The paradox of diversity

IMISCOE Research Series Wahideh Achbari The Paradox of Diversity Why does Interethnic Contact in Voluntary Organizations not lead to Generalized Trust? IMISCOE Research Series This series is the official book series of IMISCOE, the largest network of excellence on migration and diversity in the world It comprises publications which present empirical and theoretical research on different aspects of international migration The authors are all specialists, and the publications a rich source of information for researchers and others involved in international migration studies The series is published under the editorial supervision of the IMISCOE Editorial Committee which includes leading scholars from all over Europe The series, which contains more than eighty titles already, is internationally peer reviewed which ensures that the book published in this series continue to present excellent academic standards and scholarly quality Most of the books are available open access More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/13502 Wahideh Achbari The Paradox of Diversity Why does Interethnic Contact in Voluntary Organizations not lead to Generalized Trust? 123 Wahideh Achbari Applied Economics Free University Brussels Brussels Belgium and Political Science University of Amsterdam Amsterdam The Netherlands ISSN 2364-4087 IMISCOE Research Series ISBN 978-3-319-44241-9 DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-44243-3 ISSN 2364-4095 (electronic) ISBN 978-3-319-44243-3 (eBook) Library of Congress Control Number: 2016947768 © Springer International Publishing AG 2016 This work is subject to copyright All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made Printed on acid-free paper This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland Acknowledgments This book has only been made possible through support of many people whom I would like to thank here Firstly, special thanks are due to my postdoctoral supervisor Benny Geys for his support and patience in the past four years I would like to thank my Ph.D advisers Andrew Thompson and Pontus Odmalm for their feedback when I was a postgraduate student in Edinburgh I am greatly indebted to Floris Vermeulen at the Institute for Migration and Ethnic Studies for making his dataset available to me, without which I would probably still be looking for organizations Similarly, I would like to thank staff at the Radboud University Nijmegen for making their dataset The Dutch Family Survey 2009 available to me before publication I also would like to thank staff at DANCE Archive and O+S Dienst Onderzoek en Statistiek in Amsterdam for their assistance For the translation work, I would like to thank Çağrı Kahveci and Elif Keskiner I also would like to thank Sara Mohammadi in helping me distribute questionnaires I am grateful for receiving financial assistance from the University of Edinburgh (MTEM Ltd.), Prins Bernhard Cultuur Fonds, Stichting Vrijvrouwe van Renswoude, and Research Foundation Flanders (FWO Grant Number G.0022.12) without which setting up and completing this project would have been infeasible Special thanks go to the director, staff, and (post)doctoral students at the Institute for Migration and Ethnic Studies and the Department of Political Science at the University of Amsterdam for offering me a lively workspace during fieldwork and later when revising this manuscript Not only have my visiting periods been very fruitful in order to collect data, but the seminars and the discussions often clarified my research ideas Without these discussions, words of encouragement, and insights into migration research, I undoubtedly would have not been able to produce this work Support from staff at the University of Edinburgh and Free University Brussels was also indispensable for creating and shaping research ideas at the initial and later stages I would like to thank Christina Boswell, Ailsa Henderson, Marc Hooghe, and Micheal Rosie for their comments on and criticism of earlier drafts Fiona MacKay, John Peterson, and Cecile Fabre were postgraduate advisors during the course of my Ph.D I wish to thank all for their practical and mental support v vi Acknowledgments I would like to thank Paul Norris for his help with MLwiN Although I am fully responsible for the interpretation and reporting of the data in this book, I would like to especially thank Jona Linde for closely reading the final version of this manuscript I also wish to thank Anna Montazam, Martin Pullinger, and Jennifer Rontganger for proofreading and copyediting Martijn Brünger’s assistance was essential in compiling the maps in this book I would also like to thank former postgraduates at the School of Social and Political Science in Edinburgh and doctoral students at the Free University Brussels from whom I learned a great deal about many diverse topics I am greatly indebted to my close friends and family for their practical and mental support, too They often reminded me to be optimistic in periods when I thought this project would never end I am grateful to Warda Belabas (IMISCOE) and staff at Springer for their assistance during the production stage I also would like to thank the three anonymous reviewers for their detailed comments Some parts of the empirical analyses in Chap have appeared before as ‘Back to the future: Revisiting the contact hypothesis at Turkish and mixed non-profit organizations in Amsterdam,’ Ethnic and Racial Studies, 38(1), 158–175 DOI: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/ abs/10.1080/01419870.2013.826811 A discussion of the sampling and methodological approach has been included in the journal article ‘Bridging and bonding ethnic ties in voluntary organizations: a multilevel “Schools of Democracy” model,’ Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41(14): 2291–2313 DOI: http://www tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1369186X.2015.1053851 Other materials and chapters presented in this book are novel and have not been published before I would like to dedicate this book to all the interviewees and participants whose response we should not take for granted Amsterdam June 2016 Contents Introduction: Why this Book? 1.1 What Is Generalized Trust and Why Study It in Voluntary Organizations? 1.1.1 Generalized Trust 1.1.2 Ethno-national Associations: The ‘Dark Side’ of Civic Participation? 1.2 Which Factors Explain Generalized Trust? State of the Art 1.2.1 The Contact Hypothesis 1.2.2 Country Differences 1.2.3 Ethnic Diversity in Neighborhoods 1.2.4 Types of Associations 1.2.5 Individual Level Effects 1.3 Why Study Bridging and Bonding in Amsterdam? 1.3.1 Multiculturalism in Amsterdam and Ethno-national Associations 1.3.2 Why Study Turkish Organizations as an Example of Bonding? 