IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSR -JBM) [630233]

IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSR -JBM)
e-ISSN: 2278 -487X, p -ISSN: 2319 -7668. Volume 19, Issue 4. Ver . III (Apr. 2017), PP 34-40
www.iosrjournals.org
DOI: 10.9790/487X -190403 3440 www.iosrjournals.org 34 | Page
A Critical Revi ew of Scales Used in Social Capital Research

Isyaku Salisu 1) & Norashida Hashim 2)
1)School of Business Management, College of Business Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM) 06010 Sintok, Kedah
DarulAman, Malaysia.
2)School of Business Management, College of Business Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM) 06010 Sintok, Kedah
DarulAman, Malaysia.

Abstract : This paper reviewed some of the most commonly used scales of social capital researches. Depending
on the context, a mong these scales, some of them were found to be used more frequently than others. This paper
discusses some of these scales for future researches. These are, name generator, position generato r, resource
generator, Social capital assessment tool (SCAT), Adapted Social Capital Assessment Tool (A -SCAT), Personal
Social Capital Scale . After critical assessment , Personal Social Capital Scale scales were found to be the best
scales in assessing individual social capital as they possess best psychometric properties. Since Therefore, it is
imperative for future study to use the best scales in measuring their research constructs. This paper suggests
that there is the need for researchers to consider the current methodological strength of any given measurement
from stream of literature before adapting or adopting. Doing so will certainly provide more meaningful result
for inferences.

I. Introduction
It has been argued that, the more individual possesses social capital the greater the chance of achieving
higher desired outcome (Chen et al., 2015). Consequently, a comprehensive review of studies on social capital
revealed that the construct received considerable attention from both researchers and policy ma kers
(Agénor&Dinh, 2015; Barker, & Thomson, 2015; Obikili, 2015; Park, Nunkoo, & Yoon, 2015), cutting across
majority of academic disciplines such as sociology, anthropology, economics, political science, management
and entrepreneurship (Andrews, & Brewer, 2015; Strzelecka, & Wicks, 2015 ) in both developed and less
developing economy (Roberts, & Gannon, 2014). For its wider acceptability and applicability, van Deth, (2003)
argued it “has become a minor industry in the social sciences” (p. 79). The concept i s rooted in sociology (Unni,
2014; Kiani, 2012; Dehkordi, Hossieni, Naqipourfar, &Torkam ani, 2012 ) and was first studied by Durkheim in
1897 when examining how social influence relates to suicide (Durkheim, 1951), but Hanifan was the first to
introduce the term social capital in academic arena (Ritchie & Robison, 2012).

Definitions of Social Capital
There are a lot of contentions among scholars over what constitutes the term social capital, its wider
applicability in almost all human endeavours (Lee, Park, & Lee, 2015; Murayama et al., 2015; makes it more
difficult to have a unified and widely acceptable definition, thus defining it has been a subject of debate among
scholars (Bellamy, 2015; Lee et al., 2015; Kobayashi, Kawachi, Iwase, S uzuki, & Takao, 2013 ). Yet, there is no
satisfying consensus on how it should be defined (Agampodi, Agampodi, Glozier, &Siribaddana, 2015). In
attempt to define it, every field of study moulds it to suit its context (Villalonga -Olives &Kawachi, 2015a,
2015b ).
Although there a re various definitions of the concept, Neves and Fonseca (2015), Woolcock (2010)
argued that social capital is a polysemic construct having different but related definitions with one central idea
“our social ties matter and bring us benefits” (Neves, & Fon seca, 2015, p. 15) thus, “the manner in which
networks and their emergent properties (e.g. trust and norms) can constitute a resource for their members”
(Crossley, 2008, p. 477). Nevertheless, different scholars defined it for instance, as a tangible and i ntangible
resources individuals and groups acquire through network relationship that aid in enhancing varied outcomes
such as performance, success, and sustaining competitive advantage (Andrikopoulos, &Economou, 2015;
Bellamy, 2015; Lancee, 2015; Liang, Hu ang, Lu, & Wang, 2015; Ou, Hsu, & Ou, 2015; Villalonga -Olives,
&Kawachi, 2015a ) For instance, Villalonga -Olives and Kawachi (2015b, p.47) defined social capital that
capture both individual and group approaches as “the resources available to individuals and groups through
membership in social networks”. According to Ritchie and Robison (2012, p.16), “Social capital is a person ’s or
group’s sympathy for another person or group” Likewise, Chen, et al., (2015), Archuleta and Teasley (2013) and
Chen, Stanton, Gong, Fang and Li, (2009) maintained that social capital is a part of the general network
connections amassed by individuals in their lifetime that consist of four core features: reciprocity, resource -rich,
trustworthiness and durability. From most of the definitions suggested by different scholars, one could easily

