Health promotion has progressively focused on the development of the capacity for individuals and communities to be actively engaged in the enhancement of their own health. Such promotion ensues when individuals and communities actively operate a number of health assets. According to the assets model (Morgan & Ziglio, Reference Morgan and Ziglio2007), a health asset is “any factor (or resource) which maximizes the opportunities for individuals, local communities and populations to attain and maintain health and wellbeing” (p. 18). The identification of these factors or resources facilitates the delivery of interventions that optimize these individual and community health protective and promoting factors, empowering the communities to be collaborative partners in the production of health instead of passive consumers of healthcare services (Lerner & Benson, Reference Lerner and Benson2003). Therefore, health promotion focusses on the development of assets suggesting the adoption of a comprehensive approach that emphasizes not only the reduction of risk factors but also the increase of protective factors (Scales, Reference Scales1999).

Scales (Reference Scales1999) identified and categorized 40 factors into internal and external assets. Internal assets represent “values, skills and competencies young people develop to guide themselves, to become self-regulating” (p. 113). External assets refer to the “relationships and opportunities adults provide young people” (p. 113). Therefore, health assets rest within the individual or exist within the social environment or community where individuals live (Morgan & Ziglio, Reference Morgan and Ziglio2007). A number of individual assets have been identified in the literature; these include social competence, resilience, commitment to learning, positive values, self-esteem and sense of purpose. Supportive family and friendship networks, community cohesion and affinity groups are known community assets. Therefore, feeling socially connected and a sense of belonging to relevant contexts where social interactions evolve (e.g., school connectedness) are important factors to consider.

Researchers have shown that health assets are associated with quality of life (Murphey, Lamonda, Carney, & Duncan, Reference Murphey, Lamonda, Carney and Duncan2004; Proctor, Linley, & Maltby, Reference Proctor, Linley and Maltby2010). The more assets adolescents have the fewer risk behaviors they will engage in and the more positive outcomes they will experience. For example, Murphey et al. (Reference Murphey, Lamonda, Carney and Duncan2004) found that the number of assets people possess was inversely related to engagement in risk behaviors (e.g., smoking, alcohol abuse, physical fighting), and positively related to health-promoting behaviors (e.g., exercise, safety belt use). Differentiating the effects of individual and social assets in quality of life will facilitate the prioritization of targeted interventions.

Concerning individual assets, perceptions of competence have been a central topic in human motivation (Bandura, Reference Bandura1997; Ryan & Deci, Reference Ryan and Deci2000). Competence encompasses multiple dimensions within youth functioning such as academic competence and social competence (Catalano, Berglund, Ryan, Lonczak, & Hawkins, Reference Catalano, Berglund, Ryan, Lonczak and Hawkins2004). Academic competence is an indication of cognitive competence relevant to intellectual achievement and it has been suggested to be the strongest protective factor against risk behaviors (Murphey et al. Reference Murphey, Lamonda, Carney and Duncan2004). Social competence is vital for the achievement of specific social and interpersonal goals and involves the use of interpersonal skills such as interpreting social cues, conflict resolution or making social decisions (Catalano et al., Reference Catalano, Berglund, Ryan, Lonczak and Hawkins2004).

Self-regulation is an individual asset that allows individuals to exercise control over their behavior and their emotional states to pursue personally relevant goals or desired outcomes (Vohs & Baumeister, Reference Vohs, Baumeister, Baumeister and Vohs2004). Self-regulation represents the adolescents’ ability to monitor their activities, evaluate their performance, motivate themselves and maintain their resilience while experiencing school and social disappointments (Zimmerman, Reference Zimmerman and Ferrari2002). Therefore, this concept appears to be fundamental for adolescents to maintain balance and satisfaction in life through the ability to exert control over their lives in difficult situations.

In line with a broad definition of health, health is the capacity of individuals and communities to ultimately develop and pursue their life goals and dreams (Frasquilho, de Matos, Gaspar, & Almeida, Reference Frasquilho, de Matos, Gaspar and Almeida2014). Holding high and positive expectations for the future has been linked with more positive perceptions of one’s position in life in relation to one’s values, standards and concerns (Edwards, Huebner, Connell, & Patrick, Reference Edwards, Huebner, Connell and Patrick2002). Being optimistic about one’s life and personal future, and having purpose in life helps develop a sense of positive identity (Scales, Reference Scales1999). Maintaining a positive expectation about the future, having goals and making plans to pursue one’s dreams have been shown to be associated with higher life satisfaction. This is particularly important in Portugal as adolescents from low social economic backgrounds living in socioeconomic deprivation are unlikely to obtain high levels of education (Frasquilho et al., Reference Frasquilho, de Matos, Gaspar and Almeida2014). In addition, adolescents from impoverished backgrounds have lower levels of life satisfaction (Klanšček, Žiberna, Korošec, Zurc, & Albreht, Reference Klanšček, Žiberna, Korošec, Zurc and Albreht2014), which should make underserved populations a priority for interventions.

