Final Research Paper

Impacts of Air Quality on Subjective Well-Being and Community Involvement Along the

Wasatch Front

Keyton Critchley, Madi Hancock, Tarynn Kerr, Hannah O’Briant, Kimberly Webb-Zimmerman

University of Utah

SOC 3480: Environmental Sociology

Dr. Lazarus Adua

15th December 2021

 2

Abstract

There is ample evidence supporting a negative correlation between poor air quality and mental

health. The research regarding air quality's impact on community involvement is minimal. We

aim to determine if previous research regarding air quality applies to individuals living along the

Wasatch Front in Utah. We also researched potential correlations between air quality and

community involvement. We gathered data on these topics through the utilization of a survey

tool. Data regarding subjective well-being, community involvement, and Air Quality Index were

analyzed using linear regression models. The data supports a potential correlation between AQI,

subjective well-being, and community involvement. The results analyzed indicate a need for

further research on these topics.

 3

Introduction

It is no question that global air quality is rapidly deteriorating. Cities everywhere are

seeing higher rates of emissions and pollution, resulting in worse air quality year after year. It

seems that Salt Lake City, Utah, is facing the brunt of those repercussions. According to the

World Population Review, Utah has the worst air quality in the United States, with an average

daily Air Quality Index of 51.2 (World Population Review, 2021). The air quality in Utah is not

only the worst in the nation; it is one of the worst in the world (World Population Review, 2021).

Salt Lake City often sits in the top five cities with the worst air quality, among Shanghai, Lahore,

Hangzhou, and Dhaka (Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment, 2020). By August of 2021,

Salt Lake City had topped the charts with the world's worst air quality on numerous occasions

(Maryon, 2021).

It is well known that poor air quality can lead to significant health implications. The

physical implications must be discussed, but the impacts of poor air quality go well beyond that.

Current research shows that poor air quality may have a direct, negative correlation on our

mental health and quality of life. This research is still limited, but the data we do have is

compelling. While global data is climbing, the research done on the population in Utah has

focused exclusively on the physical implications of air quality. We have not seen any research to

help us better understand how air quality has impacted Utahns mental health and community

involvement. Because the air quality along the Wasatch Front is often hazardous, we must

understand its holistic impacts - not just the physical ones.

We have created a survey tool to help us bridge this gap and better understand the

impacts of air quality on subjective well-being. We also hope to uncover a potential association

between air quality and community involvement. We have asked participants to evaluate their
 4

subjective well-being and levels of community involvement. We have also requested that they

provide their zip code so this data can be analyzed against the air quality in their area.

We seek to better understand the relationship between air quality index, subjective well-

being, and community involvement. We hope that in demonstrating the mental implications of

poor air quality, we will draw more attention to this issue. If we can increase our understanding

and public knowledge, it is possible that others will begin working towards therapeutic

interventions to help combat these issues. Until then, they will remain persistent, unaddressed,

and unsolved.

We often assume that emissions are the primary cause of poor air quality. While emission

rates in Salt Lake City are high, they are not the only contributor to the poor air quality that is

devastating the Wasatch Front. The landscape of Salt Lake City itself perpetuates the poor air

initially caused by pollutants (Call, 2020). Historically, this has primarily created issues in the

winter when cold air traps pollutants in the air close to the ground (Utah Department of

Environmental Quality, 2021). Unfortunately for Utahns, this problem is no longer isolated to

the winter months. Wildfires in the West are propelling issues with poor air well into the

summer, and those living along the Wasatch Front are now coping with dangerous air quality

year-round (Nielsen & Nguyen, 2021).

The poor air quality creates a grim prognosis for many Salt Lake City residents. In a city

that has never met federal attainment goals for PM 2.5 pollution, over 600,000 people face

severe risks for heart disease and lung diseases like lung cancer, asthma, and COPD (Purple Air

& AirNow, 2021). Nearly 450 deaths are primarily attributed to the poor air quality in Salt Lake

City annually (Purple Air & AirNow, 2021). While the physical repercussions of the poor air

quality are dire, the consequences do not stop there. Significant research supports the idea that
 5

poor air quality decreases subjective well-being and increases the risk for psychopathologies. It

is becoming ever more apparent that poor air quality leads to deteriorating mental health in

individuals and reduces community involvement.