1.3.3 Research Design: Comparative Case Study with a Nested Large N 1.4 Outline References Bridging Versus Bonding Practices: Setting the Context 2.1 Methodological Considerations 2.1.1 Selecting Organizations and Participants 2.1.2 Toward an Interview Guide 2.1.3 Sample Size Multilevel Designs 2.1.4 Toward a Questionnaire 2.2 Organizational Characteristics 2.2.1 Ethnic Composition 2.2.2 Type of Organization 4 9 11 12 13 17 19 21 23 24 25 27 35 35 35 38 39 40 43 43 45 vii viii Contents 2.2.3 Location 2.2.4 Size 2.3 The Spectrum of Activities and Contact Within Organizations 2.3.1 Kinds of Activities of Organizations 2.3.2 Frequency of Activities 2.3.3 Interethnic Contact 2.3.4 Close Ties 2.4 Bridging and Bonding Organizational Network Gaps 2.4.1 Overlapping Board Membership Network 2.4.2 Collaboration Network 2.4.3 Funding 2.4.4 Multiple Memberships and Volunteering 2.5 Summary References Generalized Trust: Socialization Through Interethnic Contact? 3.1 Variance Analysis 3.1.1 Fixed Effects Model of Generalized Trust 3.1.2 Multilevel Model of Generalized Trust with Random Effects 3.1.3 Testing for the Interethnic Contact Mechanism 3.2 Controlling for Socio-demographic Factors 3.2.1 Descriptive Statistics 3.2.2 The Fixed Effects and Random Intercept Model of Generalized Trust 3.2.3 Level of Diversity in Organizations 3.3 Ties Within and Beyond the Organization 3.3.1 Close Ties 3.3.2 Ties Beyond the Organization 3.4 Summary References Who Can Afford to Evaluate Strangers as Trustworthy? 4.1 What Is Generalized Trust? 4.1.1 Particularized Trust and Generalized Trust 4.1.2 Generalized Trust and Trust Toward Strangers 4.1.3 Prejudice and Generalized Trust 4.2 Generalized Trust and Negative Life Experiences 4.2.1 The Factor Scales: Life Satisfaction, Optimism and Self-esteem 4.2.2 Generalized Trust: A Psychological Explanation 4.3 Generalized Trust and Norm-Driven Explanations 4.3.1 Factor Scales: Individualism and Humanitarianism 4.3.2 Generalized Trust: A Norm-Driven Model? 47 48 49 50 53 53 56 57 58 59 62 63 65 66 69 70 72 74 75 77 78 79 83 85 85 86 91 92 93 93 94 96 98 100 100 103 105 106 108 Contents ix 4.4 The Final Model 113 4.5 Summary 115 References 117 Discussion and Conclusion: The Promise of Social Success 5.1 Discussion of Key Results: On Interethnic Contact and Generalized Trust 5.1.1 Bridging Versus Bonding in Voluntary Organizations? 5.1.2 Disentangling Causality 5.1.3 What About Other Contextual Effects? 5.2 Alternative Explanations: Beyond Bridging and Bonding 5.2.1 Validating Generalized Trust 5.2.2 Alternative Explanations 5.3 Implications and Looking into the Future 5.3.1 Policy Implications 5.3.2 Limitations and Future Avenues of Research References 119 119 119 122 124 126 127 128 131 132 133 135 Index 139 5.2 Alternative Explanations: Beyond Bridging and Bonding 131 This non-linear effect is also reflected in the findings of other studies While over the life course, generalized trust seems to increase, many studies still find its effect to be weak (Alesina and La Ferrera 2002: 217; Freitag and Traunmüller 2009: 795; Stolle 1998: 515; Rothstein and Stolle 2003: 206; Whiteley 1999: 40–1; Wollebaek and Selle 2002: 46) A few studies, however, find stronger effect sizes (Jennings and Stoker 2004: 370; Uslaner 2002: 107) Jennings and Stoker’s (2004) panel study shows that when individuals are followed over 30 years, trust seems to rise and fall over the course of one’s life They argue that ‘it might be that a trusting or distrusting disposition itself becomes more meaningful to the individual as she ages, just as it becomes more stable over the life course [, …which might be reflective of] changing circumstances and opportunities faced by individuals at various points in their lives’ (Jennings and Stoker 2004: 370) Thus, aging alone does not affect trust independently Its effect might be moderated by other variables In fact, the results of this study are suggestive of such an interaction Younger participants who adhered to humanitarian values were more trusting in comparison to participants who were older than 55 The effect of humanitarian values on trust is rarely investigated Whiteley’s (1999: 40–2) study of the World Values Survey data from 1992–3 is an exception, in which he finds support for moral values explaining generalized trust However, he does not investigate any moderating effect of demographic variables Therefore, these findings need to be further corroborated with other datasets that are representative of a wider population 5.3 Implications and Looking into the Future Social science has long been concerned with the implications of growing sociocultural diversity and ethno religious heterogeneity for social cohesion Nor is the question of social integration new While some classical sociologists such as Durkheim and Simmel were not opposed to sociocultural homogeneity as an essential condition for social integration, sociologists such as Parson argued that growing diversity goes hand in hand with the development of universal values such as human rights (for a discussion see Schaeffer 2014) That is not to deny the potential for ethnic divisions and antagonism The answer, however, may lie in applying the rule of law, combatting social isolation, and reducing marginalization instead of promoting uniformity More recently, in understanding the psychology of immigration, scholars have questioned the extent to which the maintenance of group characteristics may inhibit acculturation (Berry 2001) The literature on the sociology of immigration speaks of segmented assimilation and selective acculturation, examining a vast array of domains in which migrants adapt to their host societies (see e.g., Alba and Nee 1997; Portes and Rumbaut 2006; Ramakrishnan and Bloemraad 2008) The results in this book can be read in line with these efforts and refute the idea that ethno-national organizations are posing a threat to a civic culture by not promoting intergroup contact That is not to deny the importance of intergroup contact Discussion and Conclusion: The Promise of Social … 132 interventions in improving ethnic attitudes and reducing prejudice—even outside the laboratory (Lemmer and Wagner 2015) Social psychology has in intergroup contact one of its most valuable explanatory tools Although its simplicity lends the concept to appropriation, in the process its original intent and meaning may be lost Despite the ideological appeal of intergroup contact, analysts and policymakers alike should not lose sight of areas in which it may not have enough predictive power The present study articulates this problem for people who have already selected into civic organizations—albeit those with an exclusive membership 5.3.1 Policy Implications The above conclusion is important for policymakers since they would prefer to worry less about funding cultural projects at ethno-national organizations, instead direct their attention to reducing social isolation Ethno-national organizations fulfil an important role by organizing social and political events and providing information and services to groups of people who are otherwise difficult to reach Without these activities