Social science
lazy808
lect21.pptxCurrent Social Science Themes and Issues Social capital and loneliness
SOSC 1000 6.0
Lecture 21
Jan Krouzil PhD
August 3, 2021
Agenda
Announcements
PART I Social capital research
PART II Types of social capital
PART III Criticisms of social capital theory
PART IV Loneliness
Keywords
Part I Social capital research (1)
Integration of social capital theory and practice
application to various disciplines and numerous subject areas
has benefits for a range of economic and sociological outcomes
combines a number of ideas including civic tradition, civic involvement and social cohesion
How to define ‘social capital’ (SC)?
no set and commonly agreed upon definition
particular definition adopted by a study depends on the discipline and level of investigation
debate over the appropriateness of the term ‘capital’
Social capital research (2)
Considerations when defining social capital
does ‘social’ relate to networks (i.e. social relationships) or the disposition to live and cooperate with others (i.e. social norms)?
is social capital the property of the individual, the property of the collective, or does it have both individual and collective components?
does ‘capital’ represent an economic definition of capital or is it a metaphor?
does social capital involve the mobilisation of forms of capital only or does the ‘capital’ in social capital have more metaphoric character
representing various tangible and intangible resources, benefits, productivities and savings?
Social capital research (3)
Caveats to how to define and conceptualise SC
there may be no right answers to these questions (Claridge 2019)
understanding of ‘capital’ as a metaphor
consider SC as having both individual and collective components
focus on clarity and consistency of approach
ability to explain and justify it
be clear about the approach you take on SC
definition must match how you conceptualise and operationalise the concept
Social capital research (4)
What definition of SC to use then?
‘ideally a definition would describe what it is; not what it does, not where it comes from, not why it’s important, not examples, not an incomplete list of constituents (for example using “such as…”), not tied to context, not based on outcomes, not overly abstract or vague to require further definition of composite concepts, and not specific as to overly narrow its scope.’ (Claridge 2019)
‘Is holding a door open for a stranger an example of an outcome of social capital?’
Social capital research (5)
Dimensions
structural, cognitive, relational social capital
conceptual distinctions useful for analytic convenience
in practice social capital involves complex interrelations between the three dimensions
structural SC
refers to the presence of a network of access to people and resources
cognitive and relational SC
cognitive relates to the subjective interpretations of shared understandings
relational includes feelings of trust that are shared by the many actors within the social context (group, organisation, community)
Social capital research (6)
high levels of SC involve strong connections, high levels of trust and a shared sense of mission
understood by the level of interconnectedness, quality and nature of these connections, and extent of common shared vision
relates to SC as structural (connections among actors), relational (trust between actors) and cognitive (shared goals and values among actors) dimensions
Structural/cognitive/relational distinction
structural and relational embeddedness (Granovetter 1992)
SC constitutes aspects of social structure and the nature of social relationships
Social capital research (7)
structural SC
tangible and can be readily observed by the existence of network ties (ie who knows who)
as well as by roles, rules, precedents, and procedures
relational SC
intangible since it is what and how people think and feel
is ‘cognitive’ since it is a function of people’s cognition
cognitive SC
described as values, beliefs, attitudes, behaviour and social norms as well as trust, solidarity and reciprocity
Social capital research (8)
Interrelationships and causality
between structural, cognitive, relational
in practice the dimensions are connected and mutually reinforcing
two-way causality resulting in a mutually reinforcing cycle
Levels of social capital
at what level of society does SC reside?
does it reside with the individual like human capital?
or is it a property of society more generally?
or in fact, is it both the property of individuals and of society?
agreement that SC has both an individual and an aggregate component
an individual has a degree of control over some aspects of social capital, but little control over other aspects
Social capital research (9)
Public good, private good, or both?
