Skip to main content
Log in

Dimensions of Bonding Social Capital in Christian Congregations Across Australia

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The research aimed to identify the structure of social capital within Christian churches in Australia. The focus is the social capital that exists within the congregation as opposed to its connections to the wider community or society, that is, to use Woolcock and Narayan (2000) terminology, the bonding rather than the bridging social capital. A total of 3363 church attendees were surveyed to identify the different ways that social capital can be generated such as through participation, informal friendships or congregational projects in any sphere of church activity including questions about both the respondents’ own actions and their perceptions of the congregation and demographic questions including denomination. The dimensions of Bonding were identified through exploratory factor analysis and then refined and confirmed through structural equation modelling. The three factors related to an underlying Bonding construct were Collective Agency, Congregational Unity and Personal Connections. A fourth factor in the model was the desire for Homogeneity, which was related to Congregational Unity but not significantly related to Bonding.

Résumé

Les recherches visaient à identifier la structure du capital social dans les églises chrétiennes en Australie. Le sujet est le capital social au sein de la congrégation par opposition à ses liens avec la communauté élargie ou la société, c’est-à-dire, pour utiliser la terminologie de Woolcott et de Narayan (2000), le capital social d’attachement plutôt que le capital social d’accointances. Au total, 3 363 fidèles ont été interrogés pour identifier les différents moyens pouvant générer du capital social, comme par des participations, des amitiés informelles ou des projets de congrégations dans tous les domaines d’activité des églises, y compris les questions concernant aussi bien les actions propres des personnes interrogées et leurs perceptions de la congrégation et les questions démographiques, y compris la dénomination. Les dimensions de l’attachement ont été identifiées par l’analyse factorielle exploratoire puis affinées et confirmées par la modélisation en équations structurelles. Les trois facteurs associés à l’idée sous-jacente d’attachement ont été l’organisation collective, l’unité congrégationaliste et les liens personnels. Un quatrième facteur de modèle a été le désir d’homogénéité qui était lié à l’unité congrégationaliste mais pas de manière significative à l’attachement.

Zusammenfassung

Ziel der Studie war es, die Struktur des sozialen Kapitals in christlichen Kirchen in Australien darzulegen. Man konzentrierte sich dabei auf das soziale Kapital innerhalb der Kirchengemeinde und nicht auf seine Verbindungen zur breiteren Gemeinschaft oder Gesellschaft, also das soziale Kapital, das von Woolcott & Narayan (2000) als „verbindendes“ im Gegensatz zu „Brücken schlagendes“ soziales Kapital bezeichnet wird. Es wurden insgesamt 3363 Kirchenbesucher befragt, um zu ermitteln, wie soziales Kapital auf unterschiedliche Weise generiert werden kann, zum Beispiel durch Partizipation, informelle Freundschaften oder Gemeindeprojekte in jeglichen Bereichen kirchlicher Aktivitäten. Die Umfrageteilnehmer wurden sowohl zu ihren eigenen Handlungen befragt als auch dazu, wie sie die Kirchengemeinde wahrnehmen; zudem wurden demografische Fragen gestellt, unter anderem zur Glaubensrichtung. Die Dimensionen des „Verbindens“ wurden anhand der exploratorischen Faktorenanalyse ermittelt und sodann mit Hilfe des Strukturgleichungsmodells präzisiert und bestätigt. Die drei Faktoren im Zusammenhang mit einem zugrunde liegenden Verbindungs-Konstrukt waren kollektives Handeln, Einheit der Gemeinde und persönliche Verbindungen. Ein vierter Faktor in dem Modell war der Wunsch nach Homogenität, der mit dem Faktor Einheit der Gemeinde in Beziehung stand, jedoch keinen bedeutenden Zusammenhang mit dem „Verbinden“ aufwies.

