Effects of service use, family social capital and school social capital on psychosocial development among economically disadvantaged secondary school students in Hong Kong

Abstract

This study investigates factors conducive to the success of young people growing up with economic disadvantage. Previous studies often focused on the risks and difficulties experienced by this cohort of young people; however, little attempt has been made to examine factors that help them thrive or escape from adversity. It is with this consideration in mind that this study examines the ways in which service use, family social capital and school social capital affect psychosocial development in such areas as mental health, positive identity, behavioural adjustment, resilience, academic success and overall accomplishment. The basic premise is that these three factors may have differential effects on youth outcomes. To test this conjecture, the study employs survey data collected from a territory-wide sample of 862 students from low-income families recruited from 14 secondary schools located in different districts of Hong Kong. The results support our hypotheses that service use, family social capital and school social capital have significantly positive effects on psychosocial development, although their individual effects differ across indicators of development. In addition, the two background characteristics of gender and public assistance reception have significant effects on developmental outcomes. The implications of the findings for further research and service provision are discussed.

Keywords:

• economic disadvantage
• psychosocial development
• service use
• family social capital
• school social capital
• secondary school students

Introduction

In a time of rapid social change, young people's transition to adulthood has become increasingly less personally manageable (Raffe, 2009). Education now provides a less direct guarantee of entry to restructuring labour markets, and jarring economic transformations on a global scale have generated escalating anxiety about unemployment (Organisation for Economic Co-operation & Development, 2000). Thus, there are mounting concerns in many nations about the marginalisation of young people from the mainstream of society and how economic polarisation is threatening the well-being of the younger generation (Lowe & Krahn, 2000). Against this social backdrop, the developmental paths of economically disadvantaged young people are especially problematic – youth in this category commonly encounter difficulties in their transition to adulthood (Bynner & Parsons, 2002). They are likely to remain idle because many of them are young school leavers with little cultural capital to pursue study or work opportunities (Creed, 1999). It is vital that these young people receive help to break out from the trap of a low-income environment, idleness and social exclusion. At the same time, without a job or an opportunity to study, these young people are at great risk of financial, social and eventually mental and behavioural problems (Schaufeli, 1997). Their problems in their extreme form, such as criminal behaviour, can be immensely traumatic to society, and their financial and mental problems already inflict a sizable cost on society (Campbell & Ramey, 1994).

Disadvantaged young people exist everywhere and their problems are not confined to any particular culture. In Hong Kong, youth transition to adulthood has also been the subject of public concern and academic research. For instance, a recent study has indicated that mental problems among young people are related to dropping out of school and unemployment (Lai & Chan, 2002). Other studies have suggested that the occurrence of drug abuse and delinquency is often attributable to family poverty (Estes, 2002). As a result of economic upheavals since 1997, the unemployment rate among young people aged between 15 and 24 has been hovering around 10–15% over the past decade (Census and Statistics Department, 2009). Moreover, the number of senior-secondary and post-secondary students receiving financial assistance (e.g., means-tested grants and loan assistance) has been rising dramatically in the past five years (Student Financial Assistance Agency, 2010). Poverty and youth problems are thus an especially significant issue that must be tackled, and more research is needed to develop a better understanding of the life paths of young people suffering from economic hardship.

Although the study reported in this paper was aimed at exploring the psychosocial developmental of young people from low-income families in Hong Kong, we expected our findings to have relevance beyond Hong Kong. Based on a territory-wide survey of economically disadvantaged secondary school students, we examined a range of indicators of, and necessary conditions for, positive development in this population. These development indicators include mental health, positive identity, behavioural adjustment, resilience and academic achievement, and the necessary conditions for positive youth development include service use, family social capital and school social capital. Our investigation of these developmental indicators and the factors that affect youth development will provide policy makers with valuable information, and may lead to improvements in both policy and practice to help disadvantaged young people thrive in these turbulent times.

Theoretical framework and hypotheses

Conceptualising youth development

For the purpose of this study, youth development was conceptualised as a dynamic process that is reflected in measurable outcomes and indicates competent functioning despite the experience of adversity (Luthar, Cicchetti, & Becker, 2000). We focused on a number of indicators reflecting the achievement of life-stage developmental tasks among impoverished youth. One of these indicators is academic success (Conger, Conger, & Elder, 1997). Young people with a high level of academic success at school tend to further their education in university and contribute to society after their graduation (Ainsworth, 2002). Investigating development among economically disadvantaged youth can also be guided by consideration of those domains in which they are at greatest risk of a poor outcome (Lane, Gresham, & O'Shaughnessy, 2002). Such an approach suggests that assessing emotional and behavioural adjustment is a good way to determine successful development (Schaufeli, 1997). Young people experiencing poverty may be considered positively adjusted if they do not display emotional or behavioural problems (Creed, 1999). All these areas of academic success, mental health and behavioural adjustment have featured prominently in our previous research, particularly studies dealing with volunteer service (Ngai, 2006), delinquency (Ngai & Cheung, 2005), mental health (Cheung & Bagley, 1998), school performance (Ngai, Cheung, Ngai,& To, 2009) and resilience (Ngai & Cheung, 2009).

Service use and psychosocial development

The literature suggests that service use can affect disadvantaged youth by providing opportunities for social and emotional development and, in some cases, for intellectually challenging experiences that may be absent from the home environment (Cauce, Stewart, Rodriguez, Cochran, & Ginzler, 2003). In the Western context, evaluations of service programmes provided at school for low-income children have found support for higher academic results in service users than in non-users, and have provided consistent evidence that service users have higher school attendance rates and fewer suspensions than do non-users (Evaluation Services Center, 1999; Kane, 2004). Likewise, community centres and neighbourhood youth-service organisations such as girls' and boys' clubs have been found to have a positive influence on youth (Masten & Coatsworth, 1998). Adolescents offering volunteer service are less likely to display behavioural problems such as assault, stealing and vandalism (Hart, Atkins, & Ford, 1998).

In the Chinese context, previous research has identified some successful programmes and activities provided by community organisations or schools, such as those emphasising building young people's self-confidence and interpersonal relationships (Cheung & Ngai, 2004; Lau, 2003; Ngai, 2004). Some of these activities of relevance to youth development include individual guidance, volunteer service, career talks and mentorship programmes (Lai & Chan, 2002; Ngai, Ngai, Cheung, & To, 2008). Drawing from the findings of previous studies, the following hypothesis emerged:

H1

=

Service use – as indicated by participation in programmes provided by community organisations and in programmes provided at school – has a positive effect on the psychosocial development of economically disadvantaged young people.

Family social capital and developmental outcomes

Previous studies indicate that social capital plays an important role in the lives of youths suffering from economic hardship as they make the transition into adulthood (Coleman, 1988). By social capital, we refer to resources that inhere in the relationships among actors and facilitate a range of social outcomes (Dufur, Parcel, & McKune, 2008). Social capital is indicated by the presence of objective ties between actors, as well as by subjective relationships contingent upon trust, reciprocity or other positive emotions (Paxton, 1999). In this study, we focused on the family and the school as key contexts from which impoverished young people may draw social capital.

According to Coleman (1988), family social capital refers to the relationships between parents and their children, including the time, effort, resources and energy parents invest in their children. Across the social capital literature, a key component representing family social capital consists of parents' supervision of their children's activities. Past research indicates that high levels of parental supervision, measured by parents' knowledge of their children's friends and whereabouts, are consistently associated with positive outcomes in young people's educational attainment (Teachman, Paasch, & Carver, 1996) and socio-economic achievement (Furstenberg & Hughes, 1995). Likewise, in a study examining how certain parental risk and protective factors influence adolescents' school and emotional outcomes, Voydanoff and Donnelly (1999) have observed that parental supervision measured by parents' knowledge of what the child is doing when not at home is related to positive outcomes in young people, including high levels of academic performance and psychological adjustment.

Another important component representing family social capital is the quality of family communication. As originally proposed by Coleman and Hoffer (1987), measuring the quality of communication between parents and children reflects the strength of intra-familial relationships in a given family. Common indicators used to measure this component of family social capital include the number of times per week parents verbally encourage the child, the number of times per week the child shares their problems with parents and parents' empathy for the child's needs. Previous studies have found that more frequent social interaction between parents and children reduces young people's likelihood of dropping out of school (Teachman et al., 1996), while other studies have found that high levels of social interaction between parents and children are related to a lower likelihood of young people faring negatively in future outcomes (Furstenberg & Hughes, 1995). Furthermore, high levels of parental empathy for children's needs are found to have a positive influence on youth outcomes (Coleman, 1988). Accordingly, we proposed the following:

H2

=

Family social capital – as indicated by parental supervision and family communication – has a positive effect on the psychosocial development of economically disadvantaged young people.

School social capital and developmental outcomes

School social capital refers to investments between students and schools that can facilitate positive outcomes. These bonds can reflect community ties, but typically refer to the relationships students form with school teachers through which norms and values are passed on to young people. According to Coleman (1988), school social capital is more than supervision or control of students; rather, school personnel must choose to bear the costs of investing in student development to transmit the knowledge and norms that lead to positive outcomes. Hence, a school environment characterised by low levels of such investment will be inadequate for teaching students norms of appropriate behaviour necessary for the healthy management of daily challenges. Likewise, students who make or receive additional investments in social capital at school by creating closer relationships with peers and teachers will see returns on those investments in the form of better academic, emotional and behavioural adjustment (Dufur et al., 2008).

