Trusting and Joining? An Empirical Test of the Reciprocal Nature of Social Capital

This article tests a key hypothesis of the social capital literature: voluntary memberships and generalized trust reproduce one another. Panel data from the Michigan Socialization Studies from 1965 to 1982 are used to test the contemporaneous and lagged effects of interpersonal trust on joining groups and the contemporaneous and lagged effects of joining groups on interpersonal trust. We find no evidence supporting the hypothesis that interpersonal trust encourages group memberships and only limited evidence suggesting that belonging to groups makes individuals more trusting.

[1]  Howard Coonley,et al.  Making democracy work , 1941, Electrical Engineering.

[2]  S. Verba,et al.  The Civic Culture , 1963 .

[3]  S. Verba,et al.  The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations, An Analytic Study , 1964 .

[4]  S. Verba,et al.  The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations , 1964 .

[5]  N. Polsby,et al.  Case Study and Theory in Political Science , 1975 .

[6]  L. Gross,et al.  Living with television: the violence profile. , 1976, The Journal of communication.

[7]  Joan B. Levine,et al.  The Feminine Routine , 1976 .

[8]  Takeshi Amemiya,et al.  The Estimation of a Simultaneous Equation Generalized Probit Model , 1978 .

[9]  Lawrence Olson,et al.  Specification and Estimation of a Simultaneous-Equation Model with Limited Dependent Variables , 1978 .

[10]  Gregory B. Markus,et al.  Analyzing panel data , 1979 .

[11]  W. Hamilton,et al.  The evolution of cooperation. , 1984, Science.

[12]  G. Clore,et al.  Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. , 1983 .

[13]  J. Coleman,et al.  Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital , 1988, American Journal of Sociology.

[14]  D. Rivers,et al.  Limited Information Estimators and Exogeneity Tests for Simultaneous Probit Models , 1988 .

[15]  Sandra L. Wood,et al.  With Malice Toward Some: Refining the Model – The Role of Antecedent Considerations as Individual Differences , 1995 .

[16]  R. Putnam.  Tuning In, Tuning Out: The Strange Disappearance of Social Capital in America , 1995, PS: Political Science & Politics.

[17]  Henry E. Brady,et al.  Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics , 1996 .

[18]  Steven E. Finkel,et al.  Causal Analysis With Panel Data , 1995, SAGE Research Methods Foundations.

[19]  P. Norris.  Does Television Erode Social Capital? A Reply to Putnam , 1996, PS: Political Science & Politics.

[20]  W. Rahn,et al.  Individual-Level Evidence for the Causes and Consequences of Social Capital , 1997 .

[21]  Thomas H. Lewis,et al.  The Authoritarian Specter , 1997 .

[22]  John M. Brehm,et al.  National Elections as Institutions for Generating Social Capital , 1998 .

[23]  Thomas R. Rochon,et al.  Are All Associations Alike? , 1998 .

[24]  M. W. Foley,et al.  Civil Society and Social Capital Beyond Putnam , 1998 .

[25]  R. M. Alvarez,et al.  Two-Stage Estimation of Nonrecursive Choice Models , 1999, Political Analysis.

[26]  T. Skocpol,et al.  Civic Engagement in American Democracy , 1999 .

[27]  Robert D. Putnam,et al.  Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community , 2000, CSCW '00.