SC has both individual and collective components
SC as both a private and public good
characteristics of a private good because an individual can invest in their social capital, has some degree of ownership and control, and can derive benefits as exclusive private property
also a public good since many aspects of social capital are beyond the control of individuals and affect and benefit larger groups of people, not just those who created it (spill-over effects, positive externality)
Social capital research (10)
Micro, meso, macro levels of SC
identifiable at any level of social grouping, from the individual level to the level of the nation
exists at any level where there is identification and belonging, i.e. a social grouping
could include identification or belonging to factors such as location, class, race, religion, profession, hobbies, interests, and a range of other factors
among these groupings there is potential for overlap and interaction
the norms, values, beliefs, shared language and shared understandings embedded in each grouping interact in complex and dynamic ways
not just between groupings, when one member interacts with a member of another group, but dynamically as any one member belongs to numerous groupings simultaneously
all these different social groupings are too numerous and their interactions too complex to describe, especially when we include their distribution in time and space
Social capital research (11)
level of interest that is relevant for any given application as either micro (individual), meso (group or organisation) or macro (community or societal)
actual reality is not divided into levels
analysis at one level is inevitably embedded in the other two
one of the main challenges of social capital theory and its research – simplification is required to make sense of the complex social environment but over-simplification can obstruct meaningful findings
Individual (micro) level social capital
focus is on individuals and the relationships between individuals
SC conceptualised as the property of an individual and therefore as a private good
distinction between bonding, bridging, and linking SC
Social capital research (12)
SC as accessible resources embedded in the social structure or social networks that will bring benefits to their owners
number and quality of social ties and the resources those ties have access to
resources can be physical (such as a tractor or financial capital) or can be social (such as connections to other people)
preferred level of analysis for many economists since it suits the reductionist paradigm that dominates economics
criticized for the over-simplification of the complex social environment
Group or organisation (meso) level social capital
focus on a target social group as the context for analysis
may be an organisation, a stakeholder group, a sporting league, or any other social grouping
focus on internal social capital, external social capital, or both internal and external
Social capital research (13)
internal SC resides in the relationships among the members of the group or organisation
external SC exists in the shape of relationships with external actors that may be individuals or other social groups
SC conceptualised at the group level as both an individual asset and a collective asset and therefore as both a private and public good
Community or societal (macro) level social capital
conceptualised as a public good that is the property of the collective rather than the individual
‘collectively-owned capital’
Social capital research (14)
understood to change slowly over time and be strongly rooted in history and culture
focus on trust, trustworthiness, civic norms, association membership, and voluntary activities
measurement at the societal level tends to be difficult due to the challenge of collecting data from a statistically significant proportion of the population
Part II Types of social capital (1)
Classifications for social capital (SC)
network perspective
social structure perspective
Network perspective
bonding
bridging
linking
bonding SC
ties between individuals with a relatively high degree of network closure
horizontal ties between individuals within the same social group
vertical ties between social groups
associated with local communities where many people know many other people in the group (network closure)
associated with strong norms, mores and trust which can have both positive and negative manifestations and implications for social exclusion
members have access to similar network assets so while providing solidarity
Types of social capital (2)
bridging SC
ties between individuals which cross social divides or between social groups
places the actors at structural holes where each is able to tap into the social network resources of each others social group
described as vertical ties often operating through formal hierarchical structures
associated with reciprocity and ‘thin trust’
may provide access to network resources outside of an individual’s normal circles and as such can provide significant individual (and group) benefits
Types of social capital (3)
linking SC
as a subset of bridging SC to capture the power dynamics of vertical associations
refers to relations between individuals and groups in different social strata in a hierarchy in which power, social status and wealth are accessed by different groups
with the inclusion of the linking type bridging SC relates to bonds of connectedness that are formed across diverse horizontal groups
Social structure perspective
cognitive and structural forms of social capital are commonly connected and mutually reinforcing
Types of social capital (4)
structural social capital
refers to elements of social structure that create opportunities for the social realisation of productive ends
includes established roles and social networks supplemented by rules, procedures and precedents
gives structure and stability to social transactions
more than norms, structural social capital is built from the historical foundations of culture and institutions within society
cognitive social capital
includes shared norms, values, attitudes, and beliefs
predisposes people towards mutually beneficial collective action
relational social capital
based on the characteristics of social relationships between individuals
described as including trust and trustworthiness
Part III Criticisms of social capital theory (1)
Social capital as a metaphor
highlights the positive and productive aspects of sociability
falls short of being a form of capital
can have positive and negative consequences
little agreement about definition, dimensions, measurement, or building
criticized for its ambiguity and variability
allows the opportunity to improve research practice and the validity or effectiveness of social science projects involving social capital
not social, not capital, and not a theory
social capital is not ‘social’
perceived as a means to give social issues prominence in analysis and decision making
methodological individualism and reductionism restrict social capital to economic rationality on the part of individuals
Criticisms of social capital theory (2)
tends to be abstracted because many aspects cannot be observed directly
‘trust’ as an aspect of social capital that cannot be observed directly
existence of trust could only be inferred from the actions of individuals
researchers tend to use ‘indicators’ that can be measured
believed to have a causal relationship with the aspects of social capital being measured
what is being measured ‘indicates’ the existence of social capital
said to be measured by proxies because the proxies ‘stand in’ for the aspects of SC researchers hope to measure
by its nature the ‘social’ is highly complex and abstract
relates to feelings, beliefs, and perceptions that are largely cognitive and pre-cognitive
Part IV Loneliness (1)
What is ‘loneliness’ about?
distressing experience that occurs when a person’s social relationships are perceived by that person to be less in quantity, and especially in quality, than desired (Hawkley 2018)
the experience of loneliness is highly subjective
an individual can be alone without feeling lonely and can feel lonely even when with other people.
