Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology

SOCIAL CAPITAL AND CIVIC PARTICIPATION: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF UNIVERSITY OF DELHI (INDIA) AND TEHRAN UNIVERSITY (IRAN)

THESIS

Submitted for the award of the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology

By JAFAR KHORSANDI

Under the supervision of DR. ABDUL WAHEED

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL WORK ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY ALIGARH 2012

Dr. Abdul Waheed DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL WORK Mob. No.- +91 9410-645-721 ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY ALIGARH – 202 002 Phone: Internal off.-1580.1581 External Res.-0571-3093854

Dated ……………..

Certificate

This is to certify that Mr. JAFAR KHORSANDI has carried out his research entitled Social capital and civic participation: A Comparative Study of university of

Delhi(India) and Tehran university(Iran). under my supervision.

This is an original piece of work and fit for submission to the examiners for recommending to the award of PhD degree in Sociology.

(Dr. Abdul Waheed)

Supervisor

ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. Introduction 1-5 CHAPTER– 1 6-27 SOCIAL CAPITAL AND CIVIC PARTICIPATION: EXPLAINING THE SYNERGY BETWEEN THE CONCEPTS 1.1. What is Social Capital? 6-11 1.2. Social Background of the Concept 11-18 1.3. What is civic participation 18-20 1.4. Dimension of Civic participation 20-22 1.5. Relation between social capital and Civic participation? 22-24 1.6. Model of study 24-27 CHAPTER - 2 28-59 THE SETTING AND DESIGN OF THE STUDY 2.1. Introduction 28-29 2.2. Delhi 30 2.2.1. Historical Background 30-31 2.2.2. Location and Geography 31-32 2.2.3. The culture and Political Scientific 32 2.3. The City of Education 32-33 2.4. Delhi University 34-35 2.5. Tehran 35 2.5.1. Historical Background 35-37 2.5.2. Location and Geography 37-38 2.5.3.Universities in Tehran 38-39 2.5.4.Tehran university 39-40 2.6 Research Design 41 2.6.1. Positivistic methodology 41

2.6.2. Sampling Method and Sample Size 42-43

2.6.3. Conceptual and Operational Definitions & Validity and Reliability of 44-55

iv the Measurement

2.6.4. Questionnaire 55-56

2.6.5. Hypothesis 57-58

CHAPTER- 3 60-83 SOCIO - ECONOMIC BACKGROUND OF RESPONDENTS

CHAPTER – 4 84-115

SOCIAL CAPITAL AND CIVIC PARTICIPATION: ANALYZES OF DATA

4.1. Introduction 84

4.2. Inferential Results 85-86

4.3. Testing first primary hypothesis based on DU and TU’ S data 86-115

CHAPTER – 5 116-161

PATH ANALYSIS AND THE MODELING OF FINDING 5.1. Introduction 116

5.2. Testing second primary hypothesis based upon Delhi’s data 116

5.3. Checking multicollinearity, Normality, Outliers and Linearity of the 117 data

5.4. Evaluating the model 118-122

5.5. Testing second primary hypothesis based upon Tehran’s data 122

5.6. Checking multicollinearity, Normality, Outliers and Linearity of 122-123 the data

5.7. Evaluating the model 123-127

5.8 Multi variable Analysis 127-128

5.9 The evaluation of the equation for prediction of civic 128-135 participation by stepwise method

5.10. Path Analysis 135-141

v Discussion and Conclusion 142-161

5.11 Introduction 142-143 5.12 Overview of the study 143-145

5.13 Discussion 145-147 5.14 Conclusion 147-161

Bibliography and References 162-172 Appendices 173-179

vi LIST OF TABLES

Tables Details Page No. Table 2.1: Social trust items 46 Table 2.2: social network items 47 Table 2.3: Social solidarity items 48 Table 2.4: Social communication items 49 Table 2.5: Elections participation items 50 Table 2.6: Media and News items 51 Table 2.7: Satisfaction of Life items 52 Table 2.8: Associations of Activity items 52 Table 2.9: Political equality items 53 Table .2.10: Civic Activity items 54 Table 3.1: Frequency distribution of population based on gander and 61 country Table 3.2: Frequency distribution of population based on Age and 62 country Table 3.3: Frequency distribution of population based on Marital 64 Status and country Table 3.4: Frequency distribution of population based on Religion 65 and country Table 3.5: Frequency distribution of population based on Education 66 and country Table 3.6: Frequency distribution of population based on father’s 67 education and country Table 3.7: Frequency distribution of population based on mother’s 69 education and Table 3.8: Frequency distribution of population based on state and 70 country

viii Table 3.9: Frequency distribution of population based on father’s 72 Occupation and country Table 3.10: Frequency distribution of population based on mother’s 75 Occupation and Table 3.11: Frequency distribution of population based on family 77 income and country

Table 3.12: Frequency distribution of population based on self income 80 and country Table 4.1: Cohen's guideline to determine the strength of the 86 relationship Table 4.2: Pearson correlation between social capital and civic 87 participation Table 4.3: The correlation between the social capital and civic 88 participation (single variable regression) for India Table 4.4: The correlation between the social capital and civic 88 participation (single variable regression) for Iran Table 4.5: Pearson correlation between social trust and civic 89 participation Table 4.6: The correlation of the social trust and civic participation 89 (Single variable regression) for India Table 4.7: The correlation of the social trust and civic participation 89 (Single variable regression) for Iran Table 4.8: Pearson correlation between social solidarity and civic 90 participation Table 4.9: The correlation of the social solidarity and civic 91 participation (Single variable regression) for India Table 4.10: The correlation of the social solidarity and civic 91 participation (Single variable regression) for Iran Table 4.11: Pearson correlation between social network and civic 92 participation

ix Table 4.12: The correlation of social network and civic participation 93 (Single variable regression) for India Table 4.13: The correlation of social network and civic participation 93 (Single variable regression) for Iran Table 4.14: Pearson correlation between social communication and civic 94 participation Table 4.15: The correlation of social communication and civic 95 participation (Single variable regression) for India Table 4.16: The correlation of social communication and civic 95 participation (Single variable regression) for Iran Table 4.17: Pearson correlation between respondents’ age and civic 96 participation Table 4.18: Descriptive statistics of Civic participation with consideration 97 of gender Table 4.19: Normality test (civic participation) for both countries 97 Table 4.20: Independent t-test in Civic participation with consideration of 98 gender for both countries Table 4.21: The correlation of respondents’ education and Civic 99 participation Table 4.22: Descriptive statistics of Civic Participation relationship 99 Table 4.23: Normality test (Civic participation) 100 Table 4.24: Independent t-test in Civic participation with consideration of 100 state (Rural and Urban) Table 4.25: Pearson correlation between father’s education and Civic 101 participation Table 4.26: The correlation of father’s education and civic participation 102 (single variable regression) for India Table 4.27: The correlation of father’s education and civic participation 102 (single variable regression) for Iran Table 4.28: Pearson correlation between mother’s education and Civic 103 participation Table 4.29: The correlation of mother’s education and civic participation 104 (single variable regression) for India

x Table 4.30: The correlation of mother’s education and civic participation 104 (single variable regression) for Iran Table 4.31: Anova test for Civic participation and father’s occupation with 105 consideration of country Table 4.32: Anova Between groups for father’s Occupation with 106 consideration of country (India) Table 4.33: Anova Between groups for father’s Occupation with 106 consideration of country (Iran) Table 4.34: ANOVA test for Civic participation and mother’s occupation 107 with consideration of country Table 4.35: Anova Between groups for mother’s Occupation with 108 consideration of country (Iran) Table 4.36: Pearson correlation between respondent’s income and Civic 109 participation Table 4.37: The correlation of respondent’s income and civic participation 109 (single variable regression) for India Table 4.38: The correlation of respondent’s income and civic participation 109 (single variable regression) for Iran Table 4.39: Pearson correlation for family’s income and Civic 111 participation Table 4.40: The correlation of family’s income and civic participation 111 (single variable regression) for India Table 4.41: The correlation of family’s income and civic participation 111 (single variable regression) for Iran Table 4.42: Descriptive statistics of Civic participation relationship 112 Table 4.43: Normality test (Civic participation) 113 Table 4.44: Independent t-test in Civic participation with consideration of 113 country Table 4.45: Descriptive statistics of Social capital relationship 114 Table 4.46: Normality test (Social capital) 114 Table 4.47: Independent t-test in social capital with consideration of 115 universities Table 5.1: Model Summary 118

xi Table 5.2: Anova 118 Table 5.3: Coefficients 118 Table 5.4: Squared part values 120 Table 5.5: Model Summary 123 Table 5.6: Anova 123 Table 5.7: Coefficients 124 Table 5.8: Squared part values 125 Table 5.9: The main components of multi-variable analysis by stepwise 129 method, from first stage to fifth stage, for predicting dependent variable (civic participation) for India Table 5.10: The main components of multi-variable analysis by stepwise 130 method, from first stage to third stage, for predicting dependent variable (civic participation) for Iran Table 5.11: The components of variables in equation for prediction of civic 131 participation in the fifth stages for India Table 5.2: The components of variables in equation for prediction of civic 132 participation in the third stages for Iran Table 5.13: Statistical indexes of Excluded variables in the fifth stage for 133 India Table 5.14: Statistical indexes of Excluded variables in the seventh stage 134 for Iran Table 5.15: Statistics related to the conducting regression were done 6 137 times, and the figure 5.1 is based on its results: For India Table 5.16: Statistics related to the conducting regression were done 4 138 times, and the figure 5.2 is based on its results: For Iran Table 5.17: direct impact, indirect impact and cumulative impact of all 140 existing impact are shown in figure 5.1 on the index of Civic participation. (For India) Table 5.18: direct impact, indirect impact and cumulative impact of all 141 existing impact are shown in figure 5.2 on the index of Civic participation. (For Iran)

xii LIST OF FIGURES

Figures Details Page No. Figure 1.1 Theoretical model for social capital and civic participation 27 Figure 3.1 Gender of DU 61 Figure 3.2 Gender of TU 61 Figure 3.3 Age Group of DU 62 Figure 3.4 Age Group of TU 62 Figure 3.5 Marital status of DU 64 Figure 3.6 Marital status of TU 64 Figure 3.7 Religion of DU 65 Figure 3.8 Religion of TU 65 Figure 3.9 Education of DU 66 Figure 3.10 Education of TU 66 Figure 3.11 Father’s Education of DU 67 Figure 3.12 Father’s Education of TU 68 Figure 3.13 Mother’s Education of DU 69 Figure 3.14 Mother’s Education in TU 70 Figure 3.15 State of rural & Urban in DU 71 Figure 3.16 State of rural & Urban in TU 71 Figure 3.17 Father’s Occupation in DU 73 Figure 3.18 Father’s Occupation in TU 73 Figure 3.19 Mother’s Occupation in DU 75 Figure 3.20 Mother’s Occupation in TU 76 Figure 3.21 Family Income for Indian Students 78 Figure 3.22 Family Income of Iranian Students 78 Figure 3.23 Self Income in Indian Students 80 Figure 3.24 Self Income of Iranian Students 81 Figure 5.1 Path analysis for DU 141(i) Figure 5.2 Path analysis for TU 141(ii)

xiii Introduction

This study deals with the explanation of relationship between social capital and civic participation among the students of Delhi University (India) and Tehran

University (Iran). Nowadays, civic participation is become a buzzword in national and international development programs, and the increasing role of civic participation is evident from the growth of varieties of voluntary of government. It has received considerable emphasis in recent years. In particular, developing countries governments have promoted civic participation as part of their civil renewal agenda (Gilbertson, J. and Manning, J. 2006).

Around the world greater participation of citizens, clients, consumers and communities is becoming a feature of many governments and both public and private organizations. People are expecting to be able to involve and to have a voice in connection between public and state, and in the decisions of organizations that affect their interests. Many are concerned about low levels of knowledge and the relations with communities that reduce the trust in public institutions. In this regard, Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and Civil

Society Organizations (CSOs) are no longer to be restricted to the role of supporting the state through service delivery. Policy-makers across the world are coming to share the understanding that the active engagement and participation of communities and citizens in the policy-making process, as well as establishing suitable institutional arrangements for securing dialogue with communities, are key to effective policy-making and consequently, to achieve the internationally agreed upon development goals (Bertucci 2007).

It is believed that the growing of civic associations are key ingredients for strengthening civil society and enhancing democracy that provides persuasive theoretical support for these interventions. Thus, civic participation has become part of the formula to achieve social development goals. According to Burde

(2004) Supporting community associations through volunteering to deliver social services when a state remains weak, can significantly revise the relationships of the state to its citizens. Participation as a mechanism to promote development has achieved such prominence because it holds strong appeal for multiple actors. The act of including the voices and concerns of civilians in the projects that are meant to help them offer a counter weight to traditional top-down (multilateral, neoliberal) development approaches.

Despite the all aforementioned discussions about importance of participation of citizens in public issues, a close look at the existing literature on peoples' attitudes, values, and beliefs reveals some troubling trends on civic participation, such as a deep decline and apathy in self-reported interest in public affairs

(Youniss and Levine 2009: 4; Bromley et al. 2001: 200; Pattie et al. 2004: xvii).

Bromely and his colleagues (2001) argued that Britain faces a crisis of participation that is far deeper than any programme of constitutional reform is capable of reversing. The durability of democratic governing systems in every country depends on better understanding of elements that have been bearing on the greater participation of the citizens. Parts of these elements are related to the quality of our relationships, networks, and trust with others, formal and informal groups and governmental institutions; that are expressed as social capital.

Expanding and facilitating the communication networks and social ties, promotes the access level of individuals and groups to economic and social resources. These ties and communications, in their different forms act as a type of glue so that the elements present in the society would be connected together and cumulative functions such as social cooperation and social supports are facilitated. Presence of cumulative functions and solving the problems in a group form will result in generalizing the trust, decrease in social externalities, and increase in the motivation of citizens in involving into economic, social, and development programs in the society. The social capital school adds the insight that cooperative attitudes and behaviors (positive-sum oriented attitudes), including reciprocity facilitate the possibility of participation in civic life. In particular, membership in voluntary associations should increase face-to-face interactions between people and create a setting for the development of trust that is generalizable to the outside world (Almond and Verba 1963; Brehm and Rahn 1997; Putnam 1993). Colman

(1988) argues that social capital comes about through changes in relations among persons that facilitate action. Hence, social capital is regarded as something that promotes activities in the society. Putman‘s idea about social capital provides a description of social components that focuses on social networks, norms and trust:

―Social Capital refers to features of social organization, such as trust, norms and networks that can improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated actions (Putnam 1993:167)‖.

Some commentators see the civic participation as a component of social capital

(Hall, 1999), but we follow the Putnam‘s definition and regard it as an outcome of

3 social capital. The major assumption which underlying the relationship between social capital and civic participation is that citizens in a society in which have good source of social capital can make effective demands to governments and others through their involvement in civic society. Social capital theory argues that participants in the life of social networks unintentionally take up virtues such as tolerance, social trust, respect for social equality and the like. Interactions in social groups may also strengthen interpersonal accountability. This accountability implies answerability rather than institutionalized enforcement

(Goetz and Jenkins 2007: 65-85). The negative consequences of a bad account can be the loss of reputation in the society. It can be argued that the realization of the democratic effects of group linkages depends on the motivation of the civic participants. Social motivation, especially with long socialization, favors the development of a democratic culture. However, the social character of engagements in groups and the motivation of joining civilians make interpersonal accountability less likely. Scholarly evidences suggest that societies high on social capital have lower crime rates, more democratic government, more efficient economies, more successful schools and better public services (Coleman, 1988;

Kawachi et al., 1997; Knack and Keefer, 1997; Putnam, 1993; McLaren and

Baird, 2006; Tarrow, 1996). The problem is that societies rich on social capital are often more democratic and have more civic participation. Thus it is extremely difficult to know what cause is and what effect is in this tightly interwoven set of variables. Are societies democratic because their citizens are trusting, cooperative

4 and supportive? Or since citizens are able to trust and make a networks in civic life explain their civic participations (Inglehart, 1997).