A Critical Review of Scales Used in Social Capital Research
DOI: 10.9790/487X -190403 3440 www.iosrjournals.org 35 | Page deduced that most of them share four things in common; network , trust, norms and resource. Also, Ellison,
Gray, Lampe, and Fiore, (2014) buttress that majority of these definitions share focus on illustrating the
connections between social relationships and different outcomes. Hence (Ooi, Laing, &Mair, 2014) defined it as
social norms such as reciprocity, trust, network of relationship and resources accessed that enable teamwork and
mutual action at both group and individual level. Furthermore, Chen et al., (2009, p. 306) argued “without
network connection s, there is no social capital”. Also, Van Staveren and Knorringa, (2007, p. 107) buttress that
the most comprehensive definition of the concept is ‘‘relations matter’’.

Measuring Social Capital
As contentious as the conceptualization and operationalization of the soci al capital, it is also difficult to
measure (Agampodi et al., 2015; Hällsten, Edling, &Rydgren, 2015; Villalonga -Olives, &Kawachi, 2015a;
Appel et al., 2014; Ritchie, & Robison, 2012; Sabatini, 2009 ) and suffer methodological vagueness (Neves,
2013). Socia l science researchers are being criticized for absence of consensus on how social capital should be
measured (M urphy, 2013; Ferri et al., 2009 ). Lack of appropriate measure that capture the construct deter from
getting and understanding its clear nature, v alue and effect. Therefore, researchers need to weigh the pros and
cons of each measure carefully before using, taking into cognisance the nature, context and objective of their
study (Veerle et al., 2012). Furthermore, Lin and Erickson (2008) argued that, for social capital to be a tool for
development, there is the need to have appropriate measure that will represent the true nature of it. But,
multidimensionality and ever changing nature of the concept compound its measurement problem overtime as
getting accurate and uniform measures (across all levels and contexts) is an impossibility.
To trigger social capital research, so many researchers validated scales for assessing social capital both
at group and individual level (Veerle et al., 2012) most of whi ch were emanated from developed countries
(Agampodi, et al., 2015), scholars hav e debated extensively as to which measurement is the best. Although there
is no consensus on one best measure, but some of them are preferred more than the others as they posse ss better
psychometric properties. Some lists of the available me asures are presented in table 1 , but the most prominent
and frequently used ones ar e hereby discussed .

Table 1
Social Capital Instruments
SN Authors and Year Instruments
1 Chen et al., 2015 Social Capital Investment Scale – SCIS
2 Story, Taleb, Ahasan, & Ali, 2015 Short Version Of Adapted Social Capital Assessment Tool B – SASCAT -B
3 Muskett, 2014 WRSCIM
4 Wang, Chen, Gong, & Jacques -Tiura., 2014 Personal Social Capital Scale 16 and Personal Social Capital Scale 8
5 Thuy& Berry, 2013 Australian Community Participation Questionnaire (ACPQ)
6 Friche et al., 2013 Neighborhood scale
7 Carr, Cole, Ring, &Blettner, 2011 Internal Social Capital Among Family Business -ISC-FB
8 Borges, Campos, Vargas, Ferreira, &Kawachi,
2010 Integrated Questionnaire on Social Capital -SCIQ
9 Zimet, Dahlem, Zimet, & Farley, 1988 Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support – MSPSS
10 Moscardino et al., 2010 Sense Of Community Index
11 Modie -Moroka, 2009, Borges et al., 2010 Perceived Social Capital Scale
12 Looman&Farrag, 2009 Arabic Social Capital Scale
13 Chen et al., 2009 Personal Social Capital Scale – PCSC
14 Mattoo et al., 2008 Social Support Questionnaire
15 De Silva &Harpham , 2007, De Silva et al.
2006 SASCAT
17 Williams, 2006 Internet Social Capital Scales – ISCS
18 Inclan, C., Hijar, M., Tovar, V., 2005; Krishna
&Shrader 2000 Social Capital Assessment Tool – SCAT
19 Harpham, Grant, & Thomas, 2002 Adapted Social Capital Assessment Tool –ASCAT
20 Grootaert, Narayan, Jones, &Woolcock, 2003 Integrated Questionnaire for the Measurement of Social Capital – SC-IQ
21 Narayan, & Cassidy, 2001 Social Capital Inventory
22 Webber & Huxley 2007; Van Der
Gaag&Snijders 2005 The Resource Generator
23 Van Der Gaag& Webber 2008; Lin& Fu.
2001; Lin &Dumin 1986 Position Generator
24 McCallister& Fischer 1978 Name Generator

Name Generator
This instrument is the oldest tool for measuring individual social capital stem from 1970s researches on
social network. It consists of general social network inventory accomplished with the blend of name generator
and interpreter questions. Initially, it was aimed for the assessment of social network size and the recognition of
its content and structure. In collecting data using this instrument, three sequences of data collection is being

A Critical Review of Scales Used in Social Capital Research
DOI: 10.9790/487X -190403 3440 www.iosrjournals.org 36 | Page carried out. Firstly, an organized lists of questions requesting th e respondents to enumerate names of individuals
they know, Secondly, name interpreter, gather facts about members in one’s personal network enumerated.
Thirdly, though non -compulsory, the assessment of the connections among alters (Van der Gaag& Webber,
2008).
This instrument was the best method of evaluating social capital till the mid -90s, it is still being used in
social network structure studies as the blend of generator and interpreter can offer vary comprehensive facts
about social capital and network . Although important, it was challenged for being costly, interviews can be very
long and repetitive in study involving diverse network, it is difficult to interpret and compare the outcome of the
studies (Van der Gaag& Webber, 2008), time consuming (Verha eghe, Van de Putte, &Roose 2013) and it
neglects other part of the social capital as it measures only some aspect of social capital (the number of alters),
therefore no longer in use (Wang et al., 2014).

Position Generator
This instrument concentrates rat her more on the existence of social resources then the connections
within the network (Lin, Fu, & Hsung, 2001). It is meant to consider the social capital in the holistic
individuals’ life. It usually ask from the list of ten to thirty different occupation s whether respondents know and
can identify anyone that engage in the listed type of occupation (Verhaeghe et al., 2013) and whether they are
family members, colleagues and friends. The data gathered from this instrument are based on the notion that the
occupation of the members in the network denote collections of social resources that can be measured
quantitatively with job prestige measures. The fundamental assumptions of this instrument are that getting
access to individuals with high prestige occupatio n provides access to enormous amount of resource and such
peoples may apply crucial effect on their social network (Van der Gaag& Webber, 2008).
For its ‘easy to administer’ feature, position generator has been regularly used since its development
and has gain popularity especially when measuring social capital at individual level (Verhaeghe et al., 2013).
Nevertheless, it suffer validity and reliability challenges (Verhaeghe et al., 2013; Van der Gaag, & Webber,
2008). The listing method used to measure so cial capital is an approach, which is complicated for data
collection, hard to produce measurement scores as it uses open -ended answers. Furthermore, there is absence of
standard list of occupation to be included (Wang et al., 2014).

Resource Generator
One of the measurements of social capital that received great attention in the social capital literature is
developed by Van der Gaag and Snijders (2005). Its reliability and validity across different cultural settings
makes it transferable to diverse cultur al context and therefore most applicable scale then other scales such as
position generator and name generator (Häuberer, 2014, 2011; Webber, & Huxley, 2007) which were both
developed to measure individual social capital (Lin & Erickson 2008; van der Gaag& Snijders, 2005). It deals
with resources in different facets of life that satiates the desires of individuals in the contemporary society (van
der Gaag&Snijders, 2005). Consequent to the notion that resources are the ingredients necessary for the
achieveme nt of economic and social mobility which differ from culture to culture, hence, the need for it to be
considered and therefore the idea behind the construction of resource generator. The distinguishing factor
between resource generation and other scales is the emphasis on particular critical resources for social capital
generation in a particular settings (Foster & Maas, 2014). The scale measures people access to social wealth
inherent in their social network (Webber & Huxley, 2007) as such, its items are d irectly asking about some
particular resources available in the social network (Verhaeghe et al., 2013). It presents a novel way of
measuring the construct using a checklist where by access is ticked against an arranged list of crucial and
concrete resourc es (Van Der Gaag& Webber, 2008).
Although, it is more robust and economical then the other generators, its findings are strictly restricted
to the resource items used (Verhaeghe et al., 2013). Also, the scale suffers some methodological issues. For
instanc e, some of its items lack validity, inserting items for actual resource in the scale is hard to attain with any
academic and statistical rigor (Van Der Gaag& Webber 2008). More so, there is high items popularity which is
very easy for the respondents to ch eck yes answer on question whether it is simple to access benefit from their
network; this also shows vulnerability for socially desirable response (Van der Gaag&Snijders, 2005).

Social capital assessment tool (SCAT)
SCAT was advanced by Krishna and Shrader (2000). It is a lengthy questionnaires (more than 60
questions) that was intended to assess social capital in developing nations (Harpham, Grant & Thomas, 2002). It
is established set of questions and approaches that evaluate the micro structural a nd cognitive levels of social
capital in the communities that benefitted from development projects of the World Bank (Krishna &Shrader,
2000). Although, the SCAT has robust operational significance (Krishna &Shrader, 2000), some of the
shortcomings of this scale is that it has not been subjected to statistical rigors (neither test of validity nor

A Critical Review of Scales Used in Social Capital Research
DOI: 10.9790/487X -190403 3440 www.iosrjournals.org 37 | Page reliability). Also, some of its questions are overlapping, nonetheless, it offers important questions from which
other measurement developers/users from different field of studies (e.g. Rastogi, Thapliyal, & Hickey, 2014;
Brune&Bossert, 2009; Morgan, 2007) used (Agampodi et al., 2015).

Adapted Social Capital Assessment Tool (A -SCAT)
To remedy the problems inherent in the use of SCAT, A -SCAT was developed (Harpham e t al., 2002).
It is a concise scale that has two dimension of social capital, cognitive (eleven indicators) and structural (seven
indicators) (Kim, Mancuso, Huang, &Erkan, 2015). Like SCAT, A -SCAT is developed to be used in low –
income developing economies which is characterized by high level of illiteracy (Harpham et al., 2002). The
scale has been validated and found to have content, face and construct validity, but reliability has not been
ascertained (Verduin, Smid, Wind, &Scholte, 2014). It has been vali dated and employed in Columbia
(Harpham, Grant, & Rodriguez, 2004), Peru, Vietnam, and Rwanda (Verduin et al., 2014), in Bangladesh
(Story, Taleb, Ahasan, & Ali, 2015) and in sub -Saharan Africa (Thomas, 2004). It has also been adapted by
Young Lives (YL) i n four less developed nations of Ethiopia, Vietnam, Peru and India (De Silva et al., 2006).
For its good psychometric properties, several studies recommend it to be used especially in developing
countries, (e.g. Agampodi et al., 2015).
The success of A -SCA T resulted in several adaption and modification which sees the emergence of
other measurements such as Short version of adapted social capital assessment tool (SASCAT, SASCAT – B),
personal social capital scale (PSCS) for health and behavioural science (Ch en et al., 2009; Archuleta, & Miller,
2011) and subsequently PSCS 16 and PSCS 8 (Wang et al., 2014).

Personal Social Capital Scale (PCSC)
Motivated by the outstanding performance of A -SCAT on the measurement of individual social capital,
Chen et al., (2009) developed social capital scale – Personal Social Capital Scale (PSCS) to provide reliable
instrument of individual social capital in hea lth and behavioral science researches aimed at remedying the
shortcomings inherent in the A -SCAT by plainly delineating what social capital is and what it does (Wang,
Chen, Gong, & Jacques -Tiura, 2014). This measure is based on the fact that social capital is part and parcel of
individual’s network connections that are characterized by reciprocity, trustworthiness and resource rich (De
Silva, McKenzie, Harpham, &Huttly, 2005; Harpham, 2002 ). It was first developed in Chinese version which
contained Forty tw o items that measure ten statements (Cap1 – Cap10) with each five measuring bonding and bridging
social capital respectively – thirty two items measuring bonding and ten measuring bridging, (Wang et al., 2014). Archuleta
and Miller (2011) translated the Ch inese version to English and tested its reliability and validity in two different countries
including China and United States of America (USA). They found the instrument to be psychometrically fit (excellent
validity and reliability) to measure individual social capital. The scale offers a valuable and practical instrument for health
and behavioural researchers. It is capable of measuring the personally owned social capital, both its bridging and bonding
aspect. It is also effective in acquiring required in formation from different respondents concerning their network
connections. More importantly, it is simples and user friendly (Archuleta & Miller, 2011).

Persona l Social Capital Scale 16 and 8
The PCSC is challenged of being too large and content loaded and can be used for small sample survey.
Therefore, there is the need to develop a scale that could be used for larger sample. Hence, (Wang et al., 2014)
used PCSC item to develop two short versions, which they believe to be capable of catering for the lar ger
sample survey. They termed them ‘Personal Social Capital Scale 16 (PCSC 16)’ consisting sixteen items, eight
measuring bonding and bridging each, and ‘Personal Social Capital Scale 8 (PCSC 8)’ consisting eight items,
four measuring bonding and bridging each. These two scales were tested for validity and reliability which they
were found to have good psychometric properties (Cronbach’s alpha of .90 and .83 respectively).

II. Conclusion
Although van Deth (2003) suggested that, evaluating the validity and rel iability of social capital
measures in different methods both longitudinally as well as cross -sectional should be a standard norm among
social capital researchers and each facet of the construct should possess multiple indicators and rigorous
statistical t echniques for data reductions and normalization, unfortunately, this plea has not been heeded. For
instance, De Silva et al. (2006) review of twenty -eight social capital empirical studies has exposed that only four
has performed test of validity. He also f ound so many methodological flaws such as; measure not congruent to
the definition, questions are not initially meant to measure social capital, questions do not measure intending
social capital aspect, conglomerating aspects of social capital that are mea nt to be different into one score and
absence of information on measurement validity. In line with Harpham, (2008) , we suggest that there is the need
for researchers to consider the current methodological strength of any given measurement from stream of
literature before adapting or adopting.
References

A Critical Review of Scales Used in Social Capital Research
DOI: 10.9790/487X -190403 3440 www.iosrjournals.org 38 | Page [1]. Agampodi, T. C., Agampodi, S. B., Glozier, N., &Siribaddana, S. (2015). Measurement of social capital in relation to health i n Low
and Middle Income Countries (LMIC); a systematic review. Social Science and Medicine . 128, 95 -104.
[2]. Agénor, P. R., &Dinh, H. T. (2015). Social capital, product imitation and growth with learning externalities. Journal of
Development Economics , 114, 41-54.
[3]. Andrews, R., & Brewer, G. A. (2015). Social Capital and Public Service Perfo rmance: Does Managerial Strategy Matter?. Public
Performance and Management Review , 38(2), 187 -213.
[4]. Andrikopoulos, A., &Economou, L. (2015). Editorial board interlocks in financial economics. International Review of Financial
Analysis, 37, 51 -62.
[5]. Appel, L. , Dadlani, P., Dwyer, M., Hampton, K., Kitzie, V., Matni, Z. A., …&Teodoro, R. (2014). Testing the validity of social
capital measures in the study of information and communication technologies. Information, Communication and Society , 17(4),
398-416.
[6]. Archuleta, A. J., & Miller, C. R. (2011). Validity Evidence for the Translated Version of the Personal Social Capital Scale a mong
People of Mexican Descent. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research , 2(2), 39 -53.
[7]. Archuleta, A. J., &Teasley, M. (2 013). Acculturative stress among people of Mexican descent: The role of acculturation, social
capital, and family role expectations. Social Work in Mental Health , 11(4), 311 -333.
[8]. Barker, J., & Thomson, L. (2015). Helpful Relationships with Service Users: Linking Social Capital. Australian Social Work , 68(1),
130-145.
[9]. Bellamy, J. (2015). Volunteering Among Church Attendees in Australia. In Religion and Volunteering (pp. 121 -143). Springer
International Publishing.
[10]. Borges, C. M., Campos, A. C. V., Vargas, A. D., Ferreira, E. F., &Kawachi, I. (2010). Social capital and self -rated health among
adolescents in Brazil: an exploratory study. BMC research notes , 3(1), 338.
[11]. Brune, N. E., &Bossert, T. (2009). Building social capital in post -conflict communities: Evide nce from Nicaragua. Social Science
and Medicine , 68(5), 885 -893.
[12]. Carr, J. C., Cole, M. S., Ring, J. K., &Blettner, D. P. (2011). A measure of variations in internal social capital among fami ly
firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice , 35(6), 1207 -1227.
[13]. Chen, X., Stanton, B., Gong, J., Fang, X., & Li, X. (2009). Personal Social Capital Scale: an instrument for health and behav ioral
research. Health education research , 24(2), 306 -317.
[14]. Chen, X., Wang, P., Wegner, R., Gong, J., Fang, X., &Kaljee, L. (2015). Measuring social capital investment: Scale development
and examination of links to social capital and perceived stress. Social indicators research , 120(3), 669 -687.
[15]. Crossley, N. (2008). (Net) Working out: social capital in a private health club. The Britis h journal of sociology , 59(3), 475 -500.
[16]. De Silva, M. J., Harpham, T., Tuan, T., Bartolini, R., Penny, M. E., &Huttly, S. R. (2006). Psychometric and cognitive valida tion of
a social capital measurement tool in Peru and Vietnam. Social Science and Medicine , 62(4), 941 -953.
[17]. De Silva, M. J., McKenzie, K., Harpham, T., &Huttly, S. R. (2005). Social capital and mental illness: a systematic review. Journal
of epidemiology and community health , 59(8), 619 -627.
[18]. Dehkordi, L.F., Hossieni M.H., Naqipourfar V., & Torkamani M. (2012). Studying the Role of Spiritual Leadership in Creating
Social Capital in the Organization. Journal of Basic Applied Scientific Research, 2(8), 7566 -7571
[19]. Durkheim E. Suicide: A Study in Sociology. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press, 1951.
[20]. Ellison, N. B., Gray, R., Lampe, C., & Fiore, A. T. (2014). Social capital and resource requests on Facebook. new media and
society , 16(7), 1104 -1121.
[21]. Ferri, P. J., Deakins, D., &Whittam, G. (2009). The measurement of social capital in the entrepreneurial conte xt. Journal of
Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy , 3(2), 138 -151.
[22]. Foster, K. A., & Maas, C. D. (2014). An Exploratory Factor Analysis of the Resource Generator -United States: A Social Capital
Measure. British Journal of Socia l Work , 46 (1), 8 -26
[23]. Friche, A. A. D. L., Diez -Roux, A. V., César, C. C., Xavier, C. C., Proietti, F. A., &Caiaffa, W. T. (2013). Assessing the
psychometric and ecometric properties of neighborhood scales in developing countries: SaudeemBeaga Study, Belo H orizonte,
Brazil, 2008 –2009. Journal of Urban Health , 90(2), 246 -261.
[24]. Grootaert, C., Narayan, D., Jones, V. N., &Woolcock, M. (2003). Integrated questionnaire for the measurement of social
capital. The World Bank Social Capital Thematic Group .
[25]. Hällsten, M. , Edling, C., &Rydgren, J. (2015). The effects of specific occupations in position generator measures of social capital.
Social Networks , 40, 55 -63.
[26]. Harpham, T. (2008). The measurement of community social capital through surveys. In Social capital and health (pp. 51 -62).
Springer New York.
[27]. Harpham, T., Grant, E., & Rodriguez, C. (2004). Mental health and social capital in Cali, Colombia. Social science and
medicine , 58(11), 2267 -2277.
[28]. Harpham, T., Grant, E., & Thomas, E. (2002). Measuring social capital within health surveys: key issues. Health policy and
planning , 17(1), 106 -111.
[29]. Häuberer, J. (2011). Social capital theory: Towards a methodological foundation . Springer Science and Business Media.
[30]. Häuberer, J. (2014). Social Capital in Voluntary Associations: Localizing Social Resources. European Societies , 16(4), 570 -593.
[31]. Inclan, C., Hijar, M., Tovar, V., 2005. Social capital in settings with a high concentration of road traffic injuries. The ca se of
Cuernavaca, Mexico. Soc. Sci. Med . 61 (9), 200 7-2017
[32]. Kiani, M. (2012). Women’s Social Capital and Social Network in Iran. International Proceedings of Economics Development and
Research , 42. 221 -229
[33]. Kim, S. S., Mancuso, C. A., Huang, W. T., &Erkan , D. (2015b). Social capital: a novel platform for understanding social
determinants of health in systemic lupus erythematosus. Lupus , 24(2), 122 -129.
[34]. Kobayashi, T., Kawachi, I., Iwase, T., Suzuki, E., & Takao, S. (2013). Individual -level social capital an d self -rated health in Japan:
an application of the Resource Generator. Social Science and Medicine , 85, 32-37.
[35]. Krishna, A., &Shrader, E. (2000). Cross -cultural measures of social capital: a tool and results from India and Panama. Social capital
initiative working paper ,21.
[36]. Lancee, B. (2015). Job search methods and immigrant earnings: A longitudinal analysis of the role of bridging social
capital. Ethnicities , 1468796815581426.
[37]. Lee, S., Park, J. G., & Lee, J. (2015). Explaining knowledge sharing with social capital theory in information systems development
projects. Industrial Management and Data Systems , 115(5).
[38]. Liang, Q., Huang, Z., Lu, H., & Wang, X. (2015). Social Capital, Member Participation, and Cooperative Performance: Evidence
from China’s Zhejiang. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 18(1), 49.

A Critical Review of Scales Used in Social Capital Research
DOI: 10.9790/487X -190403 3440 www.iosrjournals.org 39 | Page [39]. Lin, N. & Erickson, B.H. (2008) Theory, measurement, and the research enterprise on social capital. In Lin, N. & Erickson, B. H.,
Eds., Social capital. An international research program. Oxfo rd University Press Inc., New York.
doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199234387.003.0010
[40]. Lin, N., Fu, Y. C., &Hsung, R. M. (2001). The position generator: Measurement techniques for investigations of social capital . In
N. Lin, K. Cook, & R. S. Burt (Eds.) Social capital: theory and research. New York: Aldine de Gruyter , 57-81.
[41]. Looman, W. S., &Farrag, S. (2009). Psychometric properties and cross -cultural equivalence of the Arabic Social Capital Scale:
instrument development study. International journal of nursing studies , 46(1), 45 -54.
[42]. Mattoo, S. K., Bhansali, A. K., Gupta, N., Grover, S., & Malhotra, R. (2008). Psychosocial morbidity in acromegaly: a study f rom
India. Endocrine , 34(1-3), 17 -22.
[43]. McCallister, L., & Fischer, C. S. (1978). A procedure for surveying pe rsonal networks. Sociological Methods & Research , 7(2),
131-148.
[44]. Modie -Moroka, T., 2009. Does level of social capital predict perceived health in a community?eA study of adult residents of low –
income areas of Francistown, Botswana. J. Health Popul. Nutr. 27 (4), 462 -476
[45]. Morgan, A. (2007). ‘You’re nothing without me!’: the positive role of education in regaining self‐worth and ‘moving on’for
survivors of domestic abuse. Research in post -compulsory education , 12(2), 241 -258.
[46]. Moscardino, U., Scrimin, S., Capel lo, F., &Altoè, G. (2010). Social support, sense of community, collectivistic values, and
depressive symptoms in adolescent survivors of the 2004 Beslan terrorist attack. Social Science & Medicine , 70(1), 27 -34.
[47]. Murayama, H., Nofuji, Y., Matsuo, E., Nishi, M., Taniguchi, Y., Fujiwara, Y., &Shinkai, S. (2015). Are neighborhood bonding and
bridging social capital protective against depressive mood in old age? A multilevel analysis in Japan.Social Science and
Medicine, 124, 171 -179
[48]. Murphy, L. (2013). The relat ionship between social capital and the director's duty to promote the success of the
company. International Journal of Law and Management, 55(2), 86 -102.
[49]. Muskett, J. A. (2014). Measuring religious social capital: Scale properties of the modified Williams R eligious Social Capital Index
among Friends of cathedrals. Journal of Beliefs & Values , 35(2), 242 -249.
[50]. Narayan, D., & Cassidy, M. F. (2001). A dimensional approach to measuring social capital: development and validation of a soc ial
capital inventory. Curr ent sociology , 49(2), 59 -102.
[51]. Neves, B. B. (2013). Social capital and Internet use: the irrelevant, the bad, and the good. Sociology Compass , 7(8), 599 -611.
[52]. Neves, B. B., & Fonseca, J. R. (2015). Latent Class Models in action: Bridging social capital and Internet usage. Social science
research , 50, 15-30.
[53]. Obikili, N. (2015). Social Capital and Human Capital in the Colonies: A Study of Cocoa Farmers in Western Nigeria. Economic
History of Developing Regions , 30(1), 1 -22.
[54]. Ooi, N., Laing, J., &Mair, J. (2014) . Social capital as a heuristic device to explore sociocultural sustainability: a case study of
mountain resort tourism in the community of Steamboat Springs, Colorado, USA. Journal of Sustainable Tourism , (ahead -of-print),
1-20.
[55]. Ou, Y. C., Hsu, L. C., & Ou, S. L. (2015). Social Capital and Dynamic Capability Driving Competitive Advantage: The Moderating
Role of Corporate Governance. International Business Research, 8(5), 1 -18
[56]. Park, D. B., Nunkoo, R., & Yoon, Y. S. (2015). Rural residents’ attitudes to tou rism and the moderating effects of social
capital. Tourism Geographies ,17(1), 112 -133.
[57]. Rastogi, A., Thapliyal, S., & Hickey, G. M. (2014). Community action and tiger conservation: assessing the role of social
capital. Society and Natural Resources , 27(12), 1271 -1287.
[58]. Ritchie, M. B. K., & Robison, M. L. J. (2012). Relationship economics: The social capital paradigm and its application to business,
politics and other transactions . Gower Publishing, Ltd.
[59]. Roberts, J., & Gannon, B. (2014). The multidimensional n ature of social capital: an empirical investigation for older people in
Europe. Sheffield Economic Research Paper Series (SERPS) 2014014 .
[60]. Sabatini, F. (2009). Social capital as social networks: a new framework for measurement and an empirical analysis of i ts
determinants and consequences. The Journal of Socio -Economics , 38(3), 429 -442.
[61]. Story, W. T., Taleb, F., Ahasan, S. M., & Ali, N. A. (2015). Validating the Measurement of Social Capital in Bangladesh A
Cognitive Approach. Qualitative health research , 25(6), 806 -819.
[62]. Story, W. T., Taleb, F., Ahasan, S. M., & Ali, N. A. (2015). Validating the Measurement of Social Capital in Bangladesh A
Cognitive Approach. Qualitative health research , 25(6), 806 -819.
[63]. Strzelecka, M., & Wicks, B. E. (2015). Community Partici pation and Empowerment in Rural Post -Communist Societies: Lessons
from the Leader Approach in Pomerania, Poland. Tourism Planning and Development, (ahead -of-print), 1 -17.
[64]. Thomas, E. P. S. C. (2004). Social capital and women's health in Sub -Saharan Africa (Doctoral dissertation, London South Bank
University).
[65]. Thuy, N. T. M., & Berry, H. L. (2013). Social capital and mental health among mothers in Vietnam who have children with
disabilities. Global health action , 6.
[66]. Unni , A. S., (2014) A Study of Relationship between Social Capital and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. International Journal
of Managerial Studies and Research (IJMSR) 2(4), 76 -81
[67]. Van Der Gaag, M., &Snijders, T. A. (2005). The Resource Generator: social c apital quantification with concrete items. Social
networks , 27(1), 1 -29.
[68]. Van der Gaag, M., & Webber, M. (2008). Measurement of individual social capital: questions, instruments, and measures . In:
Kawachi, I., Subramanian, S.V., Kim, D. (Eds.), Social Capit al and Health. Springer, New York, pp. 29 -49.
[69]. Van Deth, J. W. (2003). Measuring social capital: orthodoxies and continuing controversies. International Journal of Social
Research Methodology , 6(1), 79 -92.
[70]. Van Staveren, I., &Knorringa, P. (2007). Unpacking social capital in economic development: How social relations matter. Review
of Social Economy , 65(1), 107 -135.
[71]. Veerle, V., Wim, P., Jan De, M., & Sara, W. (2012). Measuring the immeasurable? Operationalising social capital in health
research. Health , 2012 .
[72]. Verduin, F., Smid, G. E., Wind, T. R., &Scholte, W. F. (2014). In search of links between social capital, mental health and
sociotherapy: A longitudinal study in Rwanda. Social Science and Medicine , 121, 1-9.
[73]. Verhaeghe, P. P., Van de Putte, B., &Roose, H. (2013). Reliability of Position Generator Measures across Different Occupational
Lists A Parallel Test Experiment. Field Methods , 25(3), 238 -261.
[74]. Villalonga -Olives, E., &Kawachi, I. (2015a). The measurement of bridging social capital in population health research. Health &
place , 36, 47-56.

A Critical Review of Scales Used in Social Capital Research
DOI: 10.9790/487X -190403 3440 www.iosrjournals.org 40 | Page [75]. Villalonga -Olives, E., &Kawachi, I. (2015b). The measurement of social capital. Gaceta Sanitaria , 29(1), 62 -64.
[76]. Wang, P., Chen, X., Gong, J., & Jacques -Tiura, A. J. (2014). Reliability and validity of the personal social capital scale 16 and
personal social capital scale 8: Two short instruments for survey studies. Social Indicators Research , 119(2), 1133 -1148.
[77]. Webber, M. P., & Huxley, P. J. (2007). Measuring access to social capital: The validity and reliability of the R esource Generator –
UK and its association with common mental disorder. Social Science and Medicine , 65(3), 481 -492.
[78]. Williams, D. (2006). On and off the ’Net: Scales for social capital in an online era. Journal of Computer‐Mediated
Communication , 11(2), 593 -628.
[79]. Woolcock, M. (2010). The rise and routinization of social capital, 1988 -2008. Annual review of political science , 13, 469 -487.
[80]. Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., Zimet, S. G., & Farley, G. K. (1988). The multidimensional scale of perceived social support. Journal
of personality assessment , 52(1), 30 -41.