Review of the Current Literature

Being exposed to poor air quality daily, as Salt Lake City residents are, has been found to

have long-term implications that lower individual life satisfaction and subjective well-being

(Zhang et al., 2017). One study found that simply living in an area with poor air quality

decreases an individual's subjective well-being by 0.17 points on the standard SWB self-report

scale (Orru et al., 2016). This influence has been seen through an increased rate of

psychopathologies in areas with poor air quality (Buoli et al., 2018), higher suicide rates and

suicidal ideation (Heo et al., 2021), and increased utilization of mental health services (Newbury

et al., 2021). These implications of poor air quality remain statistically significant when we

account for social factors, such as gender, race, social class, and population density (Sass et al.,

2017).

Exposure to certain particulates may further exacerbate these impacts. PM 10, PM 2.5,

and NOx have proven to be more detrimental to mental health than other forms of air pollution

(Heo et al., 2021). PM 2.5 is the leading air pollutant in Salt Lake City, and PM 10 and NOx

contribute heavily to the city's poor air quality (Call, 2020). Constant exposure to these

emissions put Utahns at significant risk.

Various longitudinal regression studies and prospective cohort studies indicate that living

in cities with poor air quality can heavily contribute to various psychopathologies. Depression is

the most significantly implicated, but we have also seen evidence that poor air quality can

contribute to anxiety, autism, and ADHD (Buoli et al., 2018) and even mood or psychotic
 6

disorders like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder (Newbury et al., 2021). Longitudinal twin

studies further support the idea that these psychopathologies develop due to air quality (Ruben et

al., 2021).

The onset of such psychopathologies is not to be taken lightly. Mental illness can often

have dire consequences if it goes untreated or is poorly managed. Suicide rates have increased

drastically in the last century, and suicide is now the 10th leading cause of death in the United

States (American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, 2021). Over 48,000 Americans died in

2020 due to suicide, and it’s estimated that 90% of those individuals had a diagnosed mental

illness (American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, 2021). Mental illness alone poses a

significant predisposition for suicide. One study conducted by Heo et al., (2021) found that

constant exposure to poor air quality, specifically PM 10, PM 2.5, and NO2 compound with that

existing risk, and further contribute to the risk of suicide or suicidal ideation.

Research also indicates that air quality does not only affect those who are already coping

with such disorders. Living in an area where you are constantly exposed to poor air quality can

lead to the development or onset of psychopathologies that one did not previously have (Buoli et

al., 2018). PM 2.5 in particular may be chiefly implicated in their development (Buoli et al.,

2018). A longitudinal twin study conducted by Ruben et al (2021) suggests that these onsets

cannot solely be attributed to genetic factors alone. Their study further supports the idea that

these psychopathologies develop due to air quality (Ruben et al., 2021).

Living with psychopathologies has a significant impact on the subjective and functional

well-being of individuals. Those with good or fair mental health are 2.35 times more likely to

self-report higher life satisfaction and subjective well-being than those with poor mental health

or psychological disorders (Lombardo et al., 2018, 342). These impacts go beyond an individual
 7

level. Increased psychopathologies and decreased subjective well-being impact our communities

at large as well.

Community involvement can significantly benefit individuals coping with poor mental

health (Bowe et al., 2021). However, those with mental illness tend to draw away from their

local communities, propelling themselves further into isolation (Gonzales et al., 2018). As rates

of psychiatric disturbances increase in a community, we see the rates of community involvement

drop as well (Gonzales et al., 2018).

Poor air quality does not only impact individuals with psychopathologies; it can impact

even those with superb mental health. When the air quality is poor, people are encouraged to stay

inside and avoid outdoor activity whenever possible. Some high-risk individuals are advised to

avoid leaving their homes at all (Call, 2020). When people do not have the opportunities to

safely interact in their local communities, involvement rates sharply decline.

Methods

Study Design

We conducted a retrospective cohort study to see if previous findings apply to the

population along the Wasatch Front. Participants were asked to complete a self-report survey

serviced by GoogleForms (see Appendix A). We asked individuals to report on their subjective

well-being and community involvement in the week leading up to survey completion and as a

whole. Survey participants provided their zip codes, which were used to obtain data regarding

the air quality in their area. Similar self-report survey tools are the most commonly used data

collection method in research concerning subjective well-being and community involvement.

Sample
 8

We gathered information from 102 individuals living along the Wasatch Front. We

limited our sample to those living along the Wasatch front to determine if previous research can

be generalized to people living in this region. We obtained consent through a survey question

informing the participants that their information would be used for research purposes (see

Appendix A).

We recruited participants through convenience and snowball sampling methods.

Questions regarding participants' age, sex, race, sexual orientation, or other demographics were

not included. The lack of this information and the use of non-probability-based sampling makes

it impossible to determine if the cohort is representative of the population. Because of this, the

survey data is not generalizable to the overall population. Even so, results concurrent with

previous studies will indicate a need for further research that will be more generalizable to the

population along the Wasatch Front.

Measures

Air Quality Index

Air-Quality Index is the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) index measure to

report and evaluate air quality in a given area. The index runs from 0-500. The higher the score

on the AQI, the poorer the air quality in a given region. Information regarding AQI is publically

available through the EPA database (Air Quality Index Report | US EPA, 2021). We utilized the

EPAs website to determine the annual average AQI of a given zip code. To evaluate potential

changes in well-being, we utilized AirNow.gov (2021). This tool, which gathers its information

on the Air Quality Index directly from the EPA, allowed for calculations of the average AQI of a

given zip code over the seven days up to and including the survey response date.

Subjective Well-Being
 9

Subjective well-being is a measurement of how satisfied or dissatisfied an individual is

with their life. To evaluate subjective well-being, we asked participants a simple question, "All

things considered, how satisfied are you with your life these days?" This question was derived

from the Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener et al., 1985), one of the most common

methodologies used by psychologists to assess subjective well-being (see Appendix B). We

asked participants to evaluate their satisfaction with life as a whole and the week leading up to

taking the survey. This analysis of current subjective well-being is a dependent value, which we

believe is directly impacted by air quality.

Community Involvement

In this paper, we refer to community involvement as an individual's perceived

involvement in their local community. Community involvement has been used as an umbrella

term to encompass individual involvement in social events, extracurricular activities, volunteer

work, and similar activities. We asked individuals to assess their community involvement as a

whole and over the seven days leading up to the completion of the survey. We then analyzed the

assessment of involvement over the previous week as a dependent variable, influenced by air

quality.

Individual Interpretation

We included a five-point scale, similar to the scales used to assess subjective well-being

and community involvement, to analyze individual interpretation of air quality impacts. We

asked survey participants to evaluate their beliefs regarding the impacts of air quality on their

subjective well-being and community involvement. These questions have been included to

understand the perceived impacts of air quality and will be used to contrast interpretation with

the data collected.

 10

Statistical Analyses

In order to quantify and statistically analyze our results, we converted survey responses

into numerical measures scaling from 1 to 5. On the subjective well-being scale, 1 was equated

with being very dissatisfied, and 5 was very satisfied. Regarding community involvement, no

involvement was associated with a 1, and significant involvement was associated with 5. This

data was then compiled against air quality data provided publicly by the EPA.

We utilized linear regression models to evaluate the correlation between air quality,

subjective well-being, and community involvement. The annual AQI data and overall self-report

scores were separated from the data referencing the week of survey completion. Their

information was separated as well. We ran separate linear equations for the annual and weekly

data sets. Twenty-one survey participants were experiencing better-than-average air quality for

their area at the time of survey completion. These equations were evaluated with and without

their information. This information was used to determine the statistical correlation between the

three variables.

Individual perceptions regarding air quality impacts were analyzed through the use of

cross-tabulation. We utilized graphs to analyze and compare changes in reported well-being and

community involvement; these were then used to calculate significant changes to either score.

Results

The majority of participants indicated that they believe poor air quality directly

negatively influences their well-being and levels of community involvement. 80.2% of

respondents stated that they believe poor air quality directly impacts their subjective well-being.

Likewise, the majority stated that poor air quality negatively impacts their community

involvement. 68.7% reported that air quality has a significant or slight impact on how involved
 11

they are in their local communities (see Figure 1). We can see from these results that Utahns

generally do believe that the air quality directly impacts them regardless of statistical

applicability.

Figure 1

Perceived Impacts of Air Quality

Note. This cross-tabulation represents individual respondents' interpretation of how drastically

air quality impacts their levels of community involvement and subjective well-being.

Initial analysis based on percentages did not indicate a strong correlation between

subjective well-being and air quality. The majority of respondents did not report any changes in

their subjective well-being over the past week. There was no change in reported subjective-well

being for 55.56% of the 81 participants experiencing poorer air quality than the average. 30.86%

of those individuals did show a decrease in their self-reported quality of life. On average, those

who did report lower subjective well-being scores showed a reduced quality of life by .96 points

(see Figure 2). Surprisingly, our initial analysis showed a stronger correlation between poor air

quality and community involvement. 50.62% of survey participants reported that their levels of

community involvement were lower than average on the week they took the survey (see Figure

3).

Figure 2

Subjective Well-Being Rating Comparison

 12

Note. This graph compares participants' overall reported level of subjective well-being with the

current weekly rating of subjective well-being.

Figure 3

Community Involvement Rating Comparison

Note. This graph compares participants' overall reported level of community involvement with

the current weekly rating of community involvement.

 13

We ran multiple linear regressions to evaluate the statistical significance and found a

strong correlation between all variables that have been presented. The analysis of the weekly

data, as shown in figure 4, depicts a clear, negative correlation between all three variables. As air

quality decreased, respondents consistently reported lower subjective well-being and community

involvement. The correlation between air quality and subjective well-being over the given week

was more substantial than that of community involvement. However, the correlation between

community involvement and air quality remains statistically significant. Weekly results that

included those experiencing better-than-average air quality were not statistically significant.

Figure 4

Weekly Air Quality Index, Subjective Well-Being, and Community Involvement

Note. This figure depicts the weekly average air quality in respondents given zip-code based on

information provided by the EPA. It is correlated with their self-reported levels of subjective

well-being (1- extremely dissatisfied, 10- extremely satisfied) and their self-reported levels of

community involvement (1- not involved, 10- significantly involved). The latter variables were

evaluated over the week prior to survey completion.

 14

When assessed using the annual data, the correlation between the variables was not as

strong as the weekly data. Even so, this analysis did show a moderate negative correlation, as

shown in Figure 5. Though the correlation coefficient has significantly decreased when

evaluating the annual data, it still suggests a relationship between air quality, subjective well-

being, and community involvement. Unlike the weekly analysis, the annual data collection

indicates that air quality may have a more significant impact on community involvement than it

does subjective well-being. This analysis includes the data provided by individuals who did not

experience worse air quality when they participated in the study. Results that did not include

these individuals did not show a statistically significant difference compared to the data

presented here.

Figure 5

Annual Air Quality Index, Subjective Well-Being, and Community Involvement

Note. This figure depicts the annual average air quality in respondents given zip-code based on

information provided by the EPA. It is correlated with their self-reported levels of subjective
 15

well-being (1- extremely dissatisfied, 10- extremely satisfied) and their self-reported levels of

community involvement (1- not involved, 10- significantly involved).

Discussion and Conclusions

We have recently seen increased scientific attention dedicated to understanding how our

environmental circumstances may impact our quality of life. The current literature is expanding

from focusing only on how environmental degradation affects our physical health and is

analyzing the relationship between environmental vulnerabilities and our emotional or mental

well-being. This paper utilized survey data collection methods and linear regression analysis to

evaluate the potential relationship between subjective well-being, community involvement, and

air quality. The information that we gathered supports our hypothesis that subjective well-being

and community involvement are negatively impacted by the poor air quality along the Wasatch

Front.

Our study supports the rapidly growing body of research surrounding air quality and

subjective well-being. We found a direct and distinct negative correlation between the two and

showed that those living in areas with poorer air quality generally experience a lower level of life

satisfaction. Furthermore, we showed that even a brief decrease in air quality can result in a

decrease in quality of life. These findings are congruent with similar research done on other

demographics in other parts of the world. We are not currently aware of any studies analyzing a

link between community involvement and air quality. The research shown here supports the idea

that the two may be correlated and shows a need for further research on this matter.

It is important to note that subjective well-being and community involvement are closely

intertwined. Multiple studies have shown that positive community engagement and social

interaction directly improve mental health and overall well-being (Michalski et al., 2020). While
 16

these results were analyzed independently, they may have a confounding relationship that was

not pulled apart through our analysis. Further research is required to better support the

correlation we have demonstrated here.

Other confounding variables were not considered that may impact our results. We did not

adjust our analysis for factors outside of air quality that may impact either dependent variable.

Future research can address possible confounders like health status or economic hardships by

considering them and adjusting self-report data. The research presented here is limited due to a

short research period. Future studies would likely benefit from a more longitudinal approach.

Following participants for a year or more and collecting data throughout that period would likely

provide us with a better understanding of how these variables are correlated.

Despite these possible confounders, one variable remains unaffected. Most individuals

living along the Wasatch Front believe that poor air directly impacts their quality of life, both in

subjective well-being and community involvement. The cognitive impacts of air quality are not

silent. These effects are salient and felt by many individuals. The smog and smoke surrounding

us does not quietly chip away at our well-being; its influence is forceful and well recognized.

We have seen through this analysis that the poor air quality is directly impacting

individuals along the Wasatch Front. The air quality in this region is progressively getting worse

(Bartlett, 2021): This is not an issue that is simply going to disappear. We need to direct further

resources to help better our understanding of this correlation. In doing so, we will be empowered

to help create solutions to overcome the psychological consequences associated with our

deteriorating air quality.