The social capital literature indicates teacher support is a key component representing school social capital. Previous research has found that high levels of teacher support, measured via teachers' attention to student needs and their willingness to help students, are strongly related to positive socio-economic outcomes among youth, such as graduating from high school, enrolling in college, obtaining gainful employment, and remaining mentally and emotionally healthy (Furstenberg & Hughes, 1995). Similarly, in a study assessing the risk and protective factors affecting young people's academic achievement, Voyanoff and Donnelly (1999) have observed that high levels of teachers' concern for students are associated with positive outcomes in their students' educational attainment. Hence, we predicted that:

H3

=

School social capital – as indicated by teacher support – has a positive effect on the psychosocial development of economically disadvantaged young people.

Method

Sampling and data collection procedures

This study involved a survey design with data being collected through a structured questionnaire to be completed by each research participant. The population studied was low-income young people aged between 14 and 21 years attending senior secondary classes (Grades 10–2) in Hong Kong. This is the critical age range in the transition to adulthood and is a time characterised by engagement in higher study (Cramer, 2000). The participants were recruited from 14 secondary schools in Hong Kong through a stratified multiple-stage cluster sampling method in which grades, school type and school location served as the stratifying factors (Rubin & Babbie, 2005). All of the participants grew up in a deprived home environment with monthly family income at or below 75% of the city's median monthly domestic household income (MMDHI; Census and Statistics Department, 2009; see Table 1). In Hong Kong, the government uses this criterion to assess which families are eligible to receive fee waivers for social services (Social Welfare Department, 2010). All the returned questionnaires were complete and could be used for data analysis.

Table 1 Median monthly domestic household income (MMDHI) by household size 2009.

Household size	MMDHI	75% of MMDHI
1	HK$6,500 (US$833)	HK$4,875 (US$625)
2	HK$13,500 (US$1,731)	HK$10,125 (US$1,298)
3	HK$18,000 (US$2,308)	HK$13,500 (US$1,731)
4	HK$22,300 (US$2,859)	HK$16,725 (US$2,144)
5	HK$29,000 (US$3,718)	HK$21,750 (US$2,788)
6	HK$32,000 (US$4,103)	HK$24,000 (US$3,077)
7 & over	HK$37,000 (US$4,744)	HK$27,750 (US$3,558)

Measures

The measures used in our study were adapted from Chinese versions of a variety of pre-existing scales employed in the literature (Cheung & Bagley, 1998; Ngai & Cheung, 2009; Ngai et al., 2008; Shek, Siu, & Lee, 2007). The measures were pre-tested on a sample of 10 young people recruited from a secondary school. Feedback was also sought from five experienced social workers to enhance applicability of the questionnaire to our research population. After completing the data collection process, the measures were refined using the 862 responses. Reliability was assessed by computing Cronbach's alpha for each measure. Items were dropped from their respective scales if their elimination resulted in a higher level of reliability for the scale. The final scale items used and the scale reliabilities are presented below.

Mental health

This was the average score of six items on depressive mood, sense of meaning, feeling happy and self-worth in the month preceding the survey. Each item yielded scores ranging from 0 to 100 to represent five levels of mental health. Scores on negative items were recoded and then added to those on positive items (the same procedure also applied to the other outcome and predictor scales). The composite score of the six items yielded a reliability alpha coefficient of .760.

Positive identity

This was the average score of seven items on healthy identity formation and achievement such as satisfaction with one's body and appearance, being a person with self-confidence, and knowing one's strengths and weaknesses in the month preceding the survey. Each item yielded scores ranging from 0 to 100 to represent five levels of positive identity. The composite score of the seven items yielded a reliability alpha coefficient of .769.

Behavioural adjustment

This was the average score of eight items on volunteering, charity work, vandalism, using foul language, and helping older and disabled people in the month preceding the survey. Each item yielded scores ranging from 0 to 100 to represent five levels of behavioural adjustment. The composite score of the eight items yielded a reliability alpha coefficient of .668.

Resilience

This was the average score for six items on capacity to adapt to change and stressful events in a healthy way in the month preceding the survey. Each item yielded scores ranging from 0 to 100 to represent five levels of resilience. The composite score for the six items yielded an alpha reliability coefficient of .733.

Academic success

This was the average score of six items on goal attainment, academic knowledge, school accomplishment, academic results and difficulty in learning in the month preceding the survey. Each item yielded scores ranging from 0 to 100 to represent five levels of academic success. The composite score of the six items yielded a reliability alpha coefficient of .736.

Overall accomplishment

This was the average score of all items on the aforementioned developmental scales. Each item yielded scores ranging from 0 to 100 to represent five levels of overall accomplishment. The composite score of the 33 items yielded a reliability alpha coefficient of .847.

Participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations

This was the average score of six items on how many times participants had participated in developmental programmes such as those on individual guidance, volunteer service, careers and mentorship provided by community organisations in the six months before the survey. The composite score of the six items yielded a reliability alpha coefficient of .601.

Participation in developmental programmes provided at school

This was the average score of six items on how many times participants had participated in developmental programmes such as those on individual guidance, volunteer service, careers, and mentorship provided at school in the six months before the survey. The composite score of the six items yielded a reliability alpha coefficient of .608.

Parental supervision

This was the average score of four items on parental monitoring of participants' activities, whereabouts and friends in the six months before the survey. Each item yielded scores ranging from 0 to 100 to represent five levels of parental supervision. The composite score of the four items yielded a reliability alpha coefficient of .615.

Family communication

This was the average score of two items on the quality of parent–child communication such as how often participants talked with their parents when they had a problem that bothered them in the six months before the survey. Each item yielded scores ranging from 0 to 100 to represent five levels of family communication. The composite score of the two items yielded a reliability alpha coefficient of .913.

Teacher support

This was the average score of seven items on teachers' care and guidance towards participants such as showing concern when participants were absent from school and willingness to help participants in the six months before the survey. Each item yielded scores ranging from 0 to 100 to represent five levels of teacher support. The composite score of the seven items yielded a reliability alpha coefficient of .646.

Demographics

The last section of the questionnaire comprised questions designed to elicit background data on the participants, including age, gender, household size, duration of residence in Hong Kong, parental marital status, paternal and maternal employment status, paternal and maternal education, public assistance reception, and monthly family income. These background characteristics served as control variables in the regression analysis of psychosocial development.

Results

Table 2 shows the sample characteristics of the 862 secondary school students who participated in the study. All of the participants were living in a low-income home environment with monthly family income at or below 75% of the MMDHI (Census and Statistics Department, 2009). About 13% of the participants were receiving public assistance from the Hong Kong government. Approximately 50% of the participants were female and their average age was 16.4 years. All of the participants were full-time students: 32.6% were in Grade 10, 34.2% in Grade 11 and 33.2% in Grade 12. The participants had been living in Hong Kong for an average of around 14 years. The average household size in the sample was 4.2 persons, with 82.1% of the participants living in families with married parents, 14.4% coming from families with divorced parents, and 3.5% from families with one or both parents deceased. As for parental educational level, the majority of participants' fathers (87%) and mothers (88%) had secondary or below qualifications. Regarding parental employment status, the majority of participants' fathers (75.1%) and mothers (56.4%) were employees, although there was a significant difference in the percentage of participants' fathers (2.4%) and mothers (39.1%) who were homemakers.

Table 2 Demographic characteristics of youth participants (N = 862).

Characteristic	%
Gender
Female	50.0
Male	50.0
Educational level
Grade 10	32.6
Grade 11	34.2
Grade 12	33.2
Parental marital status
Married	82.1
Divorced	14.4
One parent/both parents deceased	3.5
Paternal educational level
Primary	26.3
Secondary	60.7
Tertiary	13.0
Maternal educational level
Primary	25.6
Secondary	62.4
Tertiary	12.0
Paternal employment status
Employee	75.1
Self-employed	20.4
Unemployed	2.1
Homemaker	2.4
Maternal employment status
Employee	56.4
Self-employed	3.8
Unemployed	.7
Homemaker	39.1
Monthly family income
HK$4,875 (US$625) or below	7.5
HK$4,876–10,125 (US$626–1,298)	32.9
HK$10,126–13,500 (US$1,299–1,731)	25.6
HK$13,501–16,725 (US$1,732–2,144)	16.5
HK$16,726–21,750 (US$2,145–2,788)	9.9
HK$21,751–24,000 (US$2,789–3,077)	3.8
HK$24,001–27,750 (US$3,078–3,558)	1.7
HK$27,751 (US$3,559) or above	2.1
Public assistance reception
Yes	13.0
No	87.0
	Mean
Age (years)	16.4
Duration of residence in Hong Kong (years)	14.0
Household size (number of persons/household)	4.2

Table 3 provides the means and standard deviations of all the variables used in the study. Mental health, positive identity, behavioural adjustment, resilience, academic success and overall accomplishment were the key outcome variables, while parental supervision, family communication, teacher support, participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations and participation in developmental programmes provided at school were the key predictors used in the analysis. All these variables had means around the midpoint of their scoring ranges and had considerable degrees of variation. Essentially, the distribution of each of the outcome variables resembled a normal curve, making them suitable variables for regression analysis.

Table 3 Descriptive statistics for the variables.

