Diversity Aspects of Life Quality in Urban Communities as Perceived by Urban Youth

Quality of life is a problem that is often discussed by various researchers in line with the increasing population in the city today. This different concept of quality of life caused significant changes in the study of quality of life. Thus, this study aims to examine the quality of life from the perspective of youth by involving gender and ethnic differences in the city of Kuala Lumpur. This study involves the analysis of five components of quality of life, namely satisfaction with physical facilities, personal well-being, family happiness, social harmony and financial management. This study uses quantitative study design using survey method. A total of 2400 youths were selected using the stratified random sampling method. The instrument of this study is a questionnaire that has been adapted and has been referred to several experts to determine the validity of criteria, content and language. A pilot study was conducted and showed the items were at a high level of reliability with Cronbach Alpha values of 0.853 to 0.946. The findings show that there is no significant difference in quality of life for all aspects based on gender. Nevertheless, there are significant differences in quality of life based on ethnicity. The findings also show that there is no significant interaction effect between gender and ethnicity of quality of life for all aspects. Every planning that involves youth development as well as improving the quality of life, multi-ethnic factors need to be taken into account to ensure that this program can be used by all youths.


Introduction
Quality of life is a problem that is often discussed by various researchers in line with the increasing population in the city today. In discussing quality of life, one of the problems that is often raised is the network of quality of life that can form the desired life in urban areas (Azahan Awang, 2006). This is in line with Azahan's (2007) statement which argues that quality of life is not only a measure of the existing environment, but also evaluated from the aspect of self-readiness of urban residents as well as access to the environment provided in the city.
Discussions related to the quality of life of urban dwellers have attracted the attention of recent researchers (Burc et al., 2001;Thumboo et al., 2002;Brown, 2002;Hollander & Staatsen, 2002;Henderson, 2002;Raphael et al., 2001 ). However, the discussion of these studies only focuses on research areas such as health, environment, relationship with the environment, housing and others. According to Ferrer (2004), different perceptions related to quality of life influence various existing quality of life concepts. Carlsson et al., (2002) also added, this different concept of quality of life causes significant changes in the study of quality of life. Thus, this study aims to exaMeane the quality of life from the perspective of youth by involving gender and ethnic differences in the city of Kuala Lumpur.

Quality of Life Concept
Quality of life refers to a good life or living a high quality life (Ventegodt et al., 2003). Goldsmith (2005) defines quality of life as an individual's perception of satisfaction over a situation, environment and relationships with family and friends, work, income, neighborhood and residence.
The concept of quality of life has been developed since the middle of the last century (McCall, 2005;Ruževičius, 2012). According to Ruževičius (2012), quality of life is influenced by physical and mental health, level of freedom, social relations with the environment as well as other factors. The concept of quality of life of an individual is not the same because the characters and indicators are different from each other (Susnienė & Jurkauskas, 2009). Brown et al., (2004) also added that the quality of life depends not only on the age and health condition of a person, but also on the emotional and cognitive state as well as the social function of an individual. Costanza et al., (2007) discuss the quality of life by making a relationship between quality of life and opportunity, human needs and well-being. According to them, quality of life refers to human needs that can be met and can be measured objectively and subjectively. In this case, human needs refer to the basic needs for life, reproduction and safety. While well-being refers to the individual's perception of happiness, life satisfaction, utility and welfare.
A study involving a population in Norway found that women had a worse quality of life than men (Kazlauskaitė & Rėklaitienė, 2005). This study also looked at quality of life based on physical condition, education, emotions and family background and found that these factors make a significant contribution to quality of life. Some previous research has also studied quality of life from various perspectives such as psychology, medicine, economics, environmental science and sociology (Ventegodt, et al., 2003;Goldsmith, 2005;Costanza et al., 2007).

Research Purpose
This study aims to examine the quality of life from the perspective of youth by involving gender and ethnic differences in the city of Kuala Lumpur.

Research Context
This study involves the analysis of five components of quality of life, namely satisfaction with physical facilities, personal well-being, family happiness, social harmony and financial management. To answer the argument that has been raised, the city of Kuala Lumpur has been selected as a study area. The selection of Kuala Lumpur city is based on several criteria such as its location as the main and largest city in Malaysia.

Sample
The study respondents consisted of 2400 youths around Kuala Lumpur City. A total of 1123 people (46.8%) were male youths and 1277 people (53.2%) were female youths. A total of 1133 patients (47.2%) were youth wither and 1267 patients (52.8%) non-Malay youths. A total of 1424 people (59.3%) were youths aged 25 years and less, 744 people (31.0%) aged between 26 to 30 years and a total of 232 people (9.7%) youths aged 31 years and over. Samples were selected using a simple stratified random sampling method.

Instrument
This research instrument uses a questionnaire that has been adapted from the theory of Vendegodt et al., (2003) and the Kuala Hidup Malaysia Index (IKHM, 2010) as well as several previous studies such as the study of Juhari Ahmad (2018). This questionnaire has also been referred to several experts to assess the validity of the criteria, content and language. A pilot study was also conducted to deterMeane the reliability value and the findings of the pilot study showed that the item was at a high level of reliability with a Cronbach Alpha value of 0.853 to 0.946. This questionnaire is divided into several parts, namely: Part A Demographics (9 items); Part B Physical Facilities (10 items); Part C Personal Welfare (8 items); Part D Family Happiness (6 items), Part E Social Harmony (8 items) and Part F Financial Management (8 items).

Data Analysis
The data analysis of this study uses inferential statistics that refer to the Bilateral MANOVA analysis to identify differences in quality of life based on gender and ethnicity among urban youth. Prior to this analysis, the researchers first ascertained and confirmed whether there were multivariate outliers on the data based on the value of Mahalanobis Distances, conducted normality tests to deterMeane the distribution of items and homogeneity tests to deterMeane the homogeneity of the variants involved.

Findings
The quality of life variables consists of five aspects or sub-constructs namely satisfaction of physical facilities, personal well-being, family happiness, social harmony and financial management. A comparison of the five variables based on gender and ethnicity was made using the Two-Way MANOVA test.
Prior to the two-way MANOVA analysis, the researchers first deterMeaned and confirmed whether there were multivariate outliers on the data based on the value of Mahalanobis Distances. Value Mahalanobis Distances maximum obtained is 53.23. According to Pallant (2001), the maximum value of Mahalanobis Distances for three independent variables must not exceed 20.52. Thus, it was found that there are 33 respondents belong to multivariate outliers and released in this study. The actual analysis involved 2367 respondents.
Researchers also first deterMeane the homogeneity of the variance of covariance using Box's M test. This Box's M test is important to deterMeane whether the variance among the dependent variables is the same or vice versa, across all independent variables. This is an important pre-requisite for the MANOVA test. The MANOVA test assumes that the variance-covariance among the dependent variables is the same, across all independent variables (Hair et al. 2014). Table 1 shows the results of Box's M test.  Table 1, there was no significant variance-covariance among the dependent variables for all levels of the independent variables (F = 2.304, p = 0.001) (p <0.05). This means, the homogeneous dependent variable-covariance variants across all independent variables. The results of the Two-Way MANOVA analysis are as in Table 2.  Table 2, it is found that comparing the mean scores of satisfaction with physical facilities, personal well-being, family happiness, social harmony and financial management based on gender, Wilks' value λ = 0.997, F (4, 2359) = 1.550 and p = 0.171 (p> 0.05). For a comparison of mean scores of satisfaction with physical facilities, personal wellbeing, family happiness, social harmony and financial management based on ethnicity, Wilks' λ = 0.992, F (4, 2359) = 3.956 and p = 0.001 (p <0.05). As for the effect of interaction between gender and ethnicity on satisfaction with physical facilities, personal well-being, family happiness, social harmony and financial management, Wilks' λ = 0.997, F (4, 2359) = 1.576 and p = 0.166 (p> 0.05) .
Next, multiple ANOVA analysis was performed to see the difference in mean score for each dependent variable, namely satisfaction with physical facilities, personal well-being, family happiness, social harmony and financial management based on gender and ethnicity as an extension of the Two-Way MANOVA analysis. Tables 3 and 4, show the results of ANOVA analysis for the mean score differences of each dependent variable that is satisfaction with physical facilities, personal well-being, family happiness, social harmony and financial management based on gender and ethnicity.  Table 3, there was no significant difference in terms of knowledge in urban life (F (1, 2363) = 0.056, p = 0.812; p <0.025) based on gender. This means that knowledge in urban life among male and female youths is at the same level which is a moderate level (male mean = 3.490; female mean = 3.497). Table 3, there was no significant difference from satisfaction with physical facilities (F (1, 2363) = 0.562, p = 0.454; p> 0.025) based on gender. This means that satisfaction with physical facilities among male and female youths is at the same level which is a high level (mean of men = 3.665; mean of women = 3.687).

Based on
In terms of ethnicity as well, there was no significant difference in terms of satisfaction with physical facilities (F (1, 2363) = 4.839, p = 0.028; p> 0.025) based on ethnicity. This means the satisfaction of physical facilities among the Malay and non-Malay youths are at the same level of high level (mean malay = 3,644; non malay mean = 3,704).
Comparison of aspects of personal well-being based on gender, on the other hand, showed that there was no significant difference in terms of personal well-being based on gender (F (1,2363) = 0.374, p = 0.541; p> 0.25)). This means that personal well-being among male and female youths is at the same level which is at a moderate level (male mean = 3.598; female mean = 3.623).
Comparison of personal well-being based on race as well, showed that there was a significant difference in terms of self-well-being based on ethnicity (F (1, 2363) = 5.913, p = 0.015; p <0.025). This means well-being in the non-Malay youths (mean = 3.650) is higher than the well-being of youth Malay (mean = 3,568). However, the ethnic impact on youth well-being is small (eta square = 0.002) From the aspect of family happiness, it was found that there was no significant difference in terms of family happiness based on gender (F (1,2363) = 0.078, p = 0.780). This means that the happiness of the family among male and female youths is also at the same level which is at a high level (mean male = 3.937; mean female = 3.942).
In terms of ethnicity, it was also found that there was no significant difference in terms of family happiness (F (1,2363) = 2.328, p = 0.127; p> 0.025) based on ethnicity. This means happiness among youth living in the Malay and non-Malay youths are at the same level which is at a high level (mean malay = 3,968; non malay mean = 3,913).
In terms of social harmony, it was found that there is no significant difference in terms of social harmony based on gender (F (1,2363) = 0.055, p = 0.814. This means that social harmony among male and female youth is at the same level that is the level that high (male mean = 3.718; female mean = 3.729).
In terms of ethnicity, there are also significant differences in terms of social harmony (F (1,2363) = 5.318, p = 0.021; p <0.025)) based on ethnicity. Available social harmony among the youth non-Malays (mean = 3,755) is higher than the Malay youth (mean = 3,689).
In terms of financial management, there is no significant difference in terms of financial management based on gender (F (1,2363) = 2.482, p = 0.115. This means that financial management among male and female youth is at the same level which is a moderate level. (male mean = 3,609; female mean = 3.566).
In terms of ethnicity, there are also significant differences in terms of financial management (F (1,2363) = 1.929, p = 0.165; p> 0.025) based on ethnicity. This means that financial management among the Malay and non-Malay youths are on the same level with SS medium level (mean Malay = 3,565; mean non-Malays = 3,606).
Based on Table 4, there is also no significant interaction effect between gender and ethnicity on satisfaction with physical facilities (F (1,2367)

Discussions
In line with the results of a comparative study of quality of life conducted on the average youth with disabilities and the general population of Malaysia shows that there is no significant difference in quality of life between the sexes (Shamsul et al., 2013). This shows that as long as the youths get satisfaction in all aspects of quality of life, their shortcoMeangs are not an obstacle to the well-being of others. Atchley (2004) study states that high happiness and satisfaction of life is associated with high quality of life that is in terms of physical, psychological, social and environmental. This study is in line with previous studies showing that higher life satisfaction has been associated with happiness (Lambert et al., 2014) and self-esteem (Moksnes & Espnes, 2013) as well as positively with well-being (Yue et al. , 2014).
In terms of ethnicity, it shows that there is a difference between personal well-being, social harmony and financial management. It was found that well-being and social harmony among non-Malay youths are much higher than the Malay youth. For financial management showed Malay and other youth is at the same level of average level. Moreover, the results of a study from Yaya et al., (2019) also show low differences in health and happiness among various ethnicities but more clearly seen on gender. Young men show high health and happiness while life satisfaction is clearer among young women. High household income rates are positively associated with health and life satisfaction, but not with happiness. These findings highlight the need to prioritize the psychosocial needs of youths in planning their health and social well-being policies. The findings of this study show that the level of health and quality of life is closely related to financial ability as well as social support. In line with the findings of the Shamsul et al., (2013) conducted a study of youth with disabilities and youth normal indicating that there are significant differences between ethnic groups in the mental health domain in which the Malays have the highest score compared to Chinese and Indian. However, there were no significant differences in quality of life at different ages.
As for the aspect of physical convenience and family happiness shows there is no difference between ethnicities. In line with a study from Billson (2005) related to housing conditions and environment with well-being of 400 people among the low-income residents in urban areas around the Klang Valley, namely Kuala Lumpur, Shah Alam, Petaling Jaya and Klang who found a home environment that related to the physical condition of the house, the surrounding environment, the provision of public facilities has a significant relationship with the well-being of the community in terms of comfort, security, identity and social involvement. However, the findings of the study in terms of ethnicity show that the average respondents of various ethnicities and also of age stated that they are less satisfied with the environment in which they live. Based on Bretones and Gonzales (2011), quality of life assessment should include indoor and outdoor living is a comprehensive quality of life assessment because it takes into account the assessment that is objective and subjective. Objective because it can be measured such as thermal comfort and accessibility of the population to the environment. While subjective to assess residents' perceptions of their comfort living in their homes.
Furthermore, this study found that there is no significant interaction between gender and ethnicity on satisfaction with physical facilities, personal well-being, family happiness, social harmony, financial management among youth in Kuala Lumpur City. The findings of this study illustrate that gender and ethnic differences do not affect youth satisfaction with physical facilities. This is because the existing physical facilities can be used by anyone and does not limit in terms of background such as gender and ethnicity. Youth satisfaction with physical facilities is also triggered by the facility itself where it is easily available. These findings are not in line with studies from Freire and Ferreira (2018) who exaMeaned the relationship between perceptions of HRQoL (quality of life of adolescent health) and related specific domains (physical well-being, psychological well-being, autonomy and parental relationships, peers and social support, and school environment) on age, gender, and the chronic presence of disease as well as some negative and positive dimensions of psychological function. The results of the study found that there are significant differences between male and female youth on the quality of health and quality of life. Male youth showed higher perceptions of quality of life, physical and psychological well-being, autonomy and parental relationships than female youth.

Conclusion
Nowadays, an individual's satisfaction with their quality of life has become a hotly debated topic from various fields of research. Quality of life needs to be seen from various aspects including demographic aspects to get a comprehensive impact on planning in improving the quality of life. This study has focused on research related to the quality of life of urban youth involving gender and ethnic demographics. The findings of this study indicate that overall there are significant differences in quality of life based on ethnicity. This means that every planning that involves youth development as well as improving the quality of life, multi-ethnic factors need to be taken into account. These programs need to ensure that no ethnicity is left behind in youth development. In addition, the relevant parties need to improve the aspects involved in this study in planning and designing appropriate programs to ensure that this program can be used by the entire youth.