Kopi fra DBC Webarkiv
Kopi af:
Sociologisk arbejdspapir : The social differentiation of trust : findings from a city in Denmark
Dette materiale er lagret i henhold til aftale mellem DBC og udgiveren.
www.dbc.dk
e-mail: dbc@dbc.dk
Sociologisk Arbejdspapir Nr. 25, 2009
Jakob Skjøtt-Larsen & Lars Skov Henriksen
The Social Differentiation of Trust:
Findings from a city in Denmark
Forskningsgruppen CASTOR CASTOR
Institut for Sociologi, Socialt Arbejde og Organisation Aalborg Universitet
Kroghstræde 5, 9220 Aalborg Ø Tlf. 9940 8150, fax 9811 5056
e-mail: sociologisekretariatet@socsci.aau.dk
Jakob Skjøtt-Larsen & Lars Skov Henriksen
Copyright © 2009 forfatterne og forskningsgruppen CASTOR
ISSN: 1399-4514
ISBN: 978-87-90867-28-7
Sociologiske Arbejdspapirer udgives af forskningsgruppen CASTOR (Center for analyse af strukturelle transformationer og nye orienteringsmåder i globaliserede velfærds- og videnssamfund). Arbejdspapirerne omfatter mindre arbejder fx.
seminaroplæg, konferencebidrag, udkast til artikler eller kapitler.
Serien redigeres af professor Annick Prieur og lektor Lars Skov Henriksen.
preface
This paper is a very first step in an ongoing research project intended to investigate the interrelationships between different forms of trust, different types of networking/participation, and inequality in resources. 1 It is a revised version of a paper presented at the Nordic Sociology Congress, Aarhus University, August 2008. We are grateful for the many constructive comments from the participants in the workshop on trust and social capital, and in particular from Gunnar Lind Haase Svendsen. Also, we would like to thank the members of our research unit atDept. of Sociology, Social Work and Organization, Aalborg University (CASTOR) for a fruitful discussion of the paper and for comments on the final draft from Annick Prieur.
1 Supported by a three year grant from the Danish Social Science Research Council.
Table of content
Introduction... 2
The social differentiation of trust... 2
Data and methods... 3
Some preliminary findings... 4
The space of social positions ... 5
Trust ... 8
Social network ... 10
Identification, attitudes towards (particularized) others, and modes of orientation... 13
Trust, networks and attitudes ... 17
References:... 19
Appendix 1... 20
Introduction
In many contemporary studies social trust is heralded for its beneficial effects at the individual level as well as at the collective level. Drawing on the work of the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu as well as its application in the works of Michèle Lamont and Mike Savage this research project, in contrast, aims at throwing light on the consequences of unequal distribution of trust and social capital. We are interested in learning more about variations in the forms of trust and distrust, how they relate to other social resources, and how the boundaries of trust and social networks may also result in exclusionary effects. We find this particularly relevant because individuals are said to become more mobile and social relations more fluid in what is sometimes referred to as the global network society. In order to highlight this, we need to open up the
‘black box’ of trust and to explore the interrelationships between different forms of trust, different types of networking/participation, and inequality in resources. We expect to find specific forms of trust to be produced within particular social settings and to unfold on the background of specific social conditions.
Also, we believe that the limits of trust towards institutions as well as other people should be understood as the product of a collective boundary making process that takes place within social groups. Thus, in contrast to much existing research on trust which focuses on causal mechanisms at an aggregate level, we want to disaggregate the analysis and focus on the social differentiation and demarcation of forms of trust and networking/participation. In this paper we limit ourselves to an exploratory investigation of the relationships between economic and cultural resources and various indicators of social trust, membership of networks, and attitudes towards other people and groups.
The social differentiation of trust
According to Putnam (1993), the level of trust in the population is associated with the development of civic society institutions and networks, which are seen to foster norms of reciprocity and trust in others. Partly contrasting this, Uslaner and Brown (2005) find that inequality in resources is the strongest determinant of trust and that different forms of participation are related to possession of resources in different ways. This latter point is also found in a study by Li, Pickles and Savage (2005) who conclude that class, education, and income affect social capital generation in qualitatively different ways. While those in privileged positions are more likely to form formal networks in voluntary organisations, they have weaker neighbourhood attachment than the working class. Hence, when a differentiated approach to forms of participation is adopted, one usually finds that forms of participation/networks draw on socially distinct resources and that they are structured in socially distinct ways (Li, Pickles and Savage 2005; Uslaner and Brown 2005; Henriksen, Koch-Nielsen and Rosdahl 2008). It is these findings we wish to extend to the realm of trust.
With the aid of multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) it is possible to pursue a more differentiated approach and explore the complex interrelationships between patterns of trust and possession of different forms of resources. Within many quantitative analyses trust is treated as a one-dimensional phenomenon.
Research that can identify not only high and low levels of social trust, but also different forms of trust and distrust, is therefore needed. One dimension, which often is neglected, because of the aggregate design of most trust-studies, is related to norms and group boundaries. There is a tendency to emphasize ‘generalized social trust’, that is, a bond that people share across a society’s economic and social groups (Rothstein and Uslaner 2005), while ‘particularized’ forms of trust where people put faith in their own in-group and pay less attention to others and to society in general have been much less surveyed. According to Uslaner (2002:8)
‘generalized trust’ may be well captured by the survey question “generally speaking, do you believe that most people can be trusted or can’t you be to careful in dealing with other people?”. Particularized trust on the other hand is limited to (more) specific actual or moral communities: ‘When we only have faith in some people, we are most likely to trust people like ourselves. And particularized trusters are likely to join groups composed of people like themselves – and to shy away from activities that involve people they don’t see as part of their moral community’ (Uslaner 2002:7).
Furthermore, following the broad framework of social analysis presented by Boudieu in Distinction (1984) we expect that expressions of various forms of trust are not produced as isolated items of opinion, or for that sake, as mere rational calculations. Rather, we see them as part of broader sets of values, believes and ways of relating to others, which in turn may be shaped by the social conditions characteristic of their production.
Manuel Castells, for instance, uses the socio-spatial metaphor that “elites are cosmopolitan, people are local”
(2000: 446). Following this, we expect to find a qualitative difference between more globalized and more localized forms of trust, and we would expect such differences to form part of more general ways of approaching the world.
Data and methods
Using MCA in the tradition of Bourdieu (1984) we construct a two-dimensional space of social positions, which will allow us to examine the interrelationships between on the one hand possession of economic and cultural resources and on the other hand indicators of social trust. MCA takes the individuals as units of analysis, and present their answers to survey questions in the form of a map, where answers that frequently occur together will be situated close to each other, while those that never or only rarely occur together will be situated far from each other.
Having established what in our case will be a two-dimensional space
of social positions (based on the total amount and the relative combinations of economic and
cultural capital) it is possible to insert variables or categories as supplementary or passive
modalities along the axes of the established space. These points do not affect the established axes of the social space. They may be considered to be points without weight.
Hence, the use of MCA allows for an explorative investigation of the distribution of different forms of trust within a space of socialpositions related to the distribution of cultural and economic resources, without any strict a priori
assumptions about the exact causality between trust and inequality in resources. Furthermore it will allow us to investigate the wider setting of social networks and cultural practices associated with the same areas of the social space.
We use existing survey data from the COMPAS-project (funded by the Danish Social Science Research Council).The COMPAS survey was conducted in Aalborg in 2004. Aalborg is the main city in the northern part of Denmark and has a population of 162.000 (2004). 1600 individuals between the age of 18 and 75 were randomly chosen among the residents of the municipality of Aalborg. Out of these 1174 were
successfully interviewed. Data were gathered with the specific aim of constructing a space of social positions along the lines of Bourdieu’s social theory. The data set has a great variety of “background” variables and, along with a range of questions related to cultural practices and political opinions, it includes indicators of civic participation, social network and indicators of social trust. The data were collected in Aalborg in order to test the major propositions in Bourdieu’s social theory in a post-industrial setting. As a consequence, these data are not representative of Denmark as such. The analysis presented in this paper is limited to 892
respondents. In order to focus on the relation between current social position and issues of trust students has been omitted along with respondents under the age of 25 or older than 67 years.
Some preliminary findings
In the remaining part of the paper we will present some preliminary findings from our analysis of the interrelationship between on the one hand different forms of trust, social network and
more general
attitudes towards others and -
on the other hand - the socially differentiated distribution of economic and cultural resources. Regarding the forms of trust we will draw on the distinction made by Uslaner (2002) and Rothstein & Uslaner (2005) between “generalized” and “particularized” forms of trust, and along the lines of Bourdieu (1984) we will construct a two-dimensional space of social positions in order to examine how trust, networks and related attitudes are distributed within this space. As noted above we will be using data from the Aalborg based COMPAS-survey, which was not designed for the purpose of a comprehensive analysis of trust. Consequently, we are not able to present an all inclusive battery of questions covering both generalized and particularized forms of trust. We set out by constructing the space of social positions. Havingconstructed this, we move on to a tripartite analysis of i) indicators of trust ii) indicators of social networks iii) indicators of
attitudes towards others and modes of orientation
. By inserting the chosen indicators as supplementary categories onto the space of social position, we will be able to investigate their relation to the socially differentiated distribution of economic and cultural resources. Our general expectation is to find distinct patterns in terms of communalities in the distribution of answers across these different issues within the social space.The space of social positions
In the following section a two dimensional space of social positions will be presented.2 The aim of the space construction is to make preparations for an analysis of the interrelationships between social inequality and forms of trust. That is, how are generalized and particularized forms of trust differentiated within a space constructed along two axes representing important principles of social differentiation and inequality? By the aid of MCA, and using the statistical software package SPAD, we have constructed a geometric model of data representing individuals by points and summarising the relations between categorized variables (see Le Roux & Rouanet 2004: chapter 5). In order to represent both economic and cultural capital 10 questions with a total of 45 categories were chosen from the COMPAS Survey. These are listed in following table 1:
Table 1: Indicators of capital Economic capital Number of
categories
Cultural capital
Number of categories
Vocational indicators
Number of categories
Income 5
Education
5Vocation
11Car value 4
Fathers
education
5
Fathers
vocation
6 Ownership of
residence
2
Sector of
employm.
2 Value of summer
home
3
Investments/savings 2
Total 16 10 19
2 The space of social positions was originally constructed in relation to the COMPAS-project. The indicators representing economic and cultural capital are similar (but not identical) to those included by Bourdieu in the construction of the space of social positions (1984:126-131).
The total variance of the model is summarized along a number of axis each summing up a decreasing part of the total variance. The first axis sums up 49 pct. of total variance of the model. The second axis sums up an additional 19 pct. of the variance. 3 We will not present a full-fledged analysis of the extracted axes, but give a graphical presentation of the two most important principle axes.4
Figure 1: Distribution of the modalities contributing above average to axis 1 and 2 in the space of social positions. Size of markers indicates frequencies.
-1.0 -0.5 0 0.5 1.0
-1.0 -0.5 0 0.5
(Axis 1) Faders educ. primary school
Privat
Public employment Savings etc.
Fathers educ. Master Teacher highest level Health care medium level
Craft Vocational education
Higher educ. Hum/Soc
White collar Income < DKK 220. 000
Father unskilled worker
Fathers educ. Bachelor Car value < DKK 50.000
Car value > DKK 200.000
Primary school
Income < DKK 221-350.000
Income >DKK 600.000 Owner residence
Rented residence
Manager
Tek./nat. highest level
Not imployed
Higher educ: Tek./nat./adm.
(Axis 2)
* Modalities contributing above average to the variation of the first axis are in bold, those contributing above average to the second axis are in italics and those contributing to both axes are in bold italics
Figure 1 presents answers to the 10 chosen questions included in the construction of the two-dimensional space of social positions. Along each of the two axes we find that answers that frequently occur together will be situated close to each other, while those that never or only rarely occur together will be situated far from each other. Based on these patterns, one may interpret the sociological principle at stake along each of the axes.
3 Percentages are modified rates (see: Le Roux & Rouanet 2004: 200-2001).
4 Danish readers may find a complete analysis of the space of social positions in: Skjøtt-Larsen, 2008. In English a similar model is presented in Prieur, Rosenlund & Skjott-Larsen (2008).
16 categories have contributed above average to the variation along the first axis. To the left we find
indicators of low levels of economic capital (income < DKK 220.000; income DKK 221-350.000; Car value
< DKK 50.000 and rented residence), indicators of low levels of cultural capital (primary school and fathers education primary school). The vocational indicators also imply low levels of both economic and cultural capital (not employed and father unskilled worker). Opposing these at the right hand side of figure 1 we find indicators of high levels of economic capital (income >600.000, car value >200.000 and owner residence), high levels of cultural capital (higher educ. tek/nat/adm and fathers educ. Bachelor). Also, the vocations present at the right side indicate high levels of both cultural and economic capital (manager, tech/nat. highest level and father white collar). We interpret this axis to be one of capital volume. On the left side we find low levels of capital (cultural or economic in nature). On the right side we find high levels of capital ( cultural or economic in nature).
15 categories have contributed above average to the second axis. In the lower part of figure 1 we find indicators of high cultural capital (higher educ. hum/soc, fathers educ. Bachelor and fathers educ. Master level). Regarding economic capital we interestingly find indicators of low economic capital in the lower part of the social space (income < DKK 220.000 and car value < DKK 50.000). The vocational indicators are public employment, teaching highest level, health care medium level and father white collar. Towards the top of figure 1 we find indictors of low cultural capital (vocational educ. and fathers educ. primary) and high levels of economic capital (car value > DKK 200.000 and savings). Among the vocational indicators we find private sector and craft. Because of the reversed or chiasmic relationship between economic and cultural capital, we interpret this axis to represent the composition of capital. At any given volume of capital, we find those with a capital composition dominated by economic capital (economic fractions) at the top of the vertical axis. Those with a capital composition dominated by cultural capital (cultural fractions) are to be found at the bottom of the vertical axis.5
5 To those familiar with Distinction, we may add, that the two principles identified within the space of social positions are the exact same principles that Bourdieu identified as the two main principles of the space of social positions in early 1970’s France. In Bourdieus mapping of the space of social positions and the space of lifestyles however, he chose to switch the order of the axes, so that the capital volume axis is the vertical one and the capital composition axis is horizontal one (1984: 128-129).
Trust
Having established the space of social positions we now move to the subject matter of our analysis, that is, the distribution of the forms of trust, networks and attitudes towards others within this space6. In the following section we will distinguish between trust in generalized others and trust in particularized others.
Five questions were chosen as indicators of these two types of trust:
Indicators of trust in generalized others
There are not many people one can fully trust [trust in few/trust in others].
Too many are reluctant to work today in Denmark [people won’t work/people want to work].
I sometimes feel unsafe when I go about in Aalborg [feel unsafe in Aa/don’t fell unsafe in Aa].
Indicators of trust in particularized others
People from Aalborg are more trustworthy than people from Copenhagen [trust in people from Aa/no particular trust in people from Aa].
People from Aalborg are kind and accommodating [people from Aa are accommodating/people from Aa are not particularly accommodating].
6 See appendix 1 for a numerical presentation of figure 2-4.
Figure 2: Indicators of trust as supplementary points within the space of social positions, axis 1 and 2.
Size of markers indicates frequencies.
-0.50 -0.25 0 0.25 0.50
-0.50 -0.25 0 0.25 0.50
(Axis 1) (Axis 2)
People from Aa are accommodating
People from Aa are not particularly accomodating Feel unsafe in Aa
Don't feel unsafe in Aa Trust in people from Aa
No particular trust in people from Aa People won’t work
People want to work Trust in few
Trust in others
Capital
Volume - Capital
Volume +
Economic Capital - Cultural capital + Economic Capital +
Cultural capital
-
In figure 2 the indicators of generalized and particularized forms of trust have been added as supplementary points within the space of social positions that was established in figure 1. The difference between the coordinates of two modalities along an axis is equal to the deviation between the corresponding modality mean-points in the cloud of individuals expressed in standard deviation units. Following Le Roux & Rouanet (2004: 197, 234) a deviation greater than one between the coordinates of two modalities from the same question will be characterized as large and a deviation less than 0.5 will be characterized as small (those in between will be characterized as moderate).
Trust in generalized others
Agreement that people in general can be trusted is related to volume of capital and those with many resources are more likely to express trust [Trust in others] (right side of the social space). Trust in the willingness of others to work is mainly related to the composition of capital; with high trust [People want to work] located among those with more cultural than economic capital at the bottom of the second axis.
Feeling insecure [Feel unsafe] when walking in the streets of Aalborg is mainly related to volume of capital,
with the privileged groups expressing less insecurity. Taken together, most of the indicators of high levels of generalized trust are to be found on the right side of the constructed space of social positions, while
modalities indicating low levels of generalized trust are located on the left side [Trust in few], [People won’t work], [Feel unsafe in Aa]. Regarding trust in the willingness of others to work, however, there is only a small deviation between the modalities along the axis of capital volume. The latter indicator appear to be related to the composition of capital, rather than to the volume of capital, and the high trusters are situated among those with a capital composition dominated by cultural capital rather than economic capital.
Trust in particularized others
Turning towards trust in particularized others we find that the modality mean point of those who trust their fellow Aalborg citizens above people from Copenhagen [Trust in people from Aa] is situated within the top left quadrant, while the mean point of those who disagree is situated towards the bottom right. The deviation between these points, however, is small along both axes. Regarding those who find people from Aalborg kind and accommodating [People from Aa are accommodating] and those who do not, we find the same pattern. There is no deviation along the first axis and also only a small deviation along the second axis. If there is any relation between social position and particularized forms of trust, it would be that trusting the locals above residents of the capital city is related to a capital composition dominated by economic capital.
However the deviation is small in both cases, and we do not want to make any strong conclusions here.
Social network
In this section we investigate if and how different forms of organisational memberships and personal
network are related to people’s economic and cultural resources i.e. their position within the social space. We have several measures of the respondents’ membership of different types of organizations, whereas our indicator of personal network relies on a single question about the educational level of their best friend. The following indicators were chosen:
Membership
Do you hold a (voluntary) position in an organisation, school board etc? [Position in org., school board etc./no position…].
Are you a member of a political party or organisation? [Member of political party or organization/not member…].
Are you a member of any religious group [Member of religious group/not member of..].
Are you a member of a lodge, Home Guard, riffle club or Boy Scout association [Member of lodge/military org. etc./ not member of…].7
Are you a member of any cultural, humanitarian or environmental organisation? [Member of cultural/hum.org./ not member of…]. 8
Personal network
What is the educational level of your best friend? [F1: level of education].
Figure 3: Indicators of network as supplementary points within the space of social positions, axis 1 and 2. Size of markers indicates frequencies.
-0.75 -0.50 -0.25 0 0.25 0.50
-0.50 -0.25 0 0.25 0.50
(Axis 2)
Position in org., school board etc.
No position in org., school board etc.
Member of political party/organisation
Not member of political party/organisation
Member of religious group
Not member of religious group F1: Basic education
F1: Vocational training
F1: High school/short further education
F1:Bachelor level university Not member of lodge/military org.
Member of lodge/military org.
Not member of cultural/hum. org.
Member of cultural/hum.org.
(F1:Master level university) (Axis 1)
Capital volume -
Capital volume + Economic Capital +
Cultural capital
-
Economic capital - Cultural capital +
7 The three questions of membership were asked separately. A dummy variable of membership/non-membership of any of the three organisations was created.
8 The three questions of membership were asked separately. A dummy variable of membership/non-membership of any of the three organisations was created.
There do not appear to be any strong associations between membership of the examined organisations and the space of social position. Bearing this in mind, and attending the exploratory nature of this study, we will precede with the examination of the direction of the possible associations. Membership of a religious community does not appear to have any relation to the space of social position. Political membership
[Member of political party/organization] does not appear to be related to the volume of capital; however, it is more frequent in the areas of the social space where people primarily have access to economic rather than cultural assets. All other forms of organisational memberships appear to be positively associated with high volume of capital [Position in org., school board etc], [Member of lodge/military org], [Member of
cultural/hum.org].
While membership of an organisation appears to be related to high overall volume of capital, there is an interesting differentiation between the specific kinds of organisation along the second axis. Membership of a lodge, The Home Guard, a riffle club or a Boy Scout organisation [Member of lodge/military org] is mainly found within the fractions rich on economic capital. Membership of a cultural, humanitarian or an
environmental organisation is more frequent within the cultural fractions. Holding a voluntary position within an organisation, school board etc. is not differentiated along this axis.
Regarding the quality of the personal network, there is a strong association between the individuals’ position within the space of social position and the educational level of their best friend. Having a best friend with only a basic educational level [F1: basic education] is more frequent among those holding low levels of capital, and more so among the fractions with the shortest education. Having a friend with at least a bachelor level of education is more frequent among those having high levels of capital and more so among the cultural fractions9. Examining the educational level of the best friend is of course a very restricted definition of personal network – however we found it important to include this variable, because it may tell us something about the characteristics of the people that are included in the intimate sphere of the respondents lifes.
To sum up: Organisational membership does not appear to have any strong association to the space of social positions. One may find, however, a pattern indicating that membership of cultural/humanitarian
organisations, lodge/military organisations as well as holding a voluntary position within an organisation or school board may be related to privileged positions within the space of social positions, and that there could be a differentiation between the types of membership indicating that the cultural fractions are more likely to
9 70 pct. of respondents with a higher education report that their best friend has a higher education. The same is reported by only 22 pct. of respondents without a higher education. Regarding respondent’s second friend the tendency is almost as strong. 66 pct. of respondents with a higher education report that their second friend has a higher education. The same is reported by only 21 pct. of respondents without a higher education
participate in organisations related to cultural, humanitarian or environmental issues while the economic fractions may be more likely to participate in lodges and organisations with military affiliations and political parties.
In personal network there are very strong homologies between position within the social space and the educational level of the best friend. Having a best friend with a higher education is more frequent within the educated fractions of the privileged groups, and vice versa. This result is hardly surprising. However, it is interesting because such a tendency in the networking practices may question the findings below, of an elite expressing tolerance regarding social and cultural differences.
Identification, attitudes towards particularized others, and modes of orientation
Having established the relation of trust and networks to the distribution of economic and cultural forms of capital within the space of social positions we shall examine a broader set of attitudes distributed within the same social space. This will allow us to determine the more general set of habitual differences that prevail between positions in that space.
We have chosen to focus on different sources of identification, attitudes towards others, and orientation towards the local or the global. Finally we have included a question on whether people feel able to
understand what is going on in politics. All of these may be seen as part of the way groups within the social space seek to identify with or distance themselves from other positions within that space and, consequently, as different ways of constructing an identity based on boundaries drawn towards other social groups or practices. Such boundaries may well turn out to shape the boundaries of trust and distrust as well.
Although being proud of being from Aalborg or from Denmark may be interpreted as an exclusion of those not forming part of that group, it should be noted that very few people reject these statements. As an example less than 3 pct. of the respondents disagree to the statement “I am proud of being Danish”. Regarding
attitudes towards particularized others the only available questions are related to gender and ethnicity. As already mentioned the local vs. global orientation is often taken to be a new important distinction.
Furthermore, it has proven to be an important distinction within earlier analysis of the COMPAS data (Prieur, Rosenlund & Skjott-Larsen 2008; Skjott-Larsen 2008). Finally the indicator of political self- confidence is chosen to indicate a sense of inclusion/empowerment in political decision making.
The following indicators were chosen:
Sources of identification
I am proud of being from Aalborg [Proud of Aa/not proud of…]
I am proud of being Danish [Proud of DK/not proud…]
Working class, middle class or upper class [Working class, middle class, upper class].
Attitudes towards particularized others
If I had a choice, I would prefer a male boss [Prefer male boss/don’t prefer…].
If jobs are scarce, employers should favour Danes instead of immigrants [Favour Danes/won’t favour..].
Modes of orientation
When watching television: I am more interested in local news than I am in international news [Local news/international news]
When watching television: I am more interested in news on the royal family than I am in news on the US election [News on Danish royalties/news on US election…].
When having guests for dinner: It is often something new and exotic [Exotic dinner/not exotic…].
When having guests for dinner: It is often something traditional Danish. [Traditional dinner/not traditional]
Political self-confidence
Politics is often so complicated, that I do not understand what it is all about. [Politics complicated/ politics not…]
In figure 4 below, i
ndicators of identification, attitudes towards others and modes of orientation are
included as supplementary points within the space of social positions
.Figure 4: Indicators of identification, attitudes towards others and modes of orientation as supplementary points within the space of social positions, axis 1 and 2. Size of markers indicates frequencies.
-0.50 -0.25 0 0.25 0.50
-0.50 -0.25 0 0.25 0.50
(Axis 2)
Proud of Aa
Not proud of Aa Proud of being Danish
Middle class Local news
International news News on Danish royalties
News on US-election Traditional dinner
Not traditional dinner Exotic dinner Not exotic dinner
Politics complicated
Politics not complicated Favour Danes
Won't favour Danes Prefer male boss
Don't prefer male boss
(Axis 1) Upper class
Working class
Not proud of being Danish
Capital
volume - Capital
volume +
Economic capital - Cultural capital + Economic Capital +
Cultural capital
-
Three questions representing different sources of identification was included in the analysis. Identification with nationality
[Proud of being Danish] is strongly differentiated along the second axis
, with disagreement located at the bottom, indicating a composition of capital dominated by cultural capital.Identification with Aalborg [Proud of Aalborg] exhibits a similar relation to the social space, but only with a deviation of 0.45 along the second axis. Regarding class identification [Working/middle/upper] there is a strong deviation along the first axis between those identifying with the working class (left) and those identifying with the upper class (right).
Willingness to favour Danes over immigrants if jobs are scarce [Favour Danes], is most frequent among those with low levels of capital, and more so among those lacking in cultural resources (top left side).
Disagreement to such practices are more prevalent among those privileged in volume of capital and more so within the cultural fractions (bottom right). The deviations between the mean points are moderate along both axes. Preferring a male boss [Prefer male boss] follows the same pattern, but the deviations are small along both axes.
The indicators of global vs. local forms of orientation deviate moderately along the first axis and weakly along the second. Preferring international news above local news in television [International news], preferring news on the US-elections above news on the Danish royal family [News on US election] and serving something new and exotic when having guests for dinner [Exotic dinner] are all more frequent among those privileged by high volume of capital, and more so among the cultural fractions (bottom right).
All the local modes of orientation are more frequent among those lacking in volume of capital and more so among the economic fractions (top left).
Political self-confidence [Politics not complicated] is related to volume of capital, with a moderate deviation between the modality mean points along the first axis. A high level of political self-confidence is more frequent among those with high levels of capital (right side) and less frequent among those lacking in resources (left side).
To sum up these different questions one may identify two opposing patterns. Among those with low levels of capital, and particularly within the economic fraction at the top left side in figure 4, we find a higher
tendency to identify with locality and nationality along with a stronger tendency to identify with the working class. We find a stronger tendency to discriminate against immigrants and possibly also women. We find a tendency to have a stronger orientation towards local issues when watching television and towards traditional dishes in food. Finally, there is a stronger tendency to find politics complicated. On the other hand, among those with high levels of capital and particularly within the cultural fractions (bottom right) we find a tendency to reject local and national identifications, as well as a tendency to reject discrimination of immigrants and possibly also women. We find a tendency to be oriented towards international issues in news, to reject the traditional Danish dishes and to prefer the new and exotic ones. Finally, there is a tendency to feel at ease with the ongoing political debate. While the first pattern may be captured by terms like local, traditional, closed and intolerant, the latter is often termed cosmopolitan, modern, global and tolerant.
Trust, networks and attitudes
Taken together, most of the indicators of high levels of generalized trust are to be found on the right side of the constructed space of social positions indicating high levels of capital, while modalities indicating low levels of generalized trust are located on the opposite side. Regarding trust in the willingness of others to work, however, there is only a small deviation between the modalities along the capital volume axis. Instead this indicator appears to be related to the composition of capital, with high trusters more often situated among those with a capital composition dominated by cultural capital rather than economic capital. The associations between the space of social position and particularised forms of trust are not strong; if a relation exists it would be that particularised trust in local residents is related to a capital composition dominated by economic capital.
Organisational membership does not appear to have any strong association to the space of social positions.
One may find, however, a pattern indicating that membership of cultural/humanitarian organisations, lodge/military organisations as well as holding a voluntary position within an organisation may be related to privileged positions within the space of social positions and that there could be a differentiation between the types of membership indicating that the cultural fractions are more likely to participate in organisations related to cultural, humanitarian or environmental issues and that the economic fractions may be more likely to participate in lodges and organisations with military affiliations and political parties. In personal networks like attracts like. Having a best friend with a higher education is more frequent within the educated fractions of the privileged groups, and vice versa. This result is hardly surprising. However, it is interesting because it may question the findings of an elite that is likely to trust people in general and to be tolerant regarding social and cultural differences.
Among those with low levels of capital, and particularly within the economic fraction, we find a higher tendency to identify with locality and nationality along with a stronger tendency to identify with the working class. We find a stronger tendency to discriminate against immigrants and possibly also women. We find a tendency to have a stronger orientation towards local issues when watching television and towards traditional dishes in food. Finally, there is a stronger tendency to find politics complicated. On the other hand, among those with high levels of capital, and particularly within the cultural fractions, we find a tendency to reject local and national identifications as well as a tendency to reject discrimination of immigrants and possibly also women. We also find a tendency to be oriented towards international issues in news and a tendency to state that politics is not complicated.
We find these latter patterns particularly interesting because they correspond with the patterns of generalised trust. Hence, we find that high levels of generalised trust are articulated along with global, tolerant and cosmopolitan attitudes as expressions of habitual dispositions characteristic of a privileged social position, and particularly among groups that are mainly privileged by cultural resources (or in Bourdieusan terms, by the dominated fraction of the dominant class). On the other hand, low levels of generalised trust are
articulated along with more local, traditional and ethnically discriminating attitudes expressing habitual dispositions characteristic of individuals and groups with fewer resources, and mainly with absence of cultural resources. The indicators of particularized trust in local residents of Aalborg did not reveal any strong relation to the space of social positions; however, one may note that both indicators of particularised trust were weakly associated with the economic fractions, and that locality and nationality as sources of identification revealed a similar pattern (but with an equally weak relation). Finally, regarding social networks, it is noteworthy, although by no means a novel finding, that we see a strong association between the educational level of the best friend and position within the space of social positions. This tendency for the well educated parts of the respondents to associate with friends of their own kind endorses a certain curiosity regarding the range and the nature of the generalized trust and tolerance, which is expressed among those groups.
References:
Bourdieu, Pierre (1984): Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. London: Routledge.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1986) “The Forms of Capital”, In Richardson, J.G. (ed.): Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. New York: Greenwood Press.
Castells, Manuel (2000): The Rise of the Network Society. The Information age: Economy, Society and Culture vol. I.
Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Henriksen, Lars Skov, Inger Koch-Nielsen and David Rosdahl (2008): Formal and Informal Volunteering in a Nordic Context: The Case of Denmark. Journal of Civil Society, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 193-209.
Koch-Nielsen, Inger, Lars Skov Henriksen, Torben Fridberg & David Rosdahl (2005): Frivilligt arbejde. Den frivillige indsats i Danmark. København: Socialforskningsinstituttet.
Lamont, Michèle (1992): Money, Morals, and Manners. The Culture of the French and the American Upper-Middle Class. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Levinsen, Klaus (2004): Tillid. I Gundelach, Peter (red.): Danskernes særpræg. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag, pp.
88-118.
Li, Yaojun, Andrew Pickles and Mike Savage (2005): Social Capital and Social Trust in Britain. European Sociological Review, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 109-23.
Prieur, Annick, Lennart Rosenlund, and Jakob Skjøtt-Larsen (2008): Cultural Capital Today: A Case Study From Denmark. Poetics, Vol. 36, No 1, pp. 45-70.
Putnam, Robert (1993): Making Democracy Work. Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Rothstein, Bo and Eric M. Uslaner (2005): All for all: Equality, Corruption and Trust. World Politics, 58(1):41-72.
Seligman, Adam B. (1998): Trust and sociability: On the Limits of Confidence and Role Expectations. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 391-404.
Skjøtt-Larsen, Jakob (2008): Klasse, kultur og politik: Social differentiering i det postindustrielle Aalborg. Ph.d.- afhandling, Institut for Sociologi, Socialt Arbejde og Organisation, Aalborg Universitet.
Urry, John (2000): Sociology Beyond Society: Motilities for the twenty-first century. London: Routledge.
Uslaner, Eric M., (2002): The Moral Foundations of Trust. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=824504 Uslaner, Eric M. and Michell Brown (2005): Inequality, Trust and Engagement. American Politics Research, vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 868-894.
Appendix 1
Loadings of supplementary categories
Label Count Axis 1 Axis 2
There are not many people one can fully trust
Trust in few 319 -0,3 0,19
Trust in others 486 0,2 -0,12
Missing/neutral 87
Too many are reluctant to work today in Denmark
People won't work 334 -0,10 0,22
People want to work 406 0,04 -0,18
Missing/neutral 152
I sometimes feel unsafe when I go about in Aalborg
Feel unsafe 169 -0,43 -0,09
Don't feel unsafe 690 0,08 0,04
Missing/neutral 33
People from Aalborg are more trustworthy than people from Copenhagen
Trust in people from Aa 387 -0,08 0,20
No particular trust in people from Aa 248 0,12 -0,15
Missing/neutral 257
People from Aalborg are kind and accommodating
People from Aa are accommodating 736 -0,06 0,06
People from Aa are not particularly accommodating 51 0,08 -0,15
Missing/neutral 105
Do you hold a (voluntary) position in an organisation, school board etc?
Position in org., school board etc. 243 0,23 0,09
No position in org., school board etc. 647 -0,12 -0,03
Missing 2
Are you a member of a political party or organisation?
Member of political party/org. 46 -0,06 0,27
Not member of political party/org. 846 -0,02 -0,01
Missing 0
Are you a member of any religious group
Member of religious group 31 -0,01 0,12
Not member of religious group 861 -0,03 0,00
Missing 0
Are you a member of a lodge, Home Guard, riffle association or Boy Scout association
Not member of lodge/military org. 806 -0,07 -0,04
Member of lodge/military org. 86 0,42 0,36
Are you a member of any cultural, humanitarian or environmental organisation?
Not member of cultural/hum. Org. 612 -0,09 0,08
Member of cultural/hum. Org. 280 0,11 -0,17
What is the educational level of your best friend?
Education basic level 93 -0,83 0,25
Vocational training 325 -0,27 0,40
High school/short further education 103 -0,03 -0,14
Bachelor level university 209 0,46 -0,47
Master level + university 109 0,77 -0,36
Missing 68
Working class, middle class or upper class
Working class 148 -0,92 0,04
Middle class 699 0,14 -0,02
Upper class 21 1,33 0,64
Missing 24
If I had a choice, I would prefer a male boss
Prefer male boss 174 -0,17 0,19
Don’t prefer male boss 454 0,11 -0,11
Missing/neutral 264
If jobs are scarce, employers should favour Danes instead of immigrants
Favour Danes 244 -0,44 0,31
Don't favour Danes 520 0,18 -0,18
Missing/neutral 128
When watching television: I am more interested in local news than I am in international news
Local news 299 -0,31 0,14
International news 312 0,30 -0,17
Missing/neutral 281
When watching television: I am more interested in news on the royal family than I am in news on the US election
News on Danish royalties 428 -0,29 0,08
News on US-election 248 0,38 -0,13
Missing 216
When having guests for dinner: It is often something new and exotic
Exotic dinner 448 0,18 -0,09
Not exotic dinner 320 -0,22 0,05
Missing 124
When having guests for dinner: It is often something traditional Danish.
Traditional dinner 356 -0,21 0,18
Not traditional dinner 412 0,21 -0,23
Missing 124
Politics is often so complicated, that I do not understand what it is all about
Politics complicated 418 -0,31 0,05
Politics not complicated 385 0,29 -0,06
Missing 89
