Two kinds of social capital: Bonding and bridging

I recently read the best-selling Bowling Alone by Robert D. Putnam. The premise of the book is that Americans have been connecting with each other in social interaction significantly less over the last several decades. The term he uses for connecting in social interaction, coined by L.J. Hanifan in 1916, is ‘social capital’.

Mr. Putnam discusses two kinds of social capital. In the following sections, I will discuss the benefits and costs of each kind.

Benefits of social capital

Research indicates that connecting in social interaction is fundamental to having good physical and mental health. In turn, a lack of social connection leads to loneliness which has significant negative effects on physical and mental health.

The causes of declining social capital and its negative consequences are the focal points of Bowling Alone. In the latter chapters, Mr. Putnam discusses strategies to reverse the negative trend by increasing social capital. In this discussion, he refers to two kinds of social capital to target.

Two kinds of social capital

Mr. Putnam refers to two kinds of social capital—bonding social capital and bridging social capital. Bonding social capital occurs when we strengthen connections by interacting with people who belong to groups to which we belong. Examples include spending time with co-workers at your company, with people who work in your profession, with fellow supporters of your favourite sports team, and with people who belong to the same political party as you.

Bridging social capital occurs when we create connections with people in groups to which we do not belong. Examples include getting to know workers from a rival company, people who work in other professions, supporters of rival sports teams, and people who belong to political parties which are competing with your party.

Benefits of each kind of social capital

Both types of social capital bring with them significant benefits. Bonding social capital has positive effects on mood and mental health through interactions with people in groups to which you and others belong. Continued interactions build intimacy through enjoyable activities and mutual self-disclosure which are the hallmarks of rewarding close relationships.

Bridging social capital, in which you create connections with people in groups to which you do not belong, leads to positive effects on mood and mental health through social interaction as occurs with bonding social capital. And although the benefits of increased intimacy in close relationships occur more often in bonding social capital, these benefits often also occur with bridging social capital. This scenario occurs when we discover that, despite being members of different groups, there are often things we have in common which facilitate bonding social capital.

Bridging social capital has the additional benefit of being the most effective way to reduce prejudice and discrimination. Research has consistently demonstrated that having members of opposing groups interact with each other in friendly settings leads to these positive effects.

Costs of social capital

Although connecting with others is central to good mental health, I will borrow a phrase in stating that not all connections are created equal. Some interactions have negative effects on mood, self-esteem, mental health and physical well-being.

In addition, although bonding social capital can bring significant benefits from connecting with people who are in groups to which you belong, it often also has a downside in the form of ingroup bias and ingroup favouritism. These take the form of people having have more favourable attitudes toward members of groups to which they belong (your ingroups) compared with members of other groups (the outgroups) along with treating members of your ingroup better than members of outgroups.

That is, the greater closeness and positive feelings you have from bonding with ingroup members often is accompanied by negative attitudes toward and negative treatment of outgroup members. Making it a point to interact with outgroup members to facilitate bridging social capital can help to reduce these negative effects of bonding social capital.

Unfortunately, the legacy media, podcasts and social media sites facilitate bonding social capital much more than bridging social capital. That is, people are offered many more options for connecting with members of their ingroups compared with opportunities to connect with members of outgroups. Profit-driven algorithms used on social media sites exacerbate this tendency by fueling anger toward members of outgroups.

Benefits of focusing on both types of social capital

Just because media outlets push bonding social capital more than bridging social capital does not mean you have to succumb. Enjoying the benefits of bonding social capital by interacting with members of your ingroups can be accompanied by reaching out to members of outgroups. Doing so will not only help to ameliorate the negative side of bonding social capital, it will also lead you to develop new relationships with people which can be as fulfilling as those you enjoy through bonding social capital.

May you enjoy the benefits of focusing on both types of social capital,

-Dr. Pat