Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:01:53.478Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Number of Siblings and Participation in Voluntary Associations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 May 2014

Deniz Yucel
Deniz Yucel*
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology, William Paterson University of New Jersey, 300 Pompton Road, 465 Raubinger Hall, Wayne, NJ 07470, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

While demographers have long been concerned with population increases, recent significant declines in fertility also warrant concern. So far, however, most researchers have focused on the causes of lower fertility rather than its consequences. This study makes a theoretical contribution by proposing a new conceptual framework, which suggests that growing up with fewer siblings is associated with more participation in voluntary associations. Using General Social Survey (GSS) from the US, the relationship between sibship size and participation in voluntary associations is empirically tested. It is found that there is a negative relationship between sibship size and participation in voluntary associations among American adults who have at least four siblings. These findings have implications for researchers who seek a better understanding of the consequences of declining sibship size, not only in the US but also in Europe. Specifically, these results have implications for several countries in Central, Eastern, and Southern Europe, regions that have experienced ‘the lowest-low fertility’ in the last two decades.

Type
Focus: Nihilism
Information
European Review , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , May 2014 , pp. 283 - 298
Copyright
Copyright © Academia Europaea 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Putnam, R. D. (2000) Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (New York: Simon and Schuster).Google Scholar
2.Jackman, R. W. and Miller, R. A. (1995) Voter turnout in the industrial democracies during the 1980s. Comparative Political Studies, 27, pp. 467–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Lijphart, A. (1997) Unequal participation: democracy’s unresolved dilemma. The American Political Science Review, 91(1), pp. 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Putnam, R. D. (2002) Democracies in Flux: The Evolution of Social Capital in Contemporary Society (New York: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Lane, R. (2000) The Loss of Happiness in Market Democracies (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press).Google Scholar
6.Schofer, E. and Fourcade-Gourinchas, M. (2001) The structural contexts of civic engagement: voluntary association membership in comparative perspective. American Sociological Review, 66(6), pp. 806–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.McCulloch, A. (2013) Cohort variations in the membership of voluntary associations in Great Britain, 1991–2007. Sociology, 48(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
8.Kohler, H.-P., Billari, F. C. and Antonio Ortega, J. (2002) The emergence of lowest-low fertility in Europe during the 1990s. Population and Development Review, 28(4), pp. 641–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Kohler, H.-P., Billari, F. C. and Antonio Ortega, J. (2006) Low fertility in Europe: causes, implications and policy options. In: F. R. Harris, (ed.) The Baby Bust: Who will do the Work? Who Will Pay the Taxes? (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield), pp. 48–109.Google Scholar
10.Paxton, P. (2002) Social capital and democracy: an interdependent relationship. American Sociological Review, 67(2), pp. 254–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Beyerlein, K. and Hipp, J. R. (2005) Social capital, too much of a good thing? American religious traditions and community crime. Social Forces, 84(2), pp. 995–1013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Audia, P. G. and Teckchandani, A. (2010) The effect of connected and isolated voluntary associations on economic activity in the United States, 1984–2000. Social Science Research, 39(6), pp. 1153–1163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Paxton, P. (2007) Association memberships and generalized trust: a multilevel model across 31 countries. Social Forces, 86(1), pp. 47–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Breiger, R. (1974) The duality of persons and groups. Social Forces, 53(2), pp. 181–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Moody, J. and White, D. R. (2003) Structural cohesion and embeddedness: a hierarchical concept of social groups. American Sociological Review, 68(1), pp. 103–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Alesina, A. and Giuliano, P. (2010) The power of the family. Journal of Economic Growth, 15(2), pp. 93–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Gondal, N. (2012) Who ‘fills in’ for siblings and how? A multilevel analysis of personal network composition and its relationship to sibling size. Sociological Forum, 27, pp. 732–755.Google Scholar
18.Roberts, S. G. B., Dunbar, R. I. M., Pollet, T. V. and Kuppens, T. (2009) Exploring variations in active network size: constraints and ego characteristics. Social Networks, 31(1), 138–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Simmel, G. (1955) The Web of Group Affiliation (New York: Free Press).Google Scholar
20.Granovetter, M. (1973) The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), pp. 1360–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Blau, P. M. (1977) Inequality and Heterogeneity (New York: Free Press).Google Scholar
22.Granovetter, M. (1982) The strength of weak ties: a network theory revisited. In: P. Marsden and N. Lin, (eds) Social Structures and Network Analysis (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage), pp. 105–130.Google Scholar
23.Mutz, D. C. (2002) The consequences of cross-cutting networks for political participation. American Journal of Political Science, 46(4), pp. 838–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24.Stolle, D. (1998) Bowling together, bowling alone: the development of generalized trust in voluntary associations. Political Psychology, 19(3), pp. 497–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Ferrari, G. and Zuanna, G. D. (2010) Siblings and human capital: a comparison between Italy and France. Demographic Research, 23(21), pp. 587–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Delhey, J. and Newton, K. (2005) Predicting cross-national levels of social trust: global pattern or Nordic exceptionalism? European Sociological Review, 21(4), pp. 311–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27.Curtis, J. E., Baer, D. E. and Grabb, E. G. (2001) Nations of joiners: explaining voluntary association membership in democratic societies. American Sociological Review, 66(6), pp. 783–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.Rahn, W. M., Yoon, K. S., Garet, M., Lipson, S. and Loflin, K. (2009) Geographies of trust. American Behavioral Scientist, 52(12), pp. 1646–1663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29.Robinson, R. V. and Jackson, E. F. (2001) Is trust in others declining in America? An age-period-cohort analysis. Social Science Research, 30(1), pp. 117–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Stromsnes, K. (2008) The importance of church attendance and membership of religious voluntary organizations for the formation of social capital. Social Compass, 55(4), pp. 478–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Liu, B., Wright Austin, S. D. and D’Andra Orey, B. (2009) Church attendance, social capital, and black voting participation. Social Science Quarterly, 90(3), pp. 576–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32.Allison, P. D. (2002) Missing Data (Thousand Oaks: Sage).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33.Blake, J. (1989) Family Size and Achievement (Los Angeles: University of California Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34.Downey, D. B. (2001) Number of siblings and intellectual development: the resource dilution explanation. American Psychologist, 56(6/7), pp. 497–504.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
35.Paxton, P. (1999) Is social capital declining in the United States? A multiple indicator assessment. American Journal of Sociology, 105(1), pp. 88–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36.McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L. and Brashears, M. (2006) Social isolation in America: changes in core discussion networks over two decades. American Sociological Review, 71(3), pp. 353–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37.Dunn, J. (1993) Young Children’s Close Relationships: Beyond Attachment (Los Angeles: Sage).Google Scholar
38.Ostrov, J. M., Crick, N. R. and Stauffacher, K. (2006) Relational aggression in sibling and peer relationships during early childhood. Applied Developmental Psychology, 27(3), pp. 241–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
39.Downey, D. B. and Condron, D. J. (2004) Playing well with others in kindergarten: the benefit of siblings at home. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66(2), pp. 333–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
40.Kitzmann, K. M., Cohen, R. and Lockwood, R. L. (2002) Are only children missing out? Comparison of the peer-related social competence of only children and siblings. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 19(3), pp. 299–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
41.Polit, D. E. and Falbo, T. (1987) Only children and personality development: a quantitative review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 49(2), pp. 309–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar