Sie sind auf Seite 1von 58

April 30, 2012

Youth Flash Mobs in


Kansas City: Causes,
Consequences and
Recommendations

J. Brian Houston
Hyunjin Seo
Emily J. Kennedy
Leigh Anne Taylor Knight

Technical Assistance: Joshua Hawthorne,


Alexandra Inglish, Sara L. Trask

Kansas City Area


Education Research Consortium
(913) 396-3214
www.kcaerc.org

Youth Flash Mobs in Kansas City:


Causes, Consequences and Recommendations
Research Team
of the Kansas City Area Education Research Consortium (KC-AERC)
J. Brian Houston, Ph.D.
Department of Communication, University of Missouri-Columbia
Hyunjin Seo, Ph.D.
School of Journalism and Mass Communications, University of Kansas
Emily J. Kennedy, M.S.
KC-AERC Project Coordinator, University of Kansas
Leigh Anne Taylor Knight, Ed.D.
KC-AERC Executive Director
Acknowledgements
This study was made possible by grants from the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation and the
Greater Kansas City Community Foundation. We are thankful to Munro Richardson, Sally
Fowler, Denise St. Omer and Jean-Paul Chaurand for their assistance with this work, and we
value the context-perspective brought to the endeavor.
We appreciate the youth, schools, and youth-serving agencies in Kansas City who participated in
and hosted the focus groups and facilitated survey data collection. We thank the following
Kansas City community leaders who enabled direct access to important entities for this effort:
McClain Bryant, Mark Bowland, Thalia Cherry, Deborah Mann, Manomay Malathip, and
Angela Torres.
We are grateful to our focus group moderators, Meaghan Brougher, Trey Protho, Chelsea
Simms, and Cherelle Washington, who are College Advisers from the Missouri College
Advising Corps (MCAC). We also appreciate Dr. Beth Tankersley-Bankhead, MCAC Executive
Director, who helped coordinate focus group moderator recruitment and training. Joshua
Hawthorne and Sara L. Trask, graduate students in the Department of Communication at the
University of Missouri, transcribed most of the focus group recordings for this project.
Alexandra Inglish, a graduate student in the William Allen White School of Journalism and Mass
Communications at the University of Kansas, transcribed some focus group recordings and
assisted with survey data collection. We appreciate Dr. Astrid Villamils assistance translating
the survey materials to Spanish.

Kansas City Area Education Research Consortium (KC-AERC)


In April of 2009, the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation awarded one million dollars to social
science, economics and education researchers at the University of Kansas, University of
Missouri, Kansas State University and University of Missouri-Kansas City to establish the
Kansas City Area Education Research Consortium (KC-AERC). KC-AERC conducts rigorous
research using student achievement and teacher quality data to inform elementary and secondary
education practice and policy, and to enhance postsecondary matriculation in the KC metro area.
Thirty-two regional school districts, various private and charter schools, foundations, community
colleges, economic development organizations, and the state Departments of Education in
Kansas and Missouri are collaborating with KC-AERC in this effort. KC-AERC aspires to
become a national laboratory for educational research as it studies education in a region that
spans two states, includes rural, urban and suburban environments, and serves a diverse student
population. Our shared goal is to provide all regional educational stakeholders, including school
districts, community organizations, and private sector partners, with powerful tools for building a
culture of data-driven educational policy research, evaluation, and implementation.

The findings and conclusions in this report do not necessarily represent the official positions or
policies of the funders or the Kansas City Area Education Research Consortium.

For more information about KC-AERC and copies of reports, see our Web site:
www.kcaerc.org.

Overview
The Youth Flash Mobs in Kansas City: Causes, Consequences and Recommendations report was
developed to provide youth insight into recent violent youth flash mobs in Kansas City. It is the
hope of the youth study participants, the study research team, and the many project supporters
that the youth perspective presented in this report is considered as Kansas City develops
solutions for social disorder, community violence, and violent youth flash mobs.
Why this study?
Kansas City residents and leaders are concerned about episodes of youth group violence at the
Country Club Plaza and other locations. Many of these episodes have been labeled flash mobs
by the community. The most serious of these flash mobs occurred in August 2011, when large
groups of youth assembled at the Plaza and three youth were shot. In response to these events,
Kansas City implemented a new summertime curfew.
Since the flash mobs in Kansas City have involved youth, the current study was conducted to
understand youths perspectives on these events. To gain youth insight we conducted focus
groups and a survey with Kansas City youth.
Important Findings Unique to this Report
While other projects have examined social disorder and violence in Kansas City, this study is
unique because it focuses on youths perspectives. As a result, this project has identified new
findings that should be central to discussions intended to address the related issues.

Youth are looking for ways to express themselves by connecting with others: Youth
interventions should be designed to meet this need. Focus group participants said
young people were involved in flash mobs to express themselves, get attention, be seen,
be remembered, Get their name up, and make a statement. In addition, survey
participants cited expressing themselves as the most important reason youth participate in
a flash mob. Kansas City youth with a higher level of social self-efficacy (a sense of
competence in forging new relationships) showed stronger intention to participate in a
flash mob in the future. Therefore those working with youth should consider initiatives
designed to provide youth opportunities for expressing themselves through interaction
with their peers.

YouTube, Facebook and texting are the most popular social networking venues for
youth: Social media strategies should be developed to effectively communicate with
and engage Kansas City youth. Our study indicates that online sites such as YouTube
and Facebook are important sources of information about events in general and about
flash mobs in Kansas City, and that texting was the most widely used communication
method for youth to arrange meet-ups with their friends. As such, it is suggested those
working with youth identify and utilize relevant social networking sites to provide
engaging and timely interactive content.

When implementing youth curfews, provide alternative activities for youth:


Activities should be safe, accessible and entertaining. Youth focus group participants

main objection to the new summertime curfew in Kansas City was that the curfew was
implemented, but there was still nothing for youth to do. Across focus groups, the most
frequent cause of problems associated with flash mobs or other acts of group violence
reported by youth was youth boredom. Additionally, in our survey over one-quarter of
youth who were familiar with flash mobs cited boredom as a reason to participate in a
flash mob. Therefore, if a curfew is implemented it should be done so in conjunction with
the development of more activities for youth or the establishment of curfew-free locations
where youth are provided safe activities with an accompanying police presence to
provide safety. In this respect, our study validates the Kansas City Commission on
Violent Crimes final report (2006) recommendation of developing a Youth District that
would provide safe entertainment opportunities for youth. The establishment of such a
district might help address the boredom cited by youth in our focus groups and survey.
Youth participants in our study wanted to see new entertainment facilities like a venue for
underground rappers and talent shows and sports facilities like College Basketball
Experience. A reduction in youth boredom may in turn reduce youth violence.
Concerns about personal safety were woven throughout the conversations in our youth focus
groups. Therefore, attempts to isolate events like the Plaza flash mobs from larger community
challenges in Kansas City are not likely to succeed. Efforts to reduce violence involving flash
mobs should be connected to efforts to reduce all community violence.

Table of Contents
Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 4
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ 6
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 7
Section 1: Introduction .................................................................................................................. 11
Flash Mobs ................................................................................................................................ 11
Section 2: Youth Focus Groups .................................................................................................... 13
Analysis..................................................................................................................................... 13
Flash Mobs Definitions .......................................................................................................... 14
Flash Mobs and Social Media ................................................................................................... 15
Flash Mobs Motivations for Youth Participation .................................................................. 15
Flash Mobs Causes and Consequences .................................................................................. 17
Focus Group Conclusions ......................................................................................................... 20
Section 3: Youth Survey ............................................................................................................... 23
Demographic Characteristics of Participants ............................................................................ 23
Social Media Use and Information Sources.............................................................................. 24
Perceptions of Flash Mobs ........................................................................................................ 27
Perspectives on Safety in Kansas City ...................................................................................... 30
Survey Conclusions .................................................................................................................. 32
Section 4: Recommendations ........................................................................................................ 35
References ..................................................................................................................................... 39
Appendix A: Focus Group Questions ........................................................................................... 42
Appendix B: Survey Questions..................................................................................................... 44
Appendix C: Survey Results ......................................................................................................... 53

Executive Summary
Kansas City has recently experienced episodes of youth group violence at the Country Club
Plaza (the Plaza) and other locations. Many of these episodes have been labeled flash mobs by
the community. The most serious of these flash mobs occurred in August 2011, when large
groups of youth assembled at the Plaza and three youth were shot. In response to these events,
Kansas City implemented a new summertime curfew.
While flash mobs are a recent phenomenon, they are not normally understood to be associated
with violence. Most commonly they involve a large group of people who gather in some
predetermined location, perform some brief action, and then quickly disperse (McFedries, 2003,
p. 56). The violent youth flash mobs in Kansas City do not seem to fit with this definition, so
research is needed to better understand these occurrences.
Since the flash mobs in Kansas City have involved youth, the current study was conducted to
understand youths perspectives of flash mobs. To develop this insight we conducted focus
groups and a survey with Kansas City youth.
The Current Study
Focus groups. We conducted 10 focus groups with 50 total youth participants. Participants ages
ranged from 13 to 24. Participants were recruited through community and school youth programs
in Kansas City. Focus groups were conducted in December 2011 and January 2012,
approximately 4-5 months following the Plaza shooting. Focus groups were audio recorded and
the recordings were transcribed for analysis.
Analysis of the youth focus group sessions found that Kansas City youth:

Have varying familiarity with the term flash mob and define flash mobs in different
ways

Perceive youth boredom to be the most frequent cause of problems associated with flash
mobs

Connect ongoing social disorder with the violence associated with flash mobs

Generally support, under certain conditions, the presence of police and implementation of
a curfew to curtail problems with flash mobs

Indicate that while social and new media are facilitators of flash mobs, flash mobs have
their roots in youth activities that have been going on for generations (e.g., hanging out in
groups, meeting up, cruising)

Survey. In addition to the youth focus groups, a survey of 280 Kansas City youth aged 13-19
was conducted in March 2012 to examine youth use of social media, understandings of flash
mobs, and social psychological and demographic information. The purpose of this survey was to

obtain broader information about youths perspectives on flash mobs. Focus group results
informed development of the final survey.
Analysis of the survey data suggests:

Like U.S. youth in general, Kansas City youth spend a significant amount of time online,
particularly on social media sites such as YouTube and Facebook.

Social media is an important channel for Kansas City youth to learn about upcoming
flash mobs, arrange meet-ups with their friends, and get information about things to do in
Kansas City.

Despite recent outbreaks of violence during youth mass gatherings often labeled as flash
mobs in the community, Kansas City youth who are familiar with flash mobs perceive
them largely as fun, entertaining, and benign events.

More than a third of the survey participants indicated their willingness to participate in a
flash mob in the future.

Kansas City youth with a higher level of social self-efficacy (a sense of competence in
forging new relationships) show stronger intention to participate in a flash mob in the
future.

Flash mobs are an important way for digital nativesthe generation born after the
general introduction of digital technologies that has grown up immersed in these
technologiesto express themselves, meet new friends, and deal with boredom.

Recommendations
Our study resulted in the following key recommendations intended for public officials, schools
and youth-serving organizations, the police, and media interested in understanding and
preventing problems associated with youth flash mobs.

When discussing flash mobs with youth, be clear about what flash mob means.
Many youth in our focus groups did not know what flash mobs meant and in our survey
we found that over one-third of youth were not familiar with the term flash mob.
Moreover, focus group participants provided a variety of definitions for flash mobs.
Therefore, for those wishing to engage Kansas City youth in a conversation about
preventing flash mobs or enforcing activities such as a curfew related to flash mobs, such
conversations would benefit from clarity about what type of activities are of concern.

Provide youth living in central Kansas City with safe, accessible activities and
entertainment options. Across focus groups, the most frequent cause of problems
associated with flash mobs or other acts of group violence was youth boredom.
Additionally, in our survey over one-quarter of youth who were familiar with flash mobs
cited boredom as a reason to participate in a flash mob. Therefore efforts to reduce youth
boredom may prevent some episodes of youth violence.
8

Engage in efforts to deal with ongoing community and family disorder and violence.
Youth focus group participants cited community violence, crime, and disrepair; school
problems; broken families; and bad parenting as contributors to episodes of group
violence like the shootings that occurred on the Plaza. Moreover, many youth indicated
violence, gangs, and crime were common occurrences in their neighborhoods. Concerns
about personal safety were woven throughout the conversations in our youth focus
groups. Therefore, attempts to isolate events like the Plaza flash mobs from larger
community challenges in Kansas City are not likely to succeed. Efforts to reduce violence
involving flash mobs should be connected to efforts to reduce all community violence.

When implementing youth curfews, provide alternative activities for youth. Youth
focus group participants main objection to the new summertime curfew in Kansas City
was that the curfew was implemented, but there was still nothing for youth to do, and that
the curfew was only enforced in certain areas (e.g., the Plaza). Therefore, if a curfew is
implemented it should be done so in conjunction with the development of more activities
for youth or the establishment of curfew-free locations where youth are provided safe
activities with an accompanying police presence to provide safety.

Implement (offline and online) community policing approaches. Police are


encouraged to engage youth, both in their offline and online networks. Interaction with
youth may allow police to anticipate and be present at large youth gatherings and ensure
the safety of youth present in such gatherings. Additionally, police are encouraged to
employ community policing strategies that concurrently develop trust among citizens
while also ensuring the citizen safety.

Develop social media strategies to communicate with and engage Kansas City youth.
Those working with youth are encouraged to identify and utilize social networking tools
to communicate effectively with Kansas City youth. Our study indicates that online sites
such as YouTube and Facebook are important sources of information about events in
general and about flash mobs in Kansas City. As such, those interested in communicating
with youth should be present in these online locations.

Encourage youth community engagement by facilitating good flash mobs. Despite


the episodes of violence at the Plaza that were sometimes labeled as flash mobs by the
community, youth knowledgeable about flash mobs often view them as fun and
entertaining gatherings that provide an outlet for self-expression. Therefore, instead of
instituting measures to stop all flash mobs, those working with youth should consider
ways to facilitate good flash mobs. Such efforts can have positive impact on youth
community engagement.

Limitations of Current Study


As with all research projects, this study has several limitations. First, neither the focus group nor
the survey samples for this research project were random samples of Kansas City youth.
Therefore, we cannot be sure that the results described here are generalizable to all youth in
Kansas City. In spite of our efforts to engage youth from all ethnicities, our focus group
participants were mostly African American youth, with few Caucasian and no Hispanic
participants; and, the majority of youth in our survey sample were African Americans (53.3%),
followed by Hispanics (24.2%) and Caucasians (15.4%).
The violence associated with flash mobs in Kansas City was one of the main issues that guided
this project; however, we were unable to ask youth about violence directly in either the focus
groups or the survey because of restrictions from the University of Kansas Human Subjects
Committee, which served as the Institutional Review Board for this project. Parental written
consent was also required for youth participation in our focus groups and the survey. This
requirement restricted our ability to recruit youth survey participants through youth social
networks, thus constraining the size and scope of our final survey sample. Moreover, because we
were interested in the role of social and mobile communication technologies in youth flash mobs
and youth violence, we had hoped to utilize these technologies to engage Kansas City youth in
this project, but were limited in our ability to do so. We are hopeful future research projects with
Kansas City youth are able to address and overcome these current limitations.

10

Section 1: Introduction
In August 2011, three youth were injured in a shooting at the Country Club Plaza (the Plaza), an
upscale outdoor shopping center in Kansas City, Missouri (Dillon, 2011b). The August 2011
shootings followed ongoing problems with the assemblage of large groups of unruly teens at
the Plaza (Dillon, 2011a, para. 2; Vendel & Smith, 2010). The occurrence of these large groups
of teens at the Plaza has been referred to locally as flash mobs (Flash-mob event, 2011;
Osterheldt, 2011, para. 14). The events in Kansas City mirrored incidents with large groups of
youth and violent behavior in other American cities (Chung, 2010; Goldstein, 2003; Solecki &
Goldschmidt, 2011; Zeitz et al, 2009). There has also been evidence of this phenomenon abroad
(Joung, 2005; Lee, 2011; Shmuelli, 2003). In response to the incidents at the Plaza, a new
summertime youth curfew was instituted in five areasthe Plaza, the Downtown/Crossroads
District, the 18th and Vine District, Westport, and Zona Rosain Kansas City (Hendricks, 2011).
The study described in this report was undertaken to gain youth perspectives on flash mobs in
Kansas City. We focus on youth because they are potential participants in such events and are
also potentially peers of flash mob participants. In order to better understand what youth think
about flash mobs, we conducted focus groups and a survey with youth in the Kansas City area.
The purpose of this study is to understand:

If Kansas City youth are familiar with the term flash mob and, if so, how they define
the term.
Whether Kansas City youth know of or have been involved in a flash mob.
How flash mobs are organized.
Whether flash mobs are popular among Kansas City youth.
Why Kansas City youth participate in flash mobs.
What problems occur at flash mobs and what can be done to prevent those problems.
How social psychological variables are related to youth experiences with flash mobs.

Flash Mobs
A flash mob has been defined as a large group of people who gather in some predetermined
location, perform some brief action, and then quickly disperse (McFedries, 2003, p. 56). The
organizer of the first flash mobs intended the events to be coordinated group actions that were
inexplicable and lacked an apparent agenda (Shmuelli, 2003, para. 10).
The brief action performed as part of a flash mob has included activities such as participants
freezing in place, singing a predetermined song, and performing a choreographed dance (CNW
Group, 2012; Goodman, 2011; Gore, 2010; Masterson, 2010). The parameters of a flash mob
(time, location, and performed action) are communicated to participants via new and mobile
communication technologies such as e-mail, texting, and smart phones (Goldstein, 2003, Wasik,
2011).
While the original flash mobs were intended to be good-natured spectacles (Wasik, 2011, para.
16), recent events involving large groups of youth in Boston, Massachusetts; Brooklyn, New
York; Kansas City, Missouri; Orange, New Jersey; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and Brooklyn,
New York have resulted in violence, vandalism, injuries, and arrests (Urbina, 2010). While youth
11

flash mobs involving violence have seemingly become more common across the United States,
research has not examined how youth think about and understand flash mobs. This project seeks
to gain this youth perspective.
The current report is organized as follows. Our approach to conducting youth focus groups and
the results of the focus groups are described in Section 2 of the report. Our survey approach and
survey results are presented in Section 3.
Section 4 includes key recommendations that emerged from the youth focus group and survey
results. These recommendations are intended to be used by public officials, schools and youthserving organizations, the police, and the media throughout the community as Kansas City
considers actions and policies to prevent negative outcomes associated with youth flash mobs.

12

Section 2: Youth Focus Groups


In order to understand youth perspectives on flash mobs, we conducted focus groups with youth
throughout the central Kansas City area. We recruited participants through community and
school youth programs by contacting program administrators, explaining the project, enlisting
administrative support, distributing and obtaining signed youth and parental consent forms, and
then conducting focus groups. All focus group procedures were approved by the Human Subjects
Committee at the University of Kansas.
We conducted 10 focus groups with 4 to 8 participants in each, resulting in 50 total participants.
Focus groups were conducted in three locations in Kansas City, each associated with one of the
youth programs that facilitated recruitment of participants. Each focus group lasted
approximately 1 to 1 hours. Participants ages ranged from 13 to 24, with 20% (n = 10)
between 13 and 15 and 80% (n = 40) between 16 and 24. Participants were 44% (n = 22) female
and 56% (n = 28) male. Participants were mostly (94%, n = 47) African American, while 4% (n
= 2) were Caucasian and 2% (n = 1) were Asian.
The same focus group questioning route was used for all groups (Krueger & Casey, 2009). The
full focus group questioning script can be found in Appendix A. We asked participants if they
were familiar with the term flash mob and, if so, how they defined it; whether they knew of or
had been involved in a flash mob; where flash mobs occurred; whether flash mobs were popular;
why people participate in flash mobs; whether any problems ever occurred at flash mobs and, if
so, what could be done to prevent those problems. Due to the Human Subjects Committees
requirements, none of our focus group questions addressed youth violence or the Plaza shootings
specifically.
Focus group moderators were recent college graduates who were working in Kansas City area
schools at the time of the study. Moderators were similar in age and race to focus group
participants (Krueger & Casey, 2009) and were experienced in interacting and working with
youth. Moderators received focus group training and then observed an initial focus group
conducted by project investigators. Following the initial focus group, the moderators and
investigators discussed and reviewed the moderating process. Investigators were present at all
focus groups and provided support to moderators as needed. Focus groups were conducted in
December 2011 and January 2012, approximately 4-5 months following the Plaza shooting.
Focus groups were audio recorded and the recordings were transcribed for analysis.
Analysis
Focus group transcripts were analyzed using a qualitative grounded theory approach (Strauss &
Corbin, 1998). Inductive coding was used so that coding themes were not identified prior to
analysis. Instead, a constant comparative method was utilized in which all transcripts were first
read by two coders, and then the coders worked together to identify themes and sub-themes
appearing in the transcripts. Once themes and sub-themes were identified, individual focus group
statements were placed into categories. The process of identifying themes and sub-themes and
placing statements in these categories involved both coders working together to discuss,
compare, and re-code the data until the final coding resulted in consensus.

13

Flash Mobs Definitions


In talking to Kansas City youth about flash mobs, several different definitions of flash mobs
emerged, indicating that the term does not mean the same thing to all youth.
Kansas City youth described flash mobs as:

Organized, impromptu events


Gangs
Shootings at the Plaza
Large groups of youth hanging out

Each of these definitions is discussed below.


Flash mobs as organized, impromptu events. Several youth focus group participants defined a
flash mob as a seemingly spontaneous, yet orchestrated and planned public event. For example,
one youth explained that a flash mob was when a group of people come together to do the same
activity at the same time in the same place, it has to be coordinated. Its not something random;
its actually planned out thoroughly. Other youth explained that flash mobs were both planned
and unexpected, and that people in flash mobs disappear after the event has occurred.
Focus group participants noted entertainment media examples of flash mobs such as the movie
with Justin Timberlake where they had flash mobs and they were all like singing and dancing
(Friends with Benefits) and a new television show about flash mobs (Mobbed). Youth also
described local examples of flash mobs, such as an event at Macys in which people posted on
Facebook that they would be at the store at a certain day and time to dance and sing.
Another focus group participant described a flash mob at the participants school in which
students texted other students to plan for a spontaneous group dance to a popular song played on
a boom box in the school cafeteria during lunch.
Flash mobs as gangs. The second flash mob definition to emerge involved youth focus group
participants who were not sure what flash mobs were, but generally guessed that they were
related to gangs or groups of violent youth. Confusion regarding the definition of a flash mob is
illustrated through example focus group participant responses such as: I know what a mob is;
little confused about the flash part and is the flash symbolic or is it literally a flash?
When unsure what flash mobs were, focus group participants mostly surmised they were related
to gangs or group violence. For example, focus group participants explained that a flash mob was
a big fight, a massive group of people participating in criminal activity, people with guns,
people who go around terrorizing stuff and its just a big group of em, people who carry
guns, they shoot and rob, and break in peoples houses, and groups against groups that
fightin.
Flash mob at the Plaza. The third definition to emerge from the focus group participants was
directly related to the Plaza shootings. Some focus group participants considered the events at
the Plaza to constitute a flash mob. For example, focus group participants explained that a flash

14

mob was when a certain age group of children go to the Plaza and provoke older people and
make havoc. However, other focus group participants did not perceive the events at the Plaza to
constitute flash mobs. For example, focus group participants explained that there was an
incident at the Plaza that was labeled [emphasis added] a flash mob but that event was actually
a new thing.
Some focus group participants considered the labeling of the Plaza shootings as flash mobs to be
a case of Kansas City putting a positive spin on what occurred. Other youth focus group
participants explained that the Plaza shootings only received attention (and were only called a
flash mob) because of where the event occurred. Youth participants explained that theres been
problems all across the city and like the only time that they responded to it was on the Plaza.
Flash mobs as large groups of youth hanging out. The final theme to emerge regarding the
definition of a flash mob concerned the desire for youth to want to hang out together. One focus
group participant explained that:
Flash mobs are something that (used to) kinda just occurred naturally, like after maybe a
football game like maybe you go to IHOP or something after that, then you pass along
word of mouth that way everyone is going to IHOP and eat or something like that. Then
it just so happens there is a big group there that hangs out because then you know the
restaurant can accommodate for so many people, so you know, I remember, uh, being in
those instances, to where like man the police was called to break up the, uh, crowd
standing there. We werent necessarily causing trouble, but it was more so we didnt have
anywhere else to go and it just kinda happen to be collecting in a group.
Flash Mobs and Social Media
A recurring theme in the discussion of flash mobs was the use of social and mobile media
(Facebook, twitter, texting, etc.) to organize these events. With regard to the events at the Plaza,
one focus group participant explained:
Like when a bunch of kids would meet at the Plaza they like made Facebook events, like
go to the Plaza, like not go to the Plaza to watch a movie or go to the Plaza to go
shopping, but like everybody go to the Plaza.
Youth focus group participants also discussed that social media was a new, more efficient way to
get information to peers about what was happening. This spreading of information would have
previously been accomplished through word of mouth, but social media now made the process
easier and quicker.
Flash Mobs Motivations for Youth Participation
Youth focus group participants were asked why they thought youth participated in flash mobs.
Three main motivation themes emerged from this discussion: 1) fitting in and being cool, 2)
exercising the right to be in a public place, and 3) having something to do (not being bored).
Each motivation is described below.

15

Fitting in and being cool. Many of the motivations cited by youth focus participants for
participation in flash mobs were related to social and peer factors. For example, focus group
participants said that young people were involved in flash mobs to:

Express themselves
Get attention
Be seen
Be remembered
Get their name up
Make a statement
Fit in
Be cool
Get an adrenaline rush

Exercising the right to be in a public place. Focus group participants also indicated that
participating in a flash mob at the Plaza was related to exercising the right to be in a specific
public place. As one participant explained:
If my friends like were gonna go to the Plaza and hang out I would be like sure, cause
sure I dont have a lot of money to spend, but I can spend the money that I do have and I
have just as much right to be down there as anybody else.
Having something to do (not being bored). The most frequent motivation for participating in a
flash mob cited by youth focus group participants was the desire to have something fun to do and
not be bored. Not having anything to do in Kansas City was a frequent complaint among focus
group participants. One focus group participant indicated that flash mob participants:
Were bored and had nothing else to do. We give em something to do or this is what
happens when you get a group of kids together and theyre bored, they get creative and
destructive, and thats what it is like, it was boredom and destruction.
Another participant explained:
Right now theres just not very many places for kids to go. So, they are all going to
congregate at this one place, so you are bound to be with people that you dont know.
And like you dont know what buttons you cant push with them, so like its just, its just
not a good situation. Its just not a good combination.
Focus group participants discussed three main causes for this widespread boredom: a) a lack of
fun things to do, b) a lack of transportation to get to fun places, and c) the fact that no place was
safe. Each is described below.
Lack of fun things to do. Youth focus group participants discussed that down here theres
really nothing to do, you gotta travel far out to do everything, the mall, Independence, Oak Park,
Kansas. Aint nothing down here for us to do so thats why the teens act so crazy. Activities that
youth indicated were missing from central Kansas City were a movie theatre (the closest movie

16

theatres were described as requiring adult accompaniment to see a movie in the evening),
bowling alley, skating rink, gym or sport centers/activities, arcade, free music studio,
entertainment restaurants (e.g., ESPN Zone, Dave and Busters), and community centers with
more room.
One youth focus group participant explained the lack of things to do was the result of the fact
that theres no money to spend things on because the community is not making any money.
Another participant lamented that the youth who tried to stay out of trouble were the ones who
were bored, noting that if you arent gonna abide by the laws, then theres plenty of stuff for
you to do. Other participants described activities that prevented them from getting into trouble.
For example, one participant noted that if we wasnt in (a local community program for youth),
wed prolly out there doing something. Wed be in the flash mob too.
Lack of transportation to get to fun places. In addition to the lack of activities for youth in
central Kansas City, youth expressed frustration with not having access to transportation
(personal or public) to get to places that were deemed fun but were located outside of the central
portion of the city. As one participant discussed, youth had no transportation to get to places
where there is something to do.
No place is safe. Lastly, some youth focus group participants expressed that there was nothing to
do because they did not feel safe anywhere in Kansas City. Participants indicated that You cant
go nowhere without worryin if somebody gonna start shootin or get robbed or something and
there aint nowhere you can go without having to worry about somebody getting pissed,
somebody shooting, or somebody just trippin for no reason.
Flash Mobs Causes and Consequences
In addition to the motivations for youth participation in flash mobs just described, focus group
participants discussed causes and consequences of the flash mobs in Kansas City. The themes
that emerged from this discussion are described below.
Social Disorder. Social disorder in Kansas City was often cited as a cause of the problems with
flash mobs. One youth focus group participant said:
Its like you want social order for a population that has had to endure so much social
disorder for such a long period of time, I just feel like we have this, were going to have
to deal with it and new programs might help, but its also just a nasty reality check of
what we built in our own urban environments.
Other participants expressed dismay at general social conditions. Youth participants stated that:

Several things have broken down, so the families were broken down, your communities
have broken down.

Look at these schools now. They all falling apart. Theyre not accredited. They arent
teaching nothing.

17

Like our community down here, Im gonna speak on our town, like it aint good, we got
a lot of crack heads, a lot of fiends.

Theres violence everywhere.

Several youth focus group participants indicated this social disorder would have to be addressed
by the entire community if it were to be improved. As one participant explained:
A lot of people are pointing their fingers at everyone else like all the kids are blaming the
fact that theres nothing else to do and adults are saying that were just like a terrible
generation because were just violent and were just prone like were innately evil people.
AndI think that if we all looked at how we could change the situation or improve the
situation then I honestly think thats the only way that its going to improve.
Some focus group participants suggested the community could provide support to help youth
cope with the social disorder. One focus group participant suggested providing case workers who
could work with youth at Kansas City community centers, while another participant stated that,
I really think we need people that genuinely they willing to sit here and say lets talk about
this or come here lets talk about this situation.
Other participants were less optimistic that the community could help youth cope or improve
social order. As one participant explained, how can a community help? I feel like a lot of the
times, a lot of these kids who doing it wrong they getting a lot of influence from the
community.
Police. Youth focus group participants discussed whether more police would help address the
problems with flash mobs. Several participants noted that while the police were present at places
like the Plaza, they were absent in the areas where participants lived. For example, one youth
stated, I called the cops three times and I couldnt get a cop to come to one of those events and I
was like really? Another participant suggested that:
If we had more police at events, like actual events, that kids were gonna be at. Cuz then,
not like an overwhelming presence, but like one or two police there just to give, send
some like message like, nothing can happen here like. Guys you cant get out of hand
here. And then if we had more of those events across the city then like, um, I think that
would reduce a lot of the violence that happens, just because, its just like that too many
kids get put in one spot at the same time and theres not enough control there and like
there might be security or something like that, kids barely have respect for police, like,
they are not gonna respect security. So, I think like if we just had more police presence at
uh, youth centered events it would help.
However, not all focus group participants were convinced that additional police presence would
help: Police they hype younger people up you know. So when a younger person see the police
the first thing they wanna do is runso I cant say the police (would help).
Curfew. Youth focus group participants discussed the curfew that was imposed in Kansas City
as a result of the Plaza shootings. Participants had a variety of opinions about the curfew, arguing
18

the curfew was 1) unfair, 2) unenforceable, 3) appropriate, and 4) a reaction not prevention. Each
is described below.
Curfew as unfair. Participants who thought the curfew was unfair generally believed so because
the law provided no alternative activities and punished everyone based on the behavior of a few
bad actors. One participant stated that, You cant just say, you have a curfew, heres a $500.00
fine, but you dont have nothing else for them to do. Another participant said:
The curfew was the off the bat first thing, oh if we tell them they cant be out, they cant
be out, but thats it, you dont provide any benefits for them to go anywhere else.
Theres still boredom. Theres no more companies that came in. Theres no money
growth.
Some focus group participants also believed it was inappropriate to punish all youth because of
what occurred. One focus group participant stated that, I think its unfair they, uh, penalize
everybody.
Curfew as unenforceable. Several focus group participants believed that the curfew would not
work because it would be ignored. One participant explained:
The majority of youth, we probably wont follow that curfew. And, even if we get
approached by the officers or something, excuse me, then that might spark, you know,
something, because we have a lot of fiery youth in our community now.
Another focus participant said that:
Even if they have the curfew it is just enforced at certain areas now. That just means that
theres still the kids there. The problem is still there they are just gonna relocate and its
just gonna make another area even worse than it already is, so like they need to look at a
bigger picture that what they are looking at right now.
Curfew as appropriate. Other youth focus group participants viewed the curfew as an
appropriate response to the events that occurred at the Plaza. As one focus group participant
explained, When I heard it (the curfew) on the news I just sat there and was like, that is what
you get, because if youre gonna go out and act bad then youre gonna get a consequence.
Curfew as reaction not prevention. Lastly, some focus group participants viewed the curfew as a
reaction to events rather than an attempt to prevent future problems. As one participant
explained:
I feel like so often in Kansas City they respond to bad events that happen rather than
preventing them. So, if we like just had a different approach to how we try to take care of
the problem cause like the curfew, like that was a reaction.

19

Another focus group participant stated that, its almost like they are like punishing us, like we
are parents instead of guiding us through, like helping us and preventing stuff they could prevent
rather than responding.
Parenting. Many youth focus group participants indicated that the parenting of youth was to
blame for problems associated with flash mobs. One focus group participant said:
If you dont have that parental guidance in your house then theyre gonna go out and act
up cause they dont have somebody to put their foot down and say no you cannot do this
and you cannot do that.
Though parenting was often mentioned as a reason that youth were involved in violent activity,
there was also disagreement as to whether this was a contributing factor to violence in flash
mobs. One focus group participant noted:
Somebody could have the best parents in the world and they still go out and do something
bad just to prove that they can do it. It aint really got to do with nothing at home. I mean
thats just another excuse.
Local News Media. The final theme to emerge from the youth focus groups concerned local
news media coverage of the flash mobs. Focus group participants noted that the local news
media often focused on flash mobs, crime, and violence associated with African American youth,
which, as one participant said, makes us look bad. Another participant stated:
I think that the reason why (the media) focus on African Americans is because we are the
ones on the Plaza we are the ones who cause the problems. Like you dont see a white
teenager rolling around with a gun on the Plaza, like that doesnt happen.
Another focus group participant suggested:
If we wanna change the way that people perceive us and the stereotypes that people have
on us then we as like an entire generation of African American youth are gonna have to
change. And were gonna have to behave differently and until then, yeah, people are
gonna, the news is gonna focus on us because there isnt anyone else to focus on.
Focus Group Conclusions
Overall, several important findings emerged from the focus group component of this study.
Analysis of the youth focus group sessions found that Kansas City youth:

Have varying familiarity with the term flash mob and define flash mobs in different
ways,

Perceive youth boredom to be the most frequent cause of problems associated with flash
mobs,

Connect ongoing social disorder with the violence associated with flash mobs,

20

Generally support, under certain conditions, the presence of police and implementation of
a curfew to curtail problems with flash mobs, and

Indicate that while social and new media are facilitators of flash mobs, flash mobs have
their roots in youth activities that have been going on for generations (e.g., hanging out in
groups, meeting up, cruising).

While the focus group results provide preliminary insight into Kansas City youths
understanding of flash mobs, a survey was also conducted to gain additional information about
Kansas City youths perspectives on this phenomenon. The survey portion of this study is
described in the following section.

21

22

Section 3: Youth Survey


A survey of Kansas City youth aged 13-19 was conducted in March 2012 to examine youth use
of social media, understandings of flash mobs, and social psychological and demographic
information. The complete survey is located in Appendix B, and full survey results are located in
Appendix C. The purpose of this survey was to obtain broader information about youths
perspectives on flash mobs.
An initial survey questionnaire was developed based on the focus group results and literature
review. The investigators next conducted a pretest of the questionnaire on a sample of 18 youth
recruited through a youth-oriented radio station. The participants in the survey pretest were asked
to complete the survey and then to identify questions, answer choices, or statements that were
ambiguous or difficult to comprehend. The youth also provided suggestions for changes. Based
on their feedback, several questions or statements were rephrased to enhance clarity and some
answer options were added.
Our online survey was created on Qualtrics.com, one of the leading online survey sites. A paperand-pencil version of the survey (in both English and Spanish), which included the same set of
questions and similar layout, was created for youth that might not have access to the online
version of the survey. Survey respondents were recruited through schools, youth centers, and a
youth-oriented radio broadcast. Youth under the age of 18 were required to provide parental and
youth informed written consent in order to participate in the survey. Youth aged 18-19 were
allowed to complete the survey without parental informed written consent.
The survey was approved by the Human Subjects Committee at the University of Kansas. Survey
participants were notified that the study would be about youths use of the Internet and social
gatherings and that all answers would remain confidential and be analyzed only by the
researchers. They were also informed that their participation in the survey was voluntary and
they could stop participation at any time. Completing the questionnaire took about 10-15 minutes
and survey data was collected for 4 weeks in March 2012.
Demographic Characteristics of Participants
A total of 280 youth ages 13-19 participated in the survey. The median age was 17. Most of the
respondents were high school students (89.7%) with some participation from middle school
students (6.2%) and college students or middle/high school graduates (4.1%). About 68% of the
survey respondents were female and 32% were male. African Americans were the biggest group
accounting for 53.3%, followed by Hispanics (24.2%) and Caucasians (15.4%). A little over half
of the respondents (53.9%) described their households socio-economic status as middle class,
followed by 30.3% working class, 13.3% upper middle class, and 2.5% upper class. Full
demographic breakdowns are shown in Figure 1.

23

Figure1ParticipantDemographics
Sex

Education
6% 4%
Highschoolstudent

32%
Female

Middleschool

Male

68%

SocioeconomicStatus
3%

Race/Ethnicity
1%

AfricanAmerican
Hispanic

Middleclass
Workingclass

30%

3%
3%

13%

54%

Collegestudent/other

90%

16%

Uppermiddleclass
Upperclass

24%

Caucasian

53%

Asian/PacificIslander
Other
NativeAmerican

While these demographic characteristics are not completely representative of Kansas City youth,
this sample still allows us to identify some trends in Kansas City youths communication
behavior, perspectives on flash mobs, and ideas for improving safe recreational opportunities for
youth.
Social Media Use and Information Sources
Internet usage among youth has steadily increased over the past several years, with as many as
95% of youth estimated to have access to online content and 80% of those youth engaged in
social networking sites by 2011 (Boyd, 2007; Lenhart et al., 2010; Lenhart et al., 2011). Previous
research indicates that the majority of youth have positive interactions online and find a sense of
social inclusion by sharing information with peers in the digital sphere (Boyd, 2007; Lenhart et
al., 2011). However, some youth are finding themselves going beyond a positive experience and
become addicted to social networking sites (Pelling & White, 2009). Given such intense
adoption of digital-based interactions among youth, examining this form of communication is
essential to better understand how information is spread within this group. This is particularly
relevant as flash mobs are typically organized via social media or mobile communication.
A key finding of this study is that youths social media use is highly correlated with their sense
of needing to be socially accepted. Social media use was measured by asking how much time
youth spend on different social networking sites including Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube on
an average weekday and an average weekend day. Participants were also asked to indicate how
much they agree with each of different possible reasons for using social networking sites: (i) to

24

pass time; (ii) to communicate with friends; (iii) to learn things outside school; and (iv) to help
him/herself feel better when he/she is down.
Consistent with previous research (Gangadharbatla, 2008), we found that youth who feel a
stronger need to belong also spend more time online. Need to belong was measured by asking
how much participants feel treated better online than offline and how much they feel online
interactions help them feel better when they are down. This finding indicates lonely youth are
more likely to experiment with their identities online, benefitting from the relative anonymity of
the Internet in learning how to interact with people (Valenzuela et al, 2009; Valkenburg & Peter,
2008). While social networking sites offer diverse features, people are drawn to these sites
primarily for personal connections, sharing of their activity with a growing number of friends.
Social networking sites potentially satisfy youths need to belong.
Survey participants reported spending a lot of time on social networking sites such as YouTube
and Facebook (Figure 2). YouTube was the most popular social networking site among youth,
followed by Facebook and Twitter. Youth rarely used Foursquare or Myspace. Communicating
with friends was the most important reason for youth to use social networking sites, followed by
to pass time, to learn things outside school, and to feel better when they are down.
Figure2:UseofSocialNetworkingSites
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
AverageWeekday

10%

YouTube

Facebook

Twitter

5hours+

3hours <5hours

1hour <3hours

<1hour

Notatall

5hours+

3hours <5hours

1hour <3hours

<1hour

Notatall

5hours+

3hours <5hours

1hour <3hours

<1hour

AverageWeekendDay
Notatall

0%

Moreover, survey participants relied heavily on social media and other forms of mobile
communication to arrange meet-ups with friends, get information about flash mobs, and learn
about events in Kansas City. Texting was the most widely used communication method for youth
to arrange meet-ups with their friends (Figure 3). Email was not a major communication method
among Kansas City youth. When it comes to getting information about upcoming flash mobs,
Facebook was the most frequently used, followed by speaking in person, text messaging,
speaking by phone, Twitter, and email. Social networking sites were the most important sources

25

for youth to get information about things to do in Kansas City (Figure 4). Social networking sites
were more popular sources of information about events in Kansas City than traditional mass
media such as television, radio, and newspapers. In terms of sources of information about Kansas
City events, friends were the most important, followed by family, school, church, and city or
youth centers.
Figure3:CommunicationMethodsforMeetUps
andFlashMobs
7
6
5
4

Meetups
FlashMobs

3
2
1
Text SpeakinginSpeakingby Facebook
messages
person
phone

Twitter

Email

Note. Response means are reported. Respondents were asked to indicate on a 7-point scale (1 = never, 7 = almost always) how frequently they
use each source to get information about what to do in Kansas City.

