Measuring social relations, social networks and social capital in comparative surveys 1 |
|
Convenor | Mr Christof Wolf (GESIS - Leibniz-Institute for the Social Sciences ) |
Coordinator 1 | Mr Dominique Joye (University Lausanne) |
We focus on challenges posed by measuring networks and social relations cross-culturally, in particular if data collection mode varies.
We sketch progress made in network measurement and present main approaches of egocentric network questions, position and resource generators. The specific challenges posed by employing these instruments to compare social resources cross-culturally are discussed.
Next we present results from survey experiments designed to test the validity of measures of network and resource dimensions, their comparability, as well as their cultural invariance.
We end with suggestions for next steps in the development of cross-cultural measures of networks and relationships.
Based on the studies covering America, Europe, and Asia, we examine how different versions of the position generator vary in the number and types of positons, which items tend to be universal, and which positions differ from society to society. We then use pooled compatible survey data from the U.S.A., China, and Taiwan (N=9,809) to explore whether the results from identical positions may be due to societal variations in specific occupations. To assess the relative validity of cross-national survey items, we also compare possible limitations of the position generator with another popular measure of social
Social capital encompasses social relations and exchange between residents and more latent dimensions of trust, cohesion and expectations for mutually beneficial action. Due to its inherently local perspective, cross-national comparative research on neighbourhood-level social capital is rare. We present findings from comparative community studies in two Australian (300 neighbourhoods in Brisbane & Melbourne) and two German (140 neighbourhoods in Cologne & Essen) cities. Both surveys represent a large variety of local communities in urban centres in two (post-)industrial and ethnically diverse societies. The studies use identical scales to measure community social capital. Equivalence is tested with confirmatory factor analyses.
We compare two different operationalizations of generalized trust for German survey samples: the standard dichotomous item (EVS, Allbus) and a two item operationalization (Soep), one for trust and one for the reluctance to deal with others. There is a substantial amount of respondents in the Soep survey, who state to trust others in general and – simultaneously – are careful in dealing with others. Since this descriptive result questions the application of a dichotomous operationalization, we apply factor/canonical correlation analysis in order to find out about the reasons. We will discuss the ramifications for surveying general trust in comparative studies.