González Pablo A, Dussaillant Francisca, Calvo Esteban
Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Centre for Public Systems and Center for Research in Inclusive Education, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
London School of Economics and Political Sciences, International Inequalities Institute, London, United Kingdom.
Front Psychol. 2021 Jan 18;11:628785. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.628785. eCollection 2020.
The notion of social belongingness has been applied to different scales, from individual to social processes, and from subjective to objective dimensions. This article seeks to contribute to this multidimensional perspective on belongingness by drawing from the capabilities and subjective wellbeing perspectives. The specific aim is to analyze the relationships between capabilities-including those related to social belongingness-and individual and social subjective wellbeing. The hypotheses are: (H1-H2) There is a relationship between capabilities (measured as evaluation and functioning) and (H1) individual and (H2) social subjective wellbeing; (H3) The set of capabilities associated to individual subjective wellbeing differs from the set correlated to social subjective wellbeing; (H4) The intensity and significance of the correlation between subjective wellbeing and capabilities depends on whether the latter is measured as evaluation or functioning; and (H5) The relationships between capabilities and subjective wellbeing are complex and non-linear. Using a nationally representative survey in Chile, multiple linear (H1-H5) and dose response matching (H1-H5) regressions between capabilities and subjective wellbeing outcomes are estimated, confirming all hypotheses. Subjective evaluations and effective functionings of some capabilities ("basic needs," "social ties," "feeling recognized and respected;" "having and deploying a life project") are consistently correlated with both subjective wellbeing outcomes. Others capabilities are correlated with both subjective wellbeing outcomes only when measured as functionings (contact with nature), do not display a systematic pattern of correlation ("health," "pleasure," "participation," and "human security") or are not associated with subjective wellbeing ("self-knowledge" and "understanding the world"). When observed, correlations are sizable, non-linear, and consistent across estimation methods. Moreover, capabilities related to social belongingness such as "social ties" and "feeling recognized and respected" are important by themselves but also are positively correlated to both social and individual subjective wellbeing. These findings underscore the need of a multidimensional perspective on the relationships between capabilities and subjective wellbeing, considering both subjective and objective, as well as individual and social aspects that are relevant to belongingness. These findings also have practical and policy implications, and may inform public deliberation processes and policy decisions to develop capabilities, promote subjective wellbeing, and ultimately promote positive belongingness.
社会归属感的概念已应用于不同层面，从个体层面到社会过程，从主观维度到客观维度。本文旨在通过借鉴能力视角和主观幸福感视角，为这种关于归属感的多维度观点做出贡献。具体目标是分析能力（包括与社会归属感相关的能力）与个体和社会主观幸福感之间的关系。假设如下：（H1 - H2）能力（以评价和功能来衡量）与（H1）个体和（H2）社会主观幸福感之间存在关系；（H3）与个体主观幸福感相关的能力集不同于与社会主观幸福感相关的能力集；（H4）主观幸福感与能力之间相关性的强度和重要性取决于后者是以评价还是功能来衡量；以及（H5）能力与主观幸福感之间的关系是复杂且非线性的。利用智利的一项全国代表性调查，估计了能力与主观幸福感结果之间的多元线性回归（H1 - H5）和剂量反应匹配回归（H1 - H5），证实了所有假设。某些能力（“基本需求”“社会关系”“感到被认可和尊重”“拥有并践行生活规划”）的主观评价和有效功能与两种主观幸福感结果始终相关。其他能力仅在以功能来衡量时（与自然接触）与两种主观幸福感结果相关，未呈现出系统的相关模式（“健康”“愉悦”“参与”和“人类安全”），或者与主观幸福感无关（“自我认知”和“理解世界”）。当存在相关性时，相关性显著、非线性且在不同估计方法中保持一致。此外，与社会归属感相关的能力，如“社会关系”和“感到被认可和尊重”，自身很重要，而且与社会和个体主观幸福感均呈正相关。这些发现强调了在能力与主观幸福感关系上需要一个多维度视角，要考虑到与归属感相关的主观和客观、个体和社会方面。这些发现也具有实际和政策意义，并可能为公众审议过程及发展能力、促进主观幸福感并最终促进积极归属感的政策决策提供参考。
