THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Identifieur interne : 000A02 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 000A01; suivant : 000A03THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Auteurs : Sandra L. Hofferth ; Johanne Boisjoly ; Greg J. DuncanSource :
- Rationality and society [ 1043-4631 ] ; 1999-02.
English descriptors
- Teeft :
Abstract
This paper investigates whether a family's access to social capital— defined here as perceived access to time and money help in an emergency from kin and friends—depends upon the family's past time and money investments in those kin and friends. It also examines the potential tradeoffs between money and time help from friends and relatives. Data come from parents of children under age 18 who responded to a supplement on time and money assistance included in the 1980 wave of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics. The results suggest that while parents who invest primarily in friend-based help networks have greater potential access to assistance from friends, there is no significant link between investment in family and access to family-based assistance. Thus, while exchange describes social-capital linkages to friends, it does not describe family-based behaviors. Other findings are that time and money appear to be complements while investments in friends or family are substitutes.
Url:
DOI: 10.1177/104346399011001004
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:6CCDBD3AB7A3D09EF760008634638EB4DC43F7EELe document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL</title><author><name sortKey="Hofferth, Sandra L" sort="Hofferth, Sandra L" uniqKey="Hofferth S" first="Sandra L." last="Hofferth">Sandra L. Hofferth</name></author><author><name sortKey="Boisjoly, Johanne" sort="Boisjoly, Johanne" uniqKey="Boisjoly J" first="Johanne" last="Boisjoly">Johanne Boisjoly</name></author><author><name sortKey="Duncan, Greg J" sort="Duncan, Greg J" uniqKey="Duncan G" first="Greg J." last="Duncan">Greg J. Duncan</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:6CCDBD3AB7A3D09EF760008634638EB4DC43F7EE</idno><date when="1999" year="1999">1999</date><idno type="doi">10.1177/104346399011001004</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/6CCDBD3AB7A3D09EF760008634638EB4DC43F7EE/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">000A02</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">000A02</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL</title><author><name sortKey="Hofferth, Sandra L" sort="Hofferth, Sandra L" uniqKey="Hofferth S" first="Sandra L." last="Hofferth">Sandra L. Hofferth</name></author><author><name sortKey="Boisjoly, Johanne" sort="Boisjoly, Johanne" uniqKey="Boisjoly J" first="Johanne" last="Boisjoly">Johanne Boisjoly</name></author><author><name sortKey="Duncan, Greg J" sort="Duncan, Greg J" uniqKey="Duncan G" first="Greg J." last="Duncan">Greg J. Duncan</name></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Rationality and society</title><idno type="ISSN">1043-4631</idno><idno type="eISSN">1461-7358</idno><imprint><publisher>SAGE Publications</publisher><pubPlace></pubPlace><date type="published" when="1999-02">1999-02</date><biblScope unit="volume">11</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">1</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="79">79</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="110">110</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">1043-4631</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">1043-4631</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Science collections</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">This paper investigates whether a family's access to social capital— defined here as perceived access to time and money help in an emergency from kin and friends—depends upon the family's past time and money investments in those kin and friends. It also examines the potential tradeoffs between money and time help from friends and relatives. Data come from parents of children under age 18 who responded to a supplement on time and money assistance included in the 1980 wave of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics. The results suggest that while parents who invest primarily in friend-based help networks have greater potential access to assistance from friends, there is no significant link between investment in family and access to family-based assistance. Thus, while exchange describes social-capital linkages to friends, it does not describe family-based behaviors. Other findings are that time and money appear to be complements while investments in friends or family are substitutes.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>sage</corpusName><keywords><teeft><json:string>science collections</json:string></teeft></keywords><author><json:item><name>Sandra L. Hofferth</name></json:item><json:item><name>Johanne Boisjoly</name></json:item><json:item><name>Greg J. Duncan</name></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>social capital</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>kin networks</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>time assistance</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>money assistance</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>social exchange</value></json:item></subject><articleId><json:string>10.1177_104346399011001004</json:string></articleId><arkIstex>ark:/67375/M70-TKV3HT46-F</arkIstex><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>research-article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>This paper investigates whether a family's access to social capital— defined here as perceived access to time and money help in an emergency from kin and friends—depends upon the family's past time and money investments in those kin and friends. It also examines the potential tradeoffs between money and time help from friends and relatives. Data come from parents of children under age 18 who responded to a supplement on time and money assistance included in the 1980 wave of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics. The results suggest that while parents who invest primarily in friend-based help networks have greater potential access to assistance from friends, there is no significant link between investment in family and access to family-based assistance. Thus, while exchange describes social-capital linkages to friends, it does not describe family-based behaviors. Other findings are that time and money appear to be complements while investments in friends or family are substitutes.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>3.857</score><pdfWordCount>9</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>54</pdfCharCount><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageCount>32</pdfPageCount><pdfPageSize>396 x 612 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractWordCount>154</abstractWordCount><abstractCharCount>991</abstractCharCount><keywordCount>5</keywordCount></qualityIndicators><title>THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL</title><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><title>Rationality and society</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><issn><json:string>1043-4631</json:string></issn><eissn><json:string>1461-7358</json:string></eissn><publisherId><json:string>RSS</json:string></publisherId><volume>11</volume><issue>1</issue><pages><first>79</first><last>110</last></pages><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre></host><namedEntities><unitex><date><json:string>1999</json:string></date><geogName></geogName><orgName></orgName><orgName_funder></orgName_funder><orgName_provider></orgName_provider><persName><json:string>R.T. Michael</json:string><json:string>R. Herzog</json:string><json:string>J. Roth</json:string><json:string>Connie Blumenthal</json:string><json:string>Laurence Kotlikoff</json:string><json:string>Hui-Sheng Lin</json:string><json:string>J.N. Morgan</json:string><json:string>Thomas Shapiro</json:string><json:string>Kristin Moore</json:string></persName><placeName></placeName><ref_url></ref_url><ref_bibl></ref_bibl><bibl></bibl></unitex></namedEntities><ark><json:string>ark:/67375/M70-TKV3HT46-F</json:string></ark><categories><wos><json:string>1 - social science</json:string><json:string>2 - sociology</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>1 - economic & social sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - social sciences</json:string><json:string>3 - sociology</json:string></scienceMetrix><scopus><json:string>1 - Social Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Social Sciences</json:string><json:string>3 - Social Sciences (miscellaneous)</json:string><json:string>1 - Social Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Social Sciences</json:string><json:string>3 - Sociology and Political Science</json:string></scopus><inist><json:string>1 - sciences humaines et sociales</json:string></inist></categories><publicationDate>1999</publicationDate><copyrightDate>1999</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1177/104346399011001004</json:string></doi><id>6CCDBD3AB7A3D09EF760008634638EB4DC43F7EE</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/6CCDBD3AB7A3D09EF760008634638EB4DC43F7EE/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>ocr</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/ocr</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/6CCDBD3AB7A3D09EF760008634638EB4DC43F7EE/fulltext/ocr</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/6CCDBD3AB7A3D09EF760008634638EB4DC43F7EE/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/6CCDBD3AB7A3D09EF760008634638EB4DC43F7EE/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher scheme="https://publisher-list.data.istex.fr">SAGE Publications</publisher><pubPlace></pubPlace><availability><licence><p>sage</p></licence></availability><p scheme="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-0J1N7DQT-B"></p><date>1999</date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note type="research-article" scheme="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-1JC4F85T-7">research-article</note><note type="journal" scheme="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL</title><author xml:id="author-0000"><persName><forename type="first">Sandra L.</forename><surname>Hofferth</surname></persName></author><author xml:id="author-0001"><persName><forename type="first">Johanne</forename><surname>Boisjoly</surname></persName></author><author xml:id="author-0002"><persName><forename type="first">Greg J.</forename><surname>Duncan</surname></persName></author><idno type="istex">6CCDBD3AB7A3D09EF760008634638EB4DC43F7EE</idno><idno type="ark">ark:/67375/M70-TKV3HT46-F</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1177/104346399011001004</idno><idno type="article-id">10.1177_104346399011001004</idno></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Rationality and society</title><idno type="pISSN">1043-4631</idno><idno type="eISSN">1461-7358</idno><idno type="publisher-id">RSS</idno><idno type="PublisherID-hwp">sprss</idno><imprint><publisher>SAGE Publications</publisher><pubPlace></pubPlace><date type="published" when="1999-02"></date><biblScope unit="volume">11</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">1</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="79">79</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="110">110</biblScope></imprint></monogr></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>1999</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>This paper investigates whether a family's access to social capital— defined here as perceived access to time and money help in an emergency from kin and friends—depends upon the family's past time and money investments in those kin and friends. It also examines the potential tradeoffs between money and time help from friends and relatives. Data come from parents of children under age 18 who responded to a supplement on time and money assistance included in the 1980 wave of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics. The results suggest that while parents who invest primarily in friend-based help networks have greater potential access to assistance from friends, there is no significant link between investment in family and access to family-based assistance. Thus, while exchange describes social-capital linkages to friends, it does not describe family-based behaviors. Other findings are that time and money appear to be complements while investments in friends or family are substitutes.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>keywords</head><item><term>social capital</term></item><item><term>kin networks</term></item><item><term>time assistance</term></item><item><term>money assistance</term></item><item><term>social exchange</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="1999-02">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/6CCDBD3AB7A3D09EF760008634638EB4DC43F7EE/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="corpus sage not found" wicri:toSee="no header"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" URI="journalpublishing.dtd" name="istex:docType"></istex:docType><istex:document><article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="2.3" xml:lang="EN"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="hwp">sprss</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">RSS</journal-id><journal-title>Rationality and Society</journal-title><issn pub-type="ppub">1043-4631</issn><publisher><publisher-name>SAGE Publications</publisher-name><publisher-loc></publisher-loc></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1177/104346399011001004</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">10.1177_104346399011001004</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hofferth</surname><given-names>Sandra L.</given-names></name></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Boisjoly</surname><given-names>Johanne</given-names></name></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Duncan</surname><given-names>Greg J.</given-names></name></contrib></contrib-group><pub-date pub-type="ppub"><month>02</month><year>1999</year></pub-date><volume>11</volume><issue>1</issue><fpage>79</fpage><lpage>110</lpage><abstract><p>This paper investigates whether a family's access to social capital— defined here as perceived access to time and money help in an emergency from kin and friends—depends upon the family's past time and money investments in those kin and friends. It also examines the potential tradeoffs between money and time help from friends and relatives. Data come from parents of children under age 18 who responded to a supplement on time and money assistance included in the 1980 wave of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics. The results suggest that while parents who invest primarily in friend-based help networks have greater potential access to assistance from friends, there is no significant link between investment in family and access to family-based assistance. Thus, while exchange describes social-capital linkages to friends, it does not describe family-based behaviors. Other findings are that time and money appear to be complements while investments in friends or family are substitutes.</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>social capital</kwd><kwd>kin networks</kwd><kwd>time assistance</kwd><kwd>money assistance</kwd><kwd>social exchange</kwd></kwd-group><custom-meta-wrap><custom-meta xlink:type="simple"><meta-name>sagemeta-type</meta-name><meta-value>Journal Article</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta xlink:type="simple"><meta-name>search-text</meta-name><meta-value>
THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Sandra L. Hofferth, Johanne Boisjoly and Greg J. Duncan
ABSTRACT
This paper investigates whether a family's access to social capital-
defined here as perceived access to time and money help in an
emergency from kin and friends-depends upon the family's past time
and money investments in those kin and friends. It also examines the
potential tradeoffs between money and time help from friends and
relatives. Data come from parents of children under age 18 who
responded to a supplement on time and money assistance included in
the 1980 wave of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics. The results
suggest that while parents who invest primarily in friend-based help
networks have greater potential access to assistance from friends, there
is no significant link between investment in family and access to
family-based assistance. Thus, while exchange describes social-capital
linkages to friends, it does not describe family-based behaviors. Other
findings are that time and money appear to be complements while
investments in friends or family are substitutes.
KEY WORDS * social capital * kin networks * time assistance * money
assistance * social exchange
Introduction
Social capital is a key concept in sociology because it posits that social
relationships form a resource that individuals can draw upon in their
personal and professional lives. It provides a unique organizing princi-
ple comparable to the financial and human capital relationships of
economics and a linkage to social structure. In addition, like financial
capital, social capital appears to have important consequences for
children's social and cognitive development through facilitating the
development of human capital. Recent papers have found parental social
capital to be linked to children's cognitive and socio-emotional develop-
ment in early childhood (Parcel and Menaghan 1993); to lower high
school drop-out/greater high school completion (Furstenberg and
Rationality and Society Copyright ( 1999 Sage Publications (London, Thousand Oaks,
CA and New Delhi), Vol. 11(1): 79-110. [1043-4631(199902)11:1; 79-110; 006912]
RATIONALITY AND SOCIETY 11 (1)
Hughes 1995; Smith et al. 1992; Sugland et al. 1995; Teachman et al.
1995); to greater college enrollment (Furstenberg and Hughes 1995);
and to stable employment and income in early adulthood (Furstenberg
and Hughes 1995; Sugland et al. 1995). Greater social capital has also
been linked to a lower level of neighborhood violence and crime
(Sampson et al. 1997), which is an important influence on children's
behavior (Reiss and Roth 1993).
However, while many researchers have concentrated on the con-
sequences of social capital for children's lives or for neighborhoods,
almost no papers have examined the development of social capital. As
with financial capital, inequality in who has access to it will lead to or
perpetuate inequalities in outcomes. Racial inequality in access to
financial capital, income, wealth, and housing has been an important
concern (Massey and Denton 1993; Oliver and Shapiro 1995). How-
ever, inequalities in social capital, whether by race or by other
characteristics, may also play an important role in individual careers and
children's development. Therefore, a crucial issue is how social capital
is developed.
There are clearly two different schools of thought on social capital.
One camp views social capital as the relationship between parent and
child in the household, including 'the time and effort that parents spend
on children' (e.g. Parcel and Menaghan 1993: 121). Measures include
family size, number of parents, and parenting behavior, but also include
characteristics of individuals in the household such as employment
hours. The second camp believes that social capital is lodged not in
individuals or individual households, but in relationships between
households, comprising networks of social relationships (Coleman
1988; Sampson 1997). These networks primarily link households
together; they lie outside the immediate household and may characterize
the neighborhood, the school community, friendships, or professional
associations. The development of these two forms of social capital may
be quite different and reflect both different origins and different
motivations for involvement in exchange networks. This raises the
question as to whether social capital is indeed 'capital' -a resource that
is built up through investment and can be drawn upon when needed-or
whether it is a result of altruism-that is, concern over the well-being of
others. The investment aspects of social capital, which are key to
Coleman's (1988) conception of social capital, have not been system-
atically tested.
This paper examines linkages between households by testing whether
transfers of time and money lead to access to assistance from non-
80
HOFFERTH ET AL.: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
coresidential kin and, among those who do not report access to kin,
access to help from friends. By examining the relationship between
providing transfers to others and reporting access to assistance, we
attempt to determine whether investments are expected to be recipro-
cated or not. From this we infer whether social capital results from an
investment and exchange process or whether it comes about from the
altruistic behavior of individuals and families. The paper also examines
the relationship between resources and potential access to assistance
from others. Finally, it looks at potential tradeoffs in the form of
assistance (money versus time).
Background and Hypotheses
Coleman (1988) observed that social relations or networks provide a
source of assistance based on: (1) the strength of interpersonal ties,
characterized by mutual obligations, expectations, and reciprocity; (2)
information; and (3) norms and effective sanctions. Coleman used the
term 'social capital' to describe potential assistance relationships
between people. He pointed out that individuals and families build up
their stock of social capital by investing in others. This investment
aspect is analogous to that of financial and human capital, in which an
investment leads to a stock from which returns can be expected
(Bourdieu, 1983). According to both Coleman (1988) and Blau (1994),
assistance creates diffuse obligations. Individuals may not wish to have
their loans or gifts repaid immediately, because that removes the set of
obligations that they can rely upon when in need. Social capital is most
useful if you can call upon it when you are in need rather than when the
other person wishes to pay you back (Blau 1994). In some cases,
individuals may even create obligations in order to set this chain of
obligations in motion-e.g. the Potlatch of the Northwest Kwakiutl
(Coleman 1988). In our empirical work, instances in which family
members assist a friend or relative may be investments in this network
or they may simply be altruistic gestures-contributions to the well-
being of others. What is the motivation for assistance to others?
Exchange as Motivation for Assistance
An important and policy-relevant issue is to what extent assistance to
kin and friends is, in fact, an investment motivated by exchange. That is,
in return for providing money or assistance, the donor expects a service
in return, either now or in the future (Blau 1994; Cox and Rank 1992;
81
RATIONALITY AND SOCIETY 11(1)
Bernheim et al. 1985). Whether the government can constrain social
welfare expenditures without unduly damaging children and the elderly
hinges largely on the informal system of private interhousehold trans-
fers. Some argue that this system is substantial. In 1992, with the
exception of Social Security, average private transfers exceeded income
from any single public transfer program (Schoeni 1992). On the other
hand, it is argued that private transfers are smaller than they would be if
government transfers such as unemployment insurance and social
security had not displaced some private exchanges (Barro 1974;
Schoeni 1992). The influence of government policy on the volume of
time and money help exchanged among kin or friends depends on the
reasons behind transfers and on the resources of families.
The exchange-based perspective views giving as an investment in the
creation of social capital. Some argue that the family serves a banking
function in providing loans to children to complete their schooling, start
businesses, or purchase a house in return for assistance in old age. In
Taiwan, for example, the reciprocal obligation of children to assist their
elderly parents is quite strongly established (Lee et al. 1994; Thornton
and Lin 1994). This may be particularly important when institutional
sources of assistance are not available (Coleman 1988). In Western
societies, in contrast, children's obligations to parents are fewer, with
the net transfer flow going from the older to the younger generation
(Hogan et al. 1993). Geographic mobility is likely to disrupt familial ties
and disrupt the stock of transfers. To re-establish it may require new
investments in the new location, and perhaps greater involvement in
exchanges with non-kin. Cultural differences may also result in differ-
ences in social capital, such as differences in giving between persons
from urban and rural backgrounds (Hofferth and Iceland 1998).
Although similar in some ways to social-support networks, social
capital differs from them in that it is the existence of the relationship
that is important, not the amount of actual transfer of goods and services
that occurs (Coleman 1988; Wellman 1979). Families who have
accumulated social capital stocks may behave differently from families
lacking them, regardless of the actual flows of assistance that take place.
Thus, while the active provision or receipt of services or money is
evidence for a social capital relationship, the converse is not true. Social
capital may exist as a consequence of past assistance. Thus, from a
theoretical perspective, 'access' is a more important construct than
actual provision or receipt of assistance. Our focus on perceived access
also avoids the problem of delayed reciprocation.
It is likely that families differ in their types of investments according
82
HOFFERTH ET AL.: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
to their level of resources-that is, their need and their ability to give-
and that of others. If motivated by exchange, families will be more
likely to provide time assistance to individuals whose price of time is
low, since the amount of time help received in return will be greater. In
this case, low-income families should be more likely than high-income
families to be on the receiving end (Cox 1987; Cox and Rank 1992).
However, in terms of financial assistance, it may be better to invest in
those who are better off, or at least equal in resources, and who will be
better able to assist financially (Blau 1994). In this case, middle- to
high-income families should be more likely both to invest and to have
access to financial assistance than low-income families. The question is
one of efficiency; it may be more efficient to invest in those with the
greatest prospects rather than in those who are the neediest, but perhaps
the least promising in terms of future exchanges (Gustafsson and
Stafford 1994). In any case, the relationship between income of
recipient and access to assistance depends upon the type of assistance at
issue.
Altruism as Motivation for Assistance
The other major theoretical perspective is based on altruism. Familial
models of altruism view parents as considering the well-being of their
children as part of their own well-being (Cox and Rank 1992; Altonji et
al. 1994). If so, parent-child transfers may equalize the well-being of
children as adults by making up for differential endowments. Equity is
key to this argument. Parents may also respond to the redistributional
effects of public transfers to the older generation by privately transfer-
ring resources to their offspring (Cox 1987). If so, the family serves an
insurance function to smooth out periods of income shortfalls (Lee et al.
1994). This form of altruism cannot be distinguished from giving for
social desirability or the personal satisfaction of giving. In either case, if
families are altruistically motivated we would expect little relationship
between their past investments in family and friends and current
perceptions of access to help from those family members and friends.
That is, giving does not create social capital.
If families are altruistically motivated, they would be more likely to
provide resources to low-income or less well-endowed children in order
to equalize outcomes across children. Thus low-income families should
be more likely to have access to assistance from kin. Kin should also
provide more in certain life-cycle periods, such as while children are in
school, than in other periods. Rosenzweig and Wolpin (1993) argue that
83
RATIONALITY AND SOCIETY 11(1)
children are less able to smooth their consumption than are parents.
They find that transfers occur mainly during the period of human-capital
building, when children are forgoing current income in order to invest in
their future earnings capacity. Other factors that may reflect differential
need or ability to invest include single-parent family structure, no
earners, a large family, a family with young children, and a family with
a young head.
Does altruism apply to non-kin relationships? It is conceivable that
individuals include the utility of homeless or poor families and children
in their utility function and are therefore motivated to provide assistance
without regard for potential gain (Orr 1976). Charitable contributions
also fall into this category. Again, we expect low-income families to be
more likely to be the recipients of giving.
We expect non-kin exchanges to be based primarily upon exchange
rather than on any other motivation. Since they are not tied by blood,
social-capital networks involving friends presumably constitute a purer
form of the reciprocity-based networks which Coleman talks about than
do networks involving family members. These relationships are volun-
tary and subject to negotiation (Blau 1994; Fischer 1982). We would
thus expect to observe more reciprocity among friends than family.
Consequently, there should be a stronger relationship between invest-
ment and access to assistance among non-kin than among kin.
Time versus Money
We might also expect a tradeoff between access to time and money.
Individuals whose time is costly may use their financial resources to
purchase the services of others (e.g. nursing-home care) to assist their
parents, substituting money for time help. If this were so, we would find
a negative relationship between the price of time and the provision of
time help and a more positive relationship between the price of time and
the provision of money help. Economists would expect families'
choices between time and money help to reflect their comparative
advantage in providing such help. Everything else the same, lower
wages and less formal labor-market involvement should be associated
with less money and more time investments. Education level is a good
proxy for price of time.
Social Capital Between versus Within Households
This paper limits its scope to exchange and social capital between
households. Social capital inside the household includes the time
84
HOFFERTH ET AL.: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCLAL CAPITAL
parents spend with their children. While social capital within the
household is important, it has been more widely investigated. In
addition, the allocation of resources within households is difficult to
determine (Lazear and Michael 1988). Unique to the concept of social
capital are relationships outside the household, within the broader
community, including kin and non-kin.