minorities would be even more isolated, specifically since the first-generation ethnic minorities barely speak the Dutch language Moreover, when the second generation organizes festivals along ethnic lines so as to celebrate their culture, this is not a threat to the Dutch nation and its values By strengthening their “Turkish” identity, they are not excluding themselves from Dutch society Most of the members of, for example, Turkish fraternities are highly educated people who are well integrated into Dutch society, as measured through standard socio-economic indicators It is more fruitful for policymakers to invest more energy and funds into stimulating participation in higher education in order to promote the development of generalized trust It is also quite clear that cultural or ethnic diversity on its own does not impede trusting attitudes As the discussion on the role of income inequality and redistributive welfare policies in increasing generalized trust above has shown, policymakers should focus more on how to overcome structural inequalities among the population for maintaining a civic culture (Portes and Vickstrom 2011) The literature on contact has repeatedly shown that for interethnic contact to translate into less prejudice, it needs to surpass sporadic encounters, such as the annual barbeque or festival Most importantly, it has to be supported by a favorable institutional setting that promotes equality between groups Workplaces and schools are correspondingly good environments for forging ties that bind Policymakers should, therefore, not solely direct their policies regarding social mixing and interethnic contact at ethno-national voluntary organizations as if curtailing their activities would miraculously reduce tensions between the majority and minority populations 5.3 Implications and Looking into the Future 5.3.2 133 Limitations and Future Avenues of Research This study has some limitations that need to be addressed, too Some of the variables of this research that were found to be statistically significant, for example, optimism and adhering to humanitarian values for the young, need to be studied in conjunction with life satisfaction, perceived discrimination, and other attitudes We need to corroborate these findings in datasets that are representative of the general population in order to generalize them further Some factors were not investigated here Parental upbringing style and child-rearing practices matter for the generation of generalized trust (Dinesen 2010) However, without panel data, responses to the role of parents that have been collected retrospectively might be biased People tend to remember that their parents told them to be cautious, while people often forget if their parents stimulated them into a trusting attitude (Stolle 1998: 513) It might also be too deterministic to view generalized trust as an unchangeable trait due to early socialization In a study of immigrants, Dinesen and Hooghe (2010) demonstrate that there seem to be some positive effects on generalized trust due to acculturation in the host societies In short, due to the possibly biased responses regarding parental socialization, I decided to leave these out Future research, comparing immigrant and non-immigrant families, could overcome the limitation of the current study in a panel design with respect to the role of parental or early socialization on generalized trust (see also Stolle and Nishikawa 2011) A more anthropological focus on human stories and trajectories, such as those offered in a life course approach, may complement the panel designs (Wingens et al 2011) in shedding light on how immigrant parents and children may shape each other’s perceptions Recent insights into German neighborhoods show how some children broker interethnic ties for their parents (Schaeffer 2014) Other settings may also be relevant By offering opportunities for intergroup contact, schools have the potential to shape out-group attitudes as well as generalized trust (Dinesen 2011) In the debate about the consequences of diversity for generalized trust and solidarity (civic attitudes), it is also noticeable that almost no attention is paid to interethnic relations at the workplace (cf Estlund 2005).2 For example, in a recent Amsterdam survey (‘Amsterdamse Burgermonitor’ [Amsterdam citizens’ monitor] 2008), the respondents mentioned meeting people from different backgrounds most often at their workplace In contrast, Dutch governmental reports repeatedly state that over the last 10–15 years contact between majority and minority population in their free time has not increased (Dagevos et al 2003; Gijsberts et al 2010) Work relationships, once developed, often tend to be extended into meaningful friendship ties (Grossetti 2005) A strong sense of belonging is mostly evolved among co-workers rather than among neighbors and co-participants at voluntary clubs (Putnam 2000: 275), not least There are some notable exceptions, such as Otten et al (2010), but this study conflates social trust with identification with the Netherlands 134 Discussion and Conclusion: The Promise of Social … because people tend to spend the majority of their days working rather than spending their time in voluntary organizations In a Dutch study, neighbor relations comprise only a third of all the relations of the respondents, and half of that sample did not report any neighbors in their personal networks (Völker and Flap 2007) While the workplace could hardly be characterized as democratic due to its involuntariness (Estlund 2005), it might, however, have the potential to bring people from different backgrounds together, translating into a site that offers ample opportunities for forging friendship outside work Could contact at the workplace then translate into better intergroup relations and attitudes? The impact of voluntary organizations on a civic culture should not be limited to civic attitudes As is often mentioned in the literature, voluntary organizations could have institutional impacts and could affect policies through mobilization (see Fung 2003; Warren 1999) Charles Tilly (2004) accounts for democratization through a historical process He demonstrates how trust networks between citizens are formed In his interpretation, a trust network is a relationship of collaboration that ‘consists of placing valued outcomes at risk of others’ malfeasance Trust relations are those in which people regularly take such risks’ (Tilly 2004: 4) As the process of democratization unfolds, more of these networks are formed, which reach outside traditional bonds of kinship and ethnicity in response to unsatisfactory government performance, which, in turn, translates into the integration of trust networks into the systems of rule As discussed in this book, Turkish organizations offer services and information to their participants, but they also form alliances to influence policy? To what extent mixed organizations affect policies and they differ from ethno-national organizations in this respect (see e.g., Dekker et al 2009)? How are these networks then integrated into the systems of rule and does that exclude other groups? Ethno-national organizations also have a potential to integrate individuals into society by creating opportunities for upward mobility (Lancee 2010) This, in turn, might have beneficial effects for overcoming income inequalities As far as ethnic diversity has the potential to change societal structures, Portes (2010) offers a compelling account He first identifies different elements of social life such as deeply rooted values and power structures, next to more superficial elements such as organizations and groups For change to be deep and profound, he argues that it needs to transform cultural values and power structures According to Portes (2010), the changes brought about by migration in Western Europe and across the Atlantic seem mostly to have affected the surface level of society He states ‘professional migrants tend to acculturate rapidly and seek entry into the middle-class mainstream, riding on their occupational skills and cultural resources; manual laborers cluster in poor and marginal areas, creating a host of religious, cultural, and sport organizations for comfort and self-defense… marginalized communities go on to pose a serious social problem The problem, however, is not that they threaten the basic social and cultural order of these societies, but that they remain outside of it’ (Portes 2010: 1549–50) Given the limited empirical evidence that ethnic diversity, on its own and without interaction with institutional contexts, is challenging levels of generalized trust in Western societies, perhaps the present alarm about negative ethnic diversity effects is a crisis of perception References 135 References Abascal, M., & Baldassarri, D (2015) Love thy neighbor? Ethnoracial diversity and trust reexamined American Journal of Sociology, 121(3), 722–782 Alba, R D., & Nee, V (1997) Rethinking assimilation theory for a new era of immigration International Migration Review, 31(4), 826–874 Alesina, A., & La Ferrara, E (2002) Who trusts others? Journal of Public Economics, 85(2), 207– 234 Bauer, P C (2015) Negative experiences and trust: A causal analysis of the effects of victimization on generalized trust European Sociological Review, 31(4), 397–417 Berry, J W (2001) A psychology of immigration Journal of Social Issues, 57(3), 615–631 Borgonovi, F (2012) The relationship between education and levels of trust and tolerance in Europe The British Journal of Sociology, 63(1), 146–167 Brehm, J., & Rahn, W (1997) Individual-level evidence for the causes and consequences of social capital American Journal of Political Science, 41(3), 999–1023 Burgermonitor, A (2008) [Amsterdam citizens’ monitor] Dienst Onderzoek en Statistiek [Research and Statistics Center], Gemeente Amsterdam [Amsterdam Municipality] Claibourn, M P., & Martin, P S (2000) Trusting and joining? An empirical test of the reciprocal nature of social capital Political Behavior, 22(4), 267–291 Dagevos, J., Gijsberts, M., & Van Praag, C (2003) Rapportage minderheden 2003 [Minority report 2003] The Hague: The Netherlands Institute for Social Research De Graauw, E (2008) Nonprofit organizations: Agents of immigrant political incorporation in urban America In I Bloemraad, & S K Ramakrishnan (Eds.), Civic hopes and political realities: Immigrants, community organizations, and political engagement (pp 323–350) De Hart, J., & Dekker, P (2003) A tale of two cities: Local patterns of social capital In M Hooghe & D Stolle (Eds.), Generating social capital: Civil society and institutions in comparative perspective (pp 153–169) New York: Palgrave Macmillan De Tocqueville, A (1990) Democracy in America New York: Random House [First published in 1840] Dekker, K., Torenvlied, R., Völker, B., & Lelieveldt, H (2009) Explaining the role of civic organizations in neighbourhood co-production In J W Duyvendak, F Hendriks, & M Van Niekerk (Eds.), City in sight: Dutch dealings with urban change (pp 223–248) Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press Delhey, J., & Newton, K (2003) Who trusts?: The origins of social trust in seven societies European Societies, 5(2), 93–137 Delhey, J., & Newton, K (2005) Predicting cross-national levels of social trust: Global pattern or Nordic exceptionlaism? European Sociological Review, 21(4), 311–327 Delhey, J., Newton, K., & Welzel, C (2011) How general is trust in “most people”? Solving the radius of trust problem American Sociological Review, 76(5), 786–807 Dinesen, P T (2010) A note on the measurement of generalized trust of immigrants and natives Social Indicators Research, 1–9 Dinesen, P T (2011) Me and jasmina down by the schoolyard: An analysis of the impact of ethnic diversity in school on the trust of schoolchildren Social Science Research, 40(2), 572–585 Dinesen, P T., & Hooghe, M (2010) When in Rome, as the Romans do: The acculturation of generalized trust among immigrants in western Europe International Migration Review, 44(3), 697–727 Dinesen, P T., & Sønderskov, K M (2013) Ethnic diversity and social trust: The role of exposure in the micro-context Ethnic Diversity and Social Capital Berlin, Germany: WZB Estlund, C (2005) Working together: Crossing color lines at work Labor History, 46(1), 79–98 Freitag, M (2003) Social capital in (dis)similar democracies Comparative Political Studies, 36 (8), 936–966 136 Discussion and Conclusion: The Promise of Social … Freitag, M., & Bauer, P C (2013) Testing for measurement equivalence in surveys dimensions of social trust across cultural contexts Public Opinion Quarterly, 77(S1), 24–44 Freitag, M., & Traunmüller, R (2009) Spheres of trust: An empirical analysis of the foundations of particularised and generalised trust European Journal of Political Research, 48(6), 782–803 Fung, A (2003) Associations and democracy: Between theories, hopes, and realities Annual Review of Sociology, 515–539 Geys, B (2012) Association membership and generalized trust: Are connections between associations losing their value? Journal of Civil Society, 8(1), 1–15 Gijsberts, M., Vervoort, M., Havekes, E., & Dagevos, J (2010) Maakt de buurt verschil? De relatie tussen de etnische samenstelling van de buurt, interetnisch contact en wederzijdse beeldvorming [Does the neighbourhood make any difference? The relationship between ethnic composition in the neighbourhood, interethnic contact and mutual perception] The Hague: The Netherlands Institute for Social Research Grossetti, M (2005) Where social relations come from? A study of personal networks in the Toulouse area of France Social Networks, 27, 289–300 Gundelach, B (2014) In diversity we trust: The positive effect of ethnic diversity on outgroup trust Political Behavior, 36(1), 125–142 Hooghe, M (2003) Value congruence and convergence within voluntary associations: Ethnocentrism in Belgian organizations Political Behavior, 25(2), 151–175 Hooghe, M., Reeskens, T., Stolle, D., & Trappers, A (2009) Ethnic diversity and generalized trust in Europe Comparative Political Studies, 42(2), 198–223 Hooghe, M., Marien, S., & de Vroome, T (2012) The cognitive basis of trust The relation between education, cognitive ability, and generalized and political trust Intelligence, 40(6), 604–613 Huang, J., Maassen van den Brink, H., & Groot, W (2009) A meta-analysis of the effect of education on social capital Economics of Education Review, 28(4), 454–464 Jennings, M K., & Stoker, L (2004) Social trust and civic engagement across time and generations Acta Politica, 39(4), 342–379 Kesler, C., & Bloemraad, I (2010) Does immigration erode social capital? The conditional effects of immigration-generated diversity on trust, membership, and participation across 19 countries, 1981–2000 Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue Canadienne de Science Politique, 43 (02), 319–347 Lancee, B (2010) The economic returns of immigrants’ bonding and bridging social capital: The case of the Netherlands International Migration Review, 44(1), 202–226 Lemmer, G., & Wagner, U (2015) Can we really reduce ethnic prejudice outside the lab? A meta‐ analysis of direct and indirect contact interventions European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(2), 152–168 Letki, N (2008) Does diversity erode social cohesion? Social capital and race in British neighbourhoods Political Studies, 56(1), 99–126 Lindberg, E., & Farkas, G M (2016) Much ado about nothing? A multilevel analysis of the relationship between voluntary associations’ characteristics and their members’ generalized trust Journal of Civil Society, 12(1), 33–56 Maloney, W A., Van Deth, J W., & Roßteutscher, S (2008) Civic orientations: Does associational type matter? Political Studies, 56(2), 261–287 McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J M (2001) Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444 Morales, L., & Geurts, P (2007) Associational involvement In Citizenship and involvement in European democracies: A comparative analysis (Vol 17, pp 135–157) Newton, K (1999) Social capital and democracy in modern Europe In J v Deth, M Maraffi, K Newton, & P F Whiteley (Eds.), Social capital and European democracy (pp 3–24) London: Routledge Newton, K., & Zmerli, S (2011) Three forms of trust and their association European Political Science Review, 3(2), 169–200 References 137 Otten, S., Van der Zee, K., & Tanghe, J (2010) Werkt diversiteit? Arbeidsintegratie en vertrouwen in een kleurrijke samenleving [Does diversity work? Labour integration and trust in a colourful society] Groningen: Instituut voor integratie en sociale weerbaarheid [Institute for integration and social resilience] Paxton, P (2007) Association memberships and generalized trust: A multilevel model across 31 countries Social Forces, 86(1), 47–76 Phan, M B (2008) We’re all in this together: Context, contacts, and social trust in Canada Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 8(1), 23–51 Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R G (2006) Immigrant America: A portrait Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press Portes, A (2010) Migration and social change: Some conceptual reflections Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 36(10), 1537–1563 Portes, A., & Vickstrom, E (2011) Diversity, social capital, and cohesion Annual Review of Sociology, 37, 461–479 Putnam, R D (2000) Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community New York: Simon & Schuster Ramakrishnan, S K., & Bloemraad, I (Eds.) (2008) Civic hopes and political realities: Immigrants, community organizations, and political engagement: Russell Sage Foundation Publications Rothstein, B., & Stolle, D (2003) Social capital, impartiality and the welfare state: An institutional approach In M Hooghe & D Stolle (Eds.), Generating social capital: Civil society and institutions in comparative perspectives (pp 191–210) New York: Palgrave MacMillan Schaeffer, M (2014) Ethnic diversity and social cohesion: Immigration, ethnic fractionalization and potentials for civic action Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Ltd Schmid, K., Al Ramiah, A., & Hewstone, M (2014) Neighborhood ethnic diversity and trust The role of intergroup contact and perceived threat Psychological Science, 25(3), 665–674 Smith, S S (2010) Race and trust Annual Review of Sociology, 36(1), 453–475 Sønderskov, K M (2011) Does generalized social trust lead to associational membership? Unravelling a bowl of well-tossed spaghetti European Sociological Review, 27(4), 419–434 Stolle, D (1998) Bowling together, bowling alone: The development of generalized trust in voluntary associations Political Psychology, 19(3), 497–525 Stolle, D (2003a) The sources of social capital In M Hooghe & D Stolle (Eds.), Generating social capital: Civil society and institutions in comparative perspective (pp 19–42) New York: Palgrave Macmillan Stolle, D (2003b) Communities, social capital and local government: Generalized trust in regional settings In S Prakash & P Selle (Eds.), Investigating social capital: Comparative perspectives on civil society, participation, and governance (pp 184–206) New Delhi: Sage Publications Stolle, D., & Harell, A (2013) Social capital and ethno-racial diversity: Learning to trust in an immigrant society Political Studies, 61, 42–66 Stolle, D., & Hooghe, M (2004) The roots of social capital: Attitudinal and network mechanisms in the relation between youth and adult indicators of social capital Acta Politica, 39, 422–441 Stolle, D., & Nishikawa, L (2011) Trusting others-how parents shape the generalized trust of their children Comparative Sociology, 10(2), 281–314 Stolle, D., Soroka, S., & Johnston, R (2008) When does diversity erode trust? Neighborhood diversity, interpersonal trust and the mediating effect of social interactions Political Studies, 56 (1), 57–75 Stolle, D., Petermann, S., Schmid, K., Schönwälder, K., Hewstone, M., Vertovec, S., et al (2013) Immigration-related diversity and trust in German cities: The role of intergroup contact Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 23(3), 279–298 Sturgis, P., & Smith, P (2010) Assessing the validity of generalized trust questions: What kind of trust are we measuring? International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 22(1), 74–92 138 Discussion and Conclusion: The Promise of Social … Sullivan, J L., & Transue, J E (1999) The psychological underpinnings of democracy: A selective review of research on political tolerance, interpersonal trust, and social capital Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 625–650 Sullivan, J L., Piereson, J., & Marcus, G E (1982) Political tolerance and American democracy: University of Chicago Press Tavris, C., & Aronson, E (2007) Mistakes were made (but not by me): Why we justify foolish beliefs, bad decisions, and hurtful acts Orlando: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Tilly, C (2004) Trust and rule Theory and Society, 33(1), 1–30 Uitermark, J., Rossi, U., & Van Houtum, H (2005) Reinventing multiculturalism: Urban citizenship and the negotiation of ethnic diversity in Amsterdam International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 29(3), 622–640 Uslaner, E M (1999) Democracy and social capital In M E Warren (Ed.), Democracy and trust Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Uslaner, E M (2002) The moral foundations of trust Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Uslaner, E M (2012) Segregation and mistrust: Diversity, isolation, and social cohesion Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Uslaner, E M., & Brown, M (2005) Inequality, trust, and civic engagement American Politics Research, 33(6), 868–894 Van der Meer, T (2016) Neither bridging nor bonding: A test of socialization effects by ethnically diverse voluntary associations on participants’ inter-ethnic tolerance, inter-ethnic trust and intra-ethnic belonging Social Science Research, 55, 63–74 Van der Meer, T., & Tolsma, J (2014) Ethnic diversity and its effects on social cohesion Annual Review of Sociology, 40(1), 459–478 Van der Meer, T., te Grotenhuis, M., & Scheepers, P (2009) Three types of voluntary associations in comparative perspective: The importance of studying associational involvement through a typology of associations in 21 European countries Journal of Civil Society, 5(3), 227–241 Van Ingen, E., & Bekkers, R (2015) Generalized trust through civic engagement? Evidence from five national panel studies Political Psychology, 36(3), 277–294 Viitanen, T K (2014) The divorce revolution and generalized trust: Evidence from the United States 1973–2010 International Review of Law and Economics, 38, 25–32 Völker, B., & Flap, H (2007) Sixteen million neighbors Urban Affairs Review, 43(2), 256–284 Wallman Lundåsen, S., & Wollebæk, D (2013) Diversity and community trust in Swedish local communities Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 23(3), 299–321 Warren, M E (1999) Democracy and trust Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Wegener, D T., & Carlston, D T (2005) Cognitive processes in attitude formation and change In D Albarracín, B T Johnson, & M P Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp 493– 542) Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc Whiteley, P F (1999) The origins of social capital In J Van Deth, M Maraffi, K Newton, & P F Whiteley (Eds.), Social capital and European democracy (pp 25–44) London: Routledge Wingens, M., Windzio, M., Valk, H D., & Aybek, C (2011) A life-course perspective on migration and integration Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media Wollebaek, D., & Selle, P (2002) Does participation in voluntary associations contribute to social capital? The impact of intensity, scope and type Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 31 (1), 32–61 Yamagishi, T., & Yamagishi, M (1994) Trust and commitment in the United States and Japan Motivation and Emotion, 18(2), 129–166 Zmerli, S., & Newton, K (2007) Networking among voluntary associations: Segmented or integrated? Social capital and associations in European democracies (pp 153–174) Oxon: Routledge Index A Abascal, M., 1, 125, 127 Acculturation, 9, 17, 21, 131, 133 Achbari, W., 8, 44 Activities, 13, 35, 46, 53, 57, 65, 83, 88, 92, 119, 120, 132 Adaptation, 15, 122 African, 47 Alba, R.D., 21, 131 Alesina, A., 11, 12, 17, 129–131 Allport, G.W., Almond, G.A., 5, 11, 13 American, 5, 12, 21, 47, 123–125, 128 Amos, 94 Amsterdam, 19–21, 36, 58, 65, 91, 94, 100, 119 Amsterdamse Burgermonitor, 43, 100, 133 Anderson, C.J., 12 Apolitical, 52 Aronson, E., 127 Assimilation, 21, 131 See also Segmented assimilation Association, 3, 13, 15, 22, 37, 46, 55, 69, 83, 94, 98, 115, 122 See also Types of associations Associational membership, 13 B Baldassarri, D, 1, 125, 127 Bauer, P.C., 42, 128, 130 Bekkers, R., 14, 15, 123 Belgians, 44 Bloemraad, I., 24, 44 with Kesler, C., 13, 125 with Ramakrishnan, S.K., 49, 131 Bonding, 1, 7, 14, 61, 69, 76, 116, 121 Bosker, R.J., 40, 69 Brehm, J., 14, 123, 130 Bridging, 1, 7, 14, 22, 50, 61, 69, 88, 91, 116, 119, 121 Britain, 1, 5, 126 Brown, M., 10, 11, 124, 130 Brünger, M., 58, 59 Byrne, B.M., 101, 102 C Canada, 121, 126 Canadian, 125 Causality, 13, 122 Citizen, 5, 115, 126, 134 See also Fellow citizen Citizenship, 5, 8, 21, 125, 129 Citizenship Involvement and Democracy Survey, Civic, 1, 3, 8, 47, 126 Civic attitude, 5, 7, 13, 134 Civic culture, 5, 7, 131, 132, 134 Civic engagement, 11, 122, 124 Civic-mindedness, 1, 2, 119 Civic participation, Claibourn, M.P., 14, 123, 130 Close ties, 2, 10, 19, 56, 65, 85, 91 Coffé, H., 7, 14, 18, 42, 106 Cognitive, 26, 92, 129 Cognitive bias, 130 Cognitive dissonance, 2, 27, 127 Cognitive mechanism, 93, 116, 126 Cognitive process, 2, 3, 9, 18, 26, 127 Cohesion, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 131 Collaboration, 26, 38, 57, 59, 121, 134 Collaboration network, 57–60 Collective action, Collective action dilemmas, Common board members, 58 Common board membership, 37 Community, 12, 23, 51 © Springer International Publishing AG 2016 W Achbari, The Paradox of Diversity, IMISCOE Research Series, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-44243-3 139 140 Comparative case study, 24 Composition, 10, 14, 19, 35, 43, 44, 46, 50, 54, 81, 86, 91 Confirmatory factor analysis, 93–95, 100 Conflict, 4, 10, 125 Conflicting, 10, 15 Conley, R.S., Connected associations, 14 Connected component, 61, 65 Contact, 1, 9, 14, 20, 26, 49, 54, 56, 58, 59, 85, 88, 93, 120, 126, 128, 134 See also Interethnic contact; Intergroup contact Contact hypothesis, 1, 2, 18, 22, 36, 49, 53, 57, 85 Contact theory, 53, 54, 98, 99 Context, 7, 10, 12, 13, 43, 45, 69, 74, 93, 121, 125, 134 Contextual, 130 Contextual effect, 71, 74, 79, 91, 121 Control group, 69 Control(ling) for, 8, 69, 70, 81, 83, 91, 113, 122 Cooperation, 5, 6, 10, 14 Country differences, 125 Crime, 17, 43, 103, 116, 129, 130 Cross-country, 124 Cross-cultural, 42 Cross-level, 69 Cross-national, 12 Cross-sectional, 13, 24, 74, 122 Cultural activities, 21, 22, 49, 50 Cultural diversity, 19 Cultural retention, 21 Culture, 1, 5, 36, 44, 132 D Dagevos, J., 12, 23, 133 Dalton, R.J., 11 De Graauw, E., 49, 52, 120 De Amsterdamse Burgermonitor, Dekker, P., 134 with De Hart, J., 17, 127 Delhey, J., 11–13, 42, 124, 128, 130 Democracy, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 125 See also Schools of democracy Dependent variable, 40, 108, 122, 128 Descriptive statistics, 78 De Tocqueville, A., 13, 124 Diabetes, 51, 120 Dinesen, P.T., 125, 130, 133 Index Discrimination, 17, 21, 43, 100, 103, 116, 129, 133 Dissimilarity, 44, 61 Diversity, 1, 3, 8, 12, 19, 39, 50, 65, 84, 85, 127, 131, 134 See also Ethnic diversity; Cultural diversity Diversity in neighborhoods, 126 Diversity measure, 15, 44 Diversity score, 19, 44, 45, 125 Diversity-trust nexus, Divorce, 3, 69, 79, 83, 116, 126, 129 Divorced, 81, 86, 88, 91, 105, 108, 113 Diyanet, 37, 51 Dronkers, J., 10, 12 Dutch, 5, 20, 21, 42, 44, 55, 132, 134 Dutch Chamber of Commerce, 20, 35, 37, 38, 45, 50, 58 Dutch Family Survey 2009, v Dutch language, 46, 65, 132 Dutch neighborhoods, 12, 13 E Echazarra, A., 12, 13 Education, 27, 83, 105, 129, 132 Educational attainment, 3, 13, 18, 26, 69, 70, 79, 91, 100, 119, 126, 129, 130 Educational levels, 17, 36, 42, 46, 70 Elderly, 44, 46, 51 Election times, 52, 54 English, 43 Equality, 13, 100, 129, 132 Ethnic category, 44 Ethnic composition, 2, 15, 19, 22, 43, 44, 53, 55, 69, 81, 83, 113, 121 Ethnic diversity, 1, 11, 14, 44, 71, 125, 132, 134 Ethnic fractionalization, 125 Ethnic heterogeneity, 12, 83, 125 Ethnicity, 2, 3, 16, 22, 36, 59, 119, 134 Ethnic ties, 1, 49, 65, 91, 133 Ethnocentrism, 9, 14, 122 Ethno-national association, 3, 8, 60 Ethno-national organization, 21–23, 54, 65, 122, 131, 134 Eurobarometer, European Social Survey, 5, 40, 125 Event, 21, 24, 25, 36, 38, 51–54, 61, 65, 88, 132 Experiment, 24 Experimental design, 24, 74 Index 141 Experimental situation, 24 Exposure, 59, 88, 120 Group membership, 10 Gundelach, B., 126 F Factor scale, 106, 107 Familie-enquête Nederlandse Bevolking, 30 Family, 41, 93–95, 115, 128 Fellow citizen, 93, 94 Fennema, M., 8, 23, 49, 57, 59 Financial aid, 56 Financial position, 100 First-generation, 23, 46, 54, 65, 132 Fixed effect, 69, 74 Football, 38, 44, 48, 50, 55, 83 Foreign-born, 19 Foster, P., 7, 27 Foundation, 36, 54 Freitag, M., 42, 124, 128, 130, 131 with Rapp, C., 14 Frequency of activities, 19, 38 Frequency of close ties, 57 Friends, 41, 93, 94, 96, 99, 115, 128 Friendship, 10, 23, 56, 85, 134 Friendship ties, 10, 56, 86, 121, 125, 126 Funding, 22, 35, 39, 47, 51, 52, 58, 62, 121, 132 Funding regulation, 22 H Hammersley, M., 24, 25 Hardin, R., Harell, A., 7, 126 Havekes, E., 133 Herfindahl index, 43, 44 Hewstone, M., 9, 10 Hibbing, J., Higher education, 27, 69 Holzhacker, R., 21 Hooghe, M., 8, 12, 15–18, 42, 106, 125, 130, 133 Household income, 42, 69, 79, 83 Howard, M.M., Hox, J.J., 40 Humanitarianism, 18, 26, 42, 106, 107, 110, 112, 113, 128, 130 Hyper diverse, 19 Hypersegregation, 20 G Gender, 15, 25, 36, 37, 42, 46, 69, 79, 105 Generalized trust, 1–15, 17–19, 24–26, 39–42, 45, 46, 49, 53, 55, 57, 58, 62, 63, 65, 69, 70, 72–76, 80, 81, 83, 85, 86, 88, 91–94, 96, 98–100, 103, 105, 106, 108–110, 112, 113, 115, 116, 119, 121–130, 132–134 See also Levels of generalized trust; Measurement of generalized trust; Validating generalized trust; Generalized trust question, 4, 17, 41, 42, 115, 127, 128 Generalized trust score, 69, 73, 74 General social survey, 5, 123 German, 128, 133 Germans, 44, 124 Germany, 5, 13, 123–126 Gesthuizen, M., 12, 13, 18 Geurts, P., 125 Geys, B., 7, 13, 14, 42, 121 Gijsberts, M., 12, 23, 133 Gini-coefficient, 12 Gomm, R., 24, 25 Goodness of others, 11, 18 I Identity, 7, 22, 132 Iftar, 50, 54 Immigrant, 7, 8, 21, 50, 54, 125, 133 Income, 11, 12, 17, 18, 27, 79, 100, 124, 125, 132 See also Household income Income inequality, 11, 12, 124, 125 Independent variable, 122 Individualism, 12, 18, 42, 106, 108, 116, 128 Individual level, 9, 17–19, 25, 40, 62, 63, 69, 100, 119, 121, 122, 125, 126, 129 Inequality, 11–13, 27, 125 In-group, 7, In-group bias, In-group ties, 126 Integrate, 38, 51, 58, 132, 134 Integratienota, 22, 47 Integration, 5, 8, 21, 22, 47, 52, 134 Interethnic, 1, 3, 8, 9, 18, 20–23, 26, 35, 49, 53, 54, 65, 75, 85, 86, 88, 91, 93, 98, 99, 116, 119, 120, 122, 125, 126, 128, 132, 133 Interethnic contact, 2, 3, 9, 11, 19, 20, 22, 23, 26, 38, 53, 54, 65, 98, 100, 116, 126, 128, 132 Interethnic ties, 91, 133 Intergroup contact, 10, 23, 53, 54, 57, 58, 91, 98, 119, 120, 125, 126, 131, 133 Interview, 38, 39, 50, 51, 54, 55 Interview guide, 38 142 Islam, 21, 54 Islamic festivities, 54 Islamic radicalism, 52 Isolated organizations, 37, 58 Isolates, 37 J Jennings, M.K., 7, 14, 123, 131 K Knowledge-based trust, 128 L La Ferrara, E., 11, 12, 17, 129–131 Lancee, B., 10, 12, 134 Leefsituatie Allochtone Stedelingen, 2, 43 Leigh, A., 12 Length of membership, 8, 14, 19 Length of stay, 17, 42 Levels of analysis, Levels of generalized trust, 8, 11–13, 17, 26, 65, 85, 91, 98, 105, 116, 119, 125, 129, 130, 134 Life-satisfaction, 100 LISS-panel, Location, 24, 25, 35, 47, 59, 61, 65 Lost wallet, 126 Low-trust, 13 M Maas, C.J.M., 40 Maloney, W.A., 7, 19, 24, 25, 38, 49, 125 Marien, S., 129 Marriage, 23, 119 Marsden, P.V., 19, 38 Martin, P.S., 14, 123, 130 Measurement, 5, 41, 42, 127, 129 Measurement error, 42 Measurement problem, 41 Mechanism, 2, 9–11, 14, 16, 18, 24–26, 35, 69, 75, 81, 85, 113, 116, 119, 125, 126 Membership, 8, 11, 13–16, 19, 22, 26, 37, 39, 44, 50, 57, 58, 63–65, 85, 91, 120–122, 124, 132 See also Length of membership Methodological approach, 74 Methodological considerations, 35 Milli Göruş, 37, 50 Minorities, 2, 8, 13, 20, 21, 23, 36, 44, 47, 55, 125, 132 Minority group, 19, 44, 45 Minority parents, 55 Minority policy, 22 Minority population, 23, 132, 133 Index Minority status, 81 Mixed ethnicity, 3, 16, 119 Mixed organization, 2, 10, 20, 24, 26, 35–37, 44, 45, 47, 48, 52–59, 61, 63, 65, 69, 70, 73, 76, 81, 83, 85, 86, 88, 91, 110, 119, 121, 128, 134 MLwiN, 74 Modeling, 79, 122, 123 Montero, J.R., 120 Morales, L., 12, 13, 52, 125 Moroccan, 21, 23, 44, 45, 52, 94 Mosque, 36–38, 51, 52, 83 Mplus, 94 Multiculturalism, 21, 53 Multiculturalist backlash, Multiculturalist policies, 21 Multilevel, 2, 12, 35, 39, 40, 69, 74, 79, 81, 91 Multilevel design, 39 Multilevel model, 69, 74, 75, 80, 81 Multilevel structure, 74, 81 Multiple membership, 14, 19, 39, 63–65, 121 Multiple volunteering, 19, 64 Muslims, 54 N Name interpreting method, 39 Nannestad, P., 4, 6, 7, 11 National election studies, 42, 107 Nationhood, 21 Native, 43, 44, 70 Nee, V., 21, 131 Negative experiences, 18, 127 Neighbor, 134 Neighborhood, 1, 8, 9, 12, 18, 25, 37, 46, 47, 50–55, 65, 84, 100, 121, 125, 126, 128, 133 See also Diversity in neighbourhoods Neighborhood group, 46 Neighborhood level, 13, 18, 125 Neighborhood organization, 53 Netherlands, the, 2, 15, 21, 23, 35, 42, 83 Newton, K., 5–7, 11, 13, 18, 124, 128, 130 Nishikawa, L., 133 Non-immigrant, 133 Non-members, 13, 14, 123 Non-native, 43 Non-profit organization, 2, 13, 20, 22, 39, 74, 76 Non-Western, 19, 21, 44, 47, 48 Norm-driven, 3, 4, 17, 93, 105, 108, 113, 116, 126, 130 Norm-driven factor, 109 Norm-driven framework, 105, 113, 116, 130 Norris, P., 11 Index O Optimism, 11, 17, 26, 42, 100, 101, 105, 112, 113, 116, 123, 128–130, 133 Optimistic, 3, 8, 26, 101, 113, 116, 126, 127 Organization, Turkish and mixed, 25, 26, 45, 49, 53, 54, 56, 57, 61, 65, 73, 76, 77, 83, 93, 108, 110, 115, 119, 129 See also Ethno-national organization; Isolated organization; Non-profit organization; Religious organization; Political organization; Types of organizations; Turkish organization Organizational characteristic, 2, 18, 43, 45 Organizational level, 2, 69, 72, 75, 76, 121, 124, 126 Organizational membership, 15, 22, 123, 124 Organizational network, 26, 57 Out-group, 1, 5, 8–10, 13, 93, 99, 100, 126, 128, 133 Out-group trust, 1, 9, 126 P Parent-teacher association, 37, 55 Participation, 2, 4, 7, 8, 10, 14, 21, 22, 25, 27, 41, 52, 69, 72, 74–76, 81, 85, 91, 113, 121–124, 132 See also Length of participation Participation in different types, 15 Participation in higher education, 132 Participation in mixed organization, 76 Participation in non-profit organization, 74 Participation in socio-economic life, 21 Participation in Turkish (voluntary) organization, 22 Particularized trust, 8, 41, 93, 94, 96, 115, 127 Paskeviciute, A., 12 Paxton, P., 5–7, 13, 14, 59, 121 Perception, 10–12, 43, 133, 134 Pettigrew, T.F., 2, 9, 10, 99 Pharr, S.J., 11 Policy, 1, 19, 21, 22, 61, 65 Policy document, 21, 22 Policy implication, 132 Policymaker, 2, 21, 132 Polish, 45 Political, 1, 8, 11, 12, 15, 23, 45, 46, 52, 54, 61, 64, 83, 120, 124, 132 Political activities, 23 Political culture, 1, 11, 119 Political events, 52 Political groups, 46 Political information, 52 Politically themed events, 52 Political opportunity structure, 61 143 Political organizations, 46 Political parties, 46, 52 Portes, A., 5, 6, 21, 131, 132, 134 Prejudice, 5, 9, 10, 26, 85, 93, 96, 98, 99, 115, 128, 132 Primary mission, 50, 54 Primary school qualification, 79, 81, 83, 86, 88, 91, 105, 108, 113, 129 Psychological factor, 17, 103, 105, 116, 130 Psychological framework, 26, 43, 116, 130 Putnam, R.D., 1, 5–8, 11, 14, 45, 60, 98, 115, 133 Q Quasi-experimental, 24 Questionnaire, 25, 40–43, 63, 95 Quintelier, E., 16 R Rahn, W., 14, 123, 130 Random effect, 74 Reeskens, T., 12, 42 Religion, 54, 128 Religious, 11, 15, 21, 36, 37, 47, 50, 54, 83, 106, 108, 116, 122, 134 Religious affiliation, 106, 108, 116 Religious denomination, 37 Religious festivities, 50 Religious organizations, 15, 50 Religious orientation, 42 Religious practices, 21 Religious worldview, 108 Research design, 1, 24, 26 Residential area, 47 Roßteutscher, S., 5, 7, 19, 24, 25, 38, 49, 125 Rochon, T.R., 7, 14 Rosenberg, M., 17, 40, 42, 102 Rossi, U., 22, 120 S Safety, 43, 100, 103, 116 Sample size, 3, 24, 39, 40, 61 Satisfaction, 41, 43, 100, 101, 116, 128, 129, 133 Schaeffer, M., 1, 12, 125, 127, 131, 133 Scheepers, P., 12 Scholten, P., 21 Second-generation, 36, 50, 54 Segmented, 8, 21, 22, 131 Selection bias, 24 Selection effect, 15, 116, 122, 125 Self-esteem, 17, 42, 100, 102, 116, 128 Self-selection, 1, 9, 14, 83, 113, 116, 122, 124 Selle, P., 14, 15, 123, 131 144 Size of the organization, 26, 39, 49, 65 Slijper, B., 8, 21, 22 Smith, P., 6, 41, 127 Snijders, T.A.B., 40, 69 Snowball method, 37 Social capital, 5, 6, 11, 13, 14 Social Capital Benchmark Survey, Social cohesion, 2, 4, 5, 13, 131 Social success, 3, 18, 26, 88, 91–93, 100, 105, 108, 110, 113 Social success factor, 26, 88, 113, 116, 119, 126 Social success framework, 129 Social trust, 5, 42, 123, 125 Social work, 46, 50, 51 Socio-demographic attributes, 17 Socio-demographic characteristics, 24, 36, 42, 65, 69, 70, 74, 86 Socio-demographic factors, 77 Socio-demographic variables, 81, 85, 86 Socio-economic, 3, 12, 14, 21, 22, 71, 77, 78, 83, 124, 128, 132 Socio-economic composition, 14 Sønderskov, K.M., 6, 122, 125 South American, 47 South-East, 20, 36, 47 Sport, 8, 20, 23, 37, 50, 51, 64, 84, 134 SPSS, 94, 112 Staat van de Stad Amsterdam, 20, 23, 43 Stoker, L., 7, 14, 123, 131 Stolle, D., 5–8, 11–14, 25, 98, 123, 124, 130, 133 with Marschall, M.J., 7, 12 Stranger, 2, 6, 18, 26, 41, 93, 94, 96, 99, 115, 126–130 Strong ties, 6, 55, 85 Structural equation modeling, 122 Sturgis, P., 6, 12, 41, 127 Sullivan, J.L., 128 Surinamese, 23, 94 Survey, 2, 3, 5, 25, 26, 37, 43, 53, 54, 65, 122 Sweden, 13, 123, 124, 126 T Tavris, C., 127 te Grotenhuis, M., 120 Theiss-Morse, E., Theoretical, 1, 3, 5, 10, 18, 24, 25, 37, 42, 44, 45, 56, 59, 62, 77, 81, 98, 100, 115, 116, 127, 129 Theoretical framework, 119 Ties, 2, 6, 10, 26, 38, 54, 56, 58, 59, 65, 85, 121, 132 See also Close ties; Ethnic ties; Index In-group ties; Friendship ties; Strong ties; Interethnic ties Ties beyond, 85, 86, 88 Ties within, 23, 26, 85 Tillie, J., 8, 23, 52, 57, 59 Tilly, C., 5, 134 Tolsma, J., 1, 12, 13, 125, 127 Transue, J.E., 128 Trappers, A., 12 Traunmüller, R., 128, 130, 131 Trust, 1–3, See also Ethnic trust; Generalized trust; Particularized trust; Social trust Trust in/toward, 26 Turkish board members, 54 Turkish descent, 23, 44 Turkish fraternities, 132 Turkish group, 23, 37, 64, 79 Turkish minorities, 23, 36, 65 Turkish organization, 1, 2, 23, 24, 36, 37, 44, 48, 50–52, 54, 56–59, 61, 63–65, 70, 71, 76, 81, 83, 86, 88, 91, 98, 113, 119, 120, 134 participation in Turkish (voluntary) organization, 22 Turkish participant, 46, 54, 56, 64, 77, 78, 85, 86, 88 Turkish versus mixed, 3, 16, 26, 44, 121 Turks, 44, 50, 94 Types of associations, organizations, 15 U UCINET, 59 Uitermark, J., 21–23, 38, 54, 120 Unemployed, 79 United Kingdom, 41, 125 United Nations, Unknown other, people, 42, 93, 127, 130 Unsafe, 103, 130 Uslaner, E.M., 4–7, 11, 12, 17, 123, 124, 126–128, 130, 131 V Validating generalized trust, 127 Van den Broek, A., 23 Van der Meer, T., 1, 12, 13, 45, 120, 125–127 Van Deth, J.W., 25, 38, 125 Van de Walle, R., 58, 59 Van Gogh, Theo, 21, 22, 47 Van Heelsum, A., 35, 57 Van Houtum, H., 22, 120 Van Ingen, E., 15, 23, 123 Van Praag, C., 133 Van Steenbergen, F., 22, 23, 38, 54 Index Variance, 2, 16, 26, 40, 49, 69–71, 74–76, 79, 91, 99, 121, 124, 125 Verba, S, 5, 11, 13 Vermeulen, F.F., 8, 20–23, 35, 37, 47, 49, 57, 59 Vervoort, M., 133 Vickstrom, E., 132 Vogelaar neighborhoods, 47 Volunteer, 15, 25, 35, 37, 53–55, 62, 64, 65, 88, 91 Volunteering, 15, 19, 55, 57, 63–65, 85, 86, 91 Voting, 52 Vroome, T., 129 W Warren, M.E., 7, 8, 134 Welfare, 11, 18, 59, 132 Welfare organizations, 59 Welfare policies, 132 Welfare regime, 11 Well-being, 17, 18, 100, 107, 124, 128–130 145 Welzel, C., 128 Western, 5, 6, 8, 12, 42, 44, 47, 61, 134 Western Europe, 1, 21, 38, 134 White, 55 Widowed, 3, 69, 81, 83, 86, 88, 91, 105, 108, 113, 116 Wollebaek, D., 14, 15, 123, 131 Women, 22, 25, 36, 37, 50, 52, 78, 79, 83 World Values Survey, 5, 124, 125, 128, 131 Y Yamagishi, M., 4, 128, 130 Yamagishi, T., 4, 128, 130 Yin, R.K., 24 Youth, 14, 22, 50, 52, 54 Z Zhou, M., 21 Zmerli, S., 5, 120, 128 ... on the basis of length of democracy of a country, the transparency of institutions, norms of good governance such as lack of corruption, levels of development, the perceived level of social and... and bonding organizations, the other on the effects of diversity in neighborhoods— provide rather different accounts of how generalized trust might be produced The hypothesized differences in adherence... increase the perception of threat by other groups involved, as people are competing for the same resources and cannot easily opt out of a relationship This strand of theories is called the conflict thesis