Relationships Between Arts Participation, Social Cohesion, and Well-Being in 18 US Communities: A New Theory of Change

Background: Social cohesion supports health and belonging, and the researchers examined whether community arts participation could strengthen cohesion and well-being.

Formative Work: Researchers established the study’s values, definitions, theories, and research question with an emphasis on lived experience, equity, inclusion, and community benefit.

Theory of Change Study Design: The study used a mixed-methods design combining six studies and both quantitative and qualitative evidence across 18 communities.

Foundational Studies: Five preliminary studies established the evidence base, definitions, measures, local context, and founders’ perspectives needed for the main research.

Definitions: The researchers established specific definitions for arts participation, social cohesion, and well-being to guide measurement and analysis.

Data Collection Methods: Researchers collected survey, focus-group, interview, evaluation, and evidence-review data from adults in ONOP communities and across the U.S.

Quantitative Data Collection: Three surveys measured arts participation, social cohesion, well-being, and related indicators such as trust, belonging, and social support.

Qualitative Data Collection: Focus groups, interviews, and evidence reviews explored participants’ experiences and helped explain or expand upon the quantitative findings.

Data Analysis Methods: Researchers analyzed each dataset separately using statistical and thematic methods before integrating the findings.

Quantitative Analysis: Statistical tests and regression models examined changes over time and relationships between demographics, arts participation, social cohesion, and well-being.

Qualitative Analysis: Researchers used thematic coding, consensus building, member checking, and AI-assisted analysis to identify patterns across qualitative data.

Qualitative Data Transformation: Researchers converted some qualitative themes into quantitative measures and examined whether social cohesion could explain how arts participation affects well-being.

Data Integration: Quantitative and qualitative findings were combined to identify areas of agreement, expansion, and difference and to generate final conclusions.

Demographics: The study included thousands of participants from varied demographic backgrounds across the Theory of Change survey, focus groups, and Arts Participation Survey.

Arts Participation Results: Arts participation increased substantially over the study period, although participation levels differed across demographic and community groups.

Social Cohesion Results: Social cohesion increased by 12.6%, and more frequent arts participation was associated with stronger social cohesion.

Well-Being Results: Overall well-being did not significantly increase, but frequent arts participants showed better well-being trends than people who rarely participated.

Perceptions: Participants increasingly believed that arts participation strengthens both social cohesion and well-being.

Arts Participation Survey: Most respondents believed the arts improve community well-being and social cohesion, and 90% wanted to participate more for their well-being.

Evaluation Surveys: ONOP communities provided thousands of hours of arts opportunities that reached more than 109,600 people.

Qualitative Results: Participants described accessible and inclusive arts activities as supporting connection, belonging, mental health, cultural identity, and community resilience.

Metainferences: Integrated findings showed that arts participation strengthens social cohesion and may improve well-being partly through increased connection, trust, and belonging.

Theory of Change: The resulting theory proposes that community arts participation can strengthen social cohesion, which can then contribute to improved well-being.

Discussion: The researchers conclude that arts participation is a promising community resource for strengthening social cohesion, while its relationship with well-being is more complex and requires further study.

Strengths & Limitations: The study benefited from a large, diverse, values-based mixed-methods design but was limited by short follow-up periods, selection bias, site differences, and its inability to establish causation.