 17

References

AirNow. (2021). AirNow.gov. http://airnow.gov

Air Quality Index Report | US EPA. (2021). US Environmental Protection Agency.

https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/air-quality-index-report

Bartlett, I. (2021, November 1). Utah's air quality is getting worse: 6 tips to help reduce

pollution. ABC4 Utah. https://www.abc4.com/gtu/gtu-sponsor/utahs-air-quality-is-

getting-worse-6-tips-to-help-reduce-pollution/

Bowe, M., Wakefield, J. R.H., Kellezi, B., Stevenson, C., McNamara, N., Jones, B. A.,

Sumich, A., & Heym, N. (2021). The mental health benefits of community helping

during crisis: Coordinated helping, community identification and sense of unity during

the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Community & Applied Psychology, 1-15.

Buoli, M., Grassi, S., Caldiroli, A., Carnevali, G. S., Mucci, F., Iodice, S., Cantone, L.,

Pregoli, L., & Bollati, V. (2018, September). Is there a link between air pollution and

mental disorders? Environmental International, 118, 154-168.

Call, B. (2020, November 25). Understanding the sources and causes of Utah's air

pollution. Utah Department of Environmental Quality. Retrieved December 4, 2021, from

https://deq.utah.gov/communication/news/featured/understanding-utahs-air-quality

Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life

scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75.

Gonzales, L., Yanos, P. T., Stefancic, A., Alexander, M. J., & Harney-Delehanty, B.

(2018, September 15). The role of neighborhood factors and community stigma in

predicting community participation among persons with psychiatric disabilities.

Psychiatric Services, 69(1), 76-83.

 18

Heo, S., Lee, W., & Bell, M. L. (2021). Suicide and associations with air pollution and

ambient temperature: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of

Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(14), 7699.

Maryon, L. (2021, August 21). Worst air in the world? Salt Lake City, Utah. Liberation

News. https://www.liberationnews.org/worst-air-in-the-world-salt-lake-city-utah/

Michalski, C. A., Diemert, L. M., Helliwell, J. F., Goel, V., & Rosella, L. C. (2020,

December). Relationship between sense of community belonging and self-rated health

across life stages. SSM - Population Health, 12.

Newbury, J. B., Stewart, R., Fisher, H. L., Beevers, S., Dajnak, D., Broadbent, M.,

Pritchard, M., Shiode, N., Heslin, M., Hammoud, R., Hotopf, M., Hatch, S. L., Mudway,

I. S., & Bakolis, I. (2021). Association between air pollution exposure and mental health

service use among individuals with first presentations of psychotic and mood disorders:

Retrospective cohort study. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 1-8.

Nguyen, R., & Nielsen, E. (2021, August 25). IN FOCUS Discussion: Growth in Utah

(Air Quality).

https://www.abc4.com/news/infocus/in-focus-discussion-growth-in-utah-air-

quality/

Orru, K., Orru, H., & Ainsaar, M. (2016). Well-being and environmental quality: Does

pollution affect life satisfaction? Quality of Life Research: An International Journal of

Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care & Rehabilitation, 25(3), 699-705.

Purple Air & AirNow. (2021, October 14). Salt Lake City Air Quality Index (AQI) and

Utah Air Pollution | AirVisual. IQAir. https://www.iqair.com/us/usa/utah/salt-lake-city

 19

Ruben, A., Arseneault, L., Beddows, A., Beevers, S. D., Moffitt, T. E., Ambler, A.,

Latham, R. M., Newbury, J. B., Odgers, C. L., Schaefer, J. D., & Fisher, H. L. (2021).

Association of air pollution exposure in childhood and adolescence with psychopathology

at the transition to adulthood. JAMA Open, 4(4).

Utah Department of Environmental Quality. (2021, May 21). Inversions - Utah Department of

Environmental Quality. Utah Department of Environmental Quality.

https://deq.utah.gov/air-quality/inversions

Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment. (2020, September 14). SLC – Ranked

Among the Worst Globally for Air Quality – Utah Physicians for Healthy Environment.

Utah Physicians for Healthy Environment. https://www.uphe.org/2020/09/14/slc-ranked-

among-the-worst-globally-for-air-quality/

World Population Review. (2021). Air Quality by State 2021. World Population Review.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/air-quality-by-state

Zhang, X., Zhang, X., & Chen, X. (2017, September). Happiness in the air: How does a

dirty sky affect mental health and subjective well-being? Journal of Environmental

Economics and Management, 85, 81-84.

 20

Appendix A

Copy of Survey Tool

21
22
23
 24

Appendix B

Copy of Satisfaction with Life Scale

25