Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Analyzing the Relationship Between Social Capital and Subjective Well-Being: The Mediating Role of Social Affiliation

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Happiness Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

While previous studies have established social capital as an important determinant of subjective well-being (SWB), the broader social context people are living in has not received much attention in terms of SWB. To address this issue, we propose the concept of social affiliation, measuring the feeling of belonging to the social whole, of being a respected and valued member of society. In contrast to standard concepts of social capital, social affiliation is not related to an individual’s direct environment (‘Gemeinschaft’), but concerns one’s relation to society (‘Gesellschaft’). Such a subjective evaluation of how an individual feels within a broader societal context is neither covered by traditional concepts of social capital nor by the concept of social cohesion which focuses on the macro level. A perception of oneself as living on the margins of society, of not being a respected member of society, is very likely to diminish subjective well-being. At the same time, it can be expected to not be completely unrelated to individual resources of social capital. Drawing on unique survey data from Japan, we analyze the triangle relationship between social capital, social affiliation and subjective well-being applying a structural equation model. Our results have two main implications. First, we show that social affiliation has an effect on subjective well-being that is independent from the effect of standard measures of social capital. Second, we find that social capital influences social affiliation, and thereby also has an indirect effect on subjective well-being. In terms of theory building our results suggest that social embeddedness has two elements which should be measured separately: a community dimension usually measured as social capital in terms of trust, personal networks and norms, and a societal dimension of being and feeling part of a ‘Gesellschaft’, measured as social affiliation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For a broader overview of related concepts to social capital see Lochner (1999).

  2. Note that, as a subjective measure, such an evaluation does not have to coincide with the actual state of social integration of that particular individual.

  3. An estimation of the model with incomplete data would exhibit less bias than excluding cases with missing values from the analysis (Byrne 2010: 359). However, an estimation of the model with missing values only yielded marginally different results than with the delimited data set. Therefore, the authors decided to proceed with the data set from which missing data had been deleted.

  4. The lowest income group earns less than 1,120,000 Yen. This corresponds to less than 50% of the official median income in 2009, which is the threshold set by the Japanese government to define relative poverty. Respondents who fall into this category are highly likely to face socioeconomic difficulties. Middle incomes are divided into two groups with incomes ranging from 1,120,000 to 2,240,000 Yen (50–100% of median income) categorized as lower middle, and incomes ranging from 2,240,000 to 3,360,000 Yen (100–150% of median income) grouped as upper middle of the income range. The highest income group earns over 3,360,000 Yen, which equals more than 150% of the median income.

  5. To ensure equivalency in meaning, the items were first translated from German into Japanese by a native Japanese speaker. The Japanese version of the scale was then pre-tested with 10 native Japanese respondents from different age groups and educational levels. Next, problems discovered in the pre-test were discussed at a workshop with eight Japanese experts in survey research and two German researchers who are fluent in Japanese. The Japanese version which resulted from this was then back-translated into German by a native German speaker who did not know the original scale. This back-translation showed that the intended meaning was preserved.

  6. The significant Chi square seemingly indicates that the fit of model to the data is not adequate. However, as Chi-square is sensitive to sample size, a non-significant Chi-square is difficult to achieve and has proven unrealistic in most empirical research (Byrne 2010: 76–77, Bagozzi and Yi 2012: 28). To address these limitations of the Chi-square, a number of alternative, more practical fit indices have been developed, which are commonly used as adjuncts to the Chi-square statistic. The authors here use the four indices discussed above.

  7. Detailed results on the CFA model are available from the authors upon request.

  8. Goodness of fit indices for the full structural equation model with controls before respecification: Χ2 (112) = 728.447, p = .00, RMSEA = .064 (90% CI = .060 to .068), CFI = .934, TLI = .910, SRMR = .041.) Estimating the model without control variables leads to qualitatively similar results which are available upon request.

  9. In the structural equation model, the six items measuring social affiliation (SA1-6) were coded in reverse with 1 = ‘totally applies’ and 7 = ‘does not apply at all’. High values, therefore, indicate strong feelings of social affiliation.

  10. This is especially the case for the group of the non-employed, which includes involuntarily unemployed (n = 184), who have been reported as having comparatively low levels of subjective well-being (Hommerich and Kobayashi 2015), as well as students (n = 5), homemakers (n = 135) and retirees (n = 58). The latter two groups usually display comparatively high levels of subjective well-being (ibid. as well as Tokuda et al. 2010).

References

  • Abbott, P., & Wallace, C. (2012). Social quality: A way to measure the quality of society. Social Indicators Research, 108, 153–167. doi:10.1007/s11205-011-9871-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ateca-Amestoy, V., Cortés Aquilar, A., & Moro-Egido, A. I. (2014). Social interactions and life satisfaction: Evidence from Latin America. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(3), 527–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (2012). Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural equation models. Journal of the Adacemy of Marketing Science, 40, 8–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beauvais, C., & Jenson, J. (2002). Social cohesion: Updating the state of the research. CPRN discussion paper No. F|22 (Canadian Policy Research Networks, Ottawa), http://cprn3.library.carleton.ca/documents/12949_en.pdf. Accessed Feb 21, 2015.

  • Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, P. L. (1998). The limits of social cohesion: Conflict and mediation in pluralist societies: a report of the Bertelsmann Foundation to the Club of Rome. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger-Schmitt, R. (2000). Social cohesion as an aspect of the quality of societies: Concept and measurement. EUReporting Working Paper, p. 14.

  • Berger-Schmitt, R. (2002). Considering social cohesion in quality of life assessments: Concept and measurement. In M. R. Hagerty, J. Vogel, & V. Møller (Eds.), Social indicators research series assessing quality of life and living conditions to guide national policy (pp. 403–428). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bjørnskov, C. (2003). The Happy few: Cross-country evidence on social capital and life satisfaction. Kyklos, 56(1), 3–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bjørnskov, C. (2006). Determinants of generalized trust: A cross-country comparison. Public Choice, 130, 1–21. doi:10.1007/s11127-006-9069-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bjørnskov, C., & Sønderskov, K. M. (2013). Is social capital a good concept? Social Indicators Research, 114, 1225–1242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Böhnke, P. (2004). Perceptions of social integration and exclusion in an enlarged Europe. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

  • Böhnke, P. (2005). First European quality of life survey: Life satisfaction, happiness and sense of belonging. European foundation for the improvement of living and working conditions. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhnke, P. (2008). Does society matter? Life satisfaction in the enlarged Europe. Social Indicators Research, 87, 189–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1980). Le capital social: notes provisores. Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, 31, 2–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhler, C. (1962). Genetic aspects of the self. Annals of The New York Academy of Science, 96, 730–764. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1962.tb50159.x.

  • Buchan, N. R., Croson, R. T. A., & Solnick, S. J. (2008). Trust and gender: An examination of behavior, biases, and beliefs in the investment game. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 68(3–4), 466–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bude, H., & Lantermann, E. D. (2006). Soziale Exklusion und Exklusionsempfinden. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 58, 233–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burchardt, T., Le Grand, J., & Piachaud, D. (2002). Understanding social exclusion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, J., To, H.-P., & Chan, E. (2006). Reconsidering social cohesion: Developing a definition and analytical framework for empirical research. Social Indicators Research, 75(2), 273–302. doi:10.1007/s11205-005-2118-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chuang, Y.-C., Chuang, K.-Y., & Yang, T.-H. (2013). Social cohesion matters in health. International Journal for Equity in Health, 12, 87.

  • Clark, A. E., Fritjers, P., & Schield, M. A. (2008). Relative income, happiness, and utility: An explanation for the Easterlin paradox and other puzzles. Journal of Economic Literature, 46(1), 95–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. The American Journal of Sociology, 94, 95–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, R. A. (1996). The domains of life satisfaction: An attempt to order chaos. Social Indicators Research, 38(3), 303–328. doi:10.1007/BF00292050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.

  • Deci, E. L., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2004). Self-determination theory and basic need satisfaction: Understanding human development in positive psychology. Ricerche di Psichologia, 27, 17–34.

  • Delhey, J., & Dragolov, G. (2014). Why inequality makes Europeans less happy: The role of distrust, status anxiety and perceived conflict. European Sociological Review, 30(2), 151–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delhey, J., & Dragolov, G. (2015). Happier together. Social cohesion and subjective well-being in Europe. International Journal of Psychology. published online first, doi:10.1002/ijop.12149.

  • Dickes, P. (2008). Social cohesion: Measurement based on the EVS micro data. Statistica Applicata, 20(2), 77–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickes, P., & Valentova, M. (2013). Construction, validation and application of the measurement of social cohesion in 47 European countries and regions. Social Indicators Research, 113(3), 827–846. doi:10.1007/s11205-012-0116-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302.

  • Dolan, P., Peasgood, T., & White, M. (2008). Do we really know what makes us happy? A review of the economic literature on the factors associated with subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29(1), 94–122.

  • Dragolov, G., Ignácz, Z., Lorenz, J., Delhey, J., & Boehnke, K. (2013). Social cohesion radar. Measuring common ground. An international comparison of social cohesion. Gütersloh, Germany: Bertelsmann-Foundation. http://www.gesellschaftlicher-zusammenhalt.de/fileadmin/Inhalte/Downloads_Sozialer%20Zusammenhalt/Radar_InternationalerVergleich_web_en.pdf.

  • Förster, M. F., & D’Ercole, M. M. (2009). The OECD approach to measuring income distribution and poverty: Strengths, limits and statistical issues. presentation at the conference measuring poverty, income inequality, and social exclusion: Lessons from Europe. Paris: OECD/University of Maryland International Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity. Self and society in the late modern age. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gough, I., & Olofsson, G. (1999). Capitalism and social cohesion: Essays on exclusion and integration. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, New York: Macmillan Press; St. Martin’s Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, C., & Chattopadhyay, S. (2012). Gender and well-being around the world: Some insights from the economics of happiness (Working paper series No. 2012-010). Chicago.

  • Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. The American Sociological Journal, 78(6), 1360–1380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han, S. (2015). Social capital and subjective happiness: Which contexts matter? Journal of Happiness Studies, 16(1), 241–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helliwell, J. F., & Putnam, R. D. (2004). The social context of well-being. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 359(1449), 1435–1446. doi:10.1098/rstb.2004.1522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hommerich, C. (2015). Feeling disconnected: Exploring the relationship between different forms of social capital and civic engagement in Japan. Voluntas, 26, 45–68. doi:10.1007/s11266-014-9525-3.

  • Hommerich, C. (2017). The gap as threat: Status anxiety in the ‘Middle’. In: D Chiavacci, C Hommerich (Eds.), Social inequality in post-growth japan: transformation during economic and demographic stagnation. (pp. 37–53). London: Routledge.

  • Hommerich, C., & Kobayashi, J. (2015). Are satisfied people happy? Disentangling subjective well-being in Japan. In G. Trommsdorff & W. R. Assmann (Eds.), Forschung fördern. Am Beispiel von Lebensqualität im Kulturkontext (pp. 201–216). Konstanz: UKV.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, J. A. (1994). A social cognitive conception of social structure. Social Psychological Quarterly, 57(3), 210–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, J., Maassen van den Brink, H., & Groot, W. (2011). College education and social trust: An evidence-based study on the causal mechanisms. Social Indicators Research, 104, 287–310. doi:10.1007/s11205-010-9744-y.

  • Inoguchi, T., & Fuji, S. (2009). The quality of life in Japan. Social Indicators Research, 92, 227–262. doi:10.1007/s11205-008-9351-3.

  • Jenson, J. (1998). Mapping social cohesion: The state of Canadian research. CPRN study No. F | 03 (Canadian Policy Research Networks, Ottawa), http://cprn.org/documents/15723_en.pdf. Accessed Feb 21, 2015.

  • Jenson, J. (2010). Defining and measuring social cohesion, social policies in small states series (Vol. 1). London: Commonwealth Secretariat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jessor, R., & Jessor, S. L. (1977). Problem behavior and psychosocial development. A longitudinal study of youth. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kearns, A., & Forrest, R. (2000). Social cohesion and multilevel urban governance. Urban Studies, 37(5–6), 995–1017. doi:10.1080/00420980050011208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keyes, C. L. M. (1998). Social well-being. Social Psychological Quarterly, 61(2), 121–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, C. (2013). Social capital or social cohesion: What matters for subjective well-being? Social Indicators Research, 110(3), 891–911. doi:10.1007/s11205-011-9963-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kroll, C. (2011). Towards a sociology of happiness: The case of an age perspective on the social context of well-being. Available at SSRN: doi:10.2139/ssrn.1809833.

  • Kuroki, M. (2011). Does social trust increase individual happiness in Japan? The Japanese Economic Review, 62(4), 444–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lambert, T. A., Eby, L. T., & Reeves, M. P. (2006). Predictors of networking intensity and network quality among white-collar job seekers. Journal of Career Development, 32(4), 351–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, A., Kier, C., Fung, T., Fung, L., & Sproule, R. (2011). Searching for happiness: The importance of social capital. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12, 443–462. doi:10.1007/s10902-010-9208-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lochner, K. (1999). Social capital: a guide to its measurement. Health and Place, 5(4), 259–270. doi:10.1016/S1353-8292(99)00016-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loewe, N., Bagherzadeh, M., Araya-Castillo, L., Thieme, C., & Batista-Foguet, J. M. (2014). Life domain satisfactions as predictors of overall life satisfaction among workers: Evidence from Chile. Social Indicators Research, 118(1), 71–86. doi:10.1007/s11205-013-0408-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., Kit-Tai, H., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) Finding. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 320–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matsushima, M., & Matsunaga, Y. (2015). Social capital and subjective well-being in Japan. Voluntas, 26, 1016–1045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, S., & Mair, C. A. (2010). Social capital across the life course: Age and gendered patterns of network resources. Sociological Forum, 25(2), 335–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narayan, D. (1999). Bonds and bridges: Social capital and poverty. World bank, poverty group, policy research Working paper 2167 Washington, D.C., http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/1999/10/07/000094946_9909231154006/Rendered/PDF/multi_page.pdf. Accessed Feb 21, 2015.

