CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,317Job Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorCommunity Health and DevelopmentNonprofit Sector and Volunteering

Psychological empowerment: Issues and illustrations

Open access
Zimmerman, Marc A.·1995·American Journal of Community Psychology
DOI 10.1007/bf02506983
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Discussed several issues related to psychological empowerment. The thesis of this paper is that the development of a universal and global measure of psychological empowerment may not be a feasible or appropriate goal. I begin by distinguishing between empowerment processes and outcomes. Underlying assumptions are discussed including the notion that empowerment differs across people, contexts, and times. A nomological network that includes intrapersonal, interactional, and behavioral components is also presented. Two examples of psychological empowerment for voluntary service organization members and members of a mutual help organization are described to help illustrate differences in the specific variables that may be used to measure psychological empowerment in different populations and settings.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf02506983

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Empowerment is not a unidirectional transfer of resources from library to community but a relational reconfiguration of agency.

    “empowerment is not a unidirectional transfer of resources from library to community but a relational reconfiguration of agency”

    From Fostering community empowerment through library social responsibility: A social capital approach in Malaysian academic libraries (2026) · cites this paper as Zimmerman, 1995

    The “Empowering Processes” section describes community members as coequal partners in developing and evaluating interventions, rather than dependent recipients of professional help. This supports the claim’s general contrast between one-way provision and shared agency, but the paper does not address libraries or a library–community relationship specifically (page not provided). (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Empowerment requires transferring knowledge and responsibility to communities, rather than providing indefinite library support.

    “Additionally, the finding that empowerment requires transferring knowledge and responsibility to communities, rather than providing indefinite library support, resonates with empowerment theory (Zimmerman, 1995) and recent LIS work by Rabasa and Abrizah (2022), who emphasised capacity-building over service provision.”

    From Fostering community empowerment through library social responsibility: A social capital approach in Malaysian academic libraries (2026) · cites this paper as Zimmerman, 1995

