This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Glanville, J. L. Articles by Bienenstock, E. J. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A Typology for Understanding the Connections Among Different Forms of Social Capital

University of Iowa, Iowa City

Elisa Jayne Bienenstock

Georgetown University, Washington, D.C., jennifer-glanville{at}uiowa.edu

Critics have argued that the term social capital is too vague or general to be a useful concept. Recognizing the need for clarification, the authors distill the conceptual discussions about social capital to argue that there are three components_network structure, trust and reciprocity, and resources_that are associated with but vary in degree and salience for all forms of social capital. These three components should be considered continua along which the forms of social capital can vary. A fourth continuum is between micro and macro levels of social capital. Locating particular examples of social capital along these continua opens the possibility to compare different types of social capital and to develop and test theories about how they are related to each other. The authors also describe a simulation study to illustrate how simulation can facilitate understanding of the linkages among different forms of social capital.

Key Words: social capital • social networks • trust • reciprocity • simulation

American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 52, No. 11, 1507-1530 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0002764209331524


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?