ROMANIAN JOURNAL OF

EXPERIMENTAL APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY

VOL.6 , ISSUE 3 – www.rjeap.ro

PSYCHOLOGICALLY RELEVANT MECHANISM OF

EMPOWERMENT IN LGBT INDIVIDUALS

ROK PODKRAJŠEK7

OZARA Slovenia

Abstract

Empowerment is not a new concept, its understanding and dimensions have

been studied for decades. One of the most promising and relevant aspects is its

psychological dimension in which it is addressing the issue of psychological

change. The process dimensions of the changes within the individual have yet to be

researched. With the vision of achievable goals in empowering individuals and

communities, many programmes are being developed and we have some idea about

what in these designs is effective. Implications of the construct are also related to

many personality traits and human characteristics. It is important to study

empowerment, for it is the most promising concept for individuals and societies to

cultivate basic human values. Empowerment is mostly a value orientation.

Keywords: empowerment –psychological empowerment – components of

empowerment – empowerment through designed programmes – empowerment as

an ideal state

Cuvinte cheie: emancipare, emanicipare psihologică, LGBTQ, psihoterapie.

1. INTRODUCTION – HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ON

EMPOWERMENT

Empowerment is not a new construct, but is mentioned in the literature ever

since the second half of last century. Since then there have been many different

ways of conceptualising it and its first clearer images crystallised in the work of

Rappaport and colleagues (1981, 1984). The concept has been studied ever since

and yet we don’t understand it fully in all its dimensions. In recent year it is

gaining more attention, especially in the field of organizational and community

psychology.

7 Coresponding author: Rok Podkrajšek

email: rok.podkrajsek@gmail.com

59

The emphasis of the current paper is more specific and related to the project

EU project “Empowering LGBT young people against violence: a P2P model”.

Since there are many ways to empower people, are strategy in relation to the

individuals we were addressing could be described as bottom-up - from working

with them, giving them tools, knowledge, etc., resources, we focused also on

strengthening the individuals resilience, showing them, how to be active agents for

their wishes, needs and goals. This article is an attempt to conceptualise some

components of the programme. The main question is and was, what is the broader

and more theoretical perspective of what we consider are psychologically relevant

active ingredients of the programme. The relation to the subject also stems from the

interest of other related areas, especially the question of psychological change –

when, why, how, in what way it happens, what are the forces behind it. My

personal conclusion is, that resilience and empowerment are always contained in

every intervention, a psychotherapist or a psychologist makes, whether in an

individual or in group setting, or in many different interventions, even everyday

relationships and interactions. What makes the moment for that to be possible

occur? Since, this is a seemingly simple question, researchers and practitioners

have dealt with it with many different attempts, each one not fully answering the

question. The ambition of this paper is not to answer it, but an attempt review what

we already know and how to understand it. One of the most promising concepts is

psychological empowerment.

1.1. THE COMPLEXITY OF EMPOWERMENT

We can find many, very different definitions of the term. Every definition

covers a different aspect, addresses a different level – its horizontal and vertical

dimensions (community vs. individual and the changes and states that it covers on

again – different levels). It is interesting, that we don’t have a recognized attempt

that would try to entail all the possible aspects in a unifying way. It seems that it is

a matter of common acceptance, that empowerment is a very wide term, that it is a

state, to which every researcher attributes meaning. It is described with many

psychological and other concepts (Oladipo, 2009), every time, with a different set

of them.

Empowerment is therefore a phenomenon that is hard to grasp. Most

definitions agree, that empowerment in its core is fundamentally about people and

groups gaining more control over their own affairs (Christens, Peterson & Speer,

60

2014). Because the forces that prevent and enable such control are complex and

multilayered, empowerment has been theorized as a multilevel construct that is

concerned with both processes and outcomes and with both subjective experiences,

including self-perceptions and understandings of social world, and structural

conditions ranging from organizational processes to the distribution of economic

and political power. Psychological aspects of empowerment are of great

importance and are related to uncovering the dimensions behind increasing the

power of marginalized populations and those with less resources to make social

change (political and economic). We can add that also in the areas or where there is

a strong resistance to make the social change, like regarding the issues of LGBT

minorities.

Where empowerment differs from other, more psychological concepts, is its

emphasis on the interrelatedness of the individual and his environment. It links

individual strengths and competencies, natural helping systems, and proactive

behaviour to social policy and social change. The goal of empowerment is to

cultivate enough sensitive and responsive communities, attentive to the needs of its

“citizens” in a way to enhance wellness, to ameliorate problems and to provide

opportunities for them (Zimmerman, 2000).

1.2. EMPOWERMENT AS A VALUE ORIENTATION

What really helped in our process of understanding the concept was the idea

of viewing empowerment as a value orientation. Empowerment is hard to grasp as

a construct, with its distinct properties, it is better viewed as a value orientation that

is aimed at creating the environment for creating social change. Zimmerman (1995)

proposed that empowerment perspective changes the established way to understand

social problems, linked to individual states of discomfort in three ways:

enhancing wellness (vs. fixing problems),

identifying strengths (vs. cataloguing risk factors), and

searching for environmental influences (vs. blaming victims).

The orientation is important for researchers and experts, who need to take a

different stance from the more orthodox views. Their roles become different in the

way, that they become the resources and not the solution-makers. Professionals are

now collaborators instead of authorities as experts. It is also emphasizing the

interpersonal component of empowerment.

61

From Zimmermans (2000) point of view, there is no wrongful empowerment,

because, even if people make the wrong decisions, they may develop a greater

understanding of the decision-making process, develop confidence to influence

decisions that affect their lives, and work to make their concerns known. It is a

process, where people empower themselves (Labonte, 1994). The current research

is not so just to the positive aspects of empowerment, but is more caucus with the

consequences of empowerment, emphasizing the need to understand the changes

that occur and predict the consequences (Christens, Peterson & Speer 2014). Some,

especially cultural barriers are hard to overcome. In groups, where learned

helplessness is present, it can persist even thou the exterior conditions change

(Diener & Biwas-Diener, 2009). The authors also emphasize the notion, that people

do not want to be just happy, have a comfortable existence, feel subjectively well –

we do want this to come from valuable experiences (Diener & Biwas-Diener,

2009).

1.3. COMPONENTS OF EMPOWERMENT

The components, proposed from the work of Christens, Peterson & Speer,

(2014), that stems from the work of Zimmerman (2000) and Holden (2005):

intrapersonal – beliefs about competence; also called emotional components, it

focuses on a person’s feelings about his inner world; Zimmerman (2000)

linked it to self-esteem, self-efficacy, and the sense of control over a given

condition when constructing intrapersonal empowerment;

interactional – capacity to analyse and understand one’s social and political

environment and to act in an adjusted manner, to know; it is synonymous with

the term critical thinking and understanding of causal agents, to involve new

insights, information and knowledge into one’s actions and the understanding

barriers to resource access, and

behavioural – participation in collective action that is linked to personal goals and

opportunities available, it could include problem-focused coping and stress

management activities.

There is not yet an agreement about the validity of the construct. Some

researchers argue, that only some aspects of the model are relevant, for instance

participation with others to achieve goals, efforts to gain access to resources and

critical understanding (Christens, Peterson & Speer, 2014). The model seems to

evoke the question, if there are primary and secondary components, which are

62

more relevant, or we could ask – where would it be important to begin the

empowerment process and with the aim at achieving which goal.

The question is related to defining outcomes and processes. The first, we can

define as observable evidence that people have achieved their goals, observable

behaviours, mobilization of skills or situation-specific perceived control

(Zimmerman, 2000). They are observable, definable and related to the goals that

were set. The processes are more dynamic entities and are harder to define.

From the empowerment perspective, as from the perspective of psychological

change we could presume, that “doing something”, facilitates thinking and

“understanding something”, which leads to working with it. Everything we accept,

take in, into our minds, shapes us, changes us, and directs our current and future

decisions.

Many theorists have found initial discomfort with a certain aspect ones’

personal reality, to be the initiative for the need to change something. Many

psychological constructs are making that point more visible, from Banduras’ self-

efficacy theory (Bandura, 1997), Rotters’ locus of control (Rotter, 1966), Deci &

Ryans self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2001) and a similar concept from

Carey and Mansel (2009). The latter concept emphasises the insight into the lack of

an important aspect of the individuals’ experience.

Similarly, in the context of psychotherapy in the broadest sense, most of the

research concludes, that it is much more important to deal with so called universal

therapeutic factors, than to uncover the mechanism of exactly dissecting why, what

and where it happens. Even if we could uncover that, it wouldn’t mean, that the

same path is true for every individual and that solutions would be universal. New

and complex methodology and research design is very promising. But so far, the

answer remains in the realm of current available ideas, which are also hard to

measure and define. The offered answers remain, that psychological change occurs

in many ways and that the effect is what is important, not the way in which we get

there. It is in accordance with the common factors theory, where the most accepted

and promising is the theory which proposes the change in thinking and feeling

through the specifics of the therapy setting (Imel & Wampold, 2008). Many

psychotherapy comparative studies have shown comparative effectiveness for the

individual through different modalities of therapies (Wampold et al., 1997). Yalom

(1980) proposes the theory of universal factors which is the most cited and

accepted theory, probably because it deals with the essence of the ways in which

we change.

63

Describing processes is something that is hard to define from the perspective

of the individuals’ insight and reporting about our own psychological states. When

we presume, that a person has undergone a process of change, when that is clear to

him, it is still not in accordance with one’s knowledge of oneself, to be able to see

that. Most commonly people reduce that insight to a limited set of factors and

interpreted them with their own beliefs, yet they saw those factors as changing the

course of their lives and the quality of their existence (Podkrajšek, 2012). The

findings of the LGBT programme are similar in regard of psychological change,

yet not with such impact. The participants, at the end of the programme,

remembered only fragments of their experience, they valued it and felt related to it.

What seemed important was, that the emotional orientation toward the programme

was very positive. Getting insight into the occurrence of psychological process of

change is what we yet have to figure out. Many of the psychotherapy studies are

promising in that regard (Fonagy, et al., 2014), but are made in the context of

mental illness, but show the possibility for understanding the need for other kinds

of changes, more related to the questions of empowerment.

Wang & Lee (2009) offer some other possibilities to explain or get insight

into the process dimension. They propose the notion of interactive effects of

different dimensions and their relatedness to outcomes; the dimensions could

influence outcomes in an additive fashion, or could we presume an interactive

effect, further they talk about synergistic and suppressive effects. They offer some

methodological considerations. But still, the question remains on whether we have

all the relevant dimensions, variables and possible ways and all the exact measures

figured out? What would be the best way to combine the circumstances of

favourable external conditions and the right psychological constellation for internal

empowerment (education, social support, beliefs about fate, positive emotions) to

influence the potential for effective action. People usually need outside

encouragement to do something (Delle Fave & Bassi, 2009).

2. “ACTIVE INGREDIENTS” OF EMPOWERMENT

Psychological empowerment is mainly focusing on beliefs about one’s

competence, efforts to exert control and the understanding of the socio-political

environment. These are most commonly the “ingredients” of empowerment

programmes. What influences are necessary to take into account, when attempting

to empower an individual, what could be the possible interventions. Mechanisms of

64

empowerment include individual competencies and proactive behaviours, natural

helping systems and organizational effectiveness, and community competence and

access to resources. One important guideline from the human motivation, is to be

able to be an intentional and an active agent, in accordance with Banduras’ self-

efficacy theory (Bandura, 2001). With individuals’ right constellation of

knowledge, skills, readiness for choice and to have an impact (Hall, 2008),

different levels of analysis can be made at different levels, from individual, to

organization, and community or with other words at micro-, mezzo- and macro-

level (Tully, 2000). The levels are mutually interdependent and are both cause and

a consequence. Thomas & Velthouse (1990) state, that the task-specific evaluation

and interpretation determines intrinsic motivation.

Some practitioners and researchers consider critical thinking and awareness to

be the most important facet of empowerment (Kirst-Ashman, 2012). Critical

thinking is mostly related to understanding oneself, putting yourself and your

reference group into a socio-political environment, contemplating the possibility of

change. It is the facilitator of the insight into the dynamic interplay between

gaining internal control or capacity and overcoming external structural barriers to

accessing resources. It addresses the dimensions of different sorts of beliefs and

behaviours (difference and influencing important decisions is possible, actions can

produce results, willingness to participate), from which the crucial is the ability of

critical thinking or understanding the socio-political environment, which means the

context in which the individual is functioning (Zastrow & Kirst-Ashman, 2012).

Individuals gain an awareness of dominant ideologies and the nature of domination

that one is subjected to. The change, this is making for the individual, is the

discovery of one’s true identity, to develop the ability to independently determine

one’s preferences and act upon them (Lee, 2013).

3. EMPOWERMENT PROGRAMMES AND THEIR CONTRIBUTION

Many empowerment programmes have a form of a designed programme.

Good programs are flexible, adaptable, can be applied in different settings; yet,

they are usually tailored for certain type of intervention. What works in a group

setting is learning, education, positive mood inductions, the influence of role

models. Many studies are dealing with the issue of what are the general strategies

that work so far. One of the most important things is the opportunity of role

structure. Even thou individuals know, that they act within an artificial setting,

65

they can try out and learn new behaviours or enlighten the problems with which

they are dealing with in their current roles. They get the encouragement and

support for building flexibility in roles, interpersonal connections, skills,

confidence and competencies (Maton, 2008; Peterson & Hughey, 2002).

The second important factor is social support, which refers to the degree to

which members receive both emotional and resource support from other group

members. Higher levels of social support in the form of ongoing training and

development, resource sharing, and member connectedness marked by a

psychological sense of trust, interdepencence, and community and has an

individual empowering effect (Chen, et al., 2012). The authors also emphasize the

more common group factors, such as common themes, bonding with members,

sharing, which enables the development of solidarity, common identity, mutual

confidence, and trust. Individuals benefit from resource sharing and build a strong

sense of social support.

A third important factor is related to the design of empowerment. The goal of

empowering programmes is their sustainability. That is why, it is important to think

about cultivating the group leaders. Empowering leadership is the most related to

building on skills. Leaders require good organizational abilities, interpersonal skills

and a specific set of skills, required for a certain task. They have the role of

encouraging support of growth of members and their development, which is shown

to be effective in interpersonal adjustment (Dewettinck & vam Ameijde, 2011).

Interventions to build a leader’s awareness about and the regulation of emotions,

have been shown to build leader effectiveness, especially in the interactional

domain (Rosete & Ciarrochi, 2005).

Sustainability and ongoing development has a result more driven members,

offers more opportunities for interpersonal relationship development and social

support, and engage members in more processes that may develop critical

awareness of societal power imbalances. Youth organizations show much potential

to empower their members (Christens, Peterson & Speer, 2014). The ongoing

setting offers opportunities for equality in participation, active listening, openness

to new and innovative ideas, and an atmosphere of respect (Holden et al., 2004;

Zeldin, Larson, Camino, & O’Connor, 2005).

66

4. PERSONALITY AND RELATED FACTORS, RELEVANT TO

EMPOWERMENT

We can conclude from some studies, that there are some personality factors,

that contribute for the individual, to be more prone to the empowerment

experience: from high self-esteem and optimism (Schmidt, Shernoff &

Csikszentmihalyi, 2007), to energy, agreeableness, emotional stability, and

openness (Delle Fave, Steca, Bassi, and Caprara 2009), to internal locus of control

and the combination of high skills and motivation to take on challenges (Keller and

Blomann 2008). Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi (2009) identified a group of

individuals, who develop an active and creative relationship with their environment

in which they spontaneously identify opportunities for concentration and

engagement. They call this “meta-skills”, which enable the individual to show

general curiosity, an ongoing interest in the activity, persistence and low self-

centerdness. They then link this to the possibility to be more involvement into more

complex activities, feel better about themselves, have inexhaustible psychic energy,

pay more attention to what happens around them, and are willing to invest more

attention in things for their own sake without expecting an immediate return.

Several different concepts are listed as facets of empowerment; all of which

include the persons’ belief in his ability to achieve ones goals (Pearlin & Pioli,

2003). The authors propose, that the following set of personality related states, are

related with the higher capacity to be empowered:

life satisfaction,

satisfaction in specific life domains (intimate relations, work, health),

high levels of pleasant affect and low levels of unpleasant,

meaning and purpose,

engagement,

self-efficacy,

self-confidence,

mastery, and

communal efficacy.

Diener & Biwas-Diener (2009) state, that subjective well-being and

psychological empowerment are closely related. Empowerment accompanies and

follows from certain other facets of subjective well-being such as positive affect

which lead to sociability, self-confidence, leadership and dominance and also

flexible thinking, altruism, active engagement with the environment, and self-

regulatory ability. Or, in other words, positive moods produce a state that appears

to be similar to psychological empowerment. Success can lead to psychological

67

empowerment when it heightens positive emotions, and psychological

empowerment can in turn lead to further success if external conditions allow it. But

the internal and external must be in congruence, empowerment is a facet of

subjective well being.

5. WHY EMPOWERMENT – BEYOND IDEALS

Related to the open-ended of non-definable nature of empowerment, our

relation to empowerment is also an emotional one, related to its experiential

dimensions. Thinking about individuals in relation to empowerment, evokes a need

to be empowered and the wish, that other people would be empowered too.

Empowerment is really an ideal state, but also a desired state, which is beneficial

for the individual and society. Some authors align empowered individuals to

reaching the state of self-actualisation (Oladipo, 2009). General psychotherapy

guidelines encourage reaching the state of psychological maturity and the

individuals’ full functioning. Positive psychology is making the efforts to know

and describe the so called “optimal experience” or “flow”, where empowerment is

the perquisite to reaching that state. It is described as a positive and gratifying state

of consciousness. It is characterized by effortless and focused attention, deep

involvement, sense of control over the situation, positive emotionality, possible

transformation of temporal experience, clear long-term goals and short-term stakes

in the activity, and high levels intrinsic motivation. The individual has a sense of

freedom in engaging with the activity and he is accompanied with a wish, to do the

activity. We can certainly sense the creative, authentic and limitless potential if the

conditions are meet, for such empowered psychological states to be possible. It

offers the possibility of knowing and living the true self, in accordance with the

multiple levels of the complexity of the human experience. We all benefit from

that, and loose, if we allow barriers for these processes to exist. Lyubomirsky,

King, & Diener, (2004) relate empowering experiences of sociability, self-

confidence and energy, engaged activity, altruism, creativity, etc. to a state of a

chronically happy individual.

What is also important to emphasize, is the potential of humanity of

empowering states of existence. Empowerment is the opposite of fear.

Empowerment cultivates empathy and relatedness, not only to other human beings,

but to all living things, and to our moment to moment experience. Such relation

68

with and commitment to other human beings are the very essence of mankind as an

intrinsically social animal species (Annas, 2008).

One of the most important function of empowerment is its prosocial

dimension. Empowerment strategies mean challenging control and social injustice,

through political, social, and psychological processes that uncover the mechanism

of control, the institutional or structural barriers, the cultural norms and social

biases, and therefore enable people to challenge internalized oppression and to

develop new representations of reality. Better psychological well-being eventually

could culminate in a peaceful and ever developing society. Empowerment is

therefore challenging the reciprocity of the individuals and societies (Sen, 2001).

All of the empowerment relevant qualities, such as resilience, optimism, hope,

hardiness, self-efficacy, and self-determination, can be learned and cultivated.

6. CONCLUSION

Even thou many facets of empowerment have been already discussed and

analysed through the work of many theoreticians and practitioners, there are still

many open questions on how empowerment works, why it works, what is

challenging are the process dimensions, which are harder to grasp. Newer and more

complex models show great potential to shed light on those, yet uncovered

dimensions. Where there is no doubt, empowerment enables individuals to change

in a constructive and humane way. Because of the prosocial dimensions of

empowerment, it is important to study it, cultivate it and develop knowledge that

enables insight into its mechanism, functions and other implications.

7. ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This paper as part of the research has been possible thanks to the co-fund

contribution of the European Commission, under the line Daphne III, for the

project titled “Empowering LGT young people against violence: a peer to peer

model” [JUST/2011-2012/DAP/AG/3059] that it has seen involved 5 countries:

Italy, Ireland, United Kingdom, Slovenja and Spain

69

REFERENCES:

Annas, J. (2008). The phenomenology of virtue. Phenomenology and the Cognitive

Sciences, 7, 21–34.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. NY: Freeman.

Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (2001). Self-efficacy

beliefs as shapers of children’s aspirations and career trajectories, Child Development,

72(1), 187–206.

Carey, T. A., Mansell, W. (2009). Show us a behaviour without a cognition and we’ll

show you a rock rolling down a hill. The Cognitive Behaviour Therapist, 2, 123-133.

Christens, B. D. (2010). Public relationship building in grassroots community

organizing: Relational intervention for individual and system change. Journal of

Community Psychology, 38(7), 886-900.

Christens, B. D., Peterson C. H., Speer, P. W. (2014). Promoting psychological

empowerment in adulthood. In T. P. Gullotta & M. Bloom (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Primary

Prevention and Health Promotion (2nd ed.), (1766–1776) NY: Springer.

Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2002). Handbook of Self-determination Research. NY: University

of Rochester Press.

Delle Fave, A., & Bassi, M. (2009). The contribution of diversity to happiness research.

Journal of Positive Psychology, 4, 205–207.

Dewettinck, K., & van Ameijde, M. (2011). Linking leadership empowerment

behaviour to employee attitudes and behavioural intentions: Testing the mediating role of

psychological empowerment. Personnel Review, 40(3), 284-304.

Diener E., Biwas-Diener, R., (2005). Psychological empowerment and subjective well-

being. In: D., Narayan, (Ed.). Measuring Empowerment: Cross-disciplinary Perspectives.

(125–140) Washington: World Bank.

Diener, E., & Fujita, F., (1995). Resources, personal strivings, and subjective well-

being: a nomothetic and idiographic approach, Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 68(5), 926-935.

Fonagy, P., Cottrell, D., Phillips, J., Bevington, D., Glaser, D., Allison, E., (2014). What

Works for Whom? A Critical Review of Treatments for Children and Adoselscnts: Second

Edition, NY: Karnac Books.

Hall, M. (2008). The effects of comprehensive performance measurement system on

role clarity, psychological empowerment and managerial performance. Accounting,

Organizations and Society, 33(2-3), 141–163.

Holden D. J., Crankshaw, E., Nimsch, C., Hinnant, L. W., Hund, L. (2004) Quantifying

the impact of participation in local tobacco control groups on the psychological

empowerment of involved youth. Health Education & Behavior, 31(5), 615–628.

70

Holden, D. J., Evans, W. D., Hinnant, L. W., Messeri, P. (2005). Modeling

psychological empowerment among youth involved in local tobacco control efforts. Health

Education & Behavior, 32, 264–278.

Imel, Z., Wampold, D. (2008). The importance of treatment and the science of common

factors in psychotherapy. In S. Brown & R. Lent (Eds.), Hanbook of Counseling

Psychology, (4th ed.), (249-262), NY, Wiley & Sons Inc.

Keller, J., & Blomann, F. (2008). Locus of control and the flow experience: An

experimental analysis. European Journal of Personality, 22, 1–19.

Kirst-Ashman, K. K., (2012). Introduction to Social Work & Social Welfare – Critical

Thinking Perspectives, Brooks/Cole.

Labonte R. (1994), Health promotion and empowerment: reflection on professional

practice. Health Education Quartely, 21(2): 253–268.

Lee, J. A. B. (2013). The Empowerment Approach to Social Work Practice. Columbia

University Press.

Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., Diener, E., (2004). Happiness Is a Good Thing: A Theory of

the Benefits of Positive Affect. University of California, Riverside.

Maton, K. I. (2008). Empowering community settings: Agenst of individual

development, community betterment, and positive social change. American Journal of

Community Psychology, 41, 4-21.

Nakamura, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2009). Flow theory and research. In: S. J.,

Lopez, & C. R., Snyder (Eds.), Handbook of Positive Psychology. (195-206), NY: Oxford

University Press.

Olandipo, S. E. (2009), Psychological empowerment and development. Edo Journal of

Counseling. 2(1):119-126.

Pearling L., I., Pioli, M. F., (2003). Personal control: some conceptual turf and future

directions. In: S. H. Zarit, Pearlin, L. I., & K. W., Schaie (Eds.): Personal Control in Social

and Life Course Contexts: Societal Impact on Aging, (1–21), NY: Springer.

Peterson, N. A., & Hughey, J. (2002). Tailoring organizational characteristics for

empowerment: Accommodating individual economic resources. Journal of Community

Practice, 10(3), 533-542.

Podkrajšek, R., (2012). Odvisnost od alkohola – primerjava naravnega poteka motnje in

izidov formalnega zdravljenja. Doctoral dissertation, unpublished.

Rappaport, J., (1981). In praise of paradox: a social policy of empowerment over

prevention. American Journal of Community Psychology, 9(1), 1–25.

Rappaport, J., Swift, C., Hess, R. (1984). Studies in Empowerment: Steps Toward

Understanding and Action, NY, Haworth.

Rosete, D., & Ciarrochi, J. (2005). Emotional intelligence and its relationship to

workplace performace outcomes of leadership effectiveness. Leadership & Organization

Development Journal, 26(5), 388-399.

71

Rotter, J. B., (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of

reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General & Applied, 80(1), 1–28.

Sen A. (2001). Development as Freedom. NY: Oxford University Press.

Schmidt, J., Shernoff, D., Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2007). Individual and situational

factors related to the experience of flow in adolescence: A multilevel approach. In A. D.,

Ong, & M. van Dulmen, (Eds.), The Handbook of Methods in Positive Psychology, (542–

558) Oxford University Press.

Thomas, K., & Velthouse, B. A., (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: An

“interpretative” model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review, 15(5),

1028–1044.

Tully, C. T. (2000). Lesbians, Gays and the Empowerment Perspective, Columbia

University Press, NY.

Wang, G., & Lee, P. D., (2009). Psychological empowerment and job satisfaction: an

analysis of interactive effects, Group & Organization Management, 34(3), 271–296.

Wampold, B. E., Mondin, G. W., Moody, M., Stich, F., Benson, K., & Ahn, H., (1997).

A meta-analysis of outcome studies comparing bona fide psychotherapies: empirically, “all

must have prizes.”, Psychological Bulletin, 122(3), 203–215.

Yalom, I. D., (1980). Existential Psychotherapy, NY: Basic Books.

Zastrow, C. H., Kirst-Ashman, K. K., (2013). Understanding Human Behaviour and the

Social Environment, Brooks/Cole.

Zeldin, S., Larson, R., Camino, L., & O’Connor, C. (2005). Intergenerational

relationships and partnerships in community programs: Purpose, practice, and directions for

research. Journal of Community Psychology, 33(1), 1–10.

Zimmerman, M. A. (1995). Psychological empowerment: Issues and illustrations.

American Journal of Community Psychology. 25(5), 581–599.

Zimmerman, M. A. Empowerment theory: psychological, organizational and

community levels of analysis. In: J., Rappaport, E., Seidman (Eds.), (2000). Handbook of

Community Psychology. (43-63) NY Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.