7/30/2019 10464_2004_Article_BF00922695

1/9

American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 18, No. 1, 1990

T a k in g A i m o n E m p o w e r m e n t R e se a rc h :On t he D i s t inc t i on B et we en Ind i v i dua l andP s y c h o l o g i c a l C o n c e p t i o n s 1M a r c A . Z i m m e r m a n 2Universi ty of M ichigan

This pa per exa mines tw o is sues: (a ) con t r ibu t ions o f a spec ia l s ec tion o f A J C Pf o r u n d e r s ta n d i n g a n d s tu d y i n g c i ti ze n p a r ti c ip a t io n a n d e m p o w e r m e n t , a n d( b ) e la b o ra t io n o f t h e c o n s t r u c t o f p s y c h o lo g i c a l e m p o w e r m e n t . L i m i t a t i o n so f a n i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l o f a n a l y s i s a r e d i s c u s s e d a l o n g w i t h a m o r e d e t a i l e dd e s cr ip t io n o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l e m p o w e r m e n t . A d i st in c t io n b e t w e e n p s y c h o -l o g ic a l e m p o w e r m e n t a n d in d i v i d u a l l y -o r i e n t e d c o n c e p t i o n s i s m a d e . T h ef o r m e r i n cl u d es p e r s o n - e n v i r o n m e n t f i t a n d c o n t e x t u a l iss ue s, w h i l e t h e la t te ri s p r i m a r i l y a t r a i t c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n t h a t m a y b e a n t i th e t i c a l t o t h e i d ea o fe m p o w e r m e n t . R e s ea r ch s t ra te g ie s f o r f u t u r e w o r k o n e m p o w e r m e n t a r e s u g-ges ted . Th i s r esearch requ i res us to b u i ld br idges acros s l eve ls o f ana lys i ss o w e c an f u l l y u n d e r s t a n d t h e c o n t e x t u a l a n d i n d i v i d u a l q u a li t ie s t h a t c o n -v er ge to f o r m e m p o w e r m e n t t h e or y.

E m p o w e r m e n t t h e o r y i s a n e n i g m a . R a p p a p o r t ( 1 9 8 4 ) s u g g e s t e d t h a t i t i se a s y t o d e fi n e i n i ts a b s e n c e - a l i e n a t i o n , p o w e r l e ss , h e l p l e s s n e s s - b u t d i f -f i c u lt t o d e f i n e p o s i t i v e ly b e c a u s e i t " t a k e s o n a d i f f e r e n t f o r m i n d i f f e r e n tp e o p l e a n d c o n t e x t s " ( p . 2 ). I t a l so d i f f e r s a c r o s s le v e ls o f a n a l y s is ( Z i m m e r -man, in press ) . At the indiv idual level , empowerment includes par t ic ipa-tor y behav ior , m ot ivat ions to exe r t contro l , and feelings o f ef f icacy andcon t ro l . Organ iza t iona l empowermen t inc ludes sha red l eader sh ip , oppor -

q thank Abraham Wandersman and Deborah Salem for their thoughful comments on earlierdrafts o f this manuscript.2All correspondence should be sent to Marc Zimmerman, Department of Health Behaviorand Health Education, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, 1420 WashingtonHeights, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105.169

009143562/90/0201M2169506.00/0 1990 PlenumPubtisNngCorporation

7/30/2019 10464_2004_Article_BF00922695

2/9

170 Z imme rma n

tunities to develop skills, expansion, and effective community influence.Empowered communities comprise empowered organizations, include op-portunities for citizen participation in community decision making, andallow for fair consideration of multiple perspectives during times of con-flict. Empowerment at all levels of analysis can have different intensitiesthat can change over time. It is not an absolute threshold that once reachedcan be labeled as empowered. Empowerment embodies an interaction be-tween individuals and environments that is culturally and contextuallydefined. As a result, interdisciplinary approaches, paradigm shifts, andcreative research strategies may be required to fully understand the con-struct.This special section of the American Journal of CommunityPsychologyadds to the development of empowerment theory by identifyingsettings and conditions in which residents may exert control in their com-munities. This research also provides examples of how empowerment andparticipation can be studied at multiple levels of analysis. Finally, the em-pirical papers borrow from disciplines outside of psychology to help defineresearch strategies and interpret the results. Empirically based analyses sucha those presented in this special section provide a foundat ion upon which tobuild empowerment theory and advance the debate about what it is andwhat it means. The inclusion of comments by communty participants, inthis special section, is consistent with the idea of empowerment and pro-vides useful anecdotal information. Each paper adds a distinctiveunderstanding about the empowerment process, while also building on pastresearch.The special section also raises an interesting issue about the role of theindividual level o f analysis in empowerment theory. After I comment on thecontributions of the individual papers to empowerment theory, I furtherdelineate the construct of psychological empowerment and distinguish itfrom individually oriented conceptions of empowerment. The differencebetween these two interpretations is both significant and necessary. It issignificant because paradigmatic limitations may prohibit the full develop-ment of empowerment theory. It is necessary to distinguish these two inter-pretations in order to avoid ignoring a major ingredient of empowermentth eo ry -t he individual.

C O N T R I B U T I O N S O F T H E S P E C I A L S E C T I O N

The paper by Prestby, Wandersman, Florin, Rich, and Chavis (1990)employs a person-environment fit approach that integrates individual and

7/30/2019 10464_2004_Article_BF00922695

3/9

Empowerment Research 171

organizational levels of .analysis. Analysis of the effects of perceivedbenefits and costs of participation provides a unique understanding ofpsychological empowerment. They found that the most highly involved in-dividuals reported more benefits of par ticipation-learning new skills, gain-ing information, helping others, increasing social contact, and fulfillingob li ga tions- than less-involved individuals. This is consistent with previousresearch on psychological empowerment (Kieffer, 1984; Zimmerman &Rappaport , 1988). Prestby el al.'s research expands on these previousresults, however, by identifying some of the facilitating and inhibiting fac-tors that may influence individuals' choice regarding their level of involve-ment.

Prestby et al.'s (1990) efforts to understand the link between manage-ment strategies and organizational viability provides a good example ofresearch on organizational empowerment as well. Their examination of theconnection between incentive management and organizational activity sug-gests that organizational empowerment may be linked to person-environ-ment fit. Individuals motivated by factors such as social ties, skill building,and helping others may help to empower organizations that have shared deci-sion making, open leadership, and communal projects, but may notstrengthen hierarchically defined organizations that provide few oppor-tunities to become involved in organizational tasks. Similarly, organizationsmay not be empowering for participants who expect to become involved indecision making and problem solving but find they must first work theirway through a leadership hierarchy that provides few opportunities formeaningful involvement. Future research could examine how the connec-tion between organizational structure and members' motivations may in-fluence both the empowering potential of a setting and the extent to which~the organization can attract participants, expand, and achieve its goals.

The model presented by Chavis and Wandersman (1990) helps to fur-ther specify variables that may mediate the relationship between participa-tion and empowerment. They suggest that sense o f community plays an im-portant role in the development of personal control and participation. Theyfound that sense of community had a direct effect on one's level of involve-ment in a neighborhood association and it has an even stronger effect onconstructs that are directly linked to empowerment -environmental percep-tion and perceived control. This is consistent with Maton and Rappaport's(1984) finding that sense of community was associated with individual em-powerment for members o f a religious organization.

Perhaps the most important contribution of Chavis andWandersman's (1990) paper comes from the results of their longitudinalanalysis. They suggest a reciprocal relationship between a sense of com-munity and participation and a sense of personal power and participation.

7/30/2019 10464_2004_Article_BF00922695

4/9

1 7 2 Z i m m e r m a n

This is consistent with empowerment theory which postulates that participa-tion in decision making may enhance one's sense o f empowerment and thatempowered individuals are likely to be active in community organizationsand activities (Kieffer, 1984; Zimmerman, in press; Zimmerman & Rap-paport, 1988). The fact that participation and perceptions of group powerwere not correlated suggests that other factors (e.g., organizational effec-tiveness, sense of community) may mediate the relationship between thesetwo variables. The work by Prestby et al. (1990) suggests tha t skills learnedand information gained may also help determine whether or not participa-tion contributes to the development of empowerment for individuals ororganizations. The longitudinal results also lend support for a model oflearned hopefulness (Zimmerman, 1990). This model, posited as a counterpartto learned helplessness theory, suggests that efforts to exert control may increaseone's sense of empowerment.

Chavis and Wandersman (1990) also found that individuals maydevelop a sense of control even if they do not perceive group power tochange over time. This suggests that empowering organizations (i.e., thosethat contribute to the development of psychological empowerment) are notnecessarily empowered organizations (i.e., those that influence the policyprocess and remain viable over time). This finding illustrates the need torecognize that interentions aimed at strengthening community organiza-tions may not improve their empowering potential, or conversely, that in-terventions aimed at improving the empowering potential of organizationsmay not help the organizations to become empowered. If our goal is to bothempower the organization and enhance its empowering potential, then wemay need to develop interventions specifically designed to address bothissues. This means that our interventions would have to focus on decision-making structures and social climate, as well as organizational expansionand coalition building (i.e., networking among other organizations).The paper by Perkins, Florin, Rich, Wandersman, and Chavis (1990)provides another perspective for studying a context in which to understandempowerment. Their focus on the physical environment is an innovative ap-proach to understanding the development of psychological empowerment.They go further, however, by examining how the social milieu and thephysical environment interact to mobilize an individual into aciton. Theirresults build on the Chavis and Wandersman (1990) study by identifyingone of the co ndit ions - unacceptable physical conditions of a neighborhood-when social climate (e.g., sense of community, neighboring) might act asa catalyst for action. Future research could build on this approach by ex-amining factors thay may inhibit the catalytic potential of empoweringsocial climates.

7/30/2019 10464_2004_Article_BF00922695

5/9

Em pow erm ent Research 173

LIMITATIONS OF AN INDIVIDUAL LEVEL OF ANALYSISAll three studies point out the importance of expanding our

understanding of empowerment beyond the individual level of analysis. Theauthors suggest that an overly individualistic conception of empowermentmay limit our understanding of the construct. If we focus exclusively on theindividual level of analysis we may unwittingly advance single measures ofcompetence and trait-oriented conceptions of empowerment while failing toconsider environmental influences; organizational factors; or social,cultural, and political contexts. An individual focus may also limit ourchoices for research methods and designs to those most familiar and accep-table to psychologists. This may make it easy to overlook the theories andalternative research strategies offered by other disciplines (e.g., an-thropology, education).

An interdisciplinary approach to empowerment research may benecessary for addressing the difficulty we have in defining the construct.Van Uchelen (1989) provided an example of how an interdisciplinaryperspective can enhance our way of thinking about empowerment. He in-troduced a view of control theory that has a collective rather than an in-dividual orientation. He distinguished between traditional perspectives ofcontrol that focus on individual action and perception (e.g., learnedhelplessness, self-efficacy) and an alternative approach that emphasizes"control-as-meaningfulness in a collective context" (p. 5). A more contex-tual and collectivist orientation does not ignore individual experiences ofcontrol, rather, it allows for a more culturally sensitive theory of controlthat is consistent with empowerment theory. The authors in this special sec-tion integrate theories from other disciplines to provide a suitableframework for investigating empowerment, while also incorporating con-textual influences in their research.

PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT VERSUS INDIVIDUALLYORIENTED APPROACHES

We must not go too far, however, in rejecting the individual level ofanalysis. Rather , we need to distinguish between individually oriented con-ceptions of ernpowerment and psychological empowerment. The formerneglects contextual considerations, is limited to a single paradigm, andtreats empowerment as a personality variable. The latter (i.e., psychologicalempowerment) refers to the individual level of analysis, but does not ignoreecological and cultural influences. Psychological empowerment is a contex-

7/30/2019 10464_2004_Article_BF00922695

6/9

1 74 Z i m m e r m a n

t u a ll y o r ie n t e d c o n c e p t io n o f e m p o w e r m e n t t h a t e m b r a ce s t h e n o t i o n o fp e r s o n - e n v i r o n m e n t f i t. I t i n c l u d e s , b u t is n o t l i m i t e d t o , c o l le c t iv e a c t i o n ,s k i l l d e v e l o p m e n t , a n d c u l t u r a l a w a r e n e s s ; a n d i n c o r p o r a t e s i n t r a p s y c h i cv a r ia b l e s s u c h a s m o t i v a t i o n t o c o n t r o l , l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , a n d s e l f- e ff i ca c y .T h e c h a l l e n g e f o r r e s e a r c h e r s i n t e r e s t e d i n e m p o w e r m e n t i s n o t t o i g n o r e o n el e ve l o f a n a l y s i s i n th e i n t e r e s t o f a n o t h e r b u t t o s t ru g g l e w i t h e f f o r t s t o i n -t e g r a t e l ev e ls o f a n a l y s i s f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e c o n s t r u c t i n it s e n t i r e t y . T h et h r e e s t u d i e s d e s c r i b e d i n t h is s p e c i a l s e c ti o n p o i n t u s i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n .

W h i l e a l l t h r e e e m p i r i c a l p a p e r s e x a m i n e d c o n t e x t u a l v a r i a b l e s a n dt h e i r r e l a ti o n s h i p t o p a r t ic i p a t i o n a n d e m p o w e r m e n t , t h e y d i d n o t ig n o r et h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l n a t u r e o f t h e c o n s t r u c t . I n c l u d i n g i n d i v i d u a l le v elv a r ia b l e s i n e m p o w e r m e n t r e s e a r c h i s n o t n e c e ss a r il y c o n t r a r y t o t h e i n -t e re s ts o f c o l le c ti v e a c t i o n a n d s o c ia l c h a n g e , o r f o r t h a t m a t t e r C o m m u n i t yP s y c h o l o g y . C o n t e x t u a l f a c t o rs a r e a n e s se n ti al c o m p o n e n t o f e m p o w e r -m e n t t h e o r y b u t e q u a l l y c r i t i c a l a r e i n t r a p s y c h i c f a c t o r s s u c h a s c o g n i t i v e ,p e r s o n a l i t y , a n d m o t i v a t i o n a l a s p e c ts o f c o n t r o l . T h e g o a l is t o u n d e r s t a n dh o w w h a t g o e s o n i n s id e o n e ' s h e a d i n t e r a c t s w i t h w h a t g o e s o n i n o n e 's e n -v i r o n m e n t t o e n h a n c e o r i n h i b i t o n e ' s m a s t e r y a n d c o n t r o l o v e r t h e f a c t o r st h a t a f f e c t o n e ' s li fe . D e p e n d i n g o n t h e p e r s o n a n d c o n t e x t th i s m a y b em a i n t a i n i n g a li f e o u t s i d e o f a n i n s t i tu t i o n , c o p i n g w i t h a d i v o r c e , o r s u c -c e s s f u l ly i n f lu e n c i n g a c i t y c o u n c i l d e c i s i o n .

Psychological Empo werm entP s y c h o l o g i c a l e m p o w e r m e n t r e q u i r e s a c o n t e x t u a l a n a ly s is t o b e f u l ly

u n d e r s t o o d . F o r e x a m p l e , an e m p o w e r e d p e r so n m a y h a v e n o re a l p o w e r i nt h e p o l it ic a l se n se , b u t m a y h a v e a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f w h a t c h o i ce s c a n b em a d e i n d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n s . G l i d e w e l l ( 19 7 0 ) d e s c r i b e d t h e d i f f i c u l t ie s o n ef a ce s w h e n w o r k i n g a n d l iv i ng w i t h p e o p l e , a n d t h e c h o ic e s o n e m u s t m a k e :w h e t h e r t o f i g h t o r g iv e i n , w h e t h e r t o b e d e p e n d e n t o r d e p e n d a b l e , a n dw h e t h e r t o s e ek h e lp o r p r o v i d e a s s is t an c e . E m p o w e r e d i n d iv i d u a ls m a y n o ta l w a y s m a k e t h e b e s t (o r c o r r ec t ) c h o i ce s , b u t t h e y m a y k n o w t h a t t h e y c a nc h o o s e w h e t h e r t o f i g h t o r r e t r e a t , t o b e d e p e n d e n t o r i n d e p e n d e n t , a n d t oo r g a n i z e o r w a i t.

P s y c h o l o g i c a l e m p o w e r m e n t a l so in c l u de s a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h ef a c t o r s t h a t i n f l u e n c e d e c i s i o n m a k i n g p r o c e s s e s . S u e a n d Z a n e ( 1 9 8 0 )p r e s e n t e d t h e n o t i o n o f c au s a l a g e n t s - - f a c t o r s t h a t i n f l u e n c e d ec i si o n -m a k i n g p r o c e s s e s t h a t e f f e c t i n d i v i d u a l, o r g a n i z a t i o n a l , a n d c o m m u n i t yw e l l -b e i n g . C a u s a l a g e n t s m a y b e p e o p l e s u c h a s e l e c te d o f f ic i a l s , r e s o u r c e ss u c h a s m o n e y , o r e v e n t s su c h as n a t u r a l d i s a st e rs . E m p o w e r e d p e r s o n s a r ea w a r e o f t h e f a c t o r s t h a t i n f l u e n c e t h e c a u s a l a g e n t s w i t h i n t h e l i f e d o m a i n s

7/30/2019 10464_2004_Article_BF00922695

7/9

Em powerm ent Research 175

they decide are imporant. For example, citizens interested in eliminatingtoxic dumping in their communi ty may attempt to influence both elected of-ficials and industry executives to stop toxic dumping, however, theirstrategies to influence these causal agents may be different. A peti tion driveof registered voters may be most effective for persuading an elected official,but the executive may be more influenced by a protest march in his or herown neighborhood than the threat of losing electoral support. Similarly, thechoice to boycott a product may have a greater impact on the actions of anindustry executive than writing letters to a congressperson about the in-dustry's behavior. Ultimately, psychological empowerment is a contextualconstruct that requires an ecological analysis of individual knowledge,decision-making processes, and person-environment fit.

Strategies fo r Researching Empowerm entThe research methods we use for studying empowerment will inevitablybe a limiting or facilitating factor in our understanding of the construct. As

long as we continue to use primarily quantitative methods we will have a limit-ed understanding of the construct. Qualitative approaches such as in-depth casehistories, investigative reporting (Levine, 1980), and participant observation areuseful starting points for expanding our repertoire of research methods. Forexample, Kieffer (1984) used an innovative approach for describing the em-powering experiences of several grass-roots leaders. He interviewed the leaders,summarized the interviews, and asked the leaders to comment on the summaries.This process not only helped to validate the data, but it provided the leaderswith another opportunity to reflect on their experiences.

The inclusion of the papers by Kaye (1990) and Burgess (1990) in thespecial section contribute a qualitative perspective to the quantitativeanalyses presented. The authors provide information about the researchprocess and their own experiences tha t is necessarily missing in quantitativeapproaches. Their comments reinforce the quantitative data presented and,as a consequence, further strengthen the research. Kaye (1990) provides acritical analysis of the research process and gives future researchers advicethat may help improve entry, cooperation, and collaboration. She also tellsus how we can be helpful to grass-roots organizations. These insights sup-port Prestby et al.'s (1990) finding that potential skill development is an im-portant motivator for participants. Kaye's (1990) discussion of this processfrom a participant's perspective embellishes our understanding of the quan-titative results. Burgess (1990) tells us how important social contact andfellowship are for maintaining involvement in a neighborhood association.He is essentially telling us, from the perspective of a community leader, that

7/30/2019 10464_2004_Article_BF00922695

8/9

1 7 6 Z i m m e r m a n

the results of the Chavis and Wandersman (1990) and Perkins et al. (1990)papers are on target. The comments by these two community leaders notonly validate the quantitative results but provide us with useful lessons forfuture research with grass-roots organizations and leaders. Incorporatingcomments by research participants in the reporting of our results adds toour understanding of empowerment and strengthens our conclusions. Italso exemplifies our value to be inclusive rather than exclusive, engagingrather than controlling, and empowering rather than patronizing.

S UMMARY

Empowerment theory need not remain a mystery. Efforts, such asthose described in this special section, to outline more clearly thenomological network of empowerment at multiple levels o f analysis will ad-vance empowerment theory. Tough-minded rigorous research is needed toadvance the concept of empowerment. Empowerment research requires usto shift our attention from a debate between the merits of research at onelevel of analysis versus another to building bridges between levels ofanalysis. We must integrate theories and methods from other disciplinesand develop research strategies that incorporate qualitative procedures andthe voices of the research participants. The papers in this special sectiontake aim on these tasks and add to our understanding of empowerment.

REFERENCE S

B u r g e s s , L . ( 19 9 0) . A b l o c k a s s o c i a t i o n p r e s i d e n t ' s p e r s p e c ti v e o n c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n . A m e r i -c a n J o u r n a l o f Co m mu n i t y P s y c h o lo g y , 1 8, 159-162.C h a v i s , D . M . , & W a n d e r s m a n , A . ( 19 90 ). S e n s e o f c o m m u n i t y in t h e u r b a n e n v i r o n m e n t : Ac a t a l y s t f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n a n d c o m m u n i t y d e v e l o p m e n t . A m e r i c a n J o u r n a l o f C o m -mu ni ty Psycho logy , 18 , 55-82.Gl idewel l , J . C . (1970) . Choice po in ts . C a m b r i d g e , M A : M I T P r es s .K a y e , G . (1 9 90 ). A c o m m u n i t y o r g a n i z e r ' s p e r s p e c t i v e . A m e r i c a n J o u r n a l o f C o m m u n i t yPsycho logy , 18 , 151-158.K i e f f e r , C . ( 19 8 4) . C i t i z e n e m p o w e r m e n t : A d e v e l o p m e n t a l p e r s p e c t i v e . P r e v e n ti o n i n Hu ma nServices, 3, 9-36 .L e v i n e , M . ( 19 8 0) . I n v e s t i g a t i v e r e p o r t i n g a s a r e s e a r c h m e t h o d : A n a n a l y s i s o f B e r n s t e i n ' s &W o o d w a r d ' s " A l l t h e P r e s i d e n t ' s M e n . " Amer ican Psycho log is t , 35 , 626-638.M a t o n , K . I ., & R a p p a p o r t , J . ( 1 98 4 ). E m p o w e r m e n t i n a r e l ig i o u s s e t ti n g : A m u l t i v a r i a t ei n v e s t i g a t i o n . Preven t ion in H um an Serv ices, 3 , 37-72 .P e r k i n s , D . D . , F l o r i n , P . , R i c h , R . C . , W a n d e r s m a n , A . , & C h a v i s , D . M . ( 1 99 0 ). P a r t i c i p a -t i o n a n d t h e s o c ia l a n d p h y s i ca l e n v i r o n m e n t o f r e s id e n t ia l b lo c k s : C r i m e a n d c o m m u n i -t y c o n t e x t . A m e r i c a n J o u r n a l o f Co mm u n i t y P s y c h o lo g y , 1 8 , 83-116.P r e s t b y , J . E . , W a n d e r s m a n , A . , F l o r i n , P . , R i c h , R . C . , & C h a v i s , D . (1 9 90 ). B e n e f i t s , c o s t s ,i n c e n t iv e m a n a g e m e n t a n d p a r t i c i p a t io n i n v o l u n t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n s : A m e a n s t o u n d e r -s t a n d i n g a n d p r o m o t i n g e m p o w e r m e n t . A m e r i c a n J o u r n a l o f C o m m u n i t y P s y -chology, 18, 117-150.

7/30/2019 10464_2004_Article_BF00922695

9/9

Empowe rment Research 177

Rappaport, J. (1984). Studies in empowerment: Introduction to the issue. Prevention inHuman Services, 3, 1-7.Sue, S., & Zane, N. (1980). Learn ed helplessness theory and Co mm unity Psy chology. In M. S.Gibbs, J. R. Lachenmeyer, & J. Sigal (Eds.), Community psychology: Theoretical andempirical approaches (pp. 121-143). New York: Gardner.Van Uchelen, C. (1989, June). Healing mechanisms of self-help: Toward a non-individua-listic conception of control. Paper presented at the Second Biennial Conference onComm unity Research and Action, East Lansing, MI.Zim mer man , M. A . (1 990 ). Empowerrnent: Forg ing new perspectives in mental health.In J. Rappaport, & E. Seidman, (Eds.), Handbook of community psychology, NewYork: Plenum Press.Zimmerm an, M . A . (199 0). Towa rd a theory o f learned hopefulness: A structural mode lanalysis of participation and empowerment. Journal of Research in Personality, 24, 71-86.Zimm erma n, M. A ., & Rap papo rt, J. (1988). Citizen particpation , perceived contro l, andpsychological empowerment. American Journal of Community Psychology, 16,725-750.