  • Phillips, D. (2006). Quality of life: Concept, policy and practice. New York: Routledge.

  • Portela, M., Neira, I., & del Mar Salinas-Jiménez, M. (2013). Social capital and subjective well-being in Europe: A new approach on social capital. Social Indicators Research, 114, 493–511. doi:10.1007/s11205-012-0158-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic tradition in modern Italy (with Robert Leonardi and Rafaella Y. Nanetti). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rajulton, F., Ravanera, Z. R., & Beaujot, R. (2007). Measuring social cohesion: An experiment using the canadian national survey of giving, volunteering, and participating. Social Indicators Research, 80, 461–492. doi: 10.1007/s11205-006-0011-1.

  • Rodríguez-Pose, A., & von Berlepsch, V. (2014). Social capital and individual happiness in Europe. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(2), 357–386. doi:10.1007/s10902-013-9426-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Safipour, J., Schopflocher, D., Higginbottom, G., & Emami, A. (2011). Feelings of social alienation: a comparison of immigrant and non-immigrant Swedish youth. Int J of Soc and Social Policy. doi:10.1108/01443331111149888.

    Google Scholar 

  • Safipour, J., Tessma, M. K., Higginbottom, G., & Emami, A. (2010). Measuring social alienation in adolescence: Translation and validation of the Jessor and Jessor social alienation scale. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9450.2010.00810.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, S. M., & Schupp, J. (2014). Individual differences in social comparison and its consequences for life satisfaction: Introducing a short scale of the Iowa-Netherlands comparison orientation measure. Social Indicators Research. doi:10.1007/s11205-012-0227-1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2010). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (2000). Social exclusion: Concept, application and scrutiny. Office of environment and social development, Asian Development Bank, Social Development Papers. 2000;1 (June).

  • Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiefenbach, T., & Kohlbacher, F. (2015). Happiness in Japan in times of upheaval: Empirical evidence from the national survey on lifestyle preferences. Journal of Happiness Studies, 16(2), 333–366. doi:10.1007/s10902-014-9512-9.

  • Tokuda, Y., Fujii, S., & Inoguchi, T. (2010). Individual and country-level effects of social trust on happiness: The Asia barometer survey. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(10), 2574–2593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tönnies, F. (1887). Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft. Abhandlung des Kommunismus und des Sozialismus als empirischer Kulturformen. Leipzig: Fues.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uchida, Y., Norasakkunkit, V., & Kitayama, S. (2004). Cultural construction of happiness: Theory and empirical evidence. Journal of Happiness Studies, 5, 223–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, F. & Yamagishi, T. (2005). Group-based trust and gender differences in china. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 8(2), 199–210.

  • Yamagishi, T., & Yamagishi, M. (1994). Trust and commitment in the United States and Japan. Motivation and Emotion, 18, 129–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, H., & Golpelwar, M. (2012). Testing subjective well-being from the perspective of social quality: Quantile regression evidence from Shanghai, China. Social Indicators Research, published online June 04, 2012. doi:10.1007/s11205-012-0091-z.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The survey used in this analysis was generously sponsored by the German Institute for Japanese Studies (DIJ). We are grateful for the support. Any errors or opinions are ours alone.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Letters, Department of Sociology, Hokkaido University, Kita 10, Nishi 7, Kita-ku, Sapporo, 060-0810, Japan

    Carola Hommerich

  2. German Institute for Japanese Studies (DIJ), Jochi Kioizaka Bldg. 2F, 7-1 Kioicho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 102-0094, Japan

    Tim Tiefenbach

Authors
  1. Carola Hommerich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tim Tiefenbach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carola Hommerich.

Ethics declarations

Compliance with Ethical Standards

The authors declare that the submitted work complies with the accepted principles of ethical and professional conduct in scientific research and that there are no conflicts of interest. The respondents participated voluntarily in the survey. Beforehand, they received information about the purpose of the study as well as about the institution commissioning the survey.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.

Table 3 Summary of the sample distribution of the demographic and socioeconomic indicators
Full size table
Table 4 Descriptive statistics for social capital
Full size table
Table 5 Descriptive statistics for social affiliation
Full size table
Table 6 Descriptive statistics for subjective well-being
Full size table
Table 7 Correlations between the control variables included in the SEM
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hommerich, C., Tiefenbach, T. Analyzing the Relationship Between Social Capital and Subjective Well-Being: The Mediating Role of Social Affiliation. J Happiness Stud 19, 1091–1114 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-017-9859-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-017-9859-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation