Neighborhood Profiles and Associations with Coping Behaviors among Low-Income Youth

  • Jill A. RabinowitzEmail author
  • Terrinieka Powell
  • Richard Sadler
  • Beth Reboussin
  • Kerry Green
  • Adam Milam
  • Mieka Smart
  • Debra Furr-Holden
  • Amanda Latimore
  • Darius Tandon
Empirical Research


Extant research has typically examined neighborhood characteristics in isolation using variable-centered approaches; however, there is reason to believe that perceptions of the neighborhood environment influence each other, requiring the use of person-centered approaches to study these relationships. The present study sought to determine profiles of youth that differ in their perceptions of their neighborhoods and objective neighborhood characteristics, and whether these profiles are associated with youth coping. Participants were low-income, African American youth (N= 733; 51.0% female, M age = 18.76 years, SD = 1.71) from a metropolitan city who were originally recruited for the Youth Opportunity program in Baltimore, Maryland. A latent profile analysis was conducted which included self-reported neighborhood social cohesion, collective efficacy, disorder, violence, and disadvantage derived from census data. Coping behaviors, specifically positive cognitive restructuring, problem-focused coping, distraction strategies, and avoidant behaviors were assessed via self-reported questionnaires. Four neighborhood profiles were identified: highest disorder (20.0%); highest violence/highest disadvantage (5.2%); high violence (26.6%); and highest cohesion/lowest disorder (48.2%). Individuals in the highest violence/highest disadvantage profile reported higher positive cognitive restructuring and problem-focused coping than the other profiles. These findings warrant an investigation into the individual assets and contextual resources that may contribute to more positive coping behaviors among youth in more violent and disadvantaged neighborhoods, which has the potential to improve resilient outcomes among youth in similar at-risk settings.


Neighborhood risk and protective factors Latent profiles Urban youth Coping 



We thank all study participants, in addition to D.T., the principal investigator of the current project.

Authors’ Contributions

J.R. developed the research questions, conducted the analyses, and led the writing of the paper; T.P. helped generate the research questions and study conceptualization; R.S. created the community disadvantage index, was involved in interpreting the results, and helped edit the manuscript; B.R. and K.G. provided their statistical and methodological expertise in latent profile modeling and aided in selecting the model that best fit the data; A.M., M.S., and D.F. provided their expertise in examining neighborhood-level influences on youth’s mental health and offered feedback on the manuscript conceptualization; A.L. led the collection of data and provided guidance on the research framing and writing; D.T. conceived of and supervised the study as the principal investigator on the grant supporting the researchers’ time on this project and assisted in editing the manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript as submitted and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.


Funding for the implementation of the Healthy Minds at Work intervention came from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Jacob and Hilda Blaustein Foundation, The Abell Foundation, the Leonard and Helen R. Stulman Foundation, The Annie E. Casey Foundation, Aaron Straus and Lillie Straus Foundation, and the France-Merrick Foundation. The research portion of Healthy Minds at Work was developed as the core research project of the Johns Hopkins Center for Adolescent Health, a prevention research center funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (grant no. 1-U48-DP-000040).

Data Sharing and Declaration

This manuscript’s data will not be deposited. However, data from the current study can be obtained from the Principal Investigator, D.T.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional review board at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health (IRB #NA 00021362) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Supplementary material


  1. Akaike, H. (1987). Factor analysis and AIC. Psychometrika, 52, 317–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amirkhan, J., & Auyeung, B. (2007). Coping with stress across the lifespan: absolute vs. relative changes in strategy. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 28, 298–317. Scholar
  3. Anderson, J., & Baldwin, C. (2017). Building well-being: Neighbourhood flourishing and approaches for participatory urban design intervention. In R. Phillips & C. Wong (Eds), Handbook of community well-being research (pp. 313–337). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2014). Auxiliary variables in mixture modeling: using the BCH method in mplus to estimate a distal outcome model and an arbitrary secondary model. Mplus Webnotes: No. 21, 1–22.Google Scholar
  5. Ayers, T. S., Sandier, I. N., West, S. G., & Roosa, M. W. (1996). A dispositional and situational assessment of children’s coping: testing alternative models of coping. Journal of Personality, 64(4), 923–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bennett, G. G., Merritt, M. M., Sollers, III, J. J., Edwards, C. L., Whitfield, K. E., Brandon, D. T., & Tucker, R. D. (2004). Stress, coping, and health outcomes among African-Americans: a review of the John Henryism hypothesis. Psychology and Health, 19(3), 617–632. Scholar
  7. Boardman, J. D. (2004). Stress and physical health: the role of neighborhoods as mediating and moderating mechanisms. Social Science & Medicine, 58, 2473–2483. Scholar
  8. Bolck, A., Croon, M., & Hagenaars, J. (2004). Estimating latent structure models with categorical variables: one-step versus three-step estimators. Political Analysis, 12, 3–27. Scholar
  9. Booth, J. M., Teixeira, S., Zuberi, A., & Wallace, J. M. (2018). Barrios, ghettos, and residential racial composition: examining the racial makeup of neighborhood profiles and their relationship to self-rated health. Social Science Research, 69, 19–33. Scholar
  10. Boxer, P., Sheffield, A. S., Terranova, A. M., Kithakye, M., Savoy, S. C., & Mcfaul, A. F. (2008). Coping with exposure to violence: relations to emotional symptoms and aggression in three urban samples. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 17, 881–893. Scholar
  11. Boxer, P., & Sloan-Power, E. (2013). Coping with violence: a comprehensive framework and implications for understanding resilience. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 14, 209–221. Scholar
  12. Brenner, A. B., Zimmerman, M. A., Bauermeister, J. A., & Caldwell, C. H. (2013). Neighborhood context and perceptions of stress over time: an ecological model of neighborhood stressors and intrapersonal and interpersonal resources. American Journal of Community Psychology, 51, 544–556. Scholar
  13. Browning, C. R., Soller, B., Gardner, M., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2013). “Feeling disorder” as a comparative and contingent process: gender, neighborhood conditions, and adolescent mental health. Child and Adolescent Health and Well-Being, 54, 296–314. Scholar
  14. Browning, C. R., Soller, B., & Jackson, A. L. (2015). Neighborhoods and adolescent health-risk behavior: an ecological network approach. Social Science & Medicine, 125, 163–172. Scholar
  15. Cicognani, E. (2011). Coping strategies with minor stressors in adolescence: relationships with social support, self-efficacy, and psychological well-being. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41, 559–578. Scholar
  16. Compas, B. E., Connor-Smith, J. K., Saltzman, H., Thomsen, A. H., & Wadsworth, M. E. (2001). Coping with stress during childhood and adolescence: problems, progress, and potential in theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 87–127. Scholar
  17. D’Imperio, R. L., Dubow, E. F., & Ippolito, M. F. (2000). Resilient and stress-affected adolescents in an urban setting. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 29, 129–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Drabick, D. A. G., & Steinberg, L. (2011). Developmental psychopathology. In: B. B. Brown, M. J. Prinstein, (Eds) Encyclopedia of adolescence. (Vol. 3). (pp. 136–142). San Diego, CA, USA: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dubow, E. F., Edwards, S., & Ippolito, M. F. (1997). Life stressors, neighborhood disadvantage, and resources: a focus on inner-city children’s adjustment. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 26, 130–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dupéré, V., & Perkins, D. D. (2007). Community types and mental health: a multilevel study of local environmental stress and coping. American Journal of Community Psychology, 39, 107–119. Scholar
  21. Epstein, S. (1983). Natural healing process of the mind: graded stress innoculation as an inherent coping mechanism. In M. D. & Y. M. (Eds), Stress reduction and prevention (pp. 39–66). New York, NY, US: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  22. Gambone, M. A., Klem, A. M., & Connell, J. P. (2002). Finding out what matters for youth: testing key links in a community action framework for youth development. Philadelphia: Youth Development Strategies, Inc., and Institute for Research and Reform in Education.Google Scholar
  23. Gaylord-Harden, N. K., Barbarin, O., Tolan, P. H., & Murry, V. M. B. (2018). Understanding development of African American boys and young men: moving from risks to positive youth development. American Psychologist, 73, 753–767. Scholar
  24. Graham, J. W. (2009). Missing data analysis: making it work in the real world. Annual Review of Psychology, 60(1), 549–576. Scholar
  25. Hampel, P., & Petermann, F. (2006). Perceived stress, coping, and adjustment in adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 38, 409–415. Scholar
  26. Hippensteel, C. L., Sadler, R. C., Milam, A. J., Nelson, V., & Furr-Holden, C. D. (2018). Using zoning as a public health tool to reduce oversaturation of alcohol outlets: an examination of the effects of the new “300 foot rule” on packaged goods stores in a mid-Atlantic city. Prevention Science, 20, 1–11.Google Scholar
  27. Kerrigan, D., Witt, S., Glass, B., Chung, S., & Ellen, J. (2006). Perceived neighborhood social cohesion and condom use among adolescents vulnerable to HIV/STI. AIDS and Behavior, 10, 723–729. Scholar
  28. Kingston, B., Huizinga, D., & Elliott, D. S. (2009). A test of social disorganization theory in high-risk neighborhoods. Youth and Society, 41, 53–79. Scholar
  29. Kliewer, W., Cunningham, J. N., Diehl, R., Parrish, K. A., Walker, J. A., Atiyeh, C., & Mejia, R. (2004). Violence exposure and adjustment in inner-city youth: child and caregiver emotion regulation skill, caregiver-child relationship quality, and neighborhood cohesion as protective factors. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 33, 477–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lanza, S. T., Tan, X., & Bray, B. C. (2014). A latent class analysis with distal outcomes: a flexible model-based approach. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Approach, 20, 1–26. Scholar
  31. Latkin, C. A., & Curry, A. D. (2003). Stressful neighborhoods and depression: a prospective study of the impact of neighborhood disorder. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 44, 34–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Leventhal, T., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2000). The neighbourhoods they live in: the effects of neighbourhood resilience on child and adolescent outcomes. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 309–337. Scholar
  33. MacGregor, C. (2010). Urban regeneration as a public health intervention. Journal of Social Intervention: Theory and Practice, 19, 38. Scholar
  34. Markowitz, F. E., Bellair, P. E., Liska, A. E., & Liu, J. (2001). Extending social disorganization theory: modeling the relationships between cohesion, disorder, and fear. Criminology, 39, 293–319. Scholar
  35. Masyn, K. (2013). Latent class analysis and finite mixture model. In T. D. Little (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of quantitative methods, Vol. 2: Statistical Analysis. New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2017). Mplus user’s guide. Eighth Edn Los Angeles, CA, US: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  37. Ng-Mak, D. S., Salzinger, S., Feldman, R. S., & Stueve, C. A. (2004). Pathologic adaptation to community violence among inner-city youth. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 74, 196–208. Scholar
  38. Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: a Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling, 14(4), 535–569. Scholar
  39. Pampalon, R., Hamel, D., Gamache, P., Philibert, M. D., Simpson, A., October, S., & Simpson, A. (2012). An area-based material and social deprivation Iidex for public health in Québec and Canada. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 103, S17–S22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Perkins, D. D., Meeks, J. W., & Taylor, R. B. (1992). The physical environment of street blocks and resident perceptions of crime and disorder: Implications for theory and adjustment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12, 21–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ross, C. E., & Mirowsky, J. (2001). Neighborhood disadvantage, disorder, and health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 42, 258–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sadler, R. C., Pizarro, J., Turchan, B., Gasteyer, S. P., & McGarrell, E. F. (2017). Exploring the spatial-temporal relationships between a community greening program and neighborhood rates of crime. Applied Geography, 83, 13–26. Scholar
  43. Sampson, R. J., Morenoff, J. D., & Gannon-Rowley, T. (2002). Assessing “neighborhood effects”: social processes and new directions in research. Annual Review of Psychology, 28, 443–478. Scholar
  44. Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., Earls, F., Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: a multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277, 918–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sandler, I. N., Tein, J., & West, S. G. (1994). Coping, stress, and the psychological symptoms of children of divorce: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study. Child Development, 65(6), 1744. Scholar
  46. Schwartz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics, 6, 461–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sclove, S. L. (1987). Application of model-selection criteria to some problems in multivariate analysis. Psychometrika, 52, 333–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sonenstein, F. L., Marshall, B. D., & Tandon, D. (2011). Employment and training programs: a context for reaching out of school youth with mental health and other health programs. Adolescent Medicine: State of the Art Reviews (AM: STARS), 22(3), 441–457.Google Scholar
  49. Talen, E. (2002). The social goals of new urbanism. Housing Policy Debate, 13(1), 165–188. Scholar
  50. Tandon, S. D., Latimore, A. D., Clay, E., Mitchell, L., Tucker, M., & Sonenstein, F. L. (2014). Depression outcomes associated with an intervention implemented in employment training programs for low-income adolescents and young adults. JAMA Psychiatry, 72, 31–39. Scholar
  51. Wadsworth, M. E., & Berger, L. E. (2011). Adolescents coping with poverty-related family stress: prospective predictors of coping and psychological symptoms. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 35, 57–70. Scholar
  52. Witherspoon, D., & Ennett, S. (2011). An examination of social disorganization and pluralistic neighborhood theories with rural mothers and their adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40, 1243–1253. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jill A. Rabinowitz
    • 1
    Email author
  • Terrinieka Powell
    • 2
  • Richard Sadler
    • 3
  • Beth Reboussin
    • 4
  • Kerry Green
    • 5
  • Adam Milam
    • 1
  • Mieka Smart
    • 3
  • Debra Furr-Holden
    • 3
  • Amanda Latimore
    • 6
  • Darius Tandon
    • 7
  1. 1.Department of Mental HealthJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HeathBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Department of Population, Family and Reproductive HealthJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HeathBaltimoreUSA
  3. 3.Department of Family Medicine, Division of Public HealthMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA
  4. 4.School of MedicineWake Forest UniversityWinston-SalemUSA
  5. 5.School of Public HealthUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  6. 6.Department of EpidemiologyJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HeathBaltimoreUSA
  7. 7.Feinberg School of MedicineNorthwestern UniversityEvanstonUSA

Personalised recommendations