Figure4:InformationSourcesfor
EventsinKansasCity
7
6
5
4
3

Medium

City/youthcenters

Church

School

Family

Friends

Newspaper

OtherInternetsites

Radio

Television

SocialNetworkingSites

2
MeanLevelofFrequency
UsingSource

Source

Note. Respondents were asked to indicate on a 7-point scale (1 = never, 7 = almost always) how frequently they use each of the communication
methods to arrange meet-ups and to get information about upcoming flash mobs.

Given these findings, those working with youth are encouraged to use social networking tools to
communicate with youth. For example, YouTube with its vast adoption of user-generated online

26

videos has played an important role in making entertainment flash mobs popular throughout the
world (Goldschmidt, 2011). Therefore, those working would youth could engage in
comprehensive social media planning to identify a strategy for sharing information about youthrelated events on sites like YouTube.
Perceptions of Flash Mobs
The term flash mob may evoke different feelings from individuals depending upon their
perception of the terms meaning. While some might consider a flash mob to be an entertaining,
fun event, for others the term may hold a rather ominous meaning. Traditionally, a flash mob has
been defined as a public gathering of strangers who assemble in a public place from out of
nowhere, carry out a predetermined public performance, and then quickly disperse (Goldschmidt,
2011; Wasik, 2011). Ranging from musical events performed to promote a group, service acts to
help others in need, or planning a protest, flash mobs have a connecting thread they are
organized, planned, and executed via social networking or mobile communication devices
(Goldschmidt, 2011; Solash 2012; Wasik, 2006). While flash mob performances may appear
pointless and spontaneous to observers, they may make perfect sense to those who are part of the
performances.
Our survey included a series of questions aimed at understanding youth perceptions of flash
mobs. First, respondents were asked whether they were familiar with the term flash mob. Those
who said yes to this question were led to a set of questions about flash mobs, which included
whether they have ever participated in a flash mob, how much they might be willing to
participate in the future, how they would describe flash mobs, and why they think youth organize
flash mobs.
As shown in Figure 5a, 65% of the respondents said they were familiar with the term flash mob
and 35% said they were not. Despite the shootings at the Plaza, which were often labeled a flash
mob by the community, youth familiar with flash mobs largely perceived them as fun and
entertaining gatherings. This fits with more common conceptualizations of flash mobs as
involving benign and non-violent, yet bizarre, actions such as dancing and bowing before a
robotic dinosaur. When asked to choose adjectives that best describe flash mobs (Figure 5b),
participants who were familiar with the term flash mob were more likely to describe them as fun
(26%) or random (23.1%) compared with out of control (8.7%) or violent (6.4%). Other
adjectives they used to describe flash mobs included spontaneous (20.8%) and organized (15%).

27

Figure5a:FamiliarityWiththeTermFlash
Mob

35%
Yes
No
65%

Figure5b:AdjectivesThatBestDescribe
FlashMobs
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%

Adjectivesthatbest
describeflashmobs

5%
0%

Note. For adjectives that best describe flash mobs, respondents were asked to choose all that apply.

Participating in Flash Mobs. About 16% of the respondents reported they had participated in a
flash mob and 30% said their friends had participated in one. More than a third of the
participants indicated they were at least somewhat likely to participate in a flash mob in the
future (Figure 6).
When asked why they think youth participate in flash mobs, survey participants cited expressing
themselves as the most important reason (Figure 7). Hanging out with friends and boredom were
the other important reasons mentioned. This is consistent with the focus group finding that
Kansas City youth often feel there is not much for them to do in Kansas City. To gain attention
and to make new friends were the other reasons mentioned for participating in flash mobs. Fewer
youth said there was no particular reason for youth to participate in a flash mob, and even less
said it was because of peer pressure.
28

Figure6:LikelytoParticipateinaFlashMob
intheFuture
Veryunlikely

Total
Percentage
Likely:

Unlikely

17%
33%

6%

Somewhatunlikely
Undecided

15%

Somewhatlikely
10%

Fig.6Note

13%
6%

Likely
Verylikely

37.7%
Total
Percentage
Unlikely:
51.9%

Note. 15.8% of the respondents (n = 28, N = 177) said they have participated in a flash mob and 29.9% (n = 53) said their friends have
participated in a flash mob.

Figure7:ReasonsforParticipatinginFlash
Mobs
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%

Reasons

Note. Respondents were asked to choose all that apply.

Social Self-efficacy and Participation in a Flash Mob. In order to explore what social
psychological factors are related with youths intention to participate in a flash mob, we
examined how youths social self-efficacy and collective self-esteem are associated with
intention to participate in a flash mob in the future. Social self-efficacy and collective selfesteem have been found to influence youths online social behavior (Gangadharbatla, 2008;
Harwood, 1999; Ledbetter, et al., 2011; Pelling & White, 2009; Valkenburg & Peter, 2008;
Zullig & Teoli, 2011).
Our survey results suggest that social self-efficacy is an important concept to consider in
understanding youth participation in flash mobs. Social self-efficacy refers to individuals belief
that they are competent in forging new friendships (Zullig & Teoli, 2011). Eight items were used
to measure participants social self-efficacy (Appendix B, Q22). This research found a
statistically significant positive correlation between youths social self-efficacy and intention to
participate in a flash mob. That is, the higher the level of their social self-efficacy, the stronger

29

their intention to participate in a flash mob in the future. More specifically, those who feel more
confident becoming friends of other people their age and staying friends with people their age
are more likely to participate in a flash mob. The relationship between social self-efficacy and
intention to participate in a future flash mob suggests that those working with youth should
explore opportunities to use youth flash mobs as a positive force to encourage youth community
engagement. Instead of focusing on measures for stopping all flash mobs, those working with
youth should consider ways of facilitating good flash mobs while fully engaging social media
sites frequented by youth.
Collective self-esteem is defined as an individuals self-concept derived from his/her
knowledge of membership in a social group together with the value and emotional significance
attached to that membership (Barker, 2009; Tajfel, 1981, p. 255). In our survey, 10 items were
used to measure participants collective self-esteem (Appendix B, Q23). We found no
statistically significant relationship between youths collective self-esteem and intention to
participate in a flash mob. This finding makes sense in that flash mobs are generally gatherings
of strangers and thus their sense of association or identity with the group may not be as strong as
that with their ordinary peer groups. Previous research (Barker, 2009) found that adolescents
reporting high group identification and positive collective self-esteem tend to use social
networking sites mainly to maintain contact with their closest peer groups and those who showed
negative collective self-esteem tend to seek a form of virtual companionship or social
compensation through engaging in social networking sites. Flash mobs are an interesting case in
that they involve both online and offline interactions.
Perspectives on Safety in Kansas City
Survey participants said they felt safest in a place where they never had any problems before
(Figure 8). This was followed by when they generally trust people there, when events are
organized by trustworthy organizations, and when friends assure the area is safe. Of the items
presented to them, where they often see police patrol and where they know security guards
monitor the area received lower scores although they were above the scale midpoint.
Respondents were also asked how safe they felt in different parts of Kansas City at night (Figure
9). Youth rated the Crown Center area as safest along with their own neighborhoods. These were
followed by the Sprint Center, the Plaza, public parks, and local clubs.

30

Figure8:PerspectivesonSecurity
7
6
5
4
3
2

Meanimportanceoffactor

Note. Respondents were asked to indicate on a 7-point scale (1 = not important at all, 7 = extremely important) how important each factor was
when they consider the safety of a place they might hang out.

Figure9:PerceivedSafetyofDifferentKansasCity
Areas
7
6
5
4
3
2

MeanFeelingofSafety

Note. Respondents were also asked to indicate on a 7-point scale (1 = dont feel safe at all, 7 = feel extremely safe) how safe they feel in different
parts of Kansas City at night.

Youth Suggestions for Improving Kansas City. Respondents were asked about how to make
Kansas City a better place for youth. As shown in Figure 10, youth indicated that making the city
safer is the most important. Next, youth wanted to see new entertainment facilities like a venue
for underground rappers and talent shows and sports facilities like College Basketball
Experience. Youth also wanted to see public transportation improved so they could get to places
more easily.

31

With regard to places where these services need to be introduced, 48.6% of the respondents said
within walking distance or short driving distance of their house, 36.1% said the Plaza, and 35%
said on the public transportation route. In an open-ended response, some suggested The Legends
and Village West as desirable locations for those services.
Figure10:SuggestionsforImprovingKansasCity
forTeens
7
6
5
4
3
2

AverageImportanceofFactor

Note. (i) Respondents were asked to indicate on a 7-point scale (1 = not important at all, 7 = extremely important) how important each item was
to make Kansas City a better place for teens. (ii) With regard to places where these services need to be introduced, 48.6% (n = 136) of the
respondents said within walking distance or short driving distance of their house, 36.1% (n = 101) the Country Club Plaza, and 35% (n = 98) said
on the public transportation route. In an open-ended response, some suggested The Legends and Village West as desirable locations for those
services.

Survey Conclusions
This survey indicates Kansas City youth online behavior is similar to that of U.S. youth in
general. The survey participants spent a significant amount of time on social media sites such as
YouTube and Facebook. Email is hardly a major communication method among these networked
youth. Participants rely on social media and mobile communication tools to not only stay in
touch and arrange meet-ups with their friends but also get information about things to do in
Kansas City. For some youth, the Internet satisfies their need to be socially accepted; they feel
treated and accepted better online than offline.
Social media is an important channel for youth to learn about upcoming flash mobs. Despite
recent outbreaks of violence during youth mass gatherings often labeled as flash mobs in the
community, youth familiar with flash mobs perceived them largely as fun, entertaining, and
benign events. Indeed, more than a third of the survey participants indicated their willingness to
participate in a flash mob in the future. The freedom and utilization of social media makes
entertainment flash mobs appealing to youth growing up in a world where communication is
literally almost always at their fingertips.
Youth with a higher level of social self-efficacy (a sense of competence in forging new
relationships) showed stronger intention to participate in a flash mob in the future. This finding,
which had not been discussed or explored in previous research, suggests policymakers or civic
32

leaders working with youth should have a more contextual understanding of youth flash mobs.
Flash mobs are important ways for digital natives the generation who were born after the
general introduction of digital technologies and have grown up immersed in those technologies
to express themselves, meet new friends, and deal with boredom. Kansas City can potentially use
flash mobs as a positive force to enhance youth community engagement.

33

34

Section 4: Recommendations
Several recommendations emerged from our study of Kansas City youths perceptions of flash
mobs. These recommendations include:
Recommendation 1: When discussing flash mobs with youth, be clear about what flash
mob means.
When community leaders, youth-serving organizations, the police, and the local media discuss
flash mobs in Kansas City, not all youth may understand what that term means. Many youth in
our focus groups did not know what flash mobs meant and in our survey we found that over
one-third of youth were not familiar with the term flash mob.
When flash mobs are mentioned, some youth may think of the pop culture phenomenon of
synchronized, group dancing (such as depicted in the youth-oriented film Friends with Benefits)
or other typically non-dangerous group activities; other youth may think of gangs or group
violence; and still other youth may think of a specific incident such as the shootings that
occurred at the Plaza in 2011.
Therefore, if community leaders, youth-serving organizations, the police, or the local media wish
to engage Kansas City youth in a conversation about preventing flash mobs or enforcing
activities such as a curfew related to flash mobs, those conversations would benefit from clarity
about what type of activities are of concern. In other words, we recommend being clear with
youth about what is meant by flash mobs.
Moreover it may be particularly helpful for those talking with youth to not conflate flash mobs
with episodes of group youth violence. Most flash mobs are non-violent and benign, even if the
actions performed are seemingly bizarre (Wasik, 2011). Therefore using the term flash mobs
to indicate instances of both synchronized group dancing as well as shootings within groups of
youth may impede effective community conversations about youth violence.
Recommendation 2: Provide youth living in central Kansas City with safe, accessible
activities and entertainment options.
Across focus groups, the most frequent cause of problems associated with flash mobs or other
acts of group violence reported by youth was youth boredom. Additionally, in our survey over
one-quarter of youth who were familiar with flash mobs cited boredom as a reason to participate
in a flash mob. Therefore boredom appears to be important in determining both who participates
in flash mobs, and why problems occur within large groups of youth.
Activities that focus group participants indicated were missing from central Kansas City were a
movie theatre, bowling alley, skating rink, gym or sport centers/activities, arcade, free music
studio, entertainment restaurants (e.g., ESPN Zone, Dave and Busters), community centers with
more room, and community centers employing case workers. Survey participants generally
agreed that new entertainment facilities, new sports facilities, more community/youth centers,
more movie theatres, and more bowling alleys would improve Kansas City for youth. Lack of
transportation to fun places outside of central Kansas City was also perceived to contribute to
youth boredom.

35

Additionally, youth perceived many places in Kansas City to not be safe, which prevented some
youth from going to places and events in those areas, further limiting youths options. In the
survey portion of our study, making the places we have now safer was the most supported
suggestion for improving Kansas City.
Also in our survey, youth indicated that the most important factors in choosing where to hang out
was the place had something to do, easy to get to, and safe. Thus these survey results match with
the youth perspective in our focus groups.
The Kansas City Commission on Violent Crimes final report (2006) recommended developing a
Youth District that would provide safe entertainment opportunities for youth. The establishment
of such a district would help address the boredom cited by youth in our focus groups. Youth
participants in our study suggest that a reduction in youth boredom would in turn reduce youth
violence.
Recommendation 3: Engage in efforts to deal with ongoing community and family disorder
and violence.
Youth focus group participants cited community violence, crime, and disrepair; school problems;
broken families; and bad parenting as contributors to episodes of group violence like the
shootings that occurred on the Plaza. Moreover, many youth indicated violence, gangs, and
crime were common occurrences in their neighborhoods. Concerns about personal safety were
woven throughout the conversations in our youth focus groups.
Therefore, attempts to isolate events like the Plaza flash mobs from larger community challenges
in Kansas City are not likely to succeed. In many ways, the shootings at the Plaza were a case of
ongoing community violence spilling over into an area of the city where violence is not normally
expected (or tolerated). The Kansas City Commission on Violent Crimes final report (2006)
provides many useful recommendations for reducing violent crime throughout Kansas City, and
implementation of these recommendations could help curtail episodes such as the shootings at
the Plaza.
Recommendation 4: When implementing youth curfews, provide alternative activities for
youth.
Youth focus group participants main objection to the new summertime curfew in Kansas City
was that the curfew was implemented, but there was still nothing for youth to do, and that the
curfew was only enforced in certain areas (e.g., the Plaza). Therefore, if a curfew is implemented
it should be done so in conjunction with the development of more activities for youth or the
establishment of curfew-free locations where youth are provided safe activities with an
accompanying police presence to provide safety.
Recommendation 5: Implement (offline and online) community policing approaches.
While social and mobile media are facilitators of flash mobs, in that these technologies allow
youth to rapidly coordinate plans with large numbers of youth, the flash mobs in Kansas City
have their roots in youth activities that have been going on for generations (e.g., meeting in
groups at a specific restaurant, arcade, or park; loitering or cruising at a drive-in or parking lot).

36

The tendency for youth to want to meet up and hang out in groups is not new or solely the
product of new technologies. What new social and mobile technologies bring to this situation is
broader and more effective coordination among youth, which may result in more youth from
different schools, for example, assembling in one place more often and more quickly than would
have occurred in the past, potentially resulting in more problems.
Police are encouraged to engage youth, both in their offline and online networks. Interaction with
youth may allow police to anticipate and be present at large youth gatherings and ensure the
safety of youth present in such gatherings. Additionally, police are encouraged to employ
community policing strategies that concurrently develop trust among citizens while also ensuring
the citizen safety (Wasik, 2011, Zeitz et al, 2009).
Recommendation 6: Develop social media strategies to communicate with and engage
Kansas City youth.
Community leaders, youth-serving organizations, the police, and the media are encouraged to
identify and utilize social networking tools to communicate effectively with Kansas City youth.
To communicate with younger people in Kansas City, those working with youth are encouraged
to go to online places where youth are active. Our study indicates online sites such as YouTube
and Facebook are important sources of information about events in general and about flash mobs
in Kansas City. As such, those interested in communicating with youth should be present in these
online locations.
Those working with youth should consider social media plans to connect with youth. For
example, public officials could create a YouTube channel that featured videos profiling local
youth activities and organizations and youth public service announcements, or host a video
contest in which youth submit videos on a chosen topic (e.g., young people could develop videos
on how youth can help prevent violence). Understanding the online social behavior of youth is a
key to successful engagement with this population (Li & Bernoff, 2008; Palfrey & Gasser, 2008;
Solis, 2011).
Recommendation 7: Encourage youth community engagement by facilitating good flash
mobs.
Finally, despite the variety of flash mob definitions and mixed levels of flash mob awareness
among youth focus group and survey participants, in our survey results we found that when
youth knew what a flash mob was, intention to participate in a flash mob was positively related
to social self-efficacy. That is, the higher the level of a young persons social self-efficacy, the
stronger his or her intention was to participate in a flash mob in the future. Social self-efficacy
refers to individuals belief that they are competent in forging new friendships (Zullig & Teoli,
2011).
Despite the episodes of violence at the Plaza that were sometimes labeled as flash mobs by the
community, youth knowledgeable about flash mobs often largely view them as fun and
entertaining gatherings that provide an outlet for self-expression. Therefore, instead of instituting
measures to stop all flash mobs, public officials, schools and youth-serving organizations, the
police, and the media should consider ways to facilitate good flash mobs (e.g., a youth fun
flash mob contest could be sponsored by local youth organizations, with positive youth flash

37

mobs video recorded and posted to YouTube). Public officials would benefit from engaging
Kansas City youth in online and offline conversations about preventing the negative
consequences that can result from mass gatherings of youth as well as about solving larger
community challenges in the Kansas City metropolitan area. These efforts can have positive
impact on youth community engagement.

38

References
Barker, V. (2009). Older adolescents motivations for social network site use: The Influence of
gender, group identity, and collective self-esteem. Cyber Psychology & Behavior, 12, 209-213.
Boyd, D. (2007). Why youth (heart) social network sites: the role of networked publics in
teenage social life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning
Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume (pp. 1-26). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chung, J. (2010, April 1). Flash mobs may reflect need to 'see and be seen', The Daily
Pennsylvanian. Retrieved from http://www.thedp.com
CNW Group. (2012). Reebok launches new fitness campaign with 250 person flash mob. CNW
Group.
Dillon, K. (2011a, August 13). Mayor, other advocates head to Plaza seeking unruly teens, The
Kansas City Star. Retrieved from http://www.kansascity.com
Dillon, K. (2011b, August 14). Three youths injured in Plaza shootings, The Kansas City Star.
Retrieved from http://www.kansascity.com
Flash-mob event may have led to Plaza melee. (2010, April 12). KMBC.com. Retrieved from
http://www.kmbc.com/news/23126070/detail.html
Gangadharbatla, H. (2008). Facebook me: Collective self-esteem, need to belong, and Internet
self-efficacy as predictors of the Igenerations attitudes toward social networking sites. Journal
of Interactive Advertising, 8(2), 5-15.
Goldschmidt, K. (2011). Adolescents texting and twittering: The flash mob phenomena. Journal
of Pediatric Nursing, 26, 167-169.
Goldstein, L. (2003, August 10). The mob rules. Time. Retrieved from http://www.time.com
Goodman, W. (2011, March 1). Viral video: Wisconsin flash mob protesters sing song from Les
Miserables. CBS News. Retrieved from http://www.cbsnews.com
Gore, G. (2010). Flash mob dance and the territorialisation of urban movement. Anthropological
Notebooks, 16(3), 125-131.
Harwood, J. (1999). Age identification, social identity gratifications, and television viewing.
Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 43, 123-136.
Hendricks, M. (2011, September 15). Fight breaks out on teen night at Hillcrest Community
Center. The Kansas City Star. Retrieved from http://www.kansascity.com
Hlebec, V., Manfreda, K. L., Vehovar, V. (2006). The social support networks of Internet users.
New Media & Society, 8(1), 9-32.
Joung, Y. (2005, Spring). Flash mobs: The younger generation declares its cultural
independence. Koreana, 19, 74-77.
39

Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research
(4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ledbetter, A., Mazer, J., DeGroot, J., Meyer, K., Mao, Y., & Swafford, B. (2011). Attitudes
toward online social connection and self- disclosure as predictors of Facebook communication
and relational closeness. Communication Research, 38(1), 27-53.
Lee, K. (2011, Aug 09). Flash Mob Riots: Crime in the Age of Twitter. Retrieved from
http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/lexishub/blogs/legaltechnologyandsocialmedia/archive/2
011/08/09/flash-mob-riots-crime-in-the-age-of-twitter.aspx
Lenhart, A., Purcell, K., Smith, A., & Zickuhr, K. (2010). Social media & mobile internet use
among teens and young adults. Pew Internet & American Life Project, 1-37.
Lenhart, A., Madden, M., Smith, A., Purcell, K., Zickuhr, K., & Rainie, L. (2011). Teens,
kindness and cruelty on social network sites. Pew Research Centers Internet & American Life
Project, 1-86. Retrieved from http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/Teens-and-social-media.aspx
Li, C., & Bernoff, J. (2008). Groundswell: Winning in a world transformed by social
technologies. Harvard Business Press.
Luhtanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1992). A collective self-esteem scale: Self-evaluation of ones
social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 302-318.
Masterson, T. (2010, April 2). Real flash mob freezes 30th street station. NBC10 Philadelphia.
Retrieved from http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com
McFedries, P. (2003). Mobs R Us. Spectrum, IEEE, 40(10), 56-56. doi:
10.1109/mspec.2003.1235629
Osterheldt, J. (2011, August 19). It will take more than a curfew to fix the Plaza problem, The
Kansas City Star. Retrieved from http://www.kansascity.com
Palfrey, J., & Gasser, U. (2008). Born digital: Understanding the first generation of digital
natives. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Pelling, E., & White, K. (2009). The theory of planned behavior applied to young peoples use of
social networking Web sites. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12, 755759.
Shmuelli, S. (2003, August 8). 'Flash mob' craze spreads. CNN Tech. Retrieved from
http://articles.cnn.com/2003-08-04/tech/flash.mob_1_flash-mob-mails-e-mails?_s=PM:TECH.
Solash, R. (2012, February). Digital innovation helps planning for Russian protest. Radio Free
Europe documents and publications.
Solecki, S., & Goldschmidt, K. (2011). Adolescents texting and twittering: The flash mob
phenomena. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 26(2), 167-169. doi: 10.1016/j.pedn.2010.12.013
Solis, B. (2011). Engage: The Complete Guide to Brands and Businesses to Build, Cultivate, and
Measure Success in the New Web. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
40

Strauss, A. C., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures
for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tajfel, H. (1981). Human Groups and Social Categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Urbina, I. (2010, March 24). Mobs are born as word grows by text message, The New York
Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com
Valenzuela, S. & Park, N. & Kee, K.F. (2009). Is there social capital in a social network site?:
Facebook use and college students life satisfaction, trust, and participation. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 875-901.
Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2008). Adolescents identity experiments on the Internet:
Consequences for social competence and self-concept unity. Communication Research, 35(2),
208-231.
Valkenburg P.M., Schouten, A.P., Peter, J. (2005). Adolescents identity experiments on the
Internet. New Media & Society, 7, 383402.
Vendel, C., & Smith, J. (2010, April 13). KC police brace for return of unruly youths to Plaza.
The Kansas City Star. Retrieved from http://www.kansascity.com
Wasik, B. (March 2006). My crowd, or, Phase 5: A report from the inventor of the flash mob.
Harper's Magazine: 56-66.
Wasik, B. (2011, December 16). #Riot: Self-organized, hyper-networked revoltsComing to a
city near you. Wired. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com
Zeitz, K. M., Tan, H. M., & Zeitz, C. J. (2009). Crowd behavior at mass gatherings: A literature
review. Prehospital Disast Med, 24(1), 3238.
Zullig, K. J., & Teoli, D. A. (2011). Evaluating brief measure of social self-efficacy among U.S.
adolescents. Psychological Reports, 109, 3, 907-920.

41

Appendix A: Focus Group Questions


Thank you for spending time with us today.
We are here to get your opinion on what youth flash mobs are and why they happen. We are also
interested in your thoughts on what can be done to limit any problems resulting from youth flash
mobs.
We are interested in your opinions because over the last couple of years there have been issues
associated with youth flash mobs in Kansas City. So we want to get your perspective on these
issues.
We have created some questions about these topics to ask you.
We are interested in everyones opinion. There are no right or wrong answers.
We will be conducting several groups like these around the Kansas City area.
We will spend about 1 hour talking together today. As you know from the consent form, we are
recording our conversation today. The tape of todays conversation will be transcribed so that
we can understand the main themes that occur in all the groups we meet with. We will only use
first names during todays conversation and we will not use any names in any reports that are
based on the conversations like the one we are having today.
We ask that everything discussed today remains confidential (stays in the room) so that everyone
feels comfortable about talking. Can we agree that you wont tell anyone what people say today?
We want everyone to feel comfortable talking in this group today and we want to keep everything
you say confidential. However, there are some things that we have to report if we find out about
them. If you have information about a crime that occurred during a youth flash mob, for
example, and you tell us about this during our conversation today we would have to report that.
In other words we cannot keep something like that secret. So, information like that should
probably not be shared in the group. If you want to discuss sensitive information like that with
us, lets find a time to talk about it after our group conversation. OK?
Are there any questions?
OK, lets start.

1. Lets go around the table and introduce each person. Tell us your first name and also tell us
what you like best about being part of <<this group>>.

42

2. When you're planning to go out, walk me through how you arrange to meet with your
friends.
a. Do you use your phone?
b. Facebook?
c. Twitter?
3. Are you familiar with the term flash mob?
a. How would you define it?
4. Have you been at any local events that you would describe as a flash mob?
a. If so, why?
b. If not, why not?
5. Are there a lot of flash mobs around Kansas City?
a. Where do flash mobs occur?
b. Are there places you can go where you know there will NOT be any flash mobs?
6. Are flash mobs a popular thing for teenagers in Kansas City to do?
7. Why do you think people participate in flash mobs?
8. Are there ever any problems at flash mobs?
a. Why do problems occur at flash mobs?
b. What can be done to prevent these problems from happening?
9. Is there anything else we should have asked about flash mobs that we didnt ask?
a. Is there anything else you want to tell us about flash mobs in Kansas City?
Thank you for your time today. We appreciate you talking with us.
###

43

Appendix B: Survey Questions


Thank you for your interest in this study. Please select only one answer for each question, unless
otherwise specified.

Q1. How frequently do you use each of the following to arrange meet-ups with your friends?
1-Not at
All

7-Almost
Always

Email
Facebook
Speaking in person
MySpace
Speaking by phone
Text message
Twitter
Q2. On an average weekday, how much time do you spend on each of the following sites?
Not at all

Less than
an hour

1 hour
less than 3
hours

3 hours
less than 5
hours

5 hours or
more

Facebook
Foursquare
MySpace
Twitter
YouTube
Q3. On an average weekend day, how much time do you spend on each of the following sites?
Not at all

Less than
an hour

1 hour
less than 3
hours

3 hours
less than 5
hours

5 hours or
more

Facebook
Foursquare
MySpace
Twitter
YouTube

44

Q4. Below is a list of reasons people give for using social networking sites like Facebook and
Twitter. Please indicate how important each reason is for your own use of social networking
sites.
1-Not
important at
all

7Extremely
important

To pass time
To learn things outside
school
To swap news with
friends
To communicate with
friends
To help myself feel
better when I am down
I feel treated better
online than offline
Q5. Are you familiar with the term flash mob? If your answer is no, please go to Q12.
Yes

No

Q6. Which of the following adjectives do you think best describes a flash mob?
Fun

Organized

OutofControl

Random

Spontaneous

Violent

Q7. Have you ever participated in a flash mob?


Yes

No

Q8. Have any of your friends participated in a flash mob?


Yes

No

Don'tKnow

Q9. How likely do you think you are to participate in a flash mob in the future?
1-Not very
likely

7-Certain

45

Q10. How frequently do you use each of the following to get information about upcoming flash
mobs?
1-Not at
All

7-Almost
Always

Email
Facebook
In Person
MySpace
Phone call
Text message
Twitter
Q11. People say youth participate in flash mobs for a variety of reasons. Which of the following
do you think is a reason for why youth participate in flash mobs? Pease check all that apply.
Boredom
To gain attention
To express themselves
Peer pressure
To hang out with friends To make new friends
To be musical
No particular reason
Other ___________________ (Please Specify)
Q12. Please indicate how often you use the following sources to get information about things to
do in Kansas City.
1-Not at
All

7-Almost
Always

Social networking sites like


Facebook and Twitter
Other Internet sites
Newspaper
Radio
Television
Friends
Family
Church
School
City/youth/community
centers

46

Q13. How important is each of these factors in your decision to choose a place to hang out with
your friends?
1-Not
important at
all

7-Extremely
important

The place has something to


do (e.g., see a movie or go
bowling)
The place has somewhere to
eat
The place is safe
The place has stores to shop
at
The place has other people I
want to see
The place is easy to get to
The place works well for
parties
Q14. How safe do you feel walking around at night in each of the following areas?
1-Not
safe at
all

7Extremely
safe

Not
applicable

Country Club
Plaza
Crown Center
My
Neighborhood
Sprint Center
Local Clubs
The View
Public Parks

47

Q15. When you consider the safety of a place you might hang out, how important is each of the
following?
1-Not important
at all

7-Extremely
important

I can trust people in the


area or at the event
I often see police patrol the
area
I know security guards
monitor the area
My friends assure me the
area is safe
I never had any problems
there before
Events are organized by
trustworthy organizations
Q16. How often do you visit the Country Club Plaza in Kansas City?
1-Never

2-About
once
a month

3-About
twice a
month

4-Almost
every week

5-Several
times a week

6-Almost
every day

Q17. What time of the day do you usually visit the Country Club Plaza?
Before 4pm

4pm-before
7pm

7pm-9pm

After
9pm

Q18. Please indicate how important each of the following reasons is for you to visit the Country
Club Plaza.
1-Not important
at all

7-Extremely
important

Shopping
Eating
Walking around
Partying
Watching a movie
Feeling of belonging to a
higher social status

48

Q19. Who do you usually go to the Country Club Plaza with? Check all that apply.
By myself
Friends
Family
Other ______________________ (Please Specify)
Q20. The following are some suggestions for making Kansas City a better place for people like
you. Please indicate how important you think each of the following is.
1-Not
important at
all

7-Extremely
important

Opening more community/youth


centers
Improving public transportation
Opening more movie theaters
Opening more bowling alleys
Opening more restaurants and malls
Making the places we have now safer
Building new sports facilities (e.g.,
College Basketball Experience)
Building new entertainment facilities
(e.g., a venue for underground
rappers and talent shows)
Q21. Where do you like to see the services you chose in the previous question (Q20) to be
implemented? Please check all that apply.
Within walking distance of my house
Country Club Plaza
One a public transportation route
Near my school
Other ___________________________ (Please Specify)

49

Q22. Please answer each of the following questions.


1-Not at
All

7-Very
Well

How well can you express your opinions when


other classmates disagree with you?
How well can you become friends with other
people your age?
How well can you have a chat with an
unfamiliar person?
How well can you work in harmony with your
classmates?
How well can you tell other people your age that
they are doing something that you dont like?
How well can you tell a funny story to a group
your age?
How well do you succeed in staying friends with
people your age?
How well do you succeed in preventing quarrels
with other people your age?
Q23. Please indicate how much you agree with each of the following statements.
1Strongly
disagree

7Strongly
agree

1Strongly
disagree

7Strongly
agree

I am a worthy member of the groups or


organizations I belong to.
I often regret that I belong to some of the
groups or organizations I do.
Overall, my groups or organizations are
considered good by others.
Overall, my group or organization
memberships have very little to do with how I
feel about myself.
I feel I dont have much to offer to the groups
or organizations I belong to.
In general, I am glad to be a member of the
groups or organizations I belong to.

50

Most people consider my groups or


organizations, on the average, to be more
ineffective than other groups or organizations.
The groups or organizations I belong to are an
important reflection of who I am.
I am a cooperative participant in the groups or
organizations I belong to.
Overall, I often feel that the groups or
organizations of which I am a member are not
worthwhile.
In general, others respect the groups or
organizations that I am a member of.
The groups or organizations I belong to are
unimportant to my sense of what kind of a
person I am.
I often feel I am a useless member of my
groups or organizations.
In general, others think that the groups or
organizations I am a member of are unworthy.
In general, belonging to groups or
organizations is an important part of my self
image.
Q24. In what year were you born? ________________
Q25. What is your gender?
Male
Female

Q26. What is your current level of education?


Middleschoolstudent
Highschoolstudent
Collegestudent
Collegegraduate

Other_____________________________________(PleaseSpecify)

51

Q27. How would you describe your race/ethnicity?


AfricanAmerican
Asian/PacificIslanders
Caucasian/White
Latino
MiddleEastern
NativeAmerican

Other_____________________________________(PleaseSpecify)

Q28. How would you describe your households socio-economic status?


Workingclass
Middleclass
Uppermiddleclass
Upperclass

Q29. Please enter your zipcode: ________________


Thank you for participating in this survey!

52

Appendix C: Survey Results


Table 1: Characteristics of Survey Participants
Variable
Value
Sex
Female
Male
Total
Education
High school student
Middle school student
College student/other
Total
Race/ethnicity
African American
Hispanic
Caucasian
Asian/Pacific Islander
Other
Native American
Middle Easterner
Total
Socio-economic Middle class
status
Working class
Upper middle class
Upper class
Total

Count
163
77
240
218
15
10
243
128
58
37
7
7
2
1
240
130
73
32
6
241

Percent
67.9%
32.1%
100%
89.7%
6.2%
4.1%
100%
53.3%
24.2%
15.4%
2.9%
2.9%
.8%
.4%
100%
53.9%
30.3%
13.3%
2.5%
100%

Table 2: Use of Social Networking Sites

YouTube

Ranking
1

Facebook

Twitter

Not at all
Less than an hour
1 hour less than 3 hours
3 hour less than 5 hours
5 hours or more
Total
Not at all
Less than an hour
1 hour less than 3 hours
3 hour less than 5 hours
5 hours or more
Total
Not at all
Less than an hour
1 hour less than 3 hours
3 hour less than 5 hours
5 hours or more
Total

Average
weekday
Count
20
104
76
38
30
268
55
87
65
35
29
271
137
31
35
32
32
267

Percent
7.5%
38.8%
28.4%
14.2%
11.2%
100%
20.3%
32.1%
24%
12.9%
10.7%
100%
51.3%
11.6%
13.1%
12%
12%
100%

Average weekend
day
Count
Percent
32
11.9%
78
29.1%
71
26.5%
48
17.9%
39
14.6%
268
100%
62
23%
67
24.9%
61
22.7%
43
16%
36
13.4%
269
100%
139
52.3%
28
10.5%
33
12.4%
22
8.3%
44
16.5%
266
100%

53

Table 3: Reasons for Using Social Networking Sites


Variable

SD

To communicate with friends


To pass time
To learn things outside school
To feel better when they are down

4.99
3.80
3.45
2.57

1.86
1.96
1.97
1.93

265
266
266
267

Note. Respondents were asked to indicate on a 7-point scale (1 = not important at all, 7 = extremely important) how
important each of the reasons was for them to use social networking sites.

Table 4: Communication Methods for Meet-ups and Flash Mobs


Meet-ups
Flash Mobs
Variable
Ranking M
SD
N
Ranking M
Text messages
1
5.65
1.94
268
3
2.17
Speaking in person 2
5.44
1.62
269
2
2.19
Speaking by phone 3
4.74
1.86
268
4
1.67
Facebook
4
3.80
2.19
269
1
2.25
Twitter
5
2.70
2.35
267
5
1.59
Email
6
2.33
1.85
261
6
1.41

SD
2.09
1.97
1.61
2.15
1.50
1.14

N
170
172
170
172
171
171

Note. Respondents were asked to indicate on a 7-point scale (1 = never, 7 = almost always) how frequently they use
each of the communication methods to arrange meet-ups and to get information about upcoming flash mobs.

Table 5: Information Sources for Events in Kansas City


Medium

Source

Variable
Social Networking Sites
Television
Radio
Other Internet sites
Newspaper
Friends
Family
School
Church
City/youth centers

M
4.37
3.75
3.21
3.08
1.91
5.27
4.64
4.44
2.80
2.48

SD
2.22
2.12
1.91
2.08
1.42
1.84
2.05
2.06
2.02
2.01

N
260
257
256
258
255
260
256
259
243
259

Note. Respondents were asked to indicate on a 7-point scale (1 = never, 7 = almost always) how frequently they use
each source to get information about what to do in Kansas City.

54

Table 6: Choosing Places to Hang out


Variable
The place has something to do
(e.g., seeing a movie or bowling)
The place is easy to get to
The place is safe
The place has somewhere to eat
The place has other people I want to see
The place has stores to shop at
The place works well for parties

SD

5.28

1.84

247

5.23
5.18
5.11
4.71
4.40
3.92

1.81
2.00
1.85
2.06
2.01
2.17

244
245
246
246
245
237

Note. Respondents were asked to indicate on a 7-point scale (1 = not important at all, 7 = extremely important) how
important each factor was for them to choose a place to hang out with their friends.

Table 7: Perspectives on Security


Variable
I never had any problems there before
I can trust people in the area or at the event
Events are organized by trustworthy organizations
My friends assure the area is safe
I often see the police patrol the area
I know security guards monitor the area

M
5.27
5.13
4.80
4.39
4.37
4.33

SD
1.85
1.94
2.00
1.95
1.87
1.91

N
226
227
225
227
226
227

Note. Respondents were asked to indicate on a 7-point scale (1 = not important at all, 7 = extremely important) how
important each factor was when they consider the safety of a place they might hang out.

Table 8: Perceived Safety of Different Kansas City Areas


Variable
M
SD N
My neighborhood
4.35
2.20 248
Crown Center
4.35
2.42 247
Spring Center area
4.05
2.50 244
Country Club Plaza
3.88
2.47 247
Public parks
3.42
2.15 246
Local clubs
2.64
2.16 247
Note. Respondents were also asked to indicate on a 7-point scale (1 = dont feel safe at all, 7 = feel extremely safe)
how safe they feel in different parts of Kansas City at night.

Table 9: Reasons for Visiting the Country Club Plaza


Variable
M
SD
Eating
4.71 2.09
Shopping
4.61 2.17
Walking around
4.60 2.13
Watching a movie
4.42 2.22
Partying
3.02 2.13
Feeling of belonging to a higher social status
2.48 1.99

N
232
236
234
236
232
234

Note. Respondents were asked to indicate a 7-point scale (1 = not important at all, 7 = extremely important) how
important each reason was for them to visit the Country Club Plaza.

55

Table 10: Preferred Time to Visit the Country Club Plaza


Variable
Count
Percent
7 - 9 pm
86
39.3%
4 - before 7 pm
69
31.5%
Before 4 pm
43
19.6%
After 9 pm
21
9.6%
Total
219
100%
Table 11: Perceptions of Flash Mobs
Variable
Familiarity with the term
flash mob

Value
Yes
No
Total

Count
170
90
260

Percent
65.4%
34.6%
100%

Adjectives that best describe


flash mobs

Fun
Random
Spontaneous
Organized
Out of control
Violent

45
40
36
26
15
11

26%
23.1%
20.8%
15%
8.7%
6.4%

Note. For adjectives that best describe flash mobs, respondents were asked to choose all that apply.

Table 12: Reasons for Participating in Flash Mobs


Variable
Count
To express themselves
98
To hang out with friends
86
Boredom
77
To gain attention
69
To make new friends
68
No particular reason
57
Peer pressure
35

Percent
35%
30.7%
27.5%
24.6%
24.3%
20.4%
12.5%

Note. Respondents were asked to choose all that apply.

56

Table 13: Likelihood to Participate in a Flash Mob in the Future


Value
Count
Percent
Very unlikely
58
33.1%
Unlikely
23
13.1%
Somewhat unlikely
10
5.7%
Undecided
17
9.7%
Somewhat likely
26
14.9%
Likely
10
5.7%
Very likely
31
17.1%
Total
175
100%
Note. 15.8% of the respondents (n = 28, N = 177) said they have participated in a flash mob and 29.9% (n = 53) said
their friends have participated in a flash mob.

Table 14: Zero-Order Bivariate Correlation Matrix


Flash mob participation
Social self-efficacy
Collective self-esteem
Need to belong
Time spent on social media

Flash mob
participation
1
.21**
.08
-.04
.02

Social selfefficacy

Collective
self-esteem

Need to
belong

1
.37**
-.02
.03

1
-.11
-.05

1
.29**

Note. *p .05, **p .01.

Table 15: Suggestions for Improving Kansas City for Teens


Variable
M
Make the places we have now safer
5.40
Build new entertainment facilities (e.g., a venue for
5.24
underground rappers or talent shows)
Build new sports facilities
5.00
(e.g., College Basketball Experience)
Improve public transportation
4.68
Open more community/youth centers
4.64
Open more movie theaters
4.63
Opening more bowling alleys
4.14

SD
1.91

N
242

2.03

243

2.06

245

2.03
2.07
2.07
2.09

246
246
245
244

Note. (i) Respondents were asked to indicate on a 7-point scale (1 = not important at all, 7 = extremely important)
how important each item was to make Kansas City a better place for teens. (ii) With regard to places where these
services need to be introduced, 48.6% (n = 136) of the respondents said within walking distance or short driving
distance of their house, 36.1% (n = 101) the Country Club Plaza, and 35% (n = 98) said on the public transportation
route. In an open-ended response, some suggested The Legends and Village West as desirable locations for those
services.

57

Kansas City Area Education Research Consortium


(913) 396-3214
Email: info@kcaerc.org
www.kcaerc.org/

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen