In chapter 14, I summarize the results for measures of social, civic, and political disengagement. This appendix lays out the data on which those summaries were based.
The measure of social disengagement uses GSS questions asking about membership in sports clubs (e.g., a kayaking club), hobby clubs (e.g., a stamp collectors’ club), fraternal organizations (e.g., Elks), nationality groups (e.g., Sons of Italy), veterans’ groups (e.g., VFW), literary or art groups (e.g., the Baker Street Irregulars), or school fraternities. Belonging to none of these groups is scored as an indicator of social disengagement. Figure F.1 shows the results.
These data are only suggestive. We know from Putnam’s work that disengagement began to rise in the 1960s, so in figure F.1 we are probably looking at lines that have started to level off after a rapid increase. At the right-hand side of the graph, we have results from just a single GSS survey after 1994, in 2004, to give us estimates of social disengagement in the 2000s. If we take the data at face value, Fishtown has been far more socially disengaged than Belmont at least since the 1970s, and that gap has widened even more. In the 2004 survey, 36 percent of those in Belmont were socially disengaged compared to 75 percent of those in Fishtown.
FIGURE F.1. SOCIAL DISENGAGEMENT
Source: Author’s analysis of the GSS. Sample limited to whites ages 30–49. Data for 1972 through 1994 smoothed using locally estimated regression (LOESS). Data for 2004 represent percentages for that survey.
The second composite index measures membership in civic organizations. It asks if someone is a member of a service group (e.g., Kiwanis), a youth group (e.g., coaches Little League), school service group (e.g., PTA), or a political club. Belonging to none of those groups is scored as an indicator of civic disengagement. Note that I do not include church groups, which would double-count for religiosity, covered in chapter 11. Once again we have a frustrating shortage of data after 1994, with the one survey in 2004 that asked the right questions. Figure F.2 shows the results.
Once again, divergence between Belmont and Fishtown was already high when we pick up the trendlines in the 1970s. Civic disengagement increased in Belmont through the early 1990s and then showed a decrease in the lone 2004 survey. In Fishtown, civic disengagement rose throughout the period. The combination of trends meant a wide gap between Belmont and Fishtown in the 2004 survey—45 percent in Belmont versus 85 percent in Fishtown.
FIGURE F.2. CIVIC DISENGAGEMENT
Source: Author’s analysis of the GSS. Sample limited to whites ages 30–49. Data for 1972 through 1994 smoothed using locally estimated regression (LOESS). Data for 2004 represent percentages for that survey.