Concerning social assets, social connectedness and school connectedness are important resources. While social connectedness represents the quality of adolescents’ social network, school connectedness represents the extent to which students feel accepted, respected, included and supported in school (Gerard & Booth, Reference Gerard and Booth2015; Murphey et al., Reference Murphey, Lamonda, Carney and Duncan2004).

Social connectedness has been referred to as the main precursor of youth adjustment (Guerra & Bradshaw, Reference Guerra and Bradshaw2008). Indeed, adequate social support was found to moderate the impact of stress on health among adolescents (Dumont & Provost, Reference Dumont and Provost1999). Conversely, dissatisfaction with social support has been linked to depression, anxiety and poor sleep (Bond et al, Reference Bond, Butler, Thomas, Carlin, Glover, Bowes and Patton2007). In addition to feeling cared for, a sense of connectedness also involves caring about the social environment, which strengthens a sense of belonging (Guerra & Bradshaw, Reference Guerra and Bradshaw2008). This sense of belonging develops in relation to family, friends, neighborhood or institutions in which adolescents grow (e.g., sport clubs, schools). Social environments that provide adolescents with positive resources from significant others (e.g., family, schools) tend to facilitate more adaptive behavioral patterns and more positive development (Youngblade, et al., Reference Youngblade, Theokas, Schulenberg, Curry, Huang and Novak2007).

The family context is central to the development of well adjusted, resilient adolescents. For example, perceptions of the quality of family engagement and closeness between family members, communication and parental role modelling were associated with perceptions of social competence, self-esteem and health-promoting behavior among adolescents (Youngblade et al., Reference Youngblade, Theokas, Schulenberg, Curry, Huang and Novak2007). Moreover, parental monitoring was positively associated with health-promoting behaviors such as dieting and physical activity, and negatively associated with sedentary behaviors in youngsters at risk of becoming obese (Lawman & Wilson, Reference Lawman and Wilson2012).

The health assets discussed above are resources that adolescents may develop to improve their quality of life. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to explore the associations between adolescents’ satisfaction with their life and individual and social assets. Specifically, we intend to determine the relative importance of these types of assets in a nationally representative sample of Portuguese school-aged adolescents. We focus in adolescents as this a stage of development when attitudes towards lifestyle and personal control tend to be developed and exploratory behavior with potential risk taking ensues (Lerner & Steinberg, Reference Lerner, Steinberg, Lerner and Steinberg2009).

Based on the extant literature, it is expected that adolescents who perceive themselves to be academically and socially competent, with the ability to self-regulate, and who have meaningful life goals to pursue are more likely to be more satisfied with their lives. Moreover, it is hypothesized that adolescents who perceive family and peer support, have meaningful family relationships and experience a degree of parental monitoring as well as a sense of connectedness with school will be more satisfied with their quality of life. Although it is likely that individual and social assets uniquely contribute to adolescents’ quality of life, we do not advance a hypothesis concerning which set of assets will be the stronger predictor of life satisfaction in adolescents.

Results

Descriptive statistics for all variables and correlation coefficients are presented in Table 1. All correlations were statistically significant, but more importantly, these ranged from weak (r = .07) to moderate (r = .44) and in the expected direction.

Table 1.

Means, Standard Deviations and Correlations for all Variables

*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

Table 2 summarizes the results from the sequential multiple regression for the entire sample in which life satisfaction was regressed on demographic variables (Model 1), individual assets (Model 2) and social assets (Model 3). Table 3 shows the results of the hierarchical regression analysis with Steps 2 and 3, described in Table 2, reversed.

Table 2.

Summary of the Sequential Regression Analysis for the Entire Sample with Individual Assets Entered before Social Assets

*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

Table 3.

Summary of the Sequential Regression Analysis for the Entire Sample with Social Assets Entered before Individual Assets

*p <. 05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

Overall, the model explains 18.3% of the variance of adolescents’ life satisfaction. Gender becomes a non-significant variable in the regression analysis when individual or social assets are introduced in Step 3. When individual assets were entered as a block, after gender, there is a significant increase in the variance of life satisfaction, ΔR ² = .119, F change (4, 2814) = 95.63, p < .001. Social assets were added in the third step and the results suggest a similar statistically significant effect in the variance of quality of life, ΔR ² = .06, F change (4, 2810) = 81.56, p < .001. (Table 2).

When Steps 2 and 3 are reversed, social assets explain 13,4% of life satisfaction’s variance, ΔR ² = .134, F change (4, 2814) = 109.56, p < .001, while the introduction of individual assets in Step 3 only explains a further 4.5% of life satisfaction, ΔR ² = .045, F change (4, 2810) = 38.99, p < .001 (Table 3).

At the final step (Model 3), family support (β = .154, p < .001), and school connectedness (β = .198, p < .001) were the social assets significantly associated with life satisfaction. In regard to individual assets, social competence (β = .152, p < .001) and academic achievement (β = .116, p < .001) and self-regulation (β = .064, p < .001) were significant predictors of life satisfaction.