Sociologists argue that there are much stronger norms for helping kin
than non-kin (Fischer 1982). This suggests that altruism is stronger
between kin than between friends or acquaintances. Consequently, we
expect more people to report access to assistance from family members
than from friends and perceived assistance from kin is expected to be
less strongly tied to giving than perceived assistance from non-kin.
Race Differences
Factors that reflect differential cultural factors and access to area
resources include race/ethnicity and neighborhood characteristics. Just
as patterns of intergenerational exchange vary, we expect differences by
race/ethnicity in motivation for exchange. Even after controlling for
socio-economic status differences, blacks are consistently more likely
than whites to reside in extended family households. Much of this
difference is due to the greater frequency of single mothers in black
families (Hofferth 1984; Taylor et al. 1990). Differences in household
structure and composition may strongly affect intergenerational exchan-
ges between households. Blacks may be less likely to invest in
interhousehold assistance if most assistance occurs within the house-
hold. Another way social capital may differ is that the sphere of
altruistic assistance may be wider among blacks. Distinctions between
kin and non-kin may be somewhat less clear; tradition has led to family
friends being labeled as kin-'fictive kin' (Stack 1974). On the other
hand, out of economic necessity, exchange may characterize family
assistance among blacks more than among whites.
Neighborhood Patterns
Neighborhood patterns can indicate a climate or environment as well as
resources available in a local community. Two important neighborhood
characteristics include the proportion poor and the extent of residential
stability. Families living in areas with greater residential instability
should perceive less social capital available to them. Early research has
found considerable evidence that length of residence in a community is
positively related to friendships and participation in local activities.
85
RATIONALITY AND SOCIETY 1 1 (1)
Sampson (1991) found that residential stability, the proportion of long-
time residents, had a large and significant impact on local friendship ties
at the community and individual levels. The socio-economic character-
istics of the community should also be related to perceived access to
social capital. However, the direction of the effect is unclear, once
individual characteristics are controlled. Sampson (1991) found that
high socio-economic status neighborhoods were characterized both by
less dense networks of friends and acquaintances and greater anonymity
than low socio-economic status communities, suggesting a dearth of
social capital.
Hypotheses
In this paper we focus on the relationship between past investments in
one's social network and the stock of social capital that might reap a
return in the future. Our measures of social capital are the potential in an
emergency for time or monetary assistance from a friend or relative,
specifically whether a person perceives that he/she could obtain assis-
tance were it needed in an emergency.
Although, ultimately, we are interested in the consequences of access
to these social capital stocks for family decisions, childrearing, and
child outcomes, in this paper we focus on factors leading to investment
in and access to social capital. Our model is depicted in Figure 1.
Individual and family characteristics, community characteristics, and
events such as a geographic move, divorce, or unemployment are
associated with whether or not a family provides time or money help to
family and friends. These characteristics, events, and investments, in
turn, are associated with access to social capital, which comprises the
structure, closeness to, contact with, obligations to, and access to help
from children, extended family, friends, and neighbors.
We first describe the proportion of families that report access to time
or money that they could draw upon in the event of an emergency and
the proportion of families that have invested time or money in their
network in the last five years. Second, we examine how conventional
measures of family economic well-being are related to investments in
and access to social capital. Do low-income families have more links to
such help, or fewer? Is social capital in high-poverty neighborhoods
particularly absent? To what extent is social capital altered by geo-
graphic mobility? Third, we examine the relationship between invest-
ment in and access to social capital.
Following Coleman (1988), we refer to perceived potential support
86
HOFFERTH ET AL.: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Determinants Investments Access to Social Capital
Individual/Family l Social Relationships of Parental Family
Characteristics
Structure
Closeness to, Contact with,
jCommunity 1 Investment choices, Obligations to, and Access to help from:
Characteristics - e.g., help given to - a cir
family and friends a) children
b) extended family
c) friends
Events, e.g., d) neighbors
mobility, divorce,
unemployment o
Figure 1. Model of investment in social capital
from family and friends as the stock of social capital and actual transfers
to family and friends as investments. We base our inference regarding
motivation on the consequences of investment in social capital. The
major test of our model is whether investment in family and friends is
associated with perceived access to assistance from them.
Our hypotheses are as follows:
Hypothesis 1. If exchange is the appropriate motivation for social-capital invest-
ments, then we should find a significant positive relationship between past
investments and current access-i.e. between time and money help given in the
past and the perception that time and/or money help is currently available if
needed.
Hypothesis 2. If altruism is the motivation, then we expect no such relationship
between past investments in and access to social capital.
Hypothesis 3. It is expected that the relationship between past investments and
current access will be stronger among friends than among family, because the
former are less likely than the latter to be motivated by altruism or by social
desirability and more likely to be motivated by exchange.
Hypothesis 4. Under the altruism model, higher-income families should report less
access to financial or time assistance than lower-income families, net of invest-
ments. Under the exchange model, higher income families should report more
access to financial assistance and less to time assistance.
Hypothesis 5. Under the comparative advantage argument, families should tend to
invest in and have access to either time or money, but not both.
Hypothesis 6. Migration from one's family of origin is expected to reduce access
to time help from kin and increase access to time help from friends. Money
exchanges should not be affected as much by geographic mobility.
87
RATIONALITY AND SOCIETY 11(1)
Data
Testing this model requires unusual data. Crucial is information on
investments and potential or expected receipt of transfers if the need
arises. Since we were ultimately interested in examining the outcomes
of social capital investments, we also required that the data base contain
information on the families over a number of years so that we could
examine children's completed schooling as young adults. There is only
one study that has data of this kind-the Panel Study of Income
Dynamics (PSID), an ongoing longitudinal survey of US households
begun in 1968 by the Survey Research Center of the University of
Michigan (Hill 1992).
Questions related to social capital were asked in two PSID waves
1980 and 1988 (see Morgan 1983; Hill et al. 1993). However, only the
1980 data are appropriate for testing our hypotheses, since they ask for
both a family's 'investments' in its social-capital network (i.e. whether
the family had given substantial time and money help to friends or
relatives over the previous five years) and a family's 'stock' of social
capital (i.e. whether the family perceives it could count on friends or
relatives to supply substantial amounts of emergency time or money
help-see Wellman 1979, for a similar approach). The 1988 wave
includes questions about giving and receiving assistance, but not about
potential receipt.
One disadvantage is that the income of the potential source of
assistance is not obtained; consequently, we have information only on
the income of the potential beneficiary. However, other research that has
had access to the incomes of both parties found only the income of the
beneficiary to be significantly related to transfer behavior (Rosenzweig
and Wolpin 1994). In addition, we have no information on the exact
relationship of the potential benefactor to the respondent. While rela-
tives could include siblings, aunts, uncles, and grandparents, research
clearly shows parent-child transfers to be the most common. Parent-
child transfers constitute two-thirds to three-quarters of all flows (Hill et
al. 1993). Consequently, relatives are likely to be parents and children,
though other relationships are possible. Non-relatives could include
friends, acquaintances, colleagues, neighbors, or strangers. The question
(see later) referred to them as 'friends', thus implying somewhat
stronger ties (Granovetter 1973) than other non-kin relationships.
An advantage is that data on neighborhoods are available from
addresses geocoded to the 1970 and 1980 Censuses. In addition,
because of the longitudinal nature of the sample, the residential
88
HOFFERTH ET AL.: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
locations and moves of respondents are known for an extended period of
their lives.
We selected families in their childrearing years with children at
home, since this is the age group most likely to benefit from inter-
household transfers from parents and since we are ultimately interested
in the consequences of social capital for children. Such families may
also be investing in their parents or in older children no longer living at
home.
For our description of social-capital stocks and investments, we drew
a sample of all PSID families with children as of the 1980 interview.
The 'following rules' of the PSID are designed to produce a representa-
tive sample as of that point and comparisons with the 1980 Current
Population Survey show no noteworthy differences (Duncan and Hill
1989). Low-income families were initially oversampled, but weights
were developed and used to adjust for both the differential initial
sampling probabilities and for differential non-response that has arisen
since the beginning of the study.
As a measure of the stock of a household's social capital, we use
responses to the following questions:
Time 'Stock'
K74. Suppose there were a serious emergency in your household. Is there a friend
or relative living nearby whom you could call on to spend a lot of time helping
out?' (IF YES): Would that be a relative?
Money 'Stock'
K89. Suppose in an emergency you needed several hundred dollars more than you
had available or could borrow from an institution. Would you ask either a friend or
a relative for it? (IF YES): Is the person you would ask a relative?
As measures of a family's recent 'investments' in its social capital
network, we use responses to the following pair of questions:
Time 'Investments'
K71. People sometimes have emergencies and need help from others-either time
or money. Let's talk about time. In the last five years have you (or has anyone
living with you) spent a lot of time helping either a relative or friend in an
emergency? (IF YES): Was the person you helped a relative of (yours/anybody
who lives there)?
89
RATIONALITY AND SOCIETY 11(1)
Money 'Investments'
K98. In the last five years have you helped a friend or relative in an emergency by
giving or loaning them several hundred dollars or more? (IF YES): Was the person
you helped a relative?
We used responses to these questions to distinguish between (1) stocks
versus investments; (2) friends versus relatives; and (3) time versus
money help.
Explanatory measures, also drawn from the 1980 interview, include:
(1) family income; (2) family size; (3) age of youngest child; (4)
employment and family structure (couple with two earners, couple with
one earner, couple with no earner, female head who is employed, female
head who is unemployed, and other (including single fathers); (5) age of
household head; (6) age squared; (7) education of household head; (8)
race, which distinguished 'black' from all other responses; (9) whether
head lives in same state and/or region where he/she grew up; (10)
percent of non-elderly individuals who are poor (neighborhood informa-
tion); and (11) percent who lived in the same house 5 years ago
(obtained by matching addresses of respondents in 1980 to census tracts
or, if in an untracted area, enumeration districts or minor civil divi-
sions).
Data Limitations
While these data are among the best for determining whether a family
perceives that it has access to social capital at all, there are three
important limitations. First, the amount and diversity of social capital
available to families were not ascertained-the amount of help, the type
of help, the sources of help, whether help is repeated, and non-
emergency assistance were simply not ascertained. Second, provision of
non-monetary, non-time help, such as emotional support, advice, and
information, was not asked. There are other ways of maintaining social
capital than the ones included in this paper. Third, the question wording
does not permit the respondent to name both relatives and friends as a
potential source of each type of help. The respondent is asked, first,
whether the source of friend or relative help is a relative; a friend is
coded as source only if the respondent does not first say 'relative'. This
can be thought of as a first mention or 'primary' measure. That is, is the
primary source of potential help that the respondent would think to turn
to friend or family? Since the availability and source of time and money
assistance are separately ascertained, the respondent could report friends
as a primary source for time help and relatives as a primary source for
90
HOFFERTH ET AL.: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
money help. Thus, some joint assistance shows up when time and
money are pooled. However, it should be noted that the data are likely to
under-represent help from friends if persons have multiple sources of
help. For this reason we have not interpreted the different levels of
perceived assistance from friends and relatives in this analysis as
differences in access.
Results
We begin with our descriptive findings, based on the (weighted) PSID
sample of families with children, about the distribution of social capital
stocks and investments by race, type, and source of assistance.
Perceived Access and Investments
In 1980, 92% (100% - 8%) of the sample reported that they had access
to time or money help from either friends or relatives (Table 1, Panel
A). Almost two-thirds of the sample reported access to both time and
money help from friends or relatives. Of those who reported access to
either time or money but not both, time was more readily available, with
20% of families reporting access to time only and 8% reporting access
to money only. Race differences are surprisingly small in reported
access to either friends or relatives. Ninety percent of blacks and 93% of
whites reported access to time or money help from friends or relatives.
When we examined friends and relatives as distinct potential sources
Table 1. Social capital stocks and investments for families with children
under 18 years, by race
Time Money Time and Unweighted
Neither only only money n
Panel A: Social capital stocks-percent with access to time help from
friends or relatives and/or with access to money help from friends or relatives
Black 10% 24% 8% 58% 1430
White 7% 19% 8% 66% 1881
All 8% 20% 8% 65% 3311
Panel B: Social capital investments-percent who gave time or money
help to friends or relatives in the last five years
Black 60% 19% 12% 10% 1432
White 56% 18% 15% 11% 1881
All 56% 18% 15% 11% 3313
91
RATIONALITY AND SOCIETY 11(1)
of assistance, we found that they are not equally accessible (Table 2,
Panel A). As expected from the way the question was asked, social-
capital relations involving relatives are much more common than
relations involving friends. Some 84% of families with children repor-
ted that their primary source of access to either time or money help was
a relative compared with 20% who reported that their primary source of
access to time or money help was a friend.
Potential access to support networks differs for blacks and whites.
Blacks' perceived ability to receive support from family networks is
significantly lower than whites' (76% vs. 86%). The reverse is true for
friend-based networks; blacks are more likely than whites (27% vs.
19%) to perceive support from friends. This fits with research suggest-
ing the extension of networks through friends and fictive kin among
blacks (Stack 1974). When both sources are combined, however,
differences between blacks and whites in access to time and money
assistance are small.
In contrast to the nearly universal perception of access to help, only
Table 2. Friend and family-based stocks of and investments in social
capital for families with children under 18 years, by race
Time Money Both time Unweighted
Neither only only and money n
Panel A: Social capital stocks-percent with access to time and
money help
From friends only
Black 73% 10% 10% 7% 1430
White 81% 13% 4% 2% 1881
All 80% 12% 5% 3% 3311
From relatives
Black 24% 27% 10% 38% 1430
White 14% 19% 16% 51% 1881
All 16% 20% 15% 49% 3311
Panel B: Social capital investments-percent who gave time and
money help in last five years
To friends only
Black 89% 6% 5% 0% 1429
White 89% 4% 6% 1% 1882
All 89% 4% 6% 1% 3311
To relatives
Black 69% 16% 9% 7% 1429
White 65% 16% 12% 7% 1882
All 65% 16% 12% 7% 3311
92
HOFFERTH ET AL.: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
44% of families with children reported giving time or money help in the
last five years (Table 1, Panel B). As with access, investments are more
likely to have been extended to family than friends (Table 2, Panel B).
Thirty-five percent reported giving time or money help in the last five
years to relatives, whereas only 11 % reported giving assistance to
friends. However, the ratio of investment to access is still smaller for
family (35:84) than for friends (11:20). Thus it appears from these
bivariate tables that family-based networks require less active support
from investments than do friend-based networks. Race differences in
giving assistance are small.
The composition (time versus money) of social-capital investments in
relatives is quite similar for blacks and whites. However, these invest-
ments are more likely to translate into only time-based perceived
support for blacks than whites (24% vs. 19%) (Table 1, Panel A).
Time versus Money
Table 3 presents data on the possible trade-offs between time and
money in stocks and investments in social capital networks. Looking
first at network investments in friends, there is no evidence that time and
money investments are substitutes. Indeed, whites who are more likely
to invest money in friend-based networks are also more likely to invest
time (Tau-b = 0.14, probability associated with x2 = 0.00). For blacks,
this association is not significant (Tau-b = 0.01, p associated with x2 =
0.89). Looking at perceived access to help, both whites and blacks who
are more likely to report the perception of the availability of time help
from friends are also more likely to report the availability of money
help.
Nor is there evidence of time versus money tradeoffs involving
family-based networks. Blacks and whites who report more time-based
access or investments in family-based networks also report more
money-based access or investments. The positive relationship between
time and money is somewhat stronger for blacks than whites.
Investments and Access-Bivariate Models
We next explored possible tradeoffs among the dimensions of social
capital networks. The bottom section of Table 3 presents measures of
association and probability level of chi-squared for investments versus
access to social capital, by agent (friend versus relative).
Breaking down the classification by type of recipient shows that
investments and stocks do indeed have a positive relationship for social
93
RATIONALITY AND SOCIETY 11(1)
Table 3. Association between various dimensions of social capital, by
race, for families with children under 18 years
Black White
Probability Probability
Tau-b level of X2 Tau-b level of X2
Friends: money versus time 0.006 0.894 0.138 0.000
Relatives: money versus time 0.226 0.000 0.151 0.000
Friends: money versus time 0.279 0.000 0.137 0.000
Relatives: money versus time 0.271 0.000 0.200 0.000
Friends 0.129 0.005 0.170 0.000
Relatives 0.040 0.391 0.018 0.351
Unweighted number of
observations 1432 1881
capital involving friends but not family. These patterns hold for both
white and black families with children, and provide evidence for the
existence of exchange as a motive for investments in friends.
Factors Associated with Investment in Social Capital
In Table 4, we report coefficients and standard errors from logistic
regressions of whether individuals gave time or money help to friends or
family in the past five years on demographic variables.2 Individual and
family resources and needs are key factors in investment in social
capital. High-income families are significantly more likely to invest
money in friends and relatives than are low-income families. A larger
family size is associated with a significantly lower probability of money
investment in friends and relatives. Neither the age of the youngest child
nor characteristics of the head (age, schooling, or race) are related to
social capital investment.
Other family events and circumstances associated with investment in
social capital include family structure/employment and geographic
mobility. Controlling for income and family size, married-couple, one-
earner families are more likely and non-employed female family heads
are less likely to give money to relatives than two-parent dual-earner
families. Families who moved and are living in a different region from
where they grew up are more likely to invest time in friends and money
94
HOFFERTH ET AL.: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Table 4. Various logistic regression models explaining investments of time
or money to friends or relatives, for families with children under 18 years
Gave time Gave money Gave time Gave money
help to help to help to help to
relatives relatives friends only friends only
Family income/1000 0.000 0.015 -0.023 0.018 24.541
(0.004) (0.005) (0.015) (0.005) (16.926)
Family size -0.040 -0.153 0.020 -0.279 4.011
(0.056) (0.061) (0.088) (0.081) (1.299)
Age of youngest child (years) (0-6 omitted)
Between 6 and 12 0.164 0.073 -0.067 -0.021 0.336
(0.151) (0.175) (0.259) (0.251) (0.473)
Between 13 and 17 -0.012 0.036 -0.344 -0.216 0.229
(0.193) (0.286) (0.401) (0.272) (0.421)
Family/employment structure (dual earner omitted)
Couple/one earner 0.000 0.288 0.356 0.020 0.406
(0.148) (0.111) (0.272) (0.184) (0.491)
Couple/no earner 0.165 -0.183 -0.682 0.447 0.038
(0.327) (0.330) (0.669) (0.411) (0.192)
Female head/employed 0.313 -0.194 0.291 0.205 0.106
(0.222) (0.266) (0.383) (0.350) (0.309)
Female head/not employed -0.011 -1.058 -0.096 0.237 0.089
(0.209) (0.411) (0.539) (0.458) (0.285)
Other -1.584 0.094 0.482 -0.491 0.019
(0.705) (0.542) (0.804) (0.982) (0.138)
Age -0.001 0.037 0.045 0.131 37.865
(0.032) (0.044) (0.060) (0.108) (10.705)
(Age ** 2)/100 0.011 -0.022 -0.044 -0.175 15.481
(0.040) (0.050) (0.070) (0.140) (9.042)
Number of years of schooling
completed (head) -0.021 -0.020 0.038 0.030 12.325
(0.024) (0.029) (0.051) (0.041) (2.751)
Race (white omitted)
Black -0.205 0.095 -0.384 -0.227 0.142
(0.145) (0.242) (0.301) (0.307) (0.349)
Current state/region versus state/region
head grew up (same state omitted)
Same region, different state -0.057 0.120 0.138 -0.330 0.116
(0.198) (0.169) (0.381) (0.322) (0.320)
Different region -0.134 0.337 0.820 -0.017 0.166
(0.156) (0.155) (0.258) (0.264) (0.373)
Percent of non-elderly poor in
the neighborhood 0.006 0.004 0.019 0.011 12.124
(0.005) (0.007) (0.009) (0.011) (10.524)
Percent in neighborhood who lived
in the same house five years ago 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.002 53.031
(0.005) (0.006) (0.007) (0.007) (14.157)
Intercept -1.304 -2.328 -4.302 -4.857
(0.714) (1.004) (1.389) (1.924)
-2 log likelihood 3470.0 2951.8 1353.3 1535.5
Mean of the dependent
variables 0.223 0.185 0.057 0.067
Number of unweighted
observations 3223
Parameter estimate in bold if significant at p < = 0.05.
Standard errors are reported in parentheses.
95
RATIONALITY AND SOCIETY 11(1)
in relatives than families living in the same state and region in which
they grew up. The time investment is important to developing social
capital in the new community, but the results indicate that this does not
mean that families substitute friends for family. In fact, those who
moved away from where they grew up provide more money assistance
to relatives than those who did not move.
Community characteristics are also key predictors of investing in
social capital. Consistent with earlier research showing some low
income communities to have strong friend and neighbor networks
(Sampson 1991), the higher the proportion of non-elderly poor in a
neighborhood, the more likely a family is to invest time in friends.
Contrary to Sampson (1991), however, the stability of the neighborhood
is not related to investing time or money in friends or relatives.
Basically, people who invest are generally those who are better off-
two-parent one-earner couples, higher income families, and smaller
families. However, those who have moved to a different region are also
more likely to invest, as are those with a higher proportion poor in their
neighborhood.
Relationship between Investment and Access-Multivariate
Models
To test hypotheses regarding linkages between investment and access,
we regressed whether the respondent reported access to time or money
help from friends or relatives on the same individual, family, and
community variables reported above. In the second step, we added the
four investment variables-investment of money to friends, investment
of time to friends, investment of money to relatives, and investment of
time to relatives. Coefficients from the logistic regression of social-
capital stocks on investments, and individual, family, and community
characteristics are presented in Table 5.
Years of schooling completed by the head are related to access to
time or money help from relatives, but not friends. As such, the results
do not support the altruism argument that less well-endowed persons
will have greater access to social capital. Instead, families with better-
educated heads appear to perceive greater access to time or money help
from relatives. Education may represent the resource level of family of
origin, since schooling is a major human-capital investment families
make in their children. Schooling may also be a proxy for value of time,
and we will explore this further in later analyses. Consistent with the
bivariate results, blacks have less access to time or money help from
96
HOFFERTH ET AL.: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
97
Table 5. Various logistic regression models explaining perceived access
to time and money help from friends and relatives, for families with
children under 18 years
Access to time or Access to time or
money help from money help from
relatives friends only
Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2
Family income/1000 -0.007 -0.008 0.005 0.006 24.530
(0.005) (0.005) (0.004) (0.004) (16.926)
Family size -0.068 -0.066 -0.008 0.001 4.012
(0.055) (0.052) (0.048) (0.050) (1.298)
Age of youngest child (years) (0-6 omitted)
Between6 and 12 -0.360 -0.381 0.192 0.195 0.336
(0.200) (0.205) (0.189) (0.189) (0.473)
Between 13 and 17 0.026 -0.029 -0.024 0.033 0.228
(0.232) (0.233) (0.196) (0.196) (0.420)
Family/employment structure (dual earner omitted)
Couple/one earner -0.069 -0.063 0.118 0.099 0.406
(0.145) (0.150) (0.140) (0.144) (0.491)
Couple/no earner 0.016 0.013 0.005 0.015 0.038
(0.368) (0.380) (0.265) (0.264) (0.192)
Female head/employed -0.574 -0.557 0.340 0.306 0.106
(0.291) (0.285) (0.253) (0.247) (0.307)
Female head/not employed -0.279 -0.246 0.377 0.371 0.089
(0.262) (0.268) (0.190) (0.206) (0.285)
Other -0.298 -0.032 0.541 0.578 0.019
(0.505) (0.482) (0.364) (0.340) (0.138)
Age -0.041 -0.042 -0.009 -0.012 37.862
(0.046) (0.047) (0.037) (0.037) (10.707)
(Age ** 2)/100 0.019 0.019 0.024 0.028 15.481
(0.050) (0.050) (0.040) (0.040) (9.044)
Number of years of schooling
completed (head) 0.050 0.055 0.016 0.014 12.321
(0.025) (0.025) (0.026) (0.025) (2.749)
Race (white omitted)
Black -0.576 -0.649 0.349 0.428 0.142
(0.185) (0.193) (0.204) (0.208) (0.349)
Current state/region versus state/region
head grew up (same state omitted)
Same region, different state
Different region
Percent of non-elderly poor in
the neighborhood
Percent in neighborhood who lived in
the same house five years ago
Investment of money to friends
Investment of time to friends
Investment of money to relatives
Investment of time to relatives
Intercept
-2 log likelihood 2
Mean of the dependent variables
-0.535 -0.558 0.714 0.741
(0.196) (0.202) (0.177) (0.171)
-0.756 -0.728 0.633 0.584
(0.184) (0.172) (0.187) (0.180)
0.005 0.008 0.009 0.006
(0.007) (0.007) (0.005) (0.006)
-0.006 -0.005 0.003 0.002
(0.004) (0.004) (0.004) (0.004)
-0.309 0.624
(0.223) (0.202)
- 1.019 1.226
(0.205) (0.240)
0.420 -0.113
(0.241) (0.196)
-0.056 0.186
(0.155) (0.127)
3.679 3.688 -2.422 -2.494
(0.961) (0.988) (0.824) (0.827)
588.7 2541.1 3138.6 3055.1
0.844 0.202
0.116
(0.320)
0.167
(0.373)
12.140
(10.526)
53.037
(14.155)
0.066
(0.249)
0.057
(0.232)
0.183
(0.387)
0.233
(0.423)
Number of unweighted
observations 3224
Parameter estimate in bold if significant at p < = 0.05. Standard errors are reported in parentheses.
RATIONALITY AND SOCIETY 11(1)
relatives and greater access to time or money help from friends
compared with whites.
Families that have moved consistently perceive less access to time or
money help from relatives and greater access to time or money help
from friends (as a result of greater investment, see Table 4). The results
so far are consistent with our hypothesis that migration reduces access
to social capital and that families invest to build it up in their new
communities.3
None of the other individual or family-level demographic measures
shows a significant relationship to perceived access to time or money
help in the regression models. Family income is not related to access to
time or money help from friends or relatives. Low-income families are
neither more, nor less likely to have access to time or money help from
relatives than high-income families. Family size is not significantly
related to access to time or money help from friends or relatives. The
age of a child is not significantly related to access to help. None of the
family structure/employment variables is significantly related to access
to time or money help from friends or relatives. Neither of the
community level variables is significantly associated with perceived
access to time and money help from friends or relatives, net of the other
controls.
The addition of measures of investments of money and time has
virtually no effect on the magnitude of these social and demographic
coefficients. Thus investment does not appear to explain the effects of
the individual, family, and community demographic variables on
access.
With respect to the relationship between past investments in friends
and current reports of access to help from friends, it appears that
reciprocity is indeed quite strong. Families having extended either time
or money to friends in the five-year period prior to the interview are
significantly more likely to report current access to help from them.
Families reporting past investments in relatives do not report more
access to friends' help, suggesting that these measures are not just the
result of a general inclination to give and to have access to help.
As expected, the reciprocal nature of family-based social-assistance
networks is much weaker than that of friends. Providing money or time
to relatives is not significantly associated with greater access to time or
money from relatives. Although fairly large in magnitude, the coeffi-
cient for the relationship between investment of money to relatives and
access is not significant at conventional levels. These data do not permit
testing whether there is a general inclination to give or have access to
98
HOFFERTH ET AL.: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
help. While investing time in friends has a significant negative effect on
access to social capital from relatives, this reflects the fact that
respondents can only mention one source (either friend or relative) for
each type of assistance (money or time).
Race Differences
Because of the strong race differences in perceived access, we looked
for differences between blacks and whites in the factors associated with
access to social capital. A few significant race differences in the effects
of individual and family factors on access to social capital appear when
these analyses are conducted separately for blacks and whites (Table 6).
After adjustment for other demographic factors, non-employed white
female family heads are more likely to have access to help from friends
than two-parent, dual-earner families. There are no differences by
family structure in access to help from friends among blacks. Among
blacks, 'other' family types (including male-headed families) are more
likely to have access to help from relatives than are dual earner couples.
There are no differences by family structure in access to help from
relatives among whites.
The effects of household income differ in direction for whites and
blacks. Among whites, the relationship between higher family income
(lower need) and access to time or money help from relatives is negative
and marginally significant (p < 0.10). Among blacks, the relationship
between family income and access to time or money help from relatives
is positive though non-significant. This suggests altruism as motivation
for kin assistance among whites. This inference is not supported,
however, by the relationship between family size and perceived access.
Among whites, larger family size (an indicator of greater need) is
associated with less access to time or money help from relatives. This
may be a consequence of lower investment, as large families are less
likely to report giving financial assistance to others (see Table 4).
Greater schooling is positively related to access to time or money help
from relatives for both whites and blacks, though it is only statistically
significant for whites.
The effects of migration are similar for blacks and whites, though
they are weaker for the former than for the latter. As for the entire
sample, geographic mobility is associated with greater access to time or
money help from friends and less access from relatives. The coefficients
are of similar size and in the expected direction, but fewer coefficients
are significant for blacks.
99
100
RATIONALITY AND SOCIETY 11(1)
0)~~~~~~Z
_ o ^ o o o t tn ON > N W) o 0 i 0 C' t,
^ n m o ~~~~~CS Z N t- r- Z oo ooo ot^C
,9' _ oo Nc o, w C tn w t-W t- toon oNoo
> ~ ~ ~~~~~C _ , 00 >10mNN"tW
c~~~~~~~t Oq C) \1 cn Oq O :rt C) N It t
0)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~c
CJ 00 4 00 -0C0 Cl \ O-
0) 000Q '-'I~-00 -- '-
0) 06~~~~~~6 6666 666666~~C5ciC566 6 666
40)
o 0) X 0 0 C) O N ON t ' m 6 N t OeO
0)
) 6
: 9 0 00 000 0 0el~ 0 0r~l e- P0
5200 _ I
^ O _I O t o N 0) 00 0Od -mt
_I t N O 9~~~~~~~~~0)^t^e S
- - 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0) ntoo ooo o/o_ io_
a $: _/~~~~~
Q Po X sI
*s~~~~~~~-0 @ 0 cS< t0) 0)
c) 3 s A so. o. o o.^ ^ o. t x^ w cs ^ ^^ "o o. o
c~~~~0 0) 0) 0)Soooo
= *E Q < o~~~~
ct~ ~ ~ 0) 0)
HOFFERTH ET AL.: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
N INON -OO e C N .oO
tn W) IC CI- 0- _-n
moo t- 666 o o o
n o N oo 0O0U}0 o r
00 00 w6 00 o _
00 or- o-
o o o o o o ~~oNo o
W )
O --
_ N
O O "O O
6 6 6 i
"O0
eCn 00
0
6 6
I 11-
0>-)00 00 0 0
00 00 0000 OO N C(
0 C e - m t- .-,
6 6 66 dcr
O - O - N --I
(- - 1-1
t Cl ) Cl
I.-, 6 6 -O
OC 6O N 00
N OI.N-
C
ON_ 58 b 00~ t It
O) c n vroo a\ cN
v cq 0 -
66i C5 5 666 66 i6
fNo. 0o xNe~ 0 0o.~ -
66 oos 6 6ooo_o _/
o o io N 0 0
0000 ~~N00c r 0~
~~~~m r- cnC t mN oo Wt
otN o m N o 6 t N o 6 u}
_/ rI R C5 5 4 en
00 ~ t1 W r- n C)- N
oo 00 tn W) q In en - oo
66 o o o oo om 6 nc r
m rq ON 00 t. vl r- ^
ONON C \0Nc0tNe t0 CN00 0
6 0 -oN O N o N N 0
) c - t - / -v \
n O 0 N0t - Q F
0 66m m O6 66 666 C 64- O o
ON
"0~~~~~~~~~7
~~~~~~~~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C
()
0)
CA
0
-O
lt
i
0
0)
CQ
0
3
ki
0)
O
11
0
V
.
00
.0
0)
)q
0c
0
t
9
*;::
Ct4
101
00 ON,
0 N
\ _~
RATIONALITY AND SOCIETY 11(1)
The relationships between investment and access are similar for
whites and blacks. Investing time or money in friends is associated with
greater access to time or money help from friends, and less access to
help from relatives for both whites and blacks, though, again, the
relationships are weaker for the latter. Investing money in relatives is
positively, but not significantly, associated with greater access to time or
money help from relatives for blacks and whites. Surprisingly, for
blacks, investing time in relatives is associated with greater access to
time or money help from friends. Thus for blacks there is more of a
spillover effect from investing in relatives to potential receipt from
friends. What this means is unclear, partly because access to time and
money are combined in Table 6.
Effects of Investments by Type, Relationship, and Race
To test whether investment of money is associated with access to
money, and investment of time to access to time, when examined
separately for friends and family, we ran the Table 6 analyses separately
by type of help and race (Table 7).
As expected, for both whites and blacks investment of time to friends
is associated with greater access to time help from friends and less from
relatives (Table 7). For whites there is a spillover effect with investing
time in friends being associated with access to money help from friends
as well. For whites, but not blacks, investment of money in friends is
associated with greater access to money from friends. These relation-
ships are weaker for family, with no significant associations for either
blacks or whites. Blacks show more of a cross-relationship spillover
effect of providing time assistance, with those providing time to
relatives also more likely to report access to money from friends. Thus,
the structure of social capital is generally similar for blacks and whites,
though it differs in one important respect. Among whites, access to time
or money in a particular relationship is much more closely linked to
investments in it. The finding that blacks who invest in family may have
access to help from friends may be due to the existence of fictive kin
which makes ties between kin and friends interchangeable. Alterna-
tively, it may be that, due to limitations of question wording, the data
fail to capture simultaneous investments in several different relation-
ships, e.g. both kin and friends, and that blacks are more likely than
whites to have such complex ties. Only investments in kin would be
captured under this scenario.
