↓ Skip to main content

Participation in rural community groups and links with psychological well-being and resilience: a cross-sectional community-based study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychology, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Participation in rural community groups and links with psychological well-being and resilience: a cross-sectional community-based study
Published in
BMC Psychology, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40359-016-0121-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anthony Lyons, Gillian Fletcher, Jane Farmer, Amanda Kenny, Lisa Bourke, Kylie Carra, Emily Bariola

Abstract

Fostering the development of community groups can be an important part of boosting community participation and improving health and well-being outcomes in rural communities. In this article, we examine whether psychological well-being and resilience are linked to participating in particular kinds of rural community groups. We conducted a household survey involving 176 participants aged 18 to 94 years from a medium-sized rural Australian town. We gathered data on psychological well-being (Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale), resilience (Brief Resilience Scale), and the types of community groups that people participated in as well as a range of characteristics of those groups, such as size, frequency of group meetings, perceived openness to new members, and whether groups had leaders, defined roles for members, hierarchies, and rules. Univariable regression analyses revealed significant links between particular group characteristics and individual psychological well-being and resilience, suggesting that the characteristics of the group that an individual participates in are strongly tied to that person's well-being outcomes. Multivariable analyses revealed two significant independent factors. First, psychological well-being was greatest among those who participated in groups without a hierarchy, that is, equal-status relationships between members. Second, resilience was greater among those who reported having a sense of influence within a group. Our findings suggest that policymakers wishing to promote participation in rural community groups for health and well-being benefits may do well to encourage the development of particular characteristics within those groups, in particular equal-status relationships and a sense of influence for all group members.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 92 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 17%
Student > Master 12 13%
Unspecified 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Other 19 20%
Unknown 22 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 15%
Social Sciences 11 12%
Unspecified 9 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 8%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 30 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 September 2023.
All research outputs
#4,303,801
of 25,483,400 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychology
#325
of 1,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,705
of 315,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychology
#7
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,483,400 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,112 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,705 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.