Social Indicators Research

, Volume 134, Issue 2, pp 607–629 | Cite as

Tolerance Within Community: Does Social Capital Affect Tolerance?

Article
  • 257 Downloads

Abstract

Tolerance is valuable in the development of any U.S. community. Individuals of varying religious beliefs, political leanings, and sexual orientations constitute communities. These differences can create unwanted divisions within the community if tolerance is not present. Examining through the framework of social capital theory, specifically civic engagement and social embeddedness, the present study seeks to understand what impacts an individual to be more tolerant of others. In the current study, tolerance is a broad measure that combines various types of individual characteristics into one dependent variable, including tolerance levels of different races, religious beliefs, and sexual orientations. Using independent measures of social capital in the form of civic engagement and social embeddedness, the study expects those individuals who have more instances of civic engagement and social embeddedness will be more tolerant of others compared to those with no or low levels of either civic engagement or social embeddedness.

Keywords

Tolerance Community Social capital Civic engagement Social embeddedness 

References

  1. Acock, A. C. (2005). Working with missing values. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(4), 1012–1028. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adler, R. P., & Goggin, J. (2005). What do we mean by ‘civic engagement’? Journal of Transformative Education, 3(3), 236–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allison, P. (2002). Missing data: Quantitative application in the social sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bennett, R. (2003). Factors underlying the inclination to donate to particular types of charity. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 8(1), 12–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  6. Carpiano, R. M. (2006). Toward a neighborhood resource-based theory of social capital for health: Can Bourdieu and sociology help? Social Science and Medicine, 62(1), 165–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Crowley, D. (2007). Summary of youth engagement strategy. Woburn, MA: Social Capital Inc.Google Scholar
  8. Diller, E. (2001). Citizens in service: The challenge of delivering civic engagement training to national service programs. Corporation for National Service. Retrieved July 14, 2014. https://nationalserviceresources.org/files/r2091-citizens-in-service.pdf.
  9. Djupe, P. A., & Calfano, B. R. (2012). American Muslim investment in civil society: Political discussion, disagreement, and tolerance. Political Research Quarterly, 65(3), 516–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Edgell, P., Gerteis, J., & Hartmann, D. (2006). Atheists as “other”: Moral boundaries and cultural membership in American society. American Sociological Review, 71(2), 211–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Flanagan, C., & Levine, P. (2010). Civic engagement and the transition to adulthood. The Future of Children, 20(1), 159–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Furnham, A. (1982). The protestant work ethic and attitudes towards unemployment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 55(4), 277–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Furnham, A. (1995). The just world, charitable giving and attitudes to disability. Personality and Individual Differences, 19(4), 577–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hanna, K. S., Dale, A., & Ling, C. (2009). Social capital and quality of place: Reflections on growth and change in a small town. Local Environment, 14(1), 31–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Harbaugh, W. T., Mayr, U., & Burghart, D. R. (2007). Neural responses to taxation and voluntary giving reveal motives for charitable donations. Science, 316(5831), 1622–1625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hechter, M. (1988). Principles of group solidarity. Berkley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  17. Henderson-King, D., & Kaleta, A. (2000). Learning about social diversity: The undergraduate experience and intergroup tolerance. The Journal of Higher Education, 71(2), 142–164.Google Scholar
  18. Herek, G. M. (1984). Attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. Journal of Homosexuality, 10(1–2), 39–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Irwin, P., & Thompson, N. L. (1978). Acceptance of the rights of homosexuals. Journal of Homosexuality, 3(2), 107–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2000). The three Cs of reducing prejudice and discrimination. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination: The Claremont symposium on applied social psychology (pp. 239–268). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
  21. Jones, K. S. (2006a). Giving and volunteering as distinct forms of civic engagement: The role of community integration and personal resources in formal helping. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(2), 249–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jones, P. (2006b). Toleration, recognition and identity. Journal of Political Philosophy, 14(2), 123–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jones, P. (2015). Toleration, religion and accommodation. European Journal of Philosophy, 23, 542–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kennedy, J. F. (1960). Letter and statements to the national conference of Christians and Jews conference, October 26, 1960. Retrieved December 15, 2014. http://www.jfklink.com/speeches/joint/app24_christiansandjews.html.
  25. Lee, F. L. F. (2014). Tolerated one way but not the other: Levels and determinants of social and political tolerance in Hong Kong. Social Indicators Research, 118(2), 711–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lee, Y.-K., & Chang, C.-T. (2007). Who gives what to charity? Characteristics affecting donation behavior. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 35(9), 1173–1180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Marsden, P. V., & Friedkin, N. E. (1993). Network studies of social influence. Sociological Methods & Research, 22(1), 127–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Painter, M. A., & Paxton, P. (2014). Checkbooks in the Heartland: Change over time in voluntary association membership. Sociological Forum, 29(2), 408–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pearce, J. (1993). Volunteers: The organizational behavior of unpaid workers. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Peoples, C. D., Sigillo, A., & Green, M. (2012). Friendship and conformity in group opinions: Juror verdict change in mock juries. Sociological Spectrum, 32(2), 178–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Putnam, R., & Campbell, D. (2006). Research | American grace. Retrieved August 14, 2013. http://www.thearda.com/Archive/Files/Descriptions/FTHMATT.asp.
  34. Putnam, R., Light, I., de Souza Briggs, X., Rohe, W. M., Vidal, A. C., Hutchinson, J., et al. (2004). Using social capital to help integrate planning theory, research, and practice: Preface. Journal of the American Planning Association, 70(2), 142–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rohe, W. (2004). Building social capital through community development. Journal of the American Planning Association, 70(2), 158–164.Google Scholar
  36. Robinson, J., Witenberg, R., & Sanson, A. (2001). The socialization of tolerance: Understanding prejudice, racism, and social conflict. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rotolo, T., & Wilson, J. (2014). Social heterogeneity and volunteering in U.S. Cities. Sociological Forum, 29(2), 429–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sander, T., & Putnam, R. D. (2009). Still bowling alone? The post-9/11 split. Journal of Democracy, 21(1), 9–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sargeant, A. (1999). Charitable giving: Towards a model of donor behaviour. Journal of Marketing Management, 15(4), 215–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sargeant, A., Ford, J. B., & West, D. C. (2006). Perceptual determinants of nonprofit giving behavior. Journal of Business Research, 59(2), 155–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schirmer, W., Weidenstedt, L., & Reich, W. (2012). From tolerance to respect in inter-ethnic contexts. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 38(7), 1049–1065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Smith, D. H. (1994). Determinants of voluntary association participation and volunteering: A literature review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 23(3), 243–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Snowden, L. R. (2001). Social embeddedness and psychological well-being among African Americans and Whites. American Journal of Community Psychology, 29(4), 519–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Son, J., & Wilson, J. (2012). Volunteer work and hedonic, eudemonic, and social well-being: Volunteer work and well-being. Sociological Forum, 27(3), 658–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Stroope, S. (2012). Social networks and religion: The role of congregational social embeddedness in religious belief and practice. Sociology of Religion, 73(3), 273–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. van der Ree, G. (2014). Saving the discipline: Plurality, social capital, and the sociology of IR theorizing. International Political Sociology, 8(2), 218–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Vogt, W. P. (1997). Tolerance & education: Learning to live with diversity and difference. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  48. Walters, W. (2002). Social capital and political sociology: Re-imagining politics? Sociology, 36(2), 377–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Weithman, P. (2004). T. M. Scanlon, The difficulty of tolerance. Ethics, 114(4), 836–842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wenger, G. C., Dystra, P. A., Knipscheer, K., & Melkas, T. (2007). Social embeddedness and late-life parenthood community activity, close ties, and support networks. Journal of Family Issues, 28(11), 1419–1456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Whitley, B., & Kite, M. (2009). The psychology of prejudice and discrimination. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
  52. Wilson, J. (2000). Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 215–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wilson, J., & Musick, M. (1997). Who cares? Toward an integrated theory of volunteer work. American Sociological Review, 62(5), 694–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wilson, J., & Musick, M. (1998). The contribution of social resources to volunteering. Social Science Quarterly, 79(4), 799–814.Google Scholar
  55. Wilson, J., & Musick, M. (1999). The effects of volunteering on the volunteer. Law and Contemporary Problems, 62(4), 141–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyBaylor UniversityWacoUSA

Personalised recommendations