Contents

indicate more positive outcomes that are in line with aspirational norms. Therefore, community members report that on these dimensions their current behaviour is broadly in line with community values and aspirations.

######## Table 5.5 Scale formation details and descriptive statistics for current reported behaviour and attitude measures

Scale name	Items	Alpha	n	Mean	SD
Wellbeing (1–4 scale)	In the past 4 weeks, how often did you feel calm and peaceful?	.81	554	3.21	0.63
In the past 4 weeks, how often have you been a happy person?
In the past 4 weeks, how often did you feel full of life?
In the past 4 weeks, how often did you have lots of energy?
Health support seeking (1–10 scale)	I am willing to ask for help with my problems when I need it I encourage my family to seek help when they have problems	.77	556	8.82	1.92
I am willing to volunteer to help others
Home living (1–10 scale)	It was easy for me to keep my home neat and tidy I want to make my home a nice place for my family to live	.75	568	9.06	1.47
Community engagement (1–10 scale)	Most people in this community work better together to fix their problems Most people in this community are willing to speak up and get involved	.77	551	6.47	2.39

### 5.7 2: Relationships between key variables 5.7 2: Relationships between key variables

#### 5.7.1 among explanatory and outcome variables 5.7.1 among explanatory and outcome variables

In line with Step 2 of the analysis strategy, it is possible to look at the general pattern of relationships between variables and, in particular, the relationship between explanatory (measures 1, 2 and 3; see Table 5.5) and outcome (measures 5–13) variables. This analysis could not be conducted where responses were categorical (i.e. child wellbeing change, community improvement, personal improvement). The patterns of relationships observed are in line with expectations based on the trial logic and social-psychological research (Table 5.6). When it comes to relationships among explanatory variables, those community members who reported stronger endorsement of the FRC (1) were also more likely to report strong leadership (2) and higher levels of responsibility (3). When it comes to the relationship between the FRC and outcome variables, it is clear that those community members who endorsed the FRC were also more likely to report positive change in leadership (4) and changes in community engagement (5), as well as overall levels of community engagement (6). Endorsement of the FRC was also positively related to current aspects of community life, including wellbeing (7), seeking health support (8), and a desire to improve living conditions in the family home (9). For all of these measures, the more that people endorsed the FRC, the more likely they were also to report perceptions that things had changed for the better and behaviours were in line with aspirational community norms. Similar patterns of significant, positive relationships were also observed for the remaining explanatory variables, leadership and responsibility, so that an increase in perceptions of strong leadership and endorsement of individual/family responsibility also increased perceptions of change and current (normative) behaviours. These results overall show us that the FRC and its endorsement are positively related to strong leadership and individual and family responsibility, and that all of the explanatory variables are also positively related to perceptions of change and current behaviours in line with the aspirational norms.

27