Do National Service Programs Improve Subjective Well-Being in Communities?

Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club Pub Date : 2019-04-01 Epub Date: 2018-12-10 DOI:10.1177/0275074018814883
Kristopher Velasco, Pamela Paxton, Robert W Ressler, Inbar Weiss, Lilla Pivnick
{"title":"Do National Service Programs Improve Subjective Well-Being in Communities?","authors":"Kristopher Velasco, Pamela Paxton, Robert W Ressler, Inbar Weiss, Lilla Pivnick","doi":"10.1177/0275074018814883","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Since the creation of Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA) in 1964 and AmeriCorps in 1993, a stated goal of national service programs has been to strengthen the overall health of communities across the United States. But whether national service programs have such community effects remains an open question. Using longitudinal cross-lagged panel and change-score models from 2005 to 2013, this study explores whether communities with national service programs exhibit greater subjective well-being. We use novel measures of subjective well-being derived from tweeted expressions of emotions, engagement, and relationships in 1,347 U.S. counties. Results show that national service programs improve subjective well-being primarily by mitigating threats to well-being and communities that exhibit more engagement are better able to attract national service programs. Although limited in size, these persistent effects are robust to multiple threats to inference and provide important new evidence on how national service improves communities in the United States.</p>","PeriodicalId":9453,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club","volume":"101 1","pages":"275-291"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10782458/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074018814883","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/12/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since the creation of Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA) in 1964 and AmeriCorps in 1993, a stated goal of national service programs has been to strengthen the overall health of communities across the United States. But whether national service programs have such community effects remains an open question. Using longitudinal cross-lagged panel and change-score models from 2005 to 2013, this study explores whether communities with national service programs exhibit greater subjective well-being. We use novel measures of subjective well-being derived from tweeted expressions of emotions, engagement, and relationships in 1,347 U.S. counties. Results show that national service programs improve subjective well-being primarily by mitigating threats to well-being and communities that exhibit more engagement are better able to attract national service programs. Although limited in size, these persistent effects are robust to multiple threats to inference and provide important new evidence on how national service improves communities in the United States.

国家服务计划能否改善社区的主观幸福感?
自 1964 年创建 "为美国服务志愿者组织"(VISTA)和 1993 年创建 "美国志愿服务队"(AmeriCorps)以来,国家服务计划的一个既定目标就是加强全美社区的整体健康。但是,国家服务计划是否会产生这样的社区效应仍是一个未决问题。本研究使用 2005 年至 2013 年的纵向交叉滞后面板模型和变化分数模型,探讨了拥有国民服务计划的社区是否表现出更高的主观幸福感。我们使用了新的主观幸福感测量方法,这些方法来自美国 1347 个县的推特情感表达、参与度和人际关系。结果显示,国家服务计划主要通过减轻对幸福感的威胁来改善主观幸福感,而表现出更多参与性的社区更能吸引国家服务计划。虽然规模有限,但这些持续性效应对推论的多种威胁具有稳健性,并为国家服务如何改善美国社区提供了重要的新证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信