Variable	Scoring	Mean	Standard deviation
MH	0–100	55.3	16.3
PI	0–100	52.4	13.6
BA	0–100	50.4	13.8
RE	0–100	64.3	15.4
AS	0–100	33.7	14.5
OA	0–100	51.2	10.5
PS	0–100	51.9	21.5
FC	0–100	38.2	27.8
TS	0–100	58.5	14.7
PDPCO	total frequency	1.3	4.8
PDPSC	total frequency	1.4	3.3
Note: MH = mental health, PI = positive identity, BA = behavioural adjustment, RE = resilience, AS = academic success, OA = overall accomplishment, PS = parental supervision, FC = family communication, TS = teacher support, PDPCO = participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations, PDPSC = participation in developmental programmes provided at school.

Simple correlations between the outcome variables and predictor variables provided a preliminary form of support for our hypotheses (see Table 4). The results showed that teacher support had a significant positive relationship with mental health, positive identity, behavioural adjustment, resilience, academic success and overall accomplishment (r = .142 to .505, p < .001), family communication had a significant positive relationship with mental health, positive identity, behavioural adjustment, resilience, academic success and overall accomplishment (r = .106 to .310, p < .01 to .001), parental supervision had a significant positive relationship with mental health, positive identity, behavioural adjustment, resilience and overall accomplishment (r = .139 to .287, p < .001), participation in developmental programmes provided at school had a significant positive relationship with mental health, positive identity, behavioural adjustment, resilience, and overall accomplishment (r = .085 to .244, p < .05 to .001), and participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations had a significant positive relationship with positive identity, behavioural adjustment, resilience and overall accomplishment (r = .067 to .234, p < .05 to .001). Between the five predictors, parental supervision had a moderate positive correlation with family communication (r = .503, p < .001) (see Table 5). Hence, parental supervision and family communication were distinct from one another despite their apparent similarity as measures of family social capital. Likewise, participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations had a moderate positive correlation with participation in developmental programmes provided at school (r = .413, p < .001). Thus, participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations and participation in developmental programmes provided at school were distinct from one another despite their apparent similarity as measures of service use. Overall, the moderate correlations between parental supervision, family communication, teacher support, participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations and participation in developmental programmes provided at school indicated that a joint analysis of these predictor variables through regression analysis was appropriate (Morrow-Howell, 1994).

Table 4 Correlations between outcome variables and predictor variables.

Variable	MH	PI	BA	RE	AS	OA
PS	.139***	.196***	.287***	.162***	.035	.225***
FC	.212***	.279***	.305***	.208***	.106**	.310***
TS	.402***	.425***	.365***	.454***	.142***	.505***
PDPCO	.044	.070*	.234***	.067*	-.045	.103**
PDPSC	.085*	.113**	.244***	.139***	.002	.164***
Note: MH = mental health, PI = positive identity, BA = behavioural adjustment, RE = resilience, AS = academic success, OA = overall accomplishment, PS = parental supervision, FC = family communication, TS = teacher support, PDPCO = participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations, PDPSC = participation in developmental programmes provided at school. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

Table 5 Correlations between predictor variables.

Variable	PS	FC	TS	PDPCO	PDPSC
PS	1.000
FC	.503***	1.000
TS	.273***	.306***	1.000
PDPCO	.031	.084*	.118***	1.000
PDPSC	.073*	.073*	.161***	.413***	1.000
Note: MH = mental health, PI = positive identity, BA = behavioural adjustment, RE = resilience, AS = academic success, OA = overall accomplishment, PS = parental supervision, FC = family communication, TS = teacher support, PDPCO = participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations, PDPSC = participation in developmental programmes provided at school. *p < .05, **p < .001.

Predicting developmental outcomes – mental health, positive identity, behavioural adjustment, resilience, academic success and overall accomplishment

To test the hypotheses, regression analysis was more appropriate when used to examine the predictors simultaneously and control for significant background characteristics through stepwise selection. The background characteristics included in the stepwise selection procedure were gender, age, educational level, duration of residence in Hong Kong, parental marital status, paternal educational level, maternal educational level, paternal occupational status, maternal occupational status, monthly family income, public assistance reception and household size (see Table 2). The analysis generated two models for each of the six outcome variables – mental health, positive identity, behavioural adjustment, resilience, academic success and overall accomplishment – by examining the effects of parental supervision, family communication, teacher support, participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations and participation in developmental programmes provided at school (1) without controlling for background characteristics; and (2) controlling for background characteristics. These two models gave a clear picture of the apparent and independent effects of the five predictors on mental health, positive identity, behavioural adjustment, resilience, academic success and overall accomplishment.

Table 6 reports results that partially support Hypothesis 1: economically disadvantaged secondary school students who scored higher on participation in developmental programmes provided at school tended to report higher levels of behavioural adjustment (β = 0.191 to 0.203, p < .001), resilience (β = 0.102 to 0.109, p < .05) and overall accomplishment (β = 0.120 to 0.124, p < .01), although they did not report higher levels of mental health, positive identity, and academic success. On the other hand, the effects of participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations on five of the six outcome variables (mental health, positive identity, resilience, academic success and overall accomplishment) were not significant, the sole exception being behavioural adjustment (β = 0.142 to 0.159, p < .01). Hence, participation in developmental programmes provided at school might have a significant positive influence on behavioural adjustment, resilience, and overall accomplishment only. In addition, participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations might have a significant positive influence on behavioural adjustment only, but not on the other developmental outcomes.

Table 6 Standardised regression coefficients for predicting mental health, positive identity, behavioural adjustment, resilience, academic success and overall accomplishment.

	MH		PI		BA		RE		AS		OA
Variable	M1	M2	M1	M2	M1	M2	M1	M2	M1	M2	M1	M2
PS	.002	− .002	.003	− .009	.138**	.132**	.051	.040	− .028	− .031	.042	.034
FC	.066	.098	.144**	.162**	.133**	.152**	− .024	− .007	.062	.077	.101*	.130**
TS	.356***	.375***	.329***	.321***	.207***	.191***	.397***	.381***	.120**	.155**	.396***	.400***
PDPCO	− .034	− .017	.014	.035	.142**	.159**	− .070	− .063	− .074	− .077	− .010	.005
PDPSC	.037	.007	.076	.066	.203***	.191***	.102*	.109*	.055	.036	.124**	.120**
FEM	–	− .122**	–	− .091	–	− .013	–	− .086	–	− .121**	–	− .122**
PAR	–	.089	–	.106*	–	− .091	–	.003	–	.202**	–	.144**
R ^2	.155	.218	.183	.248	.247	.275	.182	.250	.028	.119	.248	.307
Adjusted R ^2	.144	.165	.173	.198	.237	.227	.172	.198	.016	.060	.238	.260
Note: MH = mental health, PI = positive identity, BA = behavioural adjustment, RE = resilience, AS = academic success, OA = overall accomplishment, PS = parental supervision, FC = family communication, TS = teacher support, PDPCO = participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations, PDPSC = participation in developmental programmes provided at school, FEM = female, PAR = public assistance reception. M1 = not controlling for background characteristics, M2 = controlling for background characteristics. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

Our results also partially support Hypothesis 2: economically disadvantaged secondary school students who scored higher on family communication tended to report higher levels of positive identity (β = 0.144 to 0.162, p < .01), behavioural adjustment (β = 0.133 to 0.152, p < .01), and overall accomplishment (β = 0.101 to 0.130, p < .05 to .01); however, these young people did not report higher levels of mental health, resilience and academic success. On the other hand, the relationships between parental supervision and five of the six outcome variables (mental health, positive identity, resilience, academic success and overall accomplishment) were not significant, the sole exception being behavioural adjustment (β = 0.132 to 0.138, p < .01). Thus, family communication might have a significant positive influence on positive identity, behavioural adjustment and overall accomplishment only. Moreover, parental supervision might have a significant positive influence on behavioural adjustment only, but not on the other developmental outcomes.

In support of Hypothesis 3, economically disadvantaged secondary school students who scored higher on teacher support tended to report higher levels of mental health (β = 0.356 to 0.375, p < .001), positive identity (β = 0.321 to 0.329, p < .001), behavioural adjustment (β = 0.191 to 0.207, p < .001), resilience (β = 0.381 to 0.397, p < .001), academic success (β = 0.120 to 0.155, p < .001) and overall accomplishment (β = 0.396 to 0.400, p < .0.001). Teacher support therefore represented the strongest predictor with a significant positive influence on all developmental outcomes examined in this study.

Only two of the background characteristics – gender (i.e., being female) and public assistance reception (i.e., receiving welfare) – had significant effects on developmental outcomes. Accordingly, among economically disadvantaged secondary school students, girls tended to report lower levels of mental health (β = –0.122, p < .01), academic success (β = –0.121, p < .01) and overall accomplishment (β = –0.122, p < .01) than did boys, and disadvantaged students whose families received public assistance tended to report higher levels of positive identity (β = 0.106, p < .05), academic success (β = 0.202, p < .01) and overall accomplishment (β = 0.144, p < .01) than did those whose families did not receive public assistance.

Discussion

This study set out to examine the relationships between six aspects of psychosocial development – mental health, positive identity, behavioural adjustment, resilience, academic success, and overall accomplishment – with service use (i.e., participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations and participation in developmental programmes provided at school), family social capital (i.e., parental supervision and family communication) and school social capital (i.e., teacher support) among economically disadvantaged secondary school students. This question was the primary focus of this study. The premise of our study was that service use, family social capital and school social capital have different effects on youth development. The purpose of this investigation was to examine how these three sets of variables work in concert in shaping developmental outcomes. The study used a survey design measuring service use, family social capital, school social capital and developmental outcomes from the perspectives of secondary school students living in low-income families in Hong Kong.

The results generally support the hypotheses that among economically disadvantaged secondary school students, service use, family social capital and school social capital have significant positive relationships with development outcomes, although the individual effects differ across indicators of development. These conclusions reinforce previous findings that service use, family social capital and school social capital can be key determinants of positive development among impoverished young people (Cauce et al., 2003; Cheung & Ngai, 2004; Coleman, 1988; Dufur et al., 2008; Furstenberg & Hughes, 1995). The results of this study thus indicate that when young people suffering from economic hardship obtain access to adequate resources and opportunities, they can desist from failure and social exclusion. Moreover, our study extends the literature on economically deprived youth (Bynner & Parsons, 2002) by highlighting the need to go further in examining the factors that help this cohort of young people resist the adverse effects of poor financial conditions.

As noted earlier, we also sought to investigate two forms of social capital across the family and school contexts as resources that inhere in relationships among actors and facilitate a range of social outcomes. In so doing, we improved upon previous studies that failed to address the context from which social capital derives. Our results show that school social capital (i.e., teacher support) is a stronger predictor of psychosocial development among economically disadvantaged secondary school students than is family social capital (i.e., parental supervision and family communication). Because the participants in this study had reached senior grades in their secondary education, it is possible that as young people mature, their school will be a stronger influence than their family, such that social capital built at school becomes more useful in promoting positive development (Dufur et al., 2008). Another possibility is that school social capital in the form of teacher support helps strengthen disadvantaged students' identification with norms passed on by the school system, which in the long run fosters positive youth development (Furstenberg & Hughes, 1995; Voyanoff & Donnelly, 1999). Along this line of thinking, our findings suggest the possibility that school social capital can be especially influential in the socialisation process of economically disadvantaged secondary school students. This type of social capital has great potential to enhance the development of this youth population in their mental health, positive identity, behavioural adjustment, resilience, academic success and overall accomplishment.

The results of this study indicate that, in comparison with school social capital, family social capital is a less significant predictor of developmental outcomes among economically disadvantaged secondary school students. The relatively weak predictive power of family social capital is not surprising given previous studies demonstrating that when young people grow up and begin to spend more time at school, the family setting becomes less influential in the socialisation process (Dufur et al., 2008; Hartup, 1992). As for the relative effects of the two family social capital predictors examined in this study, our results show that a higher level of quality family communication has significant positive relationships with positive identity, behavioural adjustment and overall accomplishment, whereas parental supervision of children's activities does not have any significant influence on most developmental indicators, the exception being behavioural adjustment. This finding on the differential effects of our family social capital predictors suggests that among economically disadvantaged secondary school students in Hong Kong, developing a high-quality family communication environment featuring more parent–child social interaction and greater parental empathy for their children's needs may be a more effective approach to nurturing positive youth development than that offered by parental monitoring and supervision of children's activities. An important point to emphasise is that because Hong Kong is a Westernised metropolis, young people living there may have a greater orientation towards Western values and thus may strive to become more autonomous of their parents (Lau & Cheung, 1987). This conjecture suggests that our results may not be applicable to young people living in other Chinese communities such as those in mainland China. However, our findings are consistent with Lin and Fu's (1990) remark that, in comparison with their Western counterparts, Chinese parents may be more restrictive due to cultural endorsement of parental authority. Nevertheless, the patterns of within-culture relations between parental supervision, family communication and developmental outcomes discerned in this study are similar to those observed in Western societies (Coleman & Hoffer, 1987; Teachman et al., 1996). Taken together, the results of our own study and those conducted in Western contexts suggest a rapid change in the focus of Chinese socialisation patterns involving a greater emphasis on quality family communication and greater child autonomy, features of the youth experience commonly found in the West.

Furthermore, this study broadens the literature by examining the effects of service use on developmental outcomes separately across the two contexts of community organisations and schools. Although prior studies have found a positive effect of service use on developmental outcomes of disadvantaged youth (Cauce et al., 2003; Kane, 2004), what they could not demonstrate is the extent to which the observed outcomes may actually reflect the benefits of service use from more than one context. Accordingly, the results of this study indicate that participation in developmental programmes provided at school is a stronger predictor of youth development than is participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations. Indeed, while participation in developmental programmes provided at school has a significant positive effect on behavioural adjustment, resilience and overall accomplishment, participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations does not have a significant influence on most of the developmental outcomes examined here, the exception being behavioural adjustment. This finding on the differential youth development effects of service participation in the community organisation and school contexts, together with our finding on the significant effects of school social capital on all development indicators examined in this study, suggest that schools should be a focus of policy intervention and service delivery. The idea that investments at school can improve student outcomes is further supported by our finding on the significant positive relationship between participation in developmental programmes provided at school and school social capital (i.e., teacher support; β = 0.161, p < .001). Policies designed to engage students in service programmes provided at school, such as a more student-friendly activity schedule and greater involvement of school personnel in student care and academic guidance (Ngai, 2006; Cheung & Ngai, 2004), may therefore enhance teacher support for students, which eventually has a beneficial effect on student outcomes.

Our findings on gender differences in psychosocial development among economically disadvantaged secondary school students are of interest. In particular, disadvantaged girls tend to experience lower levels of mental health, academic success and overall accomplishment than do their male counterparts. These results contrast with those documented in the literature on economically deprived youth (Eckenrode, Rowe, Laird, & Braithwaite, 1995; Ripple & Luthar, 2000). For instance, in their study of disadvantaged students from multiple urban locations in the United States, Connell, Spencer, and Aber (1994) have observed that boys consistently fare more poorly than girls in academic performance and behavioural adjustment. In contrast, our results indicate that disadvantaged girls tend to report higher family social capital (parental supervision: β = 0.183, p < .001; family communication: β = 0.223, p < .001) and higher school social capital (teacher support: β = 0.111, p < .05) than do boys, although we did not observe any significant difference between the two genders in their participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations (β = 0.065, ns) and participation in developmental programmes provided at school (β = 0.055, ns). These findings on gender differences in family social capital and school social capital are consistent with those documented in the available literature showing Chinese parents and teachers seem to provide more care and concern to girls than to boys (Ma, Shek, Cheung, & Oi, 2000; Ngai & Cheung, 2009). Taken as a whole, while being a female may benefit girls through higher levels of family social capital and school social capital, its direct effect on mental health, academic success and overall accomplishment is negative among disadvantaged female students. Hence, being female may be a risk factor for positive development in secondary students suffering from economic hardship, and future research should examine the exact reasons and mechanisms underlying this gender effect on the psychosocial development of this youth cohort.

The results on the significant positive effect of public assistance reception on positive identity, academic success and overall accomplishment reinforce previous findings that young people who receive public assistance are more likely to thrive despite adverse economic circumstances (Hill & Duncan, 1987; Ngai et al., 2009). In contrast with the poverty culture hypothesis that welfare dependence is routinely passed from parents to young people (Moffitt, 2002), our results support the economic resource hypothesis that public assistance is an important social investment which provides needed resources conducive to positive youth development (Lichter & Crowley, 2004). Nevertheless, unlike findings made in previous research (McLoyd, 1998), public assistance reception was found to have no significant effect on the behavioural adjustment of disadvantaged students. Further analysis of the results indicated that public assistance reception is a significant predictor of participation in developmental programmes provided by community organisations (β = 0.094, p < .05). This finding elaborates on observations made in previous research on the positive relationship between public assistance reception and pro-social involvement (Cauce et al., 2003) by indicating that the influence of public assistance reception on behavioural adjustment is mediated by service use. When young people receive public assistance, they are more likely to participate in developmental programmes provided by community organisations and come into contact with helping professionals who exemplify positive behaviour, which eventually enhances their behavioural adjustment.

This study is subject to several limitations. First, our results were derived from a territory-wide sample of economically disadvantaged secondary school students in Hong Kong whose developmental processes and outcomes may differ from those of disadvantaged youth elsewhere. Hence, to increase the generalisability of the results to other regions, it would be helpful if comparative studies engaged similar groups of young people living in different settings and contexts. Second, this study focused on testing hypotheses about the effects of service use, family social capital and school social capital on student outcomes. This design leaves room for the investigation of alternative models using variables such as neighbourhood quality (Furstenberg & Hughes, 1995) and peer networks (Holland, Reynolds, & Weller, 2007). Other means of extending this study include longitudinal analysis of the developmental stages of young people and the use of in-depth interviews and focus groups to collect qualitative data. Third, this study used mental health, positive identity, behavioural adjustment, resilience and academic success as the measures of secondary school student development. This list does not represent an exhaustive catalogue of measures of emotional and social development among this youth population. Adding life satisfaction (Shek et al., 2007), social competence (Ngai et al., 2009) and financial adequacy (Ngai et al., 2008) as outcome measures could enhance the validity of the findings of this study and provide interesting insights into the effects of service use, family social capital and school social capital on youth developmental outcomes.

Acknowledgements

This project was supported by a grant from the Research Grants Council, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (Project Number 449409).