good Childhood Report 2012: A review of our children's well-being. London, UK: The Children's Society. Twemlow, S. W., Fonagy, P., & Sacco, F. C. (2002). Feeling safe in school. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 72(2), 303–326. Valois, R. F., Paxton, R. J., & Zullig, K. J. (2006). Life satisfaction and violent behaviors among middle school students. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 15(6), 695–707. Veenhoven, R. (1994). El estudio de la satisfacción con la vida. Intervención Psicosocial, 3(9), 87–116.