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 36

  1. Balcazar, F. E., Seekins, T., Fawcett, S. B., & Hopkins, B. L., (1990). Empowering people with physical disabilities through advocacy skills training. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 281-296.
  2. Carr, T. H., Dixon, M. C., & Ogles, R. M. (1976). Perceptions of community life which distinguish between participants and nonparticipants in a neighborhood self-help organization. American Journal of Community Psychology, 4, 357-366.
  3. Chavis, D. M., & Wandersman, A. (1990). Sense of community in the urban environment: A catalyst for participation and community development. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 55-81.
  4. Checkoway, B., & Doyle, M. (1980). Community organizing lessons for health care consumers. Journal of Health Politics, Policy, and Law, 5, 213-226.
  5. Chesler, M. A. (1991). Participatory action research with self-help groups: An alternative paradigm for inquiry and action. American Journal of Community Psychology, 19, 757-768.
  6. Cornell Empowerment Group. ~,1989)i Empowerment and family support. Networking Bulletin, 1, 1-23. "..
  7. Cottrell, L. S., Jr. (1983). The competent community. In R. Warren & L. Lyon (Eds.), New perspectives on the American community (pp. 398-432). Homewood, IL: Dorsey.
  8. Denney, W. M. (1979). Participant citizenship in a marginal group: Union membership of California farm workers. American Journal of Political Science, 23, 330-337.
  9. Elden, M., & Chisolm, R. F. (Eds.). (1993). Emerging varieties of action research: Introduction to the special issue. Human Relations, 46, 121-142.
  10. Fish, J. (1973). Black power~white control." The struggle of the Woodlawn Organization in Chicago. Princeton, N J: Princeton University Press.
  11. Florin, P., & Wandersman, A. (1984). Cognitive social learning and participation in community development. American Journal of Community Psychology, 12, 689-708.
  12. Gruber, J., & Trickett, E. J. (1987). Can we empower others? The paradox of empowerment in the governing of an alternative public school. American Journal of Community Psychology, 15, 353-371.
  13. Hall, R. H. (Ed.). (1992). Participatory research, Part I. American Sociologist, 23 (Whole issue).
  14. Harter, S. (1990). Causes, correlates, and the functional role of global self-worth: A life-span perspective. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Kolligan, Jr. (Eds.), Competence considered (pp. 67-97). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
  15. Langer, E. J. (1979). The illusion of incompetence. In L. V. Perlmutter & R. A. Monty (Eds.), Choice and perceived control (pp. 301-313). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  16. Maton, K. E., & Salem, D. A. (1995). Organizational characteristics of empowering community settings: A multiple case study approach. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23,
  17. McGrath, J. E. (1982). Dilemmatics: The study of research choices and dilemmas. In J. E. McGrath, J. Martin, & R. A. Kulka (Eds.). Judgment calls in research (pp. 69-102). Beverly Hills: Sage.
  18. Mechanic, D. (1991, February). Adolescents at risk." New directions. Paper presented at the annual Conference on Health Policy, Cornell University Medical College.
  19. Paulhus, D. (1983). Sphere-specific measures of perceived control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 1253-1265.
  20. Perkins, D. D., Florin, P., Rich, R. C., Wandersman, A., & Chavis, D. M. (1990). Participation and the social and physical environment of residential blocks: Crime and community context. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 83-116.
  21. Prestby, J. E., Wandersman, A., Florin, P., Rich, R., & Chavis, D. M. (1990). Benefits, costs, incentive management, and participation in voluntary organizations: A means to understanding and promoting empowerment. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 117-149.
  22. Rappaport, J. (1981). In praise of paradox: A social policy of empowerment over prevention. American Journal of Community Psychology, 9, 1-25.
  23. Rappaport, J. (1987). Terms of empowerment/exemplars of prevention: Toward a theory for community psychology. American Journal of Community Psychology, 15, 121-148.
  24. Rappaport, J. (1990). Research methods and the empowerment social agenda. In P. Tolan, C. Keys, F. Chertok, & L. Jason (Eds.), Researching community psychology: Integrating theories and methodologies (pp. 51-63). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  25. Rappaport, J., Reischl, T. M., & Zimmerman, M. A. (1991). Mutual help mechanisms in the empowerment of former mental patients. In D. Saleebey (Ed.), The strengths perspective in social work practice: Power in the people. White Plains, NY: Longman.
  26. Rich, R. C., Edelstein, M., Hallman, W. K., & Wandersman, A. H. (1995). Citizen participation and empowerment: The case of local environmental hazards. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23, 657-676.
  27. Roesch, R., & Golding, S. L. (1980). Competency to stand trial. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
  28. Strecher, V. T., DeVellis, B. M., Becker, M. H., & Rosenstock, I. M. (1986). The role of self-efficacy in achieving health behavior change. Health Education Quarterly, 13, 73-92.
  29. Sue, S., & Zane, N. (1980). Learned helplessness theory and community psychology. In M. S. Gibbs, J. R. Lachenmeyer, & J. Sigal (Eds.), Community Psychology: Theoretical and empirical approaches (pp. 121-143), New York: Gardner.
  30. Yeich, S., & Levine, R. (1992). Participatory research's contribution to a conceptualization of empowerment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 1894-1908.
  31. Zimmerman, M. A. (1990a). Taking aim on empowerment research: On the distinction between psychological and individual conceptions. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 169-177.
  32. Zimmerman, M. A. (1990b). Toward a theory of learned hopefulness: A structural model analysis of participation and empowerment. Journal of Research in Personality, 24, 71-86.
  33. Zimmerman, M. A. (in press). Empowerment theory: Psychological, organizational and community levels of analysis. In J. Rappaport & E. Seidman (Eds.), The handbook of community psychology. New York: Plenum Press.
  34. Zimmerman, M. A., Israel, B. A., Schulz, A., & Checkoway, B. (1992). Further explorations in empowerment theory: An empirical analysis of psychological empowerment. American Journal of Community Psychology, 20, 707-727.
  35. Zimmerman, M. A., & Rappaport, J. (1988). Citizen participation, perceived control, and psychological empowerment. American Journal of Community Psychology, 16, 725-750.
  36. Zimmerman, M. A., & Zahniser, J. H. (1991). Refinements of sphere-specific measures of perceived control: Development of a socio-political control scale. Journal of Community Psychology, 19, 189-204.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zimmerman, M. A.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Zimmerman, Marc A.
ORCID
Zimmerman, Marc A.
Venue
American Journal of Community Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1995-10
Volume
23
Issue
5
Pages
581-599
ISSN
  • 0091-0562 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2770
DOI
10.1007/bf02506983
OpenAlex
W2106618426
Cited by
2,317
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 137 · 2025: 152 · 2024: 148 · 2023: 144 · 2022: 122 · 2021: 153 · 2020: 149 · 2019: 133 · 2018: 101 · 2017: 101 · 2016: 94 · 2015: 74 · 2014: 105 · 2013: 85 · 2012: 82
FWCI
4.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • American Journal of Community Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Nonprofit Sector and Volunteering
Keywords
psychological empowerment, empowerment measurement, nomological network
MeSH terms
Humans, Power, Psychological, Psychology, Social, Self-Help Groups, Social Behavior, Social Environment, Social Support

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review