There are a few small race differences in the effects of family
102
HOFFERTH ET AL.: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
circumstances on access to social capital. Having a child in the middle
childhood years is associated with greater access to money help from
friends for blacks and with less access to money help from relatives for
whites. Among blacks, a single-earner couple has less access to money
help from friends than a dual-earner couple. Among whites, employed
female heads are less likely to report access to time assistance from kin;
they may be a stigmatized group. Schooling appears to be a proxy for
the value of time, particularly for whites. White household heads with
more years of schooling report less access to time help from relatives
and more access to money help from relatives than those with fewer
years of schooling. This is consistent with the exchange hypothesis that
time help will go to those with a lower value of time and money to those
better-off. There are no significant associations for blacks.
The Relationship between Money and Time
In Table 7, we included a control for access to money help in the time
regressions and a control for access to time help in the money
regressions to see whether money and time help are associated,
controlling for other factors.4 Contrary to our hypothesis of a negative
association, money and time help are consistently positively related for
both friends and relatives and among both blacks and whites.
Conclusion
Our descriptive analysis found that more than four out of five white and
black families with children under 18 years perceive that they could count
on access to help from family in an emergency, and about one out of five
perceive that they could access help primarily from friends. Although
blacks invest nearly as much time and money in their family networks as
whites, their perceived ability to receive support from these networks is
considerably lower. The reverse is true for friend-based networks. Blacks
and whites invest nearly identical amounts but blacks are more likely than
whites to perceive support from friends. Again, this could be due to the
failure to be able to take investments in multiple relationships into account
in the analysis.
Families that are better off tend to be heavier investors in family and
friends. This is not surprising, as they have greater resources. Strong
support for the hypothesis that investment leads to social capital comes
from the investment behavior and perceived access of movers. As
103
104 RATIONALITY AND SOCIETY 1 1 (1)
_cn V c 0 ^ > I000 0000 ICo ',t- '- ao > N m o
_~~~~~~c o. Co. CS " 't ,I q t " o o CS o~ c9~ on oolp
\l- 00 N '-
z _ w rt OoC _ o _/ o 0 o oo mCoo
.> S Xs X m o it > tm>n q q q o^o
~~ 0~~000 C>0 - 0 0 0
V o ooo6 6 O 6o o m 6 6 O ooo 00
~~~~~~~~~~~~~cl 0 0 0 \ O. O. in O.O,C N t s^m m 't "C t . .O O .O
t ~ ~~~~~~~ I
lz C C C 0c
o o
~ 0oov- 0 W - 0nm W cww~ )m -k
=~~~~~~~~C C) c) 0 n - m cl c 9 C) cq oo cq oo Cn C) C) 0 > 9o
O u < R $ 8 8 8 cC) \ o WI) C,\ 0 C> O m C CC,N "C t ooo
C)000)C)0 'CNC 0C 0llC) l c C C>0 00 C C
6666 66666666666 o o Cs ooo o 666 oo
00
+Z (7 C tn ooC9 m It oc r It tl r- oo~ m C-- N o) It ol C, W) C)
\~~~~~~~~ m 0 ,\ olloo N \o o0 00 Co N 9 N cs I o o o C\ C>o
o 0) ~~~~~ 0000 ''~C)C)0 l 0-'0 'C)C> ClCl'O 00 rm\0 N 0
a0)
'0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~c
0 e c'M -0 1E mclin o- vo l ---a r--t-0 o
0) -X ._ xo0' l t- Il M t o n o CO o o c0 l 0C oo
'~~ 0 I'-0l~ l~ I e O oO C0N 0
5o i H00 M o o o o m 2 v o C,,o 6 6 6 N 66
0000 V xo oo o o N C o> o I w o ,\N ao oooo 00
~~~0) ~~~~~ 0C),
o o-c-' -ooj-~
C-n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-
cq = _eE O m 08 o cs oO0 0000 -'C0i o o en 0 clCO ) 0 0 00
CQ C5_ C9 0 6 6 6 6 C5 6 O O cr oo
w 66oo 6 t \o o o o o o o oo
0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
0) '0_EE
o 30 zT
0 'IC) 0
0 C) 0
0
=~~~ ~~ .0Cl
* 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
0= . s> m O o '0 o u N 0
Y~~~~~i ct ASo oo o Nt nntoo 00 ~ o 0 o0oo
~~~~0 00 0 0 0 Cl 0'0 moXt^ONO
W~~~~ - A)C SOC '0t 00 0 0 0O,,
sv ~ ~ ~ * *X b0 0) 0 noooooooo
c) x E ~~~~I~ 0 ;
t a M~~~~~~~~~~
HOFFERTH ET AL.: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL 105
oN (I' \OC- 0\ 0b 0 r- N oo t t ,C, N oo o o Cl N
cqN cs O W ol 1- 0 r- \C tn to en 09 CN en v D 7t "t
00 vW0 0C0C-C t 0 l
666 oo cin 66666666 6666666
C>0 00C CIC It0 000 0000ClCC0 00 0 000 ~0
00 0 00 0 ol in N o00 C) t0 en N0
e _s en t_\0 VI I
eooo~~~~o~~ Cl-~" cnO Cl ~0cl
oo _ CS 0 0 oo oo0 C) C) 0 0 0 o X vt } W) 0
00 00 ~~~~~~~~~~~22~~~~~~ ~~0
oq 00 rz 00o ~c N C- 00r- c cl0tn i--
0 II)C'Cl.0 000 0ot
on t O N O O o o ^ ~~~m n 00^Oe OV
0C -00 - Co ) 0 l 01 C0 0c lC CS UC t"0 C 0
Oc c U ) O cQ ON t- O )\n -)
oo C - N O C O XCt_I 0 tl CIO t- )
C _ Inc 0 t" _0 - 0
_N _ e . i"..r~
m , Fz v) O0 - 0 in w N O- Oc9 ol t- cn m
- - oo t O o 0 Noo O U') 10 in 00 -
~~~~~~~C> o atFOmo 9 It 9F^Fc
000 00 00 0 C O OC O -0 X0C0 0 O O ) en C 00C \
00
00 00 00~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0
000 0 00 0 00 00 : Oin NO0 000 00C,- \ 0 \ > tt_ \
.Cl cn o o- ." q " 1- O Ili OIt O O
C CS tO, o) NW 1 ~00C )0 0 0 0 0
tn~~~~~~~~~
cn 0C C 0 0 000 O 00 en 00 tO 00 00\
C0 0 O C 0 a o C 00 C C 00 00 t00
O t O ^ O OO O ^ ^ O tn A 10 0 ^o )
o o 6 o o o oC 0 Co o o o o o CD
> - - ott- C00 o E- 0o m w 0 Cr V o00 mV
~~~~~~~~~~ 4 T " ) r _ o o ) ln W)v
C) 00 c 0 00 1* 0ClCl C-- 0 ~ 0 0 ~ ~ '
,.0t o o r' - >O o m o \ 0 W o
C o~ C C N o W o1 on N oo- t W) * W) cs _F
o soo.oo, m o.i t q In q o. q C N crE 0 1
otC> C) 0 - C l )0 )0 0 t0 \00 - ~ 0 -~I
o c C C E Cn ' t C c % o 00> o il
6 c6 6 C0 00 in O . O , m \. t66666666 ^ 9 6 O
'n ~~~~ . ' ; - : c
*y
0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t
0 0
0 >
'0 '0 0
0) 0)
0 0 0)
o. '0~~~4 4 4
5 0 ~ 0 0) 0 0) 0 - . ~
00
4. 0 0-
00) 0 0 0 0) 2 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4
Q.0 0o0 ~~~ ~ ~ o.~ ~~ o c~~ Cl
RATIONALITY AND SOCIETY 1 1 (1)
hypothesized, families who have moved away from their family of
origin report less access to help from kin and greater access to help from
friends. This suggests that greater distance reduces the influence of the
extended family. We showed that this is because migration is associated
with reduced availability to and time help from kin nearby, increased
time investment in friends, and increased access to time help from
friends. However, it is not associated with reduced monetary investment
in kin, reduced access to money help from kin, or increased access to
money help from friends.
Contrary to our hypothesis, families that invest appear to invest and
have access to both time and money help. The two are complements, not
substitutes.
Our main interest is in the extent to which altruism and exchange
explain social capital investments. Investments in friend-based social
capital appear to be motivated by exchange. Among those who do not
mention family but do mention friends as the primary source of
assistance, the relationship between investment and access is con-
sistently strong, regardless of whether time or money is involved.
Consistent with this argument, black female heads have access to less
money but more time from friends than do two parent dual-earner
families. They also invest more in them.
For kin, the exchange-based nature of networks was not in evidence.
Neither providing money to relatives, nor investing time in relatives was
associated with significantly greater access to time or money help from
relatives. Thus this suggests that other motives are involved in kin-
based social capital. We found some evidence for kin-based altruism,
but only among white families. For whites, access to time and money
help from relatives is marginally but negatively related to family
income, as would be expected in an altruistic model. Thus, while it
applies to friends, the motivation for providing time and money to kin
cannot be accurately described as an 'investment'.
While little evidence for exchange was found among kin, it is
troublesome that evidence for altruism is also weak. Other researchers
have also failed to find strong evidence for altruistic links across
extended family relations (Altonji et al. 1992). It may be of concern that
social relations are so strongly based upon exchange. A lack of altruistic
motivation makes the process of setting priorities in constraining public
expenditures more divisive than it would otherwise be. While the
decline in community has been described and studied for many years,
the high level of economic growth and prosperity in the USA previously
reduced conflict among competing interests. When society feels the
106
HOFFERTH ET AL.: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
pinch of reduced growth and lower resources, the social and political
consequences of dependence on exchange relationships become more
evident.
NOTES
Funding for this research was provided under the Child and Family Well-being Research
Network, NICHD. Martha Hill and participants in the Michigan Family Studies Seminar
provided helpful comments.
1. Note that the respondent is asked only about time help received from nearbyfriends or
kin. As families move away from where they grew up, access to time help from kin will
decline simply because they no longer live near kin, not because willingness to help has
declined. This should not affect access to time help from friends, access to money help
from kin or friends or time/money investment in kin or friend-based social capital.
2. The standard errors were corrected for the complex sampling design using SUDAAN.
3. The reader is cautioned that the reason for the strong relationship between moving and
reduced access to time help from relatives lies in the fact that the question asked about
time help from nearby relatives. Thus the reduced time help could simply be because a
move occurred, and not because of a reduction in willingness to provide time
assistance, though they are likely to be related.
4. This did not affect the other coefficients in the model.
REFERENCES
Altonji, Joseph G., Fumio Hayashi and Laurence Kotlikoff. 1992. 'Is the Extended Family
Altruistically Linked? Direct Tests using Micro Data.' American Economic Review. 82:
1177-98.
Altonji, Joseph G., Fumio Hayashi and Laurence Kotlikoff. 1994. The Effects of Income
and Wealth on Time and Money Transfers between Parents and Children. Unpublished
manuscript. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.
Barro, Robert. 1974. 'Are Government Bonds Net Wealth?' Journal of Political Economy
82: 1095-117.
Bernheim, B. Douglas, Andrei Shleifer and Lawrence Summers. 1985. 'The Strategic
Bequest Motive.' Journal of Political Economy 93: 1045-76.
Blau, Peter M. 1994. Structural Contexts of Opportunities. Chicago, IL: University of
Chicago Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1983. 'The Forms of Capital.' In Handbook of Theory and Research for
the Sociology of Education, ed. J. Richardson, pp. 241-58. New York: Greenwood
Press.
Coleman, James S. 1988. 'Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.' American
Journal of Sociology 94 (suppl): S95-S 120.
