Path Analysis of Relationships Between Social Support, Interpersonal Relations and Perceived Health in Urban Adolescents

Purpose: The purpose of this presentation is to describe the use of path analysis to test the relationships between social support, interpersonal relations, resilience, stress management, positive life perspective, and perceived health status with data from a convenience sample of 125 U.S. urban adolescents. This study uses a theoretical framework based upon previous research on social support, interpersonal relations, and perceived health in urban adolescents (Ayres & Mahat, 2012; Ayres, Mahat & Atkins, 2013; Cohen & Wills,1985; Esteves, Scoloveno, Mahat, Yarcheski & Scoloveno, 2013; Gage, 2015; Scoleveno, 2014; Underwood, 2011). Based upon this research positive relationships between social support and 1) interpersonal relations and 2) positive life perspective are predicted. Also, positive reltionships between interpersonal relations and 1) stress management and 2) positive life perspective are predicted. In addition, we predict positive relationships between stress management and perceived health and between positive life perspective and perceived health.  

Methods: A non-probability, convenience sample of 125 U.S. urban adolescents between the ages of 13 and 18 years was used for this research. Participants completed a demographic and general questionnaire and six instruments including the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, Brief Resilience Scale, and Adolescent Lifestyle Profile Score (ALP-R2). The ALP-R2 included three subscales of Interpersonal Relations, Stress Management and Positive Life Perspective. Path analyses were performed using AMOS software (20.0.0) in order to investigate the hypothesized conceptual model. Modification indices and standard regression weights were used to develop other related models to identify a model that best fit the variance-covariance matrix for these variables. 

Results: Path analyses were performed using AMOS 20.0.0. All but one of the hypothesized effects in the initial model were significant (p<0.05) (Figure 1). Results showed significant positive effects of social support on both 1) interpersonal relations (standardized r = 0.556, p<0.01) and 2) positive life perspective (r = 0.173, p<0.05). Also results showed significant positive effects of interpersonal relations on both 1) stress management (r = 0.564, p<0.01) and 2) positive life perspective (r = 0.223, p<0.05). In addition, there was a significant positive effect of stress management on positive life perspective (r = 0.430, p<0.05). Finally there were significant effects of positive life perspective on both 1) perceived health (r = 0.303, p<0.05) and 2) resilience (r = 0.229, p<0.05). There was, however, a non-significant direct effect of stress management on perceived health (r = 0.060, p>0.50). The overall lack of fit of this hypothesized model was non-significant, c2= 6.334, df=7, p>0.50.

Model 2 was developed by removing the direct effect of stress management on perceived health (Figure 2).  All effects in Model 2 were significant (p<0.05). Results showed significant positive effects of social support on both 1) interpersonal relations (standardized r = 0.556, p<0.01) and 2) positive life perspective (r = 0.173, p<0.05). Also, results showed significant positive effects of interpersonal relations on both 1) stress management (r = 0.564, p<0.01) and 2) positive life perspective (r = 0.223, p<0.05). In addition, there was a significant positive effect of stress management on positive life perspective (r = 0.430, p<0.05). Finally there were significant effects of positive life perspective on both 1) perceived health (r = 0.340, p<0.05) and 2) resilience (r = 0.229, p<0.05). The overall lack of fit of this hypothesized model was non-significant, c2= 6.627, df=8, p>0.50.  Thus results show that Model 2 better fit the data.  Based upon these results, there does not appear to be a direct relationship between stress management and perceived health. Rather the effect of stress management on perceived health is mediated by positive life perspective. Stress management increases positive life perspective which in turn increases perceived health.

Conclusion: The findings of this study increase our knowledge about how measured variables of social support and interpersonal relations have a positive effect on perceived health in urban adolescents.  Results show they have a positive effect on stress management and positive life perspective.  The positive effect of social support and interpersonal relations on perceived health is mediated by better stress management and a more positive life perspective.  Although there were no direct effects of social support and interpersonal relations on perceived health in this sample of urban adolescents, further research is needed to examine the extent to which social support and interpersonal relations are distinct or inter-related concepts.  Finally, results show that the effects of social support, interpersonal relations and stress management on resilience were significantly mediated by positive life perspective; there were no significant direct effects of each of these variables on resilience.  Futher research is needed to identify the antecedents of social support and interpersonal relations.