Resumen

La investigación tenía como objetivo identificar la estructura del capital social dentro de las iglesias cristianas en Australia. La atención se centra en el capital social que existe dentro de la congregación en oposición a sus conexiones con la sociedad o la comunidad en general, es decir, utilizar la terminología de Woolcoot & Narayan (2000), el capital social de cohesión (bonding) en lugar del capital social de vinculación (bridging). Un total de 3.363 asistentes a la iglesia fueron encuestados para identificar las diferentes formas en las que el capital social puede ser generado, tales como mediante la participación, amistades informales o proyectos congregacionales en cualquier esfera de la actividad eclesial, incluyendo preguntas sobre las propias acciones de los encuestados y sus percepciones de la congregación, y preguntas demográficas, incluida la denominación. Las dimensiones de Cohesión fueron identificadas mediante análisis factorial exploratorio y después fueron refinadas y confirmadas mediante el modelo de ecuaciones estructurales. Los tres factores relacionados con un constructo de Cohesión subyacente fueron Agencia colectiva, Unidad congregacional y Conexiones personales. Un cuarto factor en el modelo fue el deseo de Homogeneidad, que estaba relacionado con la Unidad congregacional pero no estaba relacionado de manera significativa con la Cohesión.

摘要

本研究旨在鉴别澳大利亚基督教教堂的社会资本结构。本研究只关注存在于教堂会众之中的社会资本(这与其与更广泛的社区或社会的联系恰恰相反),用伍尔科特和纳拉扬(Woolcott & Narayan)(2000)的术语来说,即是社会资本的粘接而并非连接。总共对3363名教会成员进行了调查,以鉴别社会资本的各种生成途径,例如通过参与、非正式友谊或任何教会活动范围下的会众项目等等;调查问题包括关于受访者自己的行为和他们对教会的认知,也包括教派在内的人口统计学问题。“粘接”的维度是通过探索性因子分析,然后通过结构方程模型的提炼和证实而鉴别的。三个与基础“粘接”构造有关的因素分别为集体机构会众团体个人人脉关系。模型中的另外一个因素则为对同类化的渴望,这与会众团体相关但并未与粘接有显著的相关性。

ملخص

يهدف هذا البحث إلى التعرف على هيكل رأس المال الإجتماعي داخل الكنائس المسيحية في أستراليا. ينصب التركيز على رأس المال الإجتماعي الموجود داخل الطائفة بدلا˝ من الإتصالات بالمجتمع الأوسع أو الجمعية، هذا هو، لإستخدام المصطلحات (Narayan &Woolcott) في (2000) ، الترابط بدلا˝ من رأس المال الإجتماعي الذي يصل الناس مع الآخرين . تم إستطلاع الرأي مع ما مجموعه 3363 من حضور الكنيسة للتعرف على الطرق المختلفة التي يمكن بها بدء رأس المال الإجتماعي مثل من خلال المشاركة، الصداقات الغير رسمية أو مشاريع الطائفة في أي مجال من مجالات النشاط الكنيسة بما في ذلك الأسئلة حول كل من الأفعال الخاصة للمشاركين وتصوراتهم للطائفة و الأسئلة الديموجرافية بما في ذلك المذهب. تم تحديد أبعاد الربط من خلال تحليل العوامل الإستكشافية وثم تحسينها، وتأكيدها من خلال نموذج المعادلة الهيكلية. الثلاثة عوامل المتعلقة بربط البناء كانت وكالة جماعية، وحدة تجمعية وعلاقات شخصية. كان العامل الرابع في النموذج هو الرغبة في التجانس، الذي له علاقة بالوحدة التجمعية لكن لا علاقة إلى حد كبير في الربط

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbott, S. (2009). Social capital and health: The problematic roles of social networks and social surveys. Health Sociology Review, 18(3), 297–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ABS. 2004. Measuring social capital: An Australian framework and indicators. Canberra : Australian Bureau of Statistics. Cat No. 1378.0.

  • ABS. (2006). A picture of the Nation. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics. Cat No. 2070.0.

  • Adam, F., & Roncevic, B. (2003). Social capital: Recent debates and research trends. Social Science Information, 42(2), 155–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakan, D. (1966). The duality of human existence: Isolation and communion in Western man. Boston: Beacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellamy, J., & Castle, K. (2004). 2001 Church Attendance Estimates, NCLS Occasional Paper 3. Sydney: NCLS Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bick, E. (2010). The Tal Law: A missed opportunity for bridging social capital in Israel. Journal of Church and State, 52(2), 298–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education. New York: Greenwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R. (2000). Group processes. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Childs, E. (2010). Religious attendance and happiness: examining gaps in the current literature. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 49(3), 550–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coffé, H. (2009). Social capital and community heterogeneity. Social Indicators Research, 91(2), 155–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coffé, H., & Geys, B. (2007). Participation in bridging and bonding associations and civic attitudes: Evidence from Flanders. Voluntas, 18(4), 385–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowe, J. A. (2007). In search of a happy medium: How the structure of interorganizational networks influence community economic development strategies. Social Networks, 29(4), 469–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donoghue, J., & Tranter, B. (2010). Citizenship, civic engagement and property ownership. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 45(4), 493–508.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flora, D. B., & Curran, P. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9(4), 466–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foley, M. W., & Hoge, D. R. (2007). Religion and the new immigrants: How faith communities form our newest citizens. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Francis, L., & Kaldor, P. (2002). The relationship between psychological well-being and Christian faith and practice in an Australian population sample. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 41(1), 179–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, D. (2005). Social capital. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, G. R., & Mueller, R. O. (2006). Structural equation modeling: A second course. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

  • Holmes-Smith, P. (2011). Structural equation modelling: From fundamentals to advanced topics. Melbourne: SREAMS.

    Google Scholar 

  • ISSP. (2009). International social science project. Canberra: Australian National University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iyer, S., Kitson, M., & Toh, B. (2005). Social capital, economic growth and regional development. Regional Studies, 39(8), 1015–1040.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaldor, P., Bellamy, J., & Powell, R. (1997). Shaping a future: Characteristics of vital congregations. Adelaide: Openbook.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaldor, P., Bellamy, J., Powell, R., Castle, K., & Hughes, B. (1999). Build my church: Trends and possibilities for Australian churches. Adelaide: Openbook.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilson, M. (2009). Thinking about Robert Putnam’s analysis of diversity Du Bois. Review, 6(2), 293–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y., & Moon, S. (2011). Mainstream and ethnic volunteering by Korean Immigrants in the United States. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 22, 811–830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard, R. (1997). Theorising the relationship between agency and communion. Theory and Psychology, 7(6), 823–835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard, R., & Onyx, J. (2003). Networking through loose and strong ties: An Australian qualitative study. Voluntas, 14(2), 191–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard, R., & Onyx, J. (2004). Social capital and community building. London: Janus Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onyx, J., & Bullen, P. (2000). Measuring social capital in five communities. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 36(1), 23–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oswald, R. M., & Leas, S. B. (1987). The inviting church: A study of new member assimilation. New York: The Alban Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paxton, P. (1999). Is social capital declining in the United States? A multiple indicator assessment. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 88–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. (2002). Democracies in flux: The evolution of social capital in contemporary societies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. (2007). E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and community in the twenty-first century. Scandinavian Political Studies, 30(2), 137–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R., & Campbell, D. E. (2010). American grace: How religion divides and unites us. Newyork: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rostila, M. (2010). The facets of social capital. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 41(3), 308–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, R. J. (2006). Collective efficacy theory: Lessons learned and directions for future inquiry. In F. Cullen, J. P. Wright, & K. R. Blevins (Eds.), Taking stock: The status of criminological theory (pp. 149–167). New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheitle, C., & Adamczyck, A. (2009). It takes two: The interplay of the individual and group theology on social embeddedness. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 48(1), 16–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolsma, J., Van Der Meer, T., & Gesthuizen, M. (2009). The impact of neighbourhood and municipality characteristics on social cohesion in the Netherlands. Acta Politica, 44(3), 286–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tossutti, L. S., Wang, D. M., & Kaas-Mason, S. (2008). Family, religion, and civic engagement in Canada. Canadian Ethnic Studies, 40(3), 65–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Staveren, I., & Knorringa, P. (2007). Unpacking social capital in economic development: How social relations matter. Review of Social Economy, 65(1), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, P. (1984). Leading your church to growth. California: Regal Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, J. S. (1991). Agency and communion as conceptual coordinates for the understanding and measurement of interpersonal behavior. In W. Grove & D. Cicchetti (Eds.), Thinking clearly about psychology: Essays in honor of Paul E. Meehl. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, J. S. (1997). Circumnavigating Dodge Morgan’s interpersonal style. Journal of Personality, 65(4), 1069–1086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, K., & Guerra, N. (2011). Perceptions of collective efficacy and bullying perpetration in schools. Social Problems, 58(1), 126–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woolcock, M., & Narayan, D. (2000). Social capital: Implications for development theory, research and policy. World Bank Research Observer, 15(2), 225–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rosemary Leonard.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Leonard, R., Bellamy, J. Dimensions of Bonding Social Capital in Christian Congregations Across Australia. Voluntas 26, 1046–1065 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-015-9582-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-015-9582-2

Keywords

Navigation