Cox, D. 1987. 'Motives for Private Income Transfers.' Journal of Political Economy 95:
508-46.
Cox, D. and M.R. Rank. 1992. 'Inter-vivos Transfers and Intergenerational Exchange.'
Review of Economics and Statistics. LXXIV: 305-14.
107
RATIONALITY AND SOCIETY 11(1)
Duncan, Greg and Martha Hill. 1989. 'Assessing the Quality of Household Panel Survey
Data: The Case of the PSID.' Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 7: 441-51.
Fischer, Claude S. 1982. To Dwell Among Friends: Personal Networks in Town and City.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Furstenberg, Frank F., Jr and Mary Elizabeth Hughes. 1995. 'Social Capital and
Successful Development among At-Risk Youth.' Journal of Marriage and the Family
57: 580-92.
Granovetter, Mark. 1973. 'The Strength of Weak Ties.' American Journal of Sociology
78: 1360-80.
Gustafsson, Siv S. and Frank P. Stafford. 1994. 'Links between Early Childhood
Programs and Maternal Employment in Three Countries.' The Future of Children 5:
161-74.
Hill, Martha. 1992. The Panel Study of Income Dynamics. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Hill, M.S., J.N. Morgan and R. Herzog. 1993. 'Intergenerational Aspects of Family Help
Patterns.' Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Population Association of
America, Cinannati, OH.
Hofferth, Sandra L. 1984. 'Kin Networks, Race, and Family Structure.' Journal of
Marriage and the Family 46: 791-806.
Hofferth, Sandra L. and John Iceland. 1998. 'Social Capital in Rural and Urban
Communities.' Rural Sociology 63(4): 574-98.
Hogan, Dennis P., David J. Eggebeen and Clifford C. Clogg. 1993. 'The Structure of
Intergenerational Exchanges in American Families.' American Journal of Sociology 98:
1428-58.
Lazear, E.P. and R.T. Michael. 1988. Allocation of Income within the Household.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lee, Yean-Ju, William L. Parish and Robert J. Willis. 1994. 'Sons, Daughters, and
Intergenerational Support in Taiwan.' American Journal of Sociology 99: 1010-41.
Massey, Douglas and Nancy Denton. 1993. American Apartheid: Segregation and the
Making of the Underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Morgan, James N. 1983. 'The Redistribution of Income by Families and Institutions and
Emergency Help.' In Five Thousand American Families-Patterns of Economic
Progress, Vol. X. eds G. Duncan and J. Morgan. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social
Research.
Oliver, Melvin and Thomas Shapiro. 1995. Black Wealth/White Wealth. New York:
Routledge.
Orr, Larry L. 1976. 'Income Transfers as a Public Good: An Application to AFDC.'
American Economic Review 66: 359-71.
Parcel, Toby L. and Elizabeth G. Menaghan. 1993. 'Family Social Capital and Children's
Behavior Problems.' Social Psychology Quarterly 56: 120-35.
Reiss, A.J., Jr and J. Roth (eds). 1993. Understanding and Preventing Violence.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Rosenzweig, Mark R. and Kenneth I. Wolpin. 1994. 'Parental and Public Transfers to
Young Women and Their Children.' American Economic Review 84: 1195-212.
Rosenzweig, Mark R. and Kenneth I. Wolpin. 1993. 'Intergenerational Support and Life-
Cycle Incomes of Young Men and their Parents: Human Capital Investments, Co-
Residence and Interhousehold Financial Transfers.' Journal of Labor Economics 11:
84-112.
Sampson, Robert J. 1991. 'Linking the Macro- and Microlevel Dimensions of Community
Social Organization.' Social Forces 70: 43-64.
108
HOFFERTH ET AL.: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Sampson, Robert J. 1997. 'Social Capital for Children: Its Structural and Neighborhood-
Level Context'. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Sociological
Association, Toronto, Canada.
Sampson, Robert, Stephen Raudenbush and Felton Earls. 1997. 'Neighborhoods and
Violent Crime: A Multilevel Study of Collective Efficacy.' Science 277: 918-24.
Schoeni, R.F. 1992. Another Leak in the Bucket? Public Transfer Income and Private
Family Support. Working Paper # 94-249, Population Studies Center, University of
Michigan.
Smith, Mark, Lionel Beaulieu and Glenn Israel. (1992). 'Effects of Human Capital and
Social Capital on Dropping Out of High School in the South.' Journal of Research in
Rural Education 8: 75-87.
Stack, Carol B. 1974. All Our Kin: Strategies for Survival in a Black Community. New
York: Harper and Row.
Sugland, Barbara, Connie Blumenthal and Kristin Moore. 1995. 'Social Capital and the
Normative Order of Life Events among At-Risk Female Youth.' Paper Presented at the
Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America, San Francisco, California.
Taylor, Robert J., Linda M. Chatters, M. Belinda Tucker and Edith Lewis. 1990. 'Black
Families.' Journal of Marriage and the Family 52: 993-1014.
Teachman, Jay, Karen Carver and Kathleen Paasch. 1996. 'Social Capital and Dropping
Out of School Early.' Journal of Marriage and the Family 58: 773-83.
Thornton, Arland and Hui-Sheng Lin. 1994. Social Change and the Family in Taiwan.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Wellman, Barry. 1979. 'East Yorkers and the Community Question.' American Journal of
Sociology 84: 1201-31.
SANDRA L. HOFFERTH is Research Scientist at the Institute for
Social Research; Research Associatc, Population Studies Center; and
Co-Director of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, University of
Michigan. Her current research focuses on children's time use, and
parental employment and child well-being. Her recent publications
include 'Parental Extrafamilial Resources and Children's School
Attainment' (co-authored with J. Boisjoly and G. Duncan) in Sociology
of Education (1998); 'Public Assistance Receipt of Mexican- and
Cuban-American Children in Native and Immnigrant Families' in D.
Hernandez (ed.), Children of Immigrants: Health, Adjustment and
Public Assistance (1998); and 'Family Adaptations to Income and Job
Loss in the U.S.' (co-authored with W. Jean Yeung) in Journal of
Family and Economic Issues (1998).
ADDRESS: Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1248, USA [email: Hofferth@umich.edu].
JOHANNE BOISJOLY is Professor and Chair, Department des Scien-
ces Humaines, Universite du Quebec a Rimouski, Rimouski, Quebec,
Canada. Boisjoly's current interests lie in the field of socioeconomic
inequality and quantitative methodology. Her current research explores
the risky behavior of adolescents in the USA and labor and unemploy-
ment issues in Canada. Her recent publications include 'The Shifting
109
RATIONALITY AND SOCIETY 11(1)
Incidence of Involuntary Job Losses from 1968 to 1992' (co-authored
with Greg. J. Duncan and Timothy M. Smeeding) in Industrial
Relations (1998); 'Time Limits and Welfare Reform: New Estimates of
the Number and Characteristics of Affected Families' (co-authored
with Greg J. Duncan and Kathleen Mullan Harris) in Journal of Policy
Analysis and Management (forthcoming); and 'Initial Welfare Spells:
Trends, Events and Duration' (co-authored with Kathleen Mullan
Harris and Greg J. Duncan) in Social Service Review (forthcoming).
ADDRESS: Department of Sociology, University of Quebec at
Rimouski, Rimouski, Quebec G5L 3A1, Canada.
GREG J. DUNCAN is Professor of Education and Social Policy,
School of Education, Northwestern University and Deputy Director,
Joint Center for Research on Poverty. His fields of interest include
income distribution and child and adolescent development. His current
research develops and tests intergenerational models of poverty and
welfare use and evaluates welfare reform's effects on families and
children. His recent publications include 'How Much Does Childhood
Poverty Affect the Life Chances of Children?' (co-authored with
Jeanne Brooks-Gunn, Wei-Jun J. Yeung and Judith Smith) in American
Sociological Review (1998); The Consequences of Growing Up Poor
(co-edited with Jeanne Brooks-Gunn) (1997); Neighborhood Poverty:
Context and Consequences for Children (co-edited with Jeanne
Brooks-Gunn and J. Lawrence Aber) (1997); and 'The Structure of
Achievement and Behavior Across Middle Childhood' (co-authored
with Lori Kowaleski-Jones) in Child Development (forthcoming).
ADDRESS: Center for Urban Affairs and Policy Research, Northwest-
ern University, Evanston, IL 60208, USA.
110
</meta-value> </custom-meta></custom-meta-wrap></article-meta></front><back><notes><p>Funding for this research was provided under the Child and Family Well-being Research Network, NICHD. Martha Hill and participants in the Michigan Family Studies Seminar provided helpful comments.
