we still bowl, just not in leagues

whatever kind of political implications it has, most would agree that social capital is a good thing. but what kinds of social interactions facilitate the development of social capital? membership in formal organizations is decreasing. is all hope lost?

a study from the journal political psychology says maybe not. this study examined informal social interactions and their impact on social capital.

importantly, the study hints at why many people prefer informal interactions, which the study found were "thought to be immediately rewarding and to provide long-term satisfaction to a greater extent than organizational participation." organizations cost money and often have barriers to entry, whereas informal interactions are more accommodating and often free. there are lots of potential reasons for the decline of membership in formal organizations (not least of which is the modern welfare state that decreases the need for nongovernmental support networks, but that's another story), but this one is interesting in that it points to our increasing desire to "have it your way."

that desire may not reap such ill consequences as previously thought. the study notes that while formal organizations are still tops for building civic competence, informal participation is actually better at building "feelings of connectedness and social support." informal interactions also exceed in providing companionship and creating networks of mutual obligation.

i'm certainly no expert on the subject, but that seems like a good thing to me.

source: green, mc et al. organizational membership versus informal interaction: contributions to skills and perceptions that build social capital. political psychology. february 2005 (yes, i am that far behind on my reading. back off!)

Labels: social