Sense of Community Index 2 (SCI-2)

Abstract

The Sense of Community Index 2 (SCI-2) represents the principal, empirically validated revision of the most widely utilized quantitative measurement tool in community psychology: the original Sense of Community Index (SCI). Developed by David M. Chavis, Kien S. Lee, and Joie D. Acosta (2008), building upon the foundational conceptual framework established by David W. McMillan and David M. Chavis (1986), the SCI-2 was engineered to overcome the psychometric, structural, and distributional limitations observed in the original 12-item binary instrument. Grounded in the multidimensional theory of Psychological Sense of Community (PSOC), the instrument operationalizes the construct across four interrelated theoretical dimensions: Reinforcement of Needs (integration and fulfillment of needs), Membership, Influence, and Shared Emotional Connection.

The SCI-2 comprises an initial single-item continuous validator evaluating the overarching personal importance of feeling a sense of community, followed by 24 core psychometric items divided equally across the four theoretical subscales (six items per factor). Responses are captured using a 4-point Likert-type response scale ranging from 0 (Not at All) to 3 (Completely), generating a cumulative composite score ranging from 0 to 72 alongside distinct subscale scores ranging from 0 to 18. Psychometric evaluations across diverse geographical, workplace, academic, and virtual populations demonstrate robust internal consistency, with total scale Cronbach’s alpha coefficients typically exceeding α = .94, and subscale coefficients consistently falling between α = .79 and .90. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) have confirmed both a hierarchical second-order model and a four-factor correlated structure, making the SCI-2 a psychometric gold standard for assessing social cohesion, collective efficacy, organizational climate, and civic well-being across diverse ecological settings.

Keywords

Sense of Community Index 2, SCI-2, Psychological Sense of Community, McMillan and Chavis, community psychology, social cohesion, membership, reinforcement of needs, collective efficacy, psychometrics, scale validation, community attachment

Authors

The Sense of Community Index 2 was authored and validated by a team of prominent community psychologists and researchers associated with Community Science (Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA) in collaboration with academic institutions:

• David M. Chavis, Ph.D. — Founding CEO and Principal at Community Science. Dr. Chavis is an internationally recognized authority on community psychology, community development, social capital, and comprehensive community initiatives. Formerly an associate professor at Rutgers University, he co-authored the original theoretical framework and measurement indices for psychological sense of community.
• Kien S. Lee, Ph.D. — Principal and Director of Research and Evaluation at Community Science. Dr. Lee specializes in multicultural community development, racial equity evaluation, and methodological designs for measuring social transformation in complex ecological environments.
• Joie D. Acosta, Ph.D. — Senior Behavioral Scientist at the RAND Corporation and former Senior Associate at Community Science. Dr. Acosta specializes in community resilience, disaster preparedness, collective efficacy, and the rigorous psychometric assessment of social environmental systems.

The revised instrument builds directly on the foundational theoretical contributions of David W. McMillan, Ph.D. (Vanderbilt University) and was introduced internationally at the 2nd International Community Psychology Conference in Lisboa, Portugal (Chavis, Lee, & Acosta, 2008).

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Sense of Community Index 2 (SCI-2) is to provide an empirically robust, psychometrically sound, and theoretically congruent measurement tool designed to assess an individual’s perceived psychological connection, integration, and mutual interdependence within a specified social grouping or geographical setting. While Seymour B. Sarason (1974) first identified the “psychological sense of community” as the defining overarching conceptual value of community psychology, empirical research was initially constrained by the absence of standardized measurement instruments capable of isolating its subcomponents.

In 1986, Chavis, Hogge, McMillan, and Wandersman introduced the original 12-item Sense of Community Index (SCI-1). Although the SCI-1 became the most cited scale in community psychology literature—deployed in hundreds of investigations exploring neighborhoods, intentional communities, schools, and professional associations—it frequently presented psychometric challenges. Methodological reviews (e.g., Chipuer & Pretty, 1999; Long & Perkins, 2003) revealed that the original true/false response format generated restricted variance, skewed response distributions, and suboptimal subscale internal consistency reliabilities, with alpha coefficients for individual subscales frequently dropping below .60. Furthermore, several items exhibited structural ambiguity, failing to differentiate cleanly during confirmatory factor modeling.

The SCI-2 was engineered to resolve these psychometric limitations while maintaining fidelity to McMillan and Chavis’s (1986) four-factor conceptual paradigm. By expanding the scale to 24 items (six per dimension) and implementing a graduated 4-point response metric (Not at All, Somewhat, Mostly, Completely), the instrument accomplishes several distinct clinical, organizational, and research objectives:

• Diagnostic Precision in Community Development: Facilitates granular programmatic needs assessments by evaluating which specific dimensions of community cohesion (e.g., trust and belonging versus perceived collective influence) require institutional intervention.
• Evaluation of Public Health and Social Interventions: Serves as a validated outcome metric to measure the effectiveness of community-based interventions, urban renewal strategies, housing cooperatives, and public health campaigns aimed at reducing social isolation and building collective resilience.
• Workplace and Academic Institutional Climate: Enables organizational psychologists and academic administrators to measure employee engagement, institutional identification, psychological safety, and student retention dynamics.
• Virtual and Digital Community Dynamics: Provides an adaptable psychometric architecture capable of measuring relational bonding, collaborative knowledge production, and shared identities across online forums, distributed professional networks, and virtual platforms.

Psychological Construct

The psychological construct operationalized by the SCI-2 is Psychological Sense of Community (PSOC). Rather than defining community purely as a bounded geographic locality or an administrative district, PSOC represents a relational phenomenon defined as a feeling that members have of belonging, a feeling that members matter to one another and to the group, and a shared faith that members’ needs will be met through their commitment to be together (McMillan & Chavis, 1986). The SCI-2 captures this complex latent construct through four interrelated yet empirically separable dimensions:

1. Reinforcement of Needs (Integration and Fulfillment of Needs)

This dimension reflects the degree to which an individual perceives that membership in the community provides positive reinforcement, shared values, and the tangible or intangible resources necessary to satisfy personal and collective motivations. Drawing from behavioral reinforcement theory and social exchange paradigms, this construct posits that for a group to maintain cohesion, the association must be mutually rewarding for its constituents. The SCI-2 operationalizes this dimension via six items assessing whether members experience mutual value congruence, whether the collective environment effectively satisfies individual goals, whether emotional support is accessible during times of personal crisis, and whether members share unified developmental priorities.

2. Membership

Membership constitutes the feeling of personal belonging, psychological relatedness, and shared emotional safety within the social group. McMillan and Chavis conceptualized membership as encompassing five foundational attributes: clear boundaries that establish who belongs and who does not, emotional safety and interpersonal trust, a sense of belonging and personal acceptance, individual investment (time, psychological effort, or financial resources), and a shared symbol system (such as logos, behavioral rituals, common idioms, or physical landmarks). The SCI-2 assesses this construct through items measuring mutual recognition among members, interpersonal trust, the internalization of community membership as an integral element of personal identity, and the presence of shared communicative and cultural symbols.

3. Influence

The dimension of Influence represents a bidirectional, transactional social dynamic: on one hand, it assesses the member’s perceived capacity to exert meaningful influence over the group’s direction, norms, and collective policies; on the other hand, it measures the community’s normative influence over the individual’s behavior, conformity, and adherence to shared standards. Additionally, the SCI-2 expands this dimension to capture collective agency—the group’s capacity to influence external environments, institutions, or other communities, alongside perceptions of community leadership efficacy and collaborative problem-solving capacities.

4. Shared Emotional Connection

Shared Emotional Connection is widely regarded as the affective core of the sense of community construct. It represents the psychological bond forged through shared historical experience, continuous high-quality interaction, collective investment, and shared temporal narratives. This subscale reflects the extent to which community members have navigated meaningful historical events together (including collective celebrations, holidays, or shared crises and disasters), the subjective enjoyment derived from time spent together, expectations of prolonged long-term association, mutual emotional caring, and shared optimism regarding the community’s future trajectory.

Theoretical Framework

The foundational architecture of the SCI-2 is derived from the seminal conceptual model formulated by David W. McMillan and David M. Chavis (1986), which established a systematic taxonomy for psychological sense of community. This model emerged as a direct theoretical response to Seymour Sarason’s (1974) warning regarding the erosion of traditional community life in industrialized societies. McMillan and Chavis integrated social psychological principles—including Kurt Lewin’s field theory, Leon Festinger’s cognitive dissonance and social comparison theories, and Morton Deutsch’s work on interpersonal trust and cooperation—into a dynamic, systemic framework.

The theoretical framework rests upon several foundational ontological and epistemological assumptions:

• Transactional Interdependence: A psychological sense of community is not a static individual attribute or an objective environmental property; rather, it is a transactional dynamic emerging from the reciprocal interplay between the individual’s cognitive-affective perceptions and the socio-structural attributes of the social setting.
• Dynamic Equilibrium of Influence: McMillan and Chavis posited that the most cohesive communities are characterized by a paradoxical balance of influence: individuals are most willing to conform to community norms and be influenced by the collective when they concurrently perceive that they have authentic influence over group governance and institutional decisions.
• The Role of Shared Historical Crises: Affective bonding within a collective is significantly intensified when members undergo shared crises, challenges, or collaborative struggles. The successful resolution of communal difficulties cements emotional safety, mutual trust, and long-term psychological commitment.
• Ecological Multi-Level Fit: Consistent with ecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Kelly, 1968), sense of community operates across micro-, meso-, and macro-systems. An individual may simultaneously experience distinct, nested senses of community within a workplace division, a professional organization, a neighborhood, a religious congregation, or a digital collective.

In refining the model for the SCI-2, Chavis, Lee, and Acosta (2008) addressed theoretical ambiguities in how “boundaries” and “influence” operated within increasingly permeable, non-geographical, and multicultural communities. By introducing explicit indicators evaluating shared leadership, external advocacy, and symbolic manifestations of identity, the theoretical foundation of the SCI-2 accommodates both modern virtual associations and traditional place-based collectivities.

Validity

Extensive empirical investigations have documented the psychometric validity of the SCI-2 across a diverse array of demographic samples, organizational environments, and cultural contexts. The instrument has undergone rigorous evaluations examining construct, convergent, discriminant, and criterion-related validity.

Construct Validity

In the primary validation investigation conducted by Chavis, Lee, and Acosta (2008)—utilizing a large and diverse sample of over 1,800 participants representing community-based coalitions, neighborhoods, and voluntary associations—the SCI-2 demonstrated robust construct validity. Structural equation modeling substantiated that the 24 items effectively mapped onto the four theoretical dimensions hypothesized by McMillan and Chavis, with all items exhibiting high, statistically significant factor loadings on their designated latent factors (standardized λ ranging from .58 to .88).

Convergent Validity

The convergent validity of the SCI-2 has been established through consistent, statistically significant positive correlations with conceptually aligned psychosocial constructs:

• Social Capital and Collective Efficacy: Significant positive correlations have been identified between SCI-2 total scores and measures of bridging and bonding social capital (r = .62 to .74, p < .001) as well as collective efficacy scales (Sampson et al., 1997; r = .55 to .68, p < .001).
• Civic Engagement and Community Participation: High SCI-2 scores consistently predict self-reported hours devoted to community volunteerism, attendance at public meetings, and participatory neighborhood governance (r = .42 to .59, p < .001).
• Psychological Well-Being and Life Satisfaction: In clinical and positive psychological studies, the SCI-2 demonstrates moderate-to-strong positive correlations with the Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener et al., 1985; r = .38 to .52) and subjective vitality metrics.

Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity has been demonstrated by showing that the SCI-2 assesses a construct distinct from generalized social support, extraversion, or broad positive affectivity. For example, correlations between the SCI-2 and general perceived social support (e.g., MSPSS; Zimet et al., 1988) remain moderate (typically r = .35 to .48), demonstrating that institutional and collective belonging is conceptually distinct from dyadic interpersonal support. Furthermore, the scale demonstrates robust negative correlations with standardized measures of social alienation, interpersonal loneliness (UCLA Loneliness Scale; Russell, 1996; r = -.51 to -.64, p < .001), and psychological distress (K10; r = -.30 to -.42).

Criterion and Predictive Validity

Longitudinal and cross-sectional studies demonstrate that SCI-2 scores reliably predict meaningful community-level outcomes. Higher SCI-2 scores predict lower residential turnover intentions, greater participation in disaster recovery coalitions, increased adherence to public health guidelines during crises, and enhanced academic persistence among first-generation university students.

Reliability

The Sense of Community Index 2 resolved the psychometric vulnerability that characterized the original 12-item index: unstable internal consistency reliabilities across subscales. Across published validation studies, the SCI-2 exhibits excellent reliability coefficients:

Internal Consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha)

In the foundational validation dataset reported by Chavis, Lee, and Acosta (2008), the overall 24-item SCI-2 demonstrated an exceptional internal consistency reliability coefficient:

• Total Scale: α = .94
• Reinforcement of Needs Subscale: α = .86
• Membership Subscale: α = .80
• Influence Subscale: α = .84
• Shared Emotional Connection Subscale: α = .87

Subsequent independent replications across alternative settings have reinforced these findings. In a validation of the SCI-2 adapted for academic virtual learning environments, overall scale reliability remained high (α = .95), with subscale alphas ranging from .81 to .89. Similarly, adaptations in workplace organizations have produced composite alphas ranging from .93 to .96. In contrast to the original SCI-1, where subscale alphas frequently dropped below .60, no subscale of the SCI-2 routinely falls below the accepted psychometric benchmark of α = .70.

Test-Retest Reliability

Studies examining the temporal stability of the SCI-2 across non-interventional baseline periods (ranging from two to eight weeks) demonstrate strong test-retest reliability coefficients. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) for the overall score consistently range from .82 to .91, indicating that while sense of community is responsive to major structural, organizational, or environmental disruptions, it operates as a stable socio-cognitive perception in the absence of external perturbations.

Factor Analysis

Extensive exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) have confirmed the underlying structural topology of the SCI-2. The instrument was developed using maximum likelihood and robust weighted least squares (WLSMV) estimation techniques appropriate for ordinal Likert-type data.

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

During initial scale development, principal axis factoring with promax (oblique) rotation was conducted to evaluate the 24 candidate items. Results revealed a clear four-factor solution accounting for over 58% of the total variance. Factor intercorrelations were moderate to high (ranging from r = .48 to .72), affirming that while the four subscales assess distinct theoretical dimensions, they converge onto a higher-order latent construct representing global sense of community.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

Subsequent confirmatory structural models have tested multiple competing structural configurations:

1. Unidimensional Model: All 24 items loading onto a single latent Sense of Community factor. This model consistently yields poor fit indices (χ²/df > 5.5, RMSEA > .095, CFI < .82), demonstrating that sense of community cannot be adequately modeled as a monolithic, undifferentiated construct.
2. Four-Factor Correlated Model: Twenty-four items loading onto four distinct, intercorrelated first-order factors. This model demonstrates acceptable to good fit indices across empirical investigations (χ²/df = 2.15 to 2.80; Root Mean Square Error of Approximation [RMSEA] = .048 to .062; Comparative Fit Index [CFI] = .94 to .96; Tucker-Lewis Index [TLI] = .93 to .95; Standardized Root Mean Square Residual [SRMR] = .042 to .051).
3. Hierarchical Second-Order Model: A higher-order general Sense of Community factor that accounts for the covariance among the four first-order dimensions. This model exhibits virtually equivalent fit to the four-factor correlated model (χ²/df = 2.21; RMSEA = .051; CFI = .95; TLI = .94), providing strong empirical justification for computing both an overarching total composite score and four separate subscale scores.

Standardized factor loadings across validation studies show strong item-to-factor alignment:

• Reinforcement of Needs: Items 1–6 exhibit standardized factor loadings between λ = .64 and .85.
• Membership: Items 7–12 exhibit factor loadings between λ = .58 and .81.
• Influence: Items 13–18 exhibit factor loadings between λ = .61 and .83.
• Shared Emotional Connection: Items 19–24 exhibit factor loadings between λ = .68 and .88.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

The operational administration parameters, structural design, and diagnostic scoring protocols of the SCI-2 are summarized below:

• Test Type: Standardized psychological self-report rating scale / psychometric inventory.
• Target Population: Adolescents and adults (ages 14 and older); applicable across residential neighborhoods, civic associations, intentional communities, schools, universities, professional organizations, and virtual networks.
• Administration Format: Self-administered paper-and-pencil or online digital survey; suitable for individual or large-scale group administration.
• Completion Time: Approximately 5 to 10 minutes.
• Item Composition: 25 total questions comprising:
  • 1 initial single-item validator assessing overarching perceived importance.
  • 24 core psychometric items mapped evenly across four subscales (6 items per subscale).
• Response Metrics:
  • Initial Validation Item: 6-point scale ranging from 1 = Prefer Not to be Part of This Community, 2 = Not Important at All, 3 = Not Very Important, 4 = Somewhat Important, 5 = Important, to 6 = Very Important.
  • 24 Core Scale Items: 4-point Likert-type scale scored as:
    • 0 = Not at All
    • 1 = Somewhat
    • 2 = Mostly
    • 3 = Completely
• Subscale Item Breakdown:
  • Reinforcement of Needs: Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
  • Membership: Items 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
  • Influence: Items 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18
  • Shared Emotional Connection: Items 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24
• Scoring Architecture:
  • Subscale Raw Scores: Calculated by summing the scores of the 6 constituent items for each dimension (Score Range: 0 to 18 per subscale). Alternatively, a subscale mean score can be computed by dividing the sum by 6 (Range: 0.0 to 3.0).
  • Total Composite Score: Calculated by summing all 24 items (Score Range: 0 to 72). A total scale mean score can be generated by dividing by 24 (Range: 0.0 to 3.0).
  • Reverse-Scored Items: None. All 24 core items are positively keyed.
• Score Interpretation Guidelines:
  • 0 – 24 (Mean 0.0 – 1.0): Low Sense of Community. Indicates pervasive social alienation, minimal group identification, low trust, and a perception that the community does not meet member needs.
  • 25 – 48 (Mean 1.04 – 2.0): Moderate Sense of Community. Reflects emergent belonging and partial needs fulfillment, though members may perceive limited personal influence or lack deep emotional ties.
  • 49 – 72 (Mean 2.04 – 3.0): High to Exceptional Sense of Community. Reflects robust social cohesion, mutual trust, high collective efficacy, shared values, and enduring relational commitment.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Sense of Community Index 2 (SCI-2) was finalized and formally released in 2008 by David M. Chavis, Kien S. Lee, and Joie D. Acosta at Community Science. The instrument is copyrighted by Community Science (© 2008 Community Science, Gaithersburg, MD).

Licensing and Usage Conditions:

• Non-Commercial Research & Academic Use: Community Science permits researchers, graduate students, academic scholars, and non-profit community organizations to use the SCI-2 free of charge for non-commercial research and community evaluation purposes, provided that proper academic attribution is maintained and the instrument is cited accurately.
• Commercial Applications: Commercial entities, management consulting firms, and proprietary survey platforms seeking to integrate the SCI-2 into revenue-generating assessments, products, or organizational consulting programs must obtain prior written permission and licensing authorization directly from Community Science.
• Contact Information: Inquiries regarding formal licensing agreements, permissions, and technical administration manuals may be directed to Community Science via email at [email protected] or via their official web portal at www.communityscience.com.

References

The following peer-reviewed publications, monographs, and foundational studies document the theoretical evolution and psychometric validation of the SCI and SCI-2:

• Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press.
• Chavis, D. M., Hogge, J. H., McMillan, D. W., & Wandersman, A. (1986). Sense of community through Brunswick’s lens: A first look. Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 24–40. 3.0.CO;2-F” target=”_blank” rel=”noopener noreferrer”>https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6629(199911)27:6<635::AID-JCOP1>3.0.CO;2-F
• Chipuer, H. M., & Pretty, G. M. (1999). A review of the Sense of Community Index: Challenges and opportunities for community psychology. Journal of Community Psychology, 27(6), 643–658. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
• Long, D. A., & Perkins, D. D. (2003). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Sense of Community Index and development of a Brief SCI. Journal of Community Psychology, 31(3), 279–296. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.10046
• McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.20217
• Russell, D. W. (1996). UCLA Loneliness Scale (Version 3): Reliability, validity, and factor structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 66(1), 20–40. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6601_2
• Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277(5328), 918–924. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5328.918
• Sarason, S. B. (1974). The psychological sense of community: Prospects for a community psychology. Jossey-Bass.
• Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., Zimet, S. G., & Farley, G. K. (1988). The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2

Items of the Scale