<list list-type="order"><list-item><p>1. Note that the respondent is asked only about time help received from <italic>nearby friends or kin</italic>. As families move away from where they grew up, access to time help from kin will decline simply because they no longer live near kin, not because willingness to help has declined. This should not affect access to time help from friends, access to money help from kin or friends or time/money investment in kin or friend-based social capital.</p></list-item><list-item><p>2. The standard errors were corrected for the complex sampling design using SUDAAN.</p></list-item><list-item><p>3. The reader is cautioned that the reason for the strong relationship between moving and reduced access to time help from relatives lies in the fact that the question asked about time help from nearby relatives. Thus the reduced time help could simply be because a move occurred, and not because of a reduction in willingness to provide time assistance, though they are likely to be related.</p></list-item><list-item><p>4. This did not affect the other coefficients in the model.</p></list-item></list></p></notes><ref-list><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Altonji, Joseph G.</surname></name>
, <name name-style="western"><surname>Fumio Hayashi</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Laurence Kotlikoff</surname></name>. <year>1992</year>. <article-title>`Is the Extended Family Altruistically Linked? Direct Tests using Micro Data.'</article-title><source>American Economic Review</source>. <volume>82</volume>: <fpage>1177</fpage>-<lpage>1198</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Altonji, Joseph G.</surname></name>
, <name name-style="western"><surname>Fumio Hayashi</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Laurence Kotlikoff</surname></name>. 1994. <source>The Effects of Income and Wealth on Time and Money Transfers between Parents and Children</source>. Unpublished manuscript. <publisher-loc>Evanston, IL</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Northwestern University</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Barro, Robert</surname></name>
. <year>1974</year>. <article-title>`Are Government Bonds Net Wealth?'</article-title><source>Journal of Political Economy</source><volume>82</volume>: <fpage>1095</fpage>-<lpage>1117</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Bernheim, B. Douglas</surname></name>
, <name name-style="western"><surname>Andrei Shleifer</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Lawrence Summers</surname></name>. <year>1985</year>. <article-title>`The Strategic Bequest Motive.'</article-title><source>Journal of Political Economy</source><volume>93</volume>: <fpage>1045</fpage>-<lpage>1076</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Blau, Peter M.</surname></name>
1994. <source>Structural Contexts of Opportunities</source>. <publisher-loc>Chicago, IL</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>University of Chicago Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Bourdieu, Pierre</surname></name>
. 1983. <article-title>`The Forms of Capital.'</article-title> In <source>Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education</source>, ed. <name name-style="western"><surname>J. Richardson</surname></name>, pp. <fpage>241</fpage>-<lpage>258</lpage>. <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Greenwood Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Coleman, James S.</surname></name><year>1988</year>. <article-title>`Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.'</article-title><source>American Journal of Sociology</source><volume>94</volume> (<issue>suppl</issue>): <fpage>S95</fpage>-<lpage>S120</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Cox, D.</surname></name><year>1987</year>. <article-title>`Motives for Private Income Transfers.'</article-title><source>Journal of Political Economy</source><volume>95</volume>: <fpage>508</fpage>-<lpage>546</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Cox, D.</surname></name>
and <name name-style="western"><surname>M.R. Rank</surname></name>. <year>1992</year>. <article-title>`Inter-vivos Transfers and Intergenerational Exchange.'</article-title><source>Review of Economics and Statistics</source>. <volume>LXXIV</volume>: <fpage>305</fpage>-<lpage>314</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Duncan, Greg</surname></name>
and <name name-style="western"><surname>Martha Hill</surname></name>. <year>1989</year>. <article-title>`Assessing the Quality of Household Panel Survey Data: The Case of the PSID.'</article-title><source>Journal of Business and Economic Statistics</source><volume>7</volume>: <fpage>441</fpage>-<lpage>451</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Fischer, Claude S.</surname></name>
1982. <source>To Dwell Among Friends: Personal Networks in Town and City</source>. <publisher-loc>Chicago</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>University of Chicago Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Furstenberg, Frank F., Jr</surname></name>
and <name name-style="western"><surname>Mary Elizabeth Hughes</surname></name>. <year>1995</year>. <article-title>`Social Capital and Successful Development among At-Risk Youth.'</article-title><source>Journal of Marriage and the Family</source><volume>57</volume>: <fpage>580</fpage>-<lpage>592</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Granovetter, Mark</surname></name>
. <year>1973</year>. <article-title>`The Strength of Weak Ties.'</article-title><source>American Journal of Sociology</source><volume>78</volume>: <fpage>1360</fpage>-<lpage>1380</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Gustafsson, Siv S.</surname></name>
and <name name-style="western"><surname>Frank P. Stafford</surname></name>. <year>1994</year>. <article-title>`Links between Early Childhood Programs and Maternal Employment in Three Countries.'</article-title><source>The Future of Children</source><volume>5</volume>: <fpage>161</fpage>-<lpage>174</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hill, Martha</surname></name>
. 1992. <source>The Panel Study of Income Dynamics</source>. <publisher-loc>Newbury Park, CA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Sage</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="confproc" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hill, M.S.</surname></name>
, <name name-style="western"><surname>J.N. Morgan</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>R. Herzog</surname></name>. 1993. <article-title>`Intergenerational Aspects of Family Help Patterns.'</article-title> Paper Presented at the <conf-name>Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America</conf-name>, <conf-loc>Cinannati, OH.</conf-loc></citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hofferth, Sandra L.</surname></name><year>1984</year>. <article-title>`Kin Networks, Race, and Family Structure.'</article-title><source>Journal of Marriage and the Family</source><volume>46</volume>: <fpage>791</fpage>-<lpage>806</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hofferth, Sandra L.</surname></name>
and <name name-style="western"><surname>John Iceland</surname></name>. <year>1998</year>. <article-title>`Social Capital in Rural and Urban Communities.'</article-title><source>Rural Sociology</source><volume>63</volume>(<issue>4</issue>): <fpage>574</fpage>-<lpage>598</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hogan, Dennis P.</surname></name>
, <name name-style="western"><surname>David J. Eggebeen</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Clifford C. Clogg</surname></name>. <year>1993</year>. <article-title>`The Structure of Intergenerational Exchanges in American Families.'</article-title><source>American Journal of Sociology</source><volume>98</volume>: <fpage>1428</fpage>-<lpage>1458</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Lazear, E.P.</surname></name>
and <name name-style="western"><surname>R.T. Michael</surname></name>. 1988. <source>Allocation of Income within the Household</source>. <publisher-loc>Chicago</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>University of Chicago Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Lee, Yean-Ju</surname></name>
, <name name-style="western"><surname>William L. Parish</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Robert J. Willis</surname></name>. <year>1994</year>. <article-title>`Sons, Daughters, and Intergenerational Support in Taiwan.'</article-title><source>American Journal of Sociology</source><volume>99</volume>: <fpage>1010</fpage>-<lpage>1041</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Massey, Douglas and Nancy Denton</surname></name>
. 1993. <source>American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass</source>. <publisher-loc>Cambridge, MA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Harvard University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Morgan, James N.</surname></name>
1983. <article-title>`The Redistribution of Income by Families and Institutions and Emergency Help.'</article-title> In <source>Five Thousand American Families—Patterns of Economic Progress</source>, Vol. X. eds <name name-style="western"><surname>G. Duncan</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>J. Morgan</surname></name>. <publisher-loc>Ann Arbor, MI</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Institute for Social Research</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Oliver, Melvin</surname></name>
and <name name-style="western"><surname>Thomas Shapiro</surname></name>. 1995. <source>Black Wealth/White Wealth</source>. <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Orr, Larry L.</surname></name><year>1976</year>. <article-title>`Income Transfers as a Public Good: An Application to AFDC.'</article-title><source>American Economic Review</source><volume>66</volume>: <fpage>359</fpage>-<lpage>371</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Parcel, Toby L.</surname></name>
and <name name-style="western"><surname>Elizabeth G. Menaghan</surname></name>. <year>1993</year>. <article-title>`Family Social Capital and Children's Behavior Problems.'</article-title><source>Social Psychology Quarterly</source><volume>56</volume>: <fpage>120</fpage>-<lpage>135</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Reiss, A.J., Jr</surname></name>
and <name name-style="western"><surname>J. Roth</surname></name> (eds). 1993. <source>Understanding and Preventing Violence</source>. <publisher-loc>Washington, DC</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>National Academy Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Rosenzweig, Mark R.</surname></name>
and <name name-style="western"><surname>Kenneth I. Wolpin</surname></name>. <year>1994</year>. <article-title>`Parental and Public Transfers to Young Women and Their Children.'</article-title><source>American Economic Review</source><volume>84</volume>: <fpage>1195</fpage>-<lpage>1212</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Rosenzweig, Mark R.</surname></name>
and <name name-style="western"><surname>Kenneth I. Wolpin</surname></name>. <year>1993</year>. <article-title>`Intergenerational Support and Life-Cycle Incomes of Young Men and their Parents: Human Capital Investments, Co-Residence and Interhousehold Financial Transfers.'</article-title><source>Journal of Labor Economics</source><volume>11</volume>: <fpage>84</fpage>-<lpage>112</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sampson, Robert J.</surname></name><year>1991</year>. <article-title>`Linking the Macro- and Microlevel Dimensions of Community Social Organization.'</article-title><source>Social Forces</source><volume>70</volume>: <fpage>43</fpage>-<lpage>64</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="confproc" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sampson, Robert J.</surname></name>
1997. <article-title>`Social Capital for Children: Its Structural and Neighborhood-Level Context'</article-title>. Paper Presented at the <conf-name>Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association</conf-name>, <conf-loc>Toronto, Canada</conf-loc>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sampson, Robert</surname></name>
, <name name-style="western"><surname>Stephen Raudenbush</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Felton Earls</surname></name>. <year>1997</year>. <article-title>`Neighborhoods and Violent Crime: A Multilevel Study of Collective Efficacy.'</article-title><source>Science</source><volume>277</volume>: <fpage>918</fpage>-<lpage>924</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Schoeni, R.F.</surname></name>
1992. <source>Another Leak in the Bucket? Public Transfer Income and Private Family Support</source>. Working Paper # 94-249, <publisher-name>Population Studies Center, University of Michigan</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Smith, Mark</surname></name>
, <name name-style="western"><surname>Lionel Beaulieu</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Glenn Israel</surname></name>. (<year>1992</year>). <article-title>`Effects of Human Capital and Social Capital on Dropping Out of High School in the South.'</article-title><source>Journal of Research in Rural Education</source><volume>8</volume>: <fpage>75</fpage>-<lpage>87</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Stack, Carol B.</surname></name>
1974. <source>All Our Kin: Strategies for Survival in a Black Community</source>. <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Harper and Row</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="confproc" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sugland, Barbara</surname></name>
, <name name-style="western"><surname>Connie Blumenthal</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Kristin Moore</surname></name>. 1995. <article-title>`Social Capital and the Normative Order of Life Events among At-Risk Female Youth.'</article-title> Paper Presented at the <conf-name>Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America</conf-name>, <conf-loc>San Francisco, California</conf-loc>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Taylor, Robert J.</surname></name>
, <name name-style="western"><surname>Linda M. Chatters</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>M. Belinda Tucker</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Edith Lewis</surname></name>. <year>1990</year>. <article-title>`Black Families.'</article-title><source>Journal of Marriage and the Family</source><volume>52</volume>: <fpage>993</fpage>-<lpage>1014</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Teachman, Jay</surname></name>
, <name name-style="western"><surname>Karen Carver</surname></name> and <name name-style="western"><surname>Kathleen Paasch</surname></name>. <year>1996</year>. <article-title>`Social Capital and Dropping Out of School Early.'</article-title><source>Journal of Marriage and the Family</source><volume>58</volume>: <fpage>773</fpage>-<lpage>783</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Thornton, Arland</surname></name>
and <name name-style="western"><surname>Hui-Sheng Lin</surname></name>. 1994. <source>Social Change and the Family in Taiwan</source>. <publisher-loc>Chicago, IL</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>University of Chicago Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Wellman, Barry</surname></name>
. <year>1979</year>. <article-title>`East Yorkers and the Community Question.'</article-title><source>American Journal of Sociology</source><volume>84</volume>: <fpage>1201</fpage>-<lpage>1231</lpage>.</citation></ref></ref-list></back></article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" lang="en" contentType="CDATA"><title>THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Sandra L.</namePart><namePart type="family">Hofferth</namePart><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Johanne</namePart><namePart type="family">Boisjoly</namePart><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Greg J.</namePart><namePart type="family">Duncan</namePart><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="research-article" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-1JC4F85T-7">research-article</genre><originInfo><publisher>SAGE Publications</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text"></placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1999-02</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">1999</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm></language><abstract lang="en">This paper investigates whether a family's access to social capital— defined here as perceived access to time and money help in an emergency from kin and friends—depends upon the family's past time and money investments in those kin and friends. It also examines the potential tradeoffs between money and time help from friends and relatives. Data come from parents of children under age 18 who responded to a supplement on time and money assistance included in the 1980 wave of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics. The results suggest that while parents who invest primarily in friend-based help networks have greater potential access to assistance from friends, there is no significant link between investment in family and access to family-based assistance. Thus, while exchange describes social-capital linkages to friends, it does not describe family-based behaviors. Other findings are that time and money appear to be complements while investments in friends or family are substitutes.</abstract><subject><genre>keywords</genre><topic>social capital</topic><topic>kin networks</topic><topic>time assistance</topic><topic>money assistance</topic><topic>social exchange</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Rationality and society</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">1043-4631</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1461-7358</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">RSS</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID-hwp">sprss</identifier><part><date>1999</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>11</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>1</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>79</start><end>110</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">6CCDBD3AB7A3D09EF760008634638EB4DC43F7EE</identifier><identifier type="ark">ark:/67375/M70-TKV3HT46-F</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1177/104346399011001004</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">10.1177_104346399011001004</identifier><recordInfo><recordContentSource authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-0J1N7DQT-B">sage</recordContentSource></recordInfo></mods><json:item><extension>json</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/json</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/6CCDBD3AB7A3D09EF760008634638EB4DC43F7EE/metadata/json</uri></json:item></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Psychologie/explor/BernheimV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000A02 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000A02 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Psychologie
|area= BernheimV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:6CCDBD3AB7A3D09EF760008634638EB4DC43F7EE
|texte= THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.33. |  |