Cathie Marsh Institute for Social Change, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; School of Law and Social Justice, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Cathie Marsh Institute for Social Change, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; The Economic and Social Research Institute, Dublin, Ireland.
Health Place. 2022 Jan;73:102723. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2021.102723. Epub 2021 Dec 1.
Studies in the UK demonstrate evidence that ethnic minorities living in communities with a higher proportion of co-ethnics report better mental health: co-ethnic density effects. This paper aims to address three gaps in this literature. Firstly, most UK research has focused on acute mental disorders (e.g., psychosis), with little work examining co-ethnic density effects for more common mental disorders. Secondly, there is a paucity of research exploring the role that residential segregation may play alongside co-ethnic density in minority mental health. Thirdly, little systematic testing has examined at what geographic-scale co-ethnic density effects are most salient for minority-group mental health. To address these potential gaps, we apply multi-level linear regression modelling to a large-scale, nationally-representative UK panel dataset, containing an ethnic minority booster-sample, to study the community-level drivers of mental health-related quality-of-life (SF-12 Mental Component Summary Score). The results demonstrate mixed support for the protective-effects of co-ethnic density on mental well-being. However, they demonstrate broadly consistent support for the impact of residential segregation on mental well-being. In particular, that segregation exerts a non-linear effect: mental well-being is at its most positive at medium-levels of segregation, somewhat more negative at low-levels of segregation, and much more negative at higher-levels of segregation. These patterns are present for the 'all ethnic minority' sample, and stronger for Black sub-groups compared to Asian sub-groups. These relationships appear most consistent at meso-local geographic scales (Middle Super Output Areas). These findings have important implications for theorising our understanding of the nexus between the community and mental health among minority-groups.
英国的研究表明，生活在同族人比例较高社区中的少数族裔报告称，他们的心理健康状况更好：这就是同族人密度效应。本文旨在解决该文献中的三个空白点。首先，大多数英国研究都集中在急性精神障碍（例如精神病）上，很少有研究探讨常见精神障碍的同族人密度效应。其次，探索居住隔离与少数族裔心理健康中的同族人密度之间的关系的研究很少。第三，很少有系统的测试来检验同族人密度对少数族裔群体心理健康的影响在什么地理尺度上最为显著。为了解决这些潜在的空白，我们应用多层次线性回归模型对一个大规模的、具有全国代表性的英国面板数据集进行了分析，该数据集包含一个少数民族增强样本，以研究与心理健康相关的生活质量（SF-12 心理成分综合评分）的社区层面驱动因素。结果表明，同族人密度对心理健康具有一定的保护作用，但支持程度不一。然而，它们广泛支持居住隔离对心理健康的影响。特别是，隔离具有非线性效应：隔离程度处于中等水平时，心理健康状况最为积极，隔离程度较低时，心理健康状况略差，隔离程度较高时，心理健康状况则更差。这些模式存在于“所有少数民族”样本中，并且在与亚洲少数群体相比，黑人少数群体中更为明显。这些关系在中观地理尺度（中级超级输出区）上最为一致。这些发现对少数族裔群体的社区与心理健康之间的关系的理论理解具有重要意义。