individuals have different set-points for feeling loneliness, and they fluctuate around these set-points depending on the circumstances in their lives
prolonged loneliness is associated with depression, poor social support, neuroticism, and introversion
loneliness puts people at risk for physical disease and that it may contribute to a shortened life span
Loneliness (2)
Types according to causes
Situational loneliness
socio-economic and cultural milieu contributes to situational loneliness
various environmental factors like unpleasant experiences
discrepancy between the levels of his/her needs and social contacts
migration of population, inter personal conflicts, accidents, disasters or emptiness syndrome
increased life expectancy and feminization of elderly population as a significant factor in developing situational loneliness in females
Loneliness (3)
Developmental loneliness
an innate desire of intimacy or a need to be related to others
essential for our development as human beings
a higher level of need for individualism
related to knowing and developing our own real self that requires some solitude too
optimum development - a balance between the two
when a person is not able to balance these needs properly, it results in loss of meaning from their life which in turn leads to emptiness and loneliness
personal inadequacies, developmental deficits, significant separations, social marginality, poverty, living arrangements, and physical/psychological disabilities
Loneliness (4)
Internal loneliness
being alone does not necessarily make a person lonely
the perception of being alone which makes the person lonely
people with low self-esteem and less self-worth are seen to feel lonelier than their counterparts
reasons for this type of loneliness are personality factors, locus of control, mental distress, low self-esteem, feeling of guilt or worthlessness, and poor coping strategies with situations
Loneliness (5)
Perspectives on ‘loneliness’
loneliness as part of human existence
has a relatively short history as a subject of psychological investigation (Bowlby)
emphasizes the importance of a strong emotional bond between the infant and the caregiver
occurs when children with insecure attachment patterns behave in ways that result in their being rejected by their peers
those rejections hinder their development of social skills and increase their distrust of other people, thereby fostering ongoing loneliness
Loneliness (6)
Attachment theory
social needs that, if unmet, contribute to feelings of loneliness (Weiss)
attachment, social integration, nurturance, reassurance of worth, sense of reliable alliance, and guidance in stressful situations
friendships complement but do not substitute for a close, intimate relationship with a partner in staving off loneliness
Behavioral approach
loneliness can be characterized by personality traits associated with and possibly contributing to harmful patterns of interpersonal interaction
correlated with social anxiety, social inhibition (shyness), sadness, hostility, distrust, and low self-esteem
difficulty forming and maintaining meaningful relationships
less likely to share information about themselves with their peers
Loneliness (7)
Cognitive approach
loneliness is characterized by distinct differences in perceptions and attributions
lonely individuals tend to have a pessimistic general outlook than individuals who are not lonely about the people, events, and circumstances in their lives
tend to blame themselves for not being able to achieve satisfactory social relationships
takes account of the attachment and behavioral perspectives by explaining how
failure to meet the need for attachment, social integration, nurturance, and other social needs results in perceived relationship discrepancies experienced as loneliness
loneliness is perpetuated by way of a self-fulfilling prophecy in which poor social skills result in unsatisfactory personal relationships that in turn result in negative self-attributions that lead to further social isolation and relationship dissatisfaction
Loneliness (8)
The dynamics and nature of a celebrity–follower relationship
in the domain of social media
loneliness is difficult to manipulate in an experimental setting
a challenge to researchers attempting to distinguish between the causes and consequences of loneliness
lonely individuals are more likely to disengage or withdraw from stressors
individuals who are not lonely are more likely to actively cope (e.g., problem solve) and seek tangible and emotional support from others
withdrawing from stressful circumstances may be reasonable in certain instances but can lead to an accumulation of stress that becomes increasingly taxing and oppressive
increased stress may be at least partially responsible for the risk of mental and physical disease in lonely individuals
elevated levels of stress hormones, poor immune functioning, and health-jeopardizing changes in cardiovascular functioning
Loneliness (9)
Loneliness and social media use
social media provide users with the possibility of an easy way to communicate with celebrities in society
common practice to follow celebrities through social media
celebrity followers’ loneliness is positively related to frequent visits of their favorite celebrity’s social media
social-interpersonal motive for following the celebrity
enjoyment of learning about personal life stories of the celebrity
Loneliness (10)
Para-social relationship
refers to a fictional, one-sided, and non-reciprocal relationship in which a person thinks she/he knows someone well but in actuality that person does not know the other (Rubin & McHugh 1987)
lonely individuals turn to social media to compensate for the lack of social skills and human connections with others in face-to-face settings (Kraut et al 2002, Song et al 2014)
celebrity followers’ loneliness is positively related to the usage of their favorite celebrity’s social media
social presence as a significant moderator that intensifies favorable para-social relationship perceptions with the celebrity
Keywords
social capital dimensions
structural/cognitive/relational distinction
levels of social capital
network perspective
social structure perspective
social capital as a metaphor
situational loneliness
developmental loneliness
internal loneliness
perspectives on ‘loneliness’