The civic participation of young adults - whether in the form of joining community groups, volunteering to help neighbors, or leading grassroots efforts to gain civil rights - is important to the performance of democracy. It is also important for personal growth and identity formation during the transition to adulthood (Flanagan and Levine 2010). When young adults have a voice in community affairs, they can contribute their insights to public debates and their energies to addressing public problems. Herein, this study focuses on the relationship between social capital and civic participation among the young adults in Delhi and Tehran, in particular among the students of Delhi University and

Tehran University.

Lack of knowledge about the characteristics of social capital and motivation for civic participation among the students in both societies hinder the insights to gain proper outcomes for both countries' policy makers. In the mean time, lack of comprehensive information about the societies under study also has led to some failures in policy systems that concern the civic participation in both developing countries‘ capital. In order to capture comprehensive information about the societies and choosing proper methods of data analysis it is primarily necessary to conceptualize the social capital and civic participation themselves.

CHAPTER - 1 Social Capital and Civic Participation: Explaining the synergy between the concepts

1.2. What is Social Capital?

To explain the important role that social capital plays in the civic participation, it is important to have a conceptual understanding of the concept. Social capital is a relatively new term in social science. In the more specific sense in which it is currently expanded. In a relatively short period, it has had significant success: it has been increasingly used in many disciplines of the social sciences; it has been made the object of numerous studies and has been discussed in thousands of academic papers; and it has become the focus of surveys and policy initiatives.

Social capital represents one of the most popular metaphors in the current social science debates. However, despite the immense amount of research on it, its definition has remained elusive. There are many ways and approaches to conceptualize the social capital which leads to justifiable confusion about what constitutes "social capital". Perhaps the simplest way to understand social capital and its conceptualization is to consider a few examples relevant to the field of study in Delhi (India) and Tehran (Iran). For instance, we have some friends around us to contact whenever in need. We may go to work and communicate with colleagues. We may belong to an academic or social association or club that keeps us in touch with similar professionals outside our own work context. We may also belong to a political party. In our bonds with family life, we are part of a family, a neighborhood, a religious or ethnic community in which we have to visit

6 other people to share our problems, exchange our information, or worship together. These networks and bonds that keep people together are what we mean when we talk about social capital. In general, in this point of view the main assumption is that the more people you know, and the more you share a common outlook with others, the richer you are in social capital. In this context, social capital refers to the resources available in and through networks. These resources include information, ideas, job opportunities, emotional support, even goodwill, trust, and cooperation.

According to Baker (2000) the ―social‖ in social capital emphasizes that these resources are not personal assets and no single person owns them. Indeed, the resources reside in networks of relationships. In other words, social capital is generally perceived to be public goods (Putnam 2000) because, through its creation as a by-product of social relations, it benefits both the creator and bystander and because of its non-exclusivity - its benefits cannot be restricted and hence are available to all members of a community indiscriminately (Woolcock

2001). According to Baker (2000) the ―capital‖ emphasizes that social capital, like human capital or financial capital, is productive: It enables us to create value, get things done, achieve our goals, fulfill our missions in life, and make our contributions to the world.

Despite the concept of social capital proving to be as much a source of controversy and debate as the analysis of the sources and consequences of these phenomena, nonetheless, there is a broad degree of consensus and a number of influential definitions have been offered in the literature, notably by Bourdieu

(1985), Coleman (1988; 1990), Fukuyama (1995; 1999) and Putnam (1993;

1995a; 1995b; 2000).

Pierre Bourdieu made the first contemporary analysis of social capital in the

1980s. In ―The Forms of Capital‖ (1985), he differentiates between three forms of capital – economic, cultural and social. Bourdieu's concept of social capital is a means by which people get access through social connections to economic and cultural resources. Bourdieu (1985) defines social capital as:

―The aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to

possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized

relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition – or in other words,

to membership in a group – which provides each of its members with the

backing of the collectively-owned capital‖.

According to Bourdieu (1985), the concept of social capital contains two elements: the social relationship itself with its resources and the amount of quality of those resources. He argues that ‗the profits which accrue from membership in a group are the basis of the solidarity which makes them possible‘. Bourdieu investigates individual's social capital, which is explained by the size of his or her network, the resources, and how successfully the individuals can use these resources. At the same time, he views social capital as a form of collective asset possessed by the members of a network.

In the late 1980s James Coleman‘s theory of social capital became very influential, especially in sociology. Coleman (1988; 1990) focuses on the relationship between social capital and education. He regards social capital as a

8 source of educational advantage. Coleman (1988) provides the following definition of the term:

―Social capital is defined by its function. It is not a single entity but a

variety of different entities, with two elements in common: they all consist

of some aspect of social structures, and they facilitate certain action of

actors - whether persons or corporate actors - within the structure‖.

Coleman (1990) argues that social capital, like other form of capital is productive, making possible the achievement of certain ends that in its absence would not be possible. Like physical capital and human capital, social capital is not completely fungible but may be specific to certain activities. A given form of social capital that is valuable in facilitating certain actions may be useless or even harmful for others‖.

Coleman (1988) defines social capital in terms of two aspects: an aspect of social structure and the facilitation of actions in the structure, performed either by individuals or collectives. He regards social capital as a resource gained from relationships through processes such as obligations, expectations, trustworthiness, information channels, norms and effective sanctions.

Robert Putnam is the best known contemporary social capital scholar. Few scholarly books have generated so much discussion, acclaim and criticism in recent years as Putnam's Making Democracy Work (1993) and Bowling Alone

(2000). Putnam's (1995a) analysis on social capital mainly focuses on those forms concerning civic participation: ‗people‘s connection with the life of their community‘. According to Putnam there are high levels of social capital when a

9 community is characterized by rich associational life. Putnam (1993) gives the following definition of social capital:

―By analogy with notions of physical and human capital - tools and training

that enhance individual productivity - social capital refers to features of

social organization such as networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate

co-ordination and co-operation for mutual benefit‖ (p. 167).

The definition includes three conceptually different elements: networks, norms, and trust. Putnam (1995b) emphasizes dense networks in his description of social capital, which can be described as solidarity networks. The norms that he discusses are more specifically norms of generalized reciprocity, which occur when a community member helps another and eventually is rewarded by help in return though not necessarily from the original beneficiary. Social trust means having confidence in and trusting other people, even those people one does not know. According to Putnam (1993), the combined parts - networks, norms of reciprocity and trust - are closely interrelated and mutually reinforcing.

Francis Fukuyama is another well known contemporary social capital theorist.

Fukuyama (1995) stresses the necessity of trust, which he uses as a measure of social capital. He investigates the links between trust and economic success arguing that social capital represented by trust will be as important as physical capital in economic development. According to Fukuyama, economic success is influenced by the level of trust in the society: economies whose citizens have high levels of social capital will dominate the twenty-first century. Fukuyama

(1995) in Trust: the Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity, defines social

10 capital as the ability of people to work together for common purposes. Fukuyama

(1999) defines the concept as follows:

―Social capital is an instantiated informal norm that promotes cooperation

between two or more individuals‖.

Fukuyama (1995; 1999) investigates social capital on a macro or national level.

He divides nations into low-trust cultures and high-trust cultures. He considers that cultures with high levels of trust create more social capital and exhibit greater economic growth. In high-trust societies, there are wealthy economies organized around large corporations. By contrast, in low-trust societies businesses are family-owned. These businesses tend not to trust outsiders and choose family members instead of professional managers to run the enterprise.

1.3. Sociological Background of the concept

Theoretical footprints of social capital can be found in the works of founding fathers of contemporary social sciences, such as de Tocqueville and Durkheim, and in the writings of some of the earliest scholars. In fact, social capital's conceptualization in previous section simply highlighted the important role that community relationships play in individuals' life. Halpern (2005) states that current interest in the role that associational life plays in society dates back over hundred and seventy years ago in the observations of Alex de Tocqueville.

According to Halpern de Tocqueville argued that 'an association unites the energies of divergent minds and vigorously directs them toward a clearly indicated goal'. He also mentioned that through associational life, 'feelings and ideas are renewed, the heart enlarged, and the understanding developed only by

11 the reciprocal action of men upon one another'. This greatly facilitated social collaboration or facilitated the solution of collective action problems (Halpern

2005: 5).

The earliest sociological parallel works to today's social capital research was found in the works of Emile Durkheim, whose work on social solidarity, alienation, and anomie began to shape our understanding of how social relationships and cohesion influence in individuals' life (Berkman and Glass

2000). He argued that a nation can be maintained only if, between the state and individual, there is interposed a whole series of secondary groups near enough to the individuals to attract them strongly in their sphere of action and drag them into the general torrent of social life. In particular, Durkheim showed that suicide was far more common in societies and groups characterized by social dislocation and loose social bonds. In contrast, societies characterized by high levels of social bonds and social capital seemed able to protect their individual members from suicide through mutual moral support, which instead of throwing the individual on his own resources, leads him to share in the collective energy and supports his own when exhausted (Halpern 2005: 5). About a century before, the concept of social capital specifically was used by Lyda J. Hanifan, the superintendent of schools in West Virginia, in 1916 to explain the importance of community participation in enhancing school performance. Hanifan by invoking the concept of social capital stated that social capital included "those intangible substances

[that] count for most in the daily lives of people namely goodwill, fellowship,

12 sympathy, and social intercourse among the individuals and families who make up a social unit"( Woolcock and Narayan 2000: 228).

After Hanifan, the idea of social capital disappeared for several decades but was reinvented in the 1950s by a team of Canadian urban sociologists (Woolcok 2000:

26). Jane Jacobs (1961) in her book ―The Death and Life of Great American

Cities‖ applied the concept of social capital as social networks that could perform the role of social control. She believed that the depth of urban networks in old and mixed regions of the cities, establish a form of the social capital that is more responsible regarding the subjects related to environment health and hygiene, non- existence of crimes and street offences, and other decisions related to promotion of quality of life in comparison to the institutional and official authorities responsible for hygiene, security and disciplinary affairs (Fukuyama 1999).

Therefore, Jacobs considers the local resources in shaping the social capital and also their role in promoting the social control. None of these writers, interestingly, cited earlier works on the subject, but all used the same umbrella term to encapsulate the vitality and significance of community ties. Fukuyama (1999) also stated that the work of the economist, Glen Loury, along with the sociologist, Ivan

Light, working in the 1970s who applied the term social capital to analyze the problems of inner-city development. The seminal research by Coleman (1988,

1990) on education and by Putnam (1993, 1995) on civic participation and institutional performance, however, have provided the inspiration for most of the current works, which have since coalesced around studies in nine primary fields: families and youth behavior; schooling and education; community life (virtual and

13 civic); work and organizations; democracy and governance; collective action; public health and environment; crime and violence; and economic development

(Woolcock 2000: 27).

In James Coleman's view, the activists are interested in the events that are controlled by other activists; and this in turn establishes social relationships that are somehow stable in the length of time. Coleman considers social capital in the framework of the benefits earned through facilitated social relationships; and believes it is an element for promotion and development of life along with other capitals such as human and physical capitals. In fact, he states that social capital is defined by its function. It is not a single entity, but a variety of different entities, having two characteristics in common: they all consist of some aspect of a social structure, and they facilitate certain actions of individuals who are within the structure' (Coleman 1994: 302). The experimental support for Coleman‘s views is a study he has made, in the name of equality in education opportunities. In

Coleman‘s viewpoint, parents could transfer the necessary skills and potentials to their children by facilitating and strengthening their relations with them (social capital) and establish a human capital in the children in order to be influential in their educational progress (Coleman 1988).

In a study by Robert Putnam (1993) conducted after political reforms in Italy, he was trying to answer to the following issue: Despite the specific and macro policies of the central government, why the democratic institutions in the north have more efficiently than the south and what is the element that creates this difference in the economic development of north and south in Italy. To clarify this

14 issue, he considers the subject of social capital. In his viewpoint, while physical capital refers to physical objects and human capital refers to the properties of individuals; social capital refers to connections among individuals, social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them. In that sense social capital is closely related to what some have called civic virtue.

The difference is that social capital calls attention to the fact that civic virtue is most powerful when embedded in a sense network of reciprocal social relations.

A society of many virtuous but isolated individuals is not necessarily rich in social capital.

The concept of social capital is developed by Pierre Bourdieu in the 1970s and early 1980s. According to Siisiainen (2000) the theoretical roots of Bourdieu's conception about social capital should be searched rather in the sociology of conflict and structuralism than in the sociology of integration and functionalism.

Bourdieu's approach is made from the point of view of actors engaged in struggle in pursuit of their interests. His concept in social capital is connected with his theoretical ideas on class. According to him concept of social capital puts the emphasis on conflicts and the power function (social relations that increase the ability of an actor to advance her/his interests). In his view social capital has two components: first, a resource that is connected with group membership and social networks. The volume of social capital is possessed by a given agent depends on the size of the network of connections that he can effectively mobilize. ‌The second characteristic of social capital is that it is based on mutual Cognition and recognition(Siisiainen 2000).

Fukuyama has also paid attention to the issue of social capital. In his view, social capital is a set of social norms that results in promotion of the level of cooperation among the members of society and reduction of the level of the expenses for exchanges and communications (Fukuyama 1999). In Fukuyama‘s (2002) viewpoint, the domain and scope of the effects of these norms in the micro level up to macro level are changeable, that is the exchange of ideas between two friends up to the exchange of ideas between countries. In his model, in order to study social capital, in addition to common norms and values he considers independent variables as group internal consolidation, reciprocal trust within the group, effective relationship with other groups, radius of trust, and group consolidation. And indicates that in order to strengthen the social capital, just the bonding social capital or limited resources are not sufficient; and the bridging social capital or linking social capital resources shall be considered as well.

Cullen and Whiteford (2001) noted that in World Bank's researchers view social capital refers to the institutions, relationships, and norms that shape the quality and quantity of a society's social interactions. Social capital is not just the sum of the institutions which underpin a society – it is the glue that holds them together.

In the World Bank, report Woolcock and Narayan have dealt with the subject of social capital in many studies. In order to study this construct, they have applied the perspective of synergy. On the basis of this perspective, they study social capital from three forms of bonding, bridging, and linking social capital (Healy et al 2002). The bonding social capital refers to social relationships that are consolidated on similarity and sincerity. In this form of social capital, emphasis is

16 made on limited personal resources such as familial relationships, neighborhood, and friendship ties. A number of research documents acknowledge that this type of social capital affects the civil society by promoting reciprocal understanding and mutual coordination (Cattell 2001). This type of social capital could have two essential applications; first, to strengthen the social unity like social glue; and next, strengthen the special transactions in bonding social capital. Bridging social capital is referred to communications that instead of depending on personal sincerity and common identity among individuals; it depends on common interests. Non-homogenous bridging social capital networks refer to communications that are indicated by Granovetter (1973) as weak ties. Main appearances of this dimension of social capital could be observed in the social networks and membership in the non-local associations and groups (Healy et al

2002). Strengthening the connection to external resources and facilitating diffusion of data are the two main outputs of connecting or bridging social capital.

The linking social capital refers to relationships among societies and individuals with a formal power; and in general refers to communications among the individuals and groups that occupy different positions in the structure of power

(Stone and Huges 2001). In contrast to the other two previous types, this type of capital is solely referring to vertical relationships. The main output of this capital is seen in the accessibility of individuals and groups to different government, non- government, commercial, and trade sections.

But more recently, some scholars defined the social capital that has adopted a more institutional tone, and they attempted to articulate the value that social

17 structures contribute to organizations. For example, Fountain (1998) defines social capital as the institutional effectiveness of inter-organizational relationships and cooperation, horizontally among similar firms in associations, vertically in supply chains, and multidirectional links to sources of technical knowledge, human resources, and public agencies. Fountain argues that this form of capital is as powerful as physical and human capital, and is the "stock" that is created when a group of organizations develop the ability to work together for mutually productive gains.

1.4. What is civic participation?

Civic participation, civic engagement, and civic involvement are used interchangeably in the literature but are not the same thing in the sense. In this study we consider that civic participation is having broader motif, encompassing civic engagement and civic involvement. Civic participation is a term that is both expansive and contested. As a point of departure, for a working concept that is both credible and useful, the Michael Delli Carpini‘s is defined the term as follows:

―Individual and collective actions designed to identify and address issues of

public concern‖ (American Psychological Association 2010).

This definition says more than appears: First, it suggests that civic participation is about behavior. Although one‘s attitudes and beliefs are potential motivations and consequences of civic participation, participation itself has to do with action.

Second, civic participation is purposive and conscious. One‘s actions are designed to do something; civic participation does not occur by accident. Finally, civic

18 participation is public. It can occur in either individual or collective settings but is directed at issues of public—not private—concern.

As the current study focuses on youth civic participation among the university students, it is defined by Elrich (2000) as follows:

―Youth civic participation is defined as working to make a difference in the

civic life of one‘s community. It also involves developing the combination

of knowledge, skills, values, and motivation to make that difference‖.

These activities enrich the lives of youths and are socially beneficial to the locality where they live. Civic participation among the students is the ability of students to participate actively in the public life of their communities. This is demonstrated by the ability of students too:

 Connect their learning to the social, civic, ethical, and environmental issues

of the larger community

 Exhibit interest in and knowledge of contemporary matters of public

importance

 Identify the civic and ethical responsibilities of people in specific fields and

professions

 Engage in public discourse and exercise civic imagination

 Acquire skills for participatory democracy by completing a civic

experiential learning project (service learning, community-based research,

or social action project)

Civic participation is acting upon a heightened sense of responsibility to one‘s community. This includes a wide range of activities, including developing civic

19 sensitivity, participation in building civil society, and benefitting the common good. Through civic participation individuals – as citizens of their community and their nations – are empowered as agents of positive social change for a more democratic world. Civic participation involves one or more of the following:

 Learning from others and environment to develop informed perspectives

on social issues.

 Recognizing and appreciating human diversity and commonality.

 Behaving and working through controversy, with civility.

 Participating actively in public life, public problem solving, and

community service.

 Developing empathy, ethics, values, and sense of social responsibility. Civic Participation is community involvement, volunteering, active membership in a group, participating in fundraising, and board membership.

1.5. Dimensions of Civic Participation

Bobek et al (2009) identified four interrelated dimensions of civic participation as follows:

 Civic Action, participation in activities such as volunteering or service-

learning to help better the community

 Civic Commitment or Duty, the willingness to make positive contributions

to society

 Civic Skills, the ability to be involved in civil society, politics, and

democracy

 Social Cohesion, a sense of reciprocity, trust, and bonding together

According to the aforementioned dimensions, civic participation involves working to make a difference in the civic life of one‘s community and developing the combination of knowledge, skills, values and motivation to make that difference.

It means promoting the life quality in a community, through both political and non-political processes. Civic participation includes both paid and unpaid forms of political activism, environmentalism, and community and national service

(Michelsen et al, 2002).

Stern and Seifert (2009) suggest other dimensions for civic participation. It contributes the political participation, public voice, and cognitive participation.

One of the common dimensions of civic participation is political participation.

Zukin et al (2006) define political participation as ―activity aimed at influencing government policy or affecting the selection of public officials‖. Civic

Participation in political sense is regular voting in elections, persuading others to vote, displaying buttons, signs and stickers, making campaign contributions, volunteering for candidates or other political organizations, or being a candidate in an election. In this view it is having a political voice by contacting officials, demonstrating or approaching the media. Another dimension of civic participation is public voice. Public voice refers to the ways citizens express their views on public issues, such as writing letters to the editor, engaging in public dialogues, participating in e-mail campaigns, or signing petitions. The third dimension of civic participation is cognitive participation. Cognitive participation refers to paying attention to public affairs and politics, such as following the news or talking politics.

Pattie et al. (2003) in their analysis of patterns of participation revealed three dimensions of civic participation in modern Britain: individualistic participation; contact participation; and collective participation. Three alternative theories of participation were examined to account for these dimensions: general incentives; social capital; and civic voluntarism.

Using the activities which Putnam (2000a; 1993; 2000b) highlighted as a guide,

Job (2006) identified four dimensions of civic participation: leisure activity, volunteering activity, political activity, and involvement with the media.

1.6. Relation between Social Capital and Civic Participation?

People in some places have more participation in the public issues than people in other places. This is not merely because of their genetic features, the physical environment or their socioeconomic status. It also reflects the fabric of society– the way in which communities are set up and people live (McKenzie and

Harpham 2006: 12). Proponents of social capital argue that this phenomenon is highly important to improve different dimensions of civic participation. Eva Cox

(1998) asserts that our sense of public good must be in the bonds we have within families, amongst friends, workmates, neighbours, and the broader social system.

As social beings, the capacities we have to live and work in groups are intrinsic to our life. It has long been recognized that motivations accessed through social relationships can be important energizers of civilians to participate in public issues. For example, Putnam (2000) finds evidence of positive associations between civic participation and social capital in terms of level of civic activities.

Social capital facilitates community by enhancing individuals' opportunity for

22 social belonging. But social capital does much more than this. Indeed, Putnam also argues that social capital improves ―the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated actions‖ (Putnam 1993: 167). Putnam (2000) argues that social capital allows citizens to resolve collective problems more easily. People often might be better off if they cooperate with each doing her/his share. Social norms and the networks enforce them provide such a mechanism. Putnam believes that social capital greases the wheels that allow communities to advance smoothly.

Where people are trusting to each other, and where they are subject to repeated interactions with fellow citizens, everyday business and social transactions are less costly. He also argues that the networks that constitute social capital also serve as conduits for the flow of helpful information that facilitates achieving our goals. Finally, he suggested that people whose lives are rich in social capital cope better with traumas and fight illness more effectively (Putnam 2000). Carpenter and his colleagues (2004) also suggested that the expansion of positive social capital, especially for communities with few economic and political resources, consequently results in enhanced economic and political performance and this performance will motivate the civilians to do more participate to improvement of the society.

According to Burde (2004) horizontal social ties can support the society when the vertical social capital is weak. That is, supporting community associations through volunteering to deliver social services when a state remains weak, can significantly revise the relationships of the state to its citizens. Social capital as a mechanism to promote the coordinated actions has achieved such prominence

23 because it holds strong appeal for multiple actors. The act of including the voices and concerns of citizens in the projects is meant to help them offer a counter weight to traditional top-down governing approaches.

1.7. Model of study

During recent years, the research for the potential factors affecting social development and its positive outcomes like civic participation has received much attention by social scientists. Within this context, researches about social capital have gained considerable prominence (James 2009; Dekker 2007; Ferguson 2006;

Requena 2003; Putnam 2000; Woolcock and Narayan 2000; Uphoff 1999). A broad consensus exists regarding the importance of social capital for civic participation. The theoretical foundation of the concept of social capital is still in a nascent phase, and there is much debate about its definition, creation, and utility as well as its role in social policy, public policy and modernization strategies

(Karner 2000: 2638). Essential to social capital is the building of social relationships which allow people to work together to produce positive outcomes for individuals and for communities. However, social capital can have negative outcomes (Portes and Sensenbrenner 1993). Putnam advocates the building of these relationships through civic engagement and associational membership as espoused in the Tocquevillean perspective (Farr 2004; Maloney, Smith and Stoker

2000; Putnam 1993). Moreover, as a theoretical concept, social capital holds great promise for furthering the sociological understanding of social action. Clearly, there is no single conceptualization of social capital, and but it is possible to categorize current conceptualization into two major categories. Uphoff (1999)

24 distinguishes between structural and cognitive social capital. Structural social capital involves various forms of social networks and communications that contribute to co-operation and civic participation. Cognitive social capital includes norms, values, attitudes, beliefs, shared understanding and those variables that hold people together. Structural and cognitive social capitals are complimentary; structures help translate norms and beliefs into well coordinated goal-orientated behaviour. Drawing from these structural and cognitive dimensions of social capital it is possible to conclude that there is no single construct called social capital, but rather, social capital can be understood as a composite of the central idea of social capital.

At the same time, Putnam (1993) has given a new perspective on this context. He suggests that the social capital model claims that joining and taking part in local organisations helps foster a sense of trust in others and motivate the more participate in social and voluntary activities outside of the home. He took a cultural or relational perspective to show that civic participation and associational membership is created through social capital in particular and social capital in general (1993: 171). In other words he suggests that social trust as one of most important components of social capital is a precondition for civic participation.

Putnam‘s view of social capital in his book Making Democracy Work builds on

Coleman‘s work but is narrower in that it focuses on specific aspects of social interactions. He states that the norms of generalized reciprocity and trust, and networks as ingredients of social capital reduce the information costs of the trustworthiness of their citizens and foster cooperation and civic participation.

Emphasizing on incorporating different dimensions of social capital and its recognition of the positive and negative outcomes can generate civic participation components in societies. This view attempts to integrate the compelling work emerging from the cognitive and structural social capital. This perspective endeavours to identify the nature and extent of a community's social relations and formal institutions, and the interaction between them; to develop institutional strategies based on these social relations; and to determine how the positive manifestations of social capital - cooperation, trust, and institutional efficiency- can offset sectarianism, isolationism, and corruption. As conceptual definition of social capital and civic participation constructs, social capital conceptually refers to the features of social organization, such as trust, norms and networks that can improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated actions (Putnam

1993:167) While, civic participation is defined as working to make a difference in the civic life of one‘s community. It also involves developing the combination of knowledge, skills, values, and motivation to make that difference (Adler and

Goggin 2005).

Following the aforementioned conceptualization and theoretical framework of the constructs the theoretical model could be depicted in Figure 1.1. Based on this model social capital was defined in a broad manner, including both cognitive and structural forms. Four indicators of social capital were distinguished as independent variables: Network, local solidarity, social trust (as cognitive social capital), and social communication (as structural social capital). In while, civic participation was measured by six indicators: Media and news, Elections and

26 participation, Satisfaction of life, associations of Activity, Political equality, Civic activity. Following the theoretical model showed in figure 1.1 two primary and four secondary hypotheses are proposed as follows:

Figure .1.1: Theoretical model for social capital and civic participation

Social Communication Nettwork Sociiall Sociiall Trrustt Social Communication Solliidarriitty

Structural Social Capital Cogniittiive Sociiall Capiittall Structural Social Capital

Ciiviic Parrttiiciipattiion‌‌

Media and news Elections and participation

Satisfaction of life Associations of Activity Political equality

Civic activity

Leisure Activity

Volunteering Activity

Political Activity 27 Involvement with the Media

CHAPTER-TWO Study Area and Setting of the Research Design

2.1. Introduction

The current political climate reflects the growing significance of civic participation among youth specially students. In particular, developing countries governments have promoted civic participation as part of their civil renewal agenda (Gilbertson, J. and Manning, J. 2006).

Recently, many scholars and policy advocates have focused on how universities prepare democratic citizens. This focus reflects concern regarding the health of democracy and, in particular, young people’s declining civic participation (Kahne et al 2006). Galston (2001) suggested that youth voting rates, engagement in community‐based efforts for social change, or interest in discussing political issues, the last several decades have seen relatively steady and sizable declines in the United States. The durability of democratic governing systems in every country depends on better understanding of elements that have been bearing on the greater participation of the citizens. Parts of these elements are related to the quality of our relationships with others, formal and informal groups and governmental institutions; that are expressed as social capital. These ties and communications, in their different forms act as a type of glue so that the elements present in the society would be connected together and cumulative functions such as social cooperation, social support are facilitated. Presence of cumulative functions and solving the issues and problems in a group form will result in generalizing the trust, decrease in social externalities, and increase in the motivation of citizens in involving into economic, social, and development

28 programs in the society. The social capital school adds the insight that cooperative attitudes and behavior, including reciprocity facilitate the possibility of participation in civic life. The civic participation of students—whether in the form of joining community groups, volunteering to help neighbors, or leading grassroots efforts to gain civil rights—is important to the performance of democracy. It is also important for personal growth and identity formation during the transition to adulthood (Flanagan and Levine 2010). When young students have a voice in community affairs, they can contribute their insights to public debates and their energies to addressing public problems. However, given the fundamental importance of civic participation in a democratic society, attention to the ways universities can prepare citizens for a democratic society is warranted. In other words, educational institutions have potential of preparing an environment to get experience and improve the youth’s skills and dispositions to support the civic society. Gibson & Levine (2003) stated that educational practices and contexts promote the skills, knowledge, and dispositions that support a democratic society. Print and Coleman (2003) suggested that especially as a way universities can promote norms of civic commitment, social trust, and knowledge of social networks that support the development of civic participation. Therefore, it is expected that both the Delhi University and Tehran University as leading and premier higher educational institution of both the developing countries of India and Iran play an important role in adding the stock of social capital and, as a result, foster the civic participation and prepare democratic citizens.

2.2. Delhi

2.2.1. Historical Background

The recorded history of Delhi starts from Mahabharata era of Pandavas and

Kauravas when it was called Indraprastha, the first name of Delhi. The origin of its name is narrated to a king called Raja Dhillu who ruled the area for 14 years at the beginning of Christian era. The famous Iron Pillar, now in the vicinity of

Qutub, was named as Lal Kot and Delhi of that time was also named as Lal Kot.

The Tomars King Anangpal continued to rule Delhi till the middle of 12th

Century when they were thrown out by Chauhans. The greatest ruler of the

Chauhan Dynasty was Prithvi Raj. Mohammad Gauri invaded Delhi and Prithvi

Raj Chauhan was defeated and killed in the battle by Mohammad Gauri, the first king of Slave Dynesty. Mohammad Gauri was succeeded by Qut-bud-din who started the construction of Qutab Minar in 1200 AD but could not complete it. His son-in-law, Iltumish, could complete it during 1211-1236 AD. Jalal-ud-din Khilji took over the reign of Delhi by 1290 AD by making an end of Slave Dynasty.

Then Delhi is ruled by Tuglaq Dynasty upto 1413 AD. Thereafter, The Sayyed

Dynasty ruled the Delhi by 1450 AD. Bahlol Lodhi, the Governor of Punjab, took over the reign of Delhi by staging a coup and laid the foundation of Lodhi

Dynasty. Ibrahim Lodhi was the last ruler of Lodhi Dynasty during 1517-1526

AD. Zahir-ud-din Muhammad Babur defeated Ibrahim Lodhi in the first battle of

Panipat in 1526 AD and took over the reign of Delhi on 24thApril, 1526. The

Mughal Dynasty ruled Delhi for the maximum longest period except the period of

1540-1555 AD when Sher Shah Suri took over the reign of Delhi from Humayun.

Akbar shifted the capital of his Kingdom from Delhi to Agra. Shahjahan shifted back the capital to Delhi with the construction of Shahjahanabad, Lal Quila and

Jamia Masjid. Aurangzeb ascended the throne and ruled Delhi for the maximum period of 50 years between 1658-1707 AD. After Aurangzeb, the Mughal Dynasty could not provide any strong and capable ruler to Delhi. Britishers came to the help of Shah Alam in 1803. Lord Lake led the British Army and defeated the

Marathas in a battle fought near Humayun Tomb. Shah Alam became the pensioner of the British. He was succeeded by Akbar Shah. Bahadur Shah II, better known as ―Zafar‖, succeeded Akbar Shah in 1857. Britishers took over the reign of Delhi and last Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar was deported to

Rangoon as a punishment for taking lead role in first freedom movement for India in 1857. Delhi become the capital of British India in 1911. New Delhi was designed by Edward Lutyens in 1912-13. Delhi became a Union Territory without

Legislature after Independence. It acquired the status of National Capital Territory

(with Legislature) w.e.f. January, 1992. (Economic Survey of Delhi, 2007-2008)

2.2.2. Location and Geography

Delhi is located in northern India between the latitudes of 28˚-24′-17″ and 28˚-

53′-00″ north and longitudes of 76˚- 50′- 24″ and 77˚- 20′- 37″ east (see Figure

2.1). Delhi shares its border with the states of Uttar Pradesh Ragastaan and

Haryana. Delhi was a small town in 1901 with a population 0.4 million. Delhi's

Population started increasing after it became the capital of British of India in

1911. During the partition of the country, a large number of people migrated from

Pakistan and settled in Delhi. Migration into the city continued even after

31 partition. According to the Economic Survey of Delhi (2007-2008) recorded

138.51 lakh people in Delhi with 3.85% annual growth rate and 47.02% decennial growth rate during 1991-2001 (Ibid, 2007-2008).

2.2.3. The Cultural and Political Significance

As the country's capital, with vibrant trade and excellent employment opportunities, Delhi has attracted people from all over the country and its population today reflects the characteristics of almost every region. Delhi truly reflects the wealth and diversity of India where in diverse religions, languages, customs and cultures co- exist in splendid plural harmony. Religious, cultural and social functions of different socio-cultural groups have transformed Delhi into a city of festivals.

Delhi is home to the President of India and houses the Central Government. At the same time, Delhi has an elected State government headed by the Chief Minister.

The city is overwhelmingly urban—with less than 7 per cent of its 14 million people living in rural areas. It attracts hundreds of migrants every day who make

Delhi their home. Over the years Delhi has established an extensive network of educational institutions offering among the finest education within India (Ibid,

2007-2008).

2.3. The City of Education

Delhi is well known for its high educational standards and housing world class academic and boarding facilities. It has some of the most reputed institutions known across the globe especially with reference to the quality of education imparted owing to which, it is known as one of the most preferred education

32 destinations worldwide in particular in Asia, for students who seek to pursue higher studies in various streams and disciplines. Most of the renowned universities in India are located in the capital city of Delhi and are famous for their teaching abilities and research techniques. Delhi has several top universities recognized as centers of excellence to its credit, viz. Jamia Hamdard established in 1906, University of Delhi established in 1922, Jamia Millia Islamia found in

1935, IIT Delhi established in 1961, and JNU which is established in 1969 and many more.The universities in Delhi offer under graduate and post graduate courses in varied disciplines ranging from Arts, Science, Environmental Science,

Medicine Agriculture, Technology, Architecture, and so forth. While, most of the

Universities in Delhi follow the same methodology of education, a few do offer distance learning programs besides the regular classroom courses for both under graduate and post graduate levels. According to the Economic Survey of Delhi

Report (2007-2008) there are 176 degree colleges in Delhi. Of these, 86 colleges are affiliated with Delhi University and the remaining 88 colleges are affiliated with G.G.S.I.P. University. These include Delhi Government sponsored 28 Delhi

University Colleges, of which 12 are fully funded by Delhi Government. Delhi also has five Universities, including one Open University; eight deemed universities and two Institutes of National Importance. Delhi has 43 AICTE approved Technical Education Institutions at the Degree/Post Graduation level affiliated to Delhi University or GGSIP University. In the Government and private sector 19 institutes are offering Diploma level courses. Out of which, 18 institutes are affiliated to Board of Technical Education, Delhi and one is affiliated to Delhi

University. 73 Institutes (18 ITI's in Govt. sector and 55 ITI's in Private Sector) are offering certificate level courses affiliated to BTE/SCVT/NCVT.

2.4. Delhi University

The University of Delhi (or simply DU) is a leading and premier university which is famous for its high standards, reputed faculty members, and world class facilities, and the university draws students from all over India and from across the world. DU has a nationwide reputation that attracts a large number of students and scholars from all corners of the country. It has been ranked 371 in the whole world in the year 2010 by the THES - QS world universities ranking. The university has two campuses, namely north campus and south campus in the northern and southern part of the city respectively.

The Delhi University which is situated in Delhi (India) came into being as a result of an act passed by the Central Legislative Assembly in 1922. When the university had first commenced its operations it had started out with a modest 3 colleges operating under its management. The three colleges, St. Stephens

College, Hindu College and Ramjas College, together comprised of around 750 students and two faculty sections related to the arts and science departments.

These were the first few colleges in the area. In the year 1933, the Delhi

University campus was shifted to the Viceregal Lodge Estate which became its permanent residence till date. Even today the main campus of the Delhi

University, which includes the central administrative offices, examination offices and the sports complex, is situated at the Viceregal Lodge Estate. The University of Delhi has expanded into one of the largest in the whole of India with over 14

34 faculties and 86 academic departments. With over 79 colleges the university draws more than 2, 20,000 students from all over the country. In the first half of the seventies, the University of Delhi started a new executive model with a multi- campus system. This was aimed at relieving the pressure of the rising number of applicants to the campus. The start was made with the opening of the South

Campus in 1973 with the commencement of postgraduate programs in the certain departments of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences. There are two more campuses in the offering. While the West Campus will focus on Engineering and

Technology, the East Campus will be centre around the University College of

Medical Science. The university grants commission or the UGC awarded 6

Centres of Advanced Studies to the DU in the fields of Physics, Chemistry,

Botany, Zoology, Economics and Sociology which have now developed into centers of excellence in instruction and research. Already blessed with15 libraries over and above the individual college libraries the university has hastened information dissemination with the completion of the fiber-optic networks in the

North and South Campus.

2.5. Tehran

2.5.1. Historical Background

The origin of the name Tehran is unknown. Tehran was well known as a village in the 9th century, but was less well-known than the city of Rhages (Ray) which was flourishing nearby in the early era. Najm al-Din Razi known as Dayya gives the population of Rayy as 500,000 before the Mongol invasion. In the 13th century, following the destruction of Ray by Mongols, many of its inhabitants escaped to

Tehran. In some sources of the early era, the city is mentioned as "Rhages's

Tehran". The city is later mentioned in Hamdollah Mostowfi's Nuz'hat al-Qulub

(written in 1340) as a famous village.

There is also a shrine there, dedicated to commemorate Princess Shahr Banu, eldest daughter of the last ruler of the Sassanid Empire. She gave birth to Ali Zayn al Abidin, the fourth holy Imam of the Shia faith. This was through her marriage to Husayn ibn Ali, the grandson of Muhammad, the prophet of Islam. However, some sources attribute the shrine to the goddess of water and fertility, Anahita, claiming it was renamed in Islamic times to protect it from any possible harm after the conversion of Iranians to Islam.

Don Ruy Gonzáles de Clavijo, a Castilian ambassador, was probably the first

European to visit Tehran, stopping in July 1404, while on a journey to Samarkand

(now in Uzbekistan) the capital of Timur, who ruled Iran at the time. At this time, the city of Tehran was unwalled.

In the early of 18th century, Karim Khan Zand ordered a palace, and a government office to be built in Tehran, possibly to declare the city his capital, but later moved his government to Shiraz. Tehran finally became the capital of

Iran in 1795, when the Qajar king Agha Mohammad Khan was crowned in the city. It remains the capital to this day.

View of Mount Damavand as seen from the Dizin ski resort.

In the 1920s and 30s, the city essentially was started from scratch under the rule of the Shah of Iran, Reza Shah Pahlavi. Reza Shah believed that ancient buildings such as large parts of the Golestan Palace, Takieh-ye Dowlat, the Toopkhaneh

Square, the city fortifications and the old citadel among others should not be part of a modern city. They were systematically destroyed and modern buildings with pre-islamic Iranian style, such as the National Bank, Police Headquarter,

Telegraph Office and Military Academy were built in their place. The Tehran

Bazaar was divided in half and many historic buildings were destroyed in order to build wide straight avenues in the capital. Many examples of Persian Gardens also became targets to new construction projects.

1. During World War II, British and Soviet troops entered the city. Tehran

was the site of the Tehran Conference in 1943, attended by U.S. President

Franklin D. Roosevelt, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and

Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin.

2. In the 1960s and 70s Tehran was rapidly developing under the reign of

Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi. Modern buildings altered the face of

Tehran and ambitious projects were envisioned for the following decades.

The majority of these projects were continued after the Islamic Revolution

1979 when Tehran's urbanization has reached it's peak, and new

government started many other new projects like Milad Tower.

3. During the 1980–88 Iran–Iraq War, Tehran was the scene of repeated Scud

missile attacks and air strikes.

2.5.2. Location and Geography

According to the geographic alignment Tehran is located between the latitudes of

35º, 35´ and 35º, 45´ north and longitudes 51º, 17´ and 51º, 33´ east (see Figure

2.2) in the Central Iranian Plateau and is bordered by the Alborz mountains in the

37 north and by the Kavir desert in the south with an area of about 800sq/m. Today

Tehran marks a gigantic Iranian metropolis in approximately equal distance from eastern (Afghanistan) and western (Turkey, Iraq) boarders in the Middle East.

Representing all of Iran´s urban and pastoral nomadic population Tehran defines the politically and social forefront of Iran. Tehran as capital of Iran and Tehran province with a population of 8,429,807 is largest city of Iran and Western Asia.

2.5.3. Universities in Tehran

Tehran as capital city of Iran has a significant network of public, state, and private affiliated universities offering degrees in higher education. Public and state-run universities of Tehran are under the supervision of Ministry of Science, Research and Technology and Ministry of Health and Medical Education.

The history of the establishment of modern and western style academic universities in Tehran dates back to 1851 with the establishment of Darolfonoon – which was found as a result of the effort of the royal vizier Mirza Taghi Khan

Amir Kabir – aimed at training and teaching Iranian students in many fields of science and technology. By the 1890s Darolfonoon was competing with other prominent institutions of modern learning namely the Military College of Tehran and College of Political Sciences.

In the medical field, it was Samuel M. Jordan who first founded a professional medical school in Tehran and established the American Medical College in

Tehran. The school received a permanent charter from the Board of Regents of the

State University of New York in 1932. In the field of school teachers training,

Tarbiate Moallem University was stablished in 1919 as "The Central Teachers

Institute", it was changed to the "Higher Institute for Tarbiat Moalem" in 1928, gained collegiate status in 1963, and finally gained university status in 1967.

Then, in the field of communication technology, Khajeh Nasir Toosi University as first technical university of Iran in 1928 is established. The second technical university of Tehran, University of Science and Technology, was founded in 1929 to train engineers. However it was back in 1928 that Tehran’s first modern comprehensive university, that is Tehran University, was proposed by Iranian prominent physicist, Prof. Mahmoud Hessaby, and was designed by a French architect, Andre Godard, and built in 1934. By the end of the first Pahlavi period,

Tehran University was still the only modern comprehensive university in the country. The Shah, the second Pahlavi king, initiated projects to build universities modeled after American schools in Tehran and other cities of Iran. Thus, in the field of Social Sciences and Art, Allameh Tabatabai University (1956), Amirkabir

University (1958) known as The Mother of Engineering Universities in Iran,

Shahid Beheshti University (1959) as second comprehensive university in Tehran,

Al-Zahra University (1964) as first comprehensive girls university, Sharif

University of Technology (1966) as the most prestigious technical universities in the country, and finally Iran University of Medical Sciences (1974) as one of the largest medical universities of Iran, were modeled based on American higher educational institutes. After the revolution in 1979, Tarbiat Modares University, as the only exclusively post graduate university of Iran, was established in 1982.

Hereunto, Tehran University is largest university of Iran with over 45000 students

39 including the medical colleges' students (Retrieved from: http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/List_of_colleges_and_universities_in_Tehran).

2.5.4. Tehran University

The University of Tehran, also known as Tehran University and UT, is one of the oldest universities and symbol of higher education in Iran, ranking in the top 500 global universities. The University of Tehran was inaugurated in the winter of

1934. Ali Asghar Hekmat, the Minister of Science, became the first Dean of the

University. Its library and information services facilities are the largest in the country. Based on its historical, socio-cultural and political pedigree and research and teaching profile, it has the pseudonym of "The Mother University of Iran".

Located in Tehran, the university is among the most prestigious in Iran and the

Middle East, and among the first options of applicants in the annual nationwide entrance exam for top Iranian universities. The school also admits students from all over the world and is known for its wide-ranging fields of research. UT offers

111 bachelor degree programs, 177 masters degree programs, and 156 Ph.D. degree programs. The academic staff of the University consists of 1,650 full‐time faculty members and several hundred part time and adjunct professors and affiliated members. The University has 19,000 undergraduate and 13,000 graduate students. The University has 6 colleges with a total of 39 faculties and 120 departments at its 7 campuses located in the cities of Tehran, Qom and Karaj as well as its Kish International Campus (in Kish Island). The University of Tehran, as the main research University of the Country, offers more than 300 post graduate programs. Fifteen percent of the country’s Centers of Excellence, as

40 recognized by the government, are located at the University of Tehran, which along with more than 40 research centers ensure UT’s commitment to research.

Over 3,500 laboratories are active in these centers and in the faculties. In addition, the University of Tehran publishes more than 50 scientific journals, some of which have the ISI index.

2.6. Research Design

This study employs follows Positivistic methodology and the correlational quantitative research design to test the relationship between social capital and civic participation among the students of Delhi University (India) and Tehran

University (Iran). In order to conduct this research positivistic methodology and survey method is used which are explained in details as follows.

2.6.1. Positivistic methodology

Positivistic methodology is involved in this study. Positivism is the most widely practiced social science approach, especially in North America. Positivists believe that different observers looking at the same facts will get the same results if they carefully specify their ideas, precisely measure the facts, and follow the standards of objective research (Neuman 2007: 37).

Positivistic methodology takes for granted the nature of the real world and reserves all its doubts for the nature of the evidence about it; problems within positivism are problems of measurement – how to measure the real world most accurately – rather than about its ontology. In positivistic sociology while scientific epistemology arguments tend to the 'social facts' about societies or

41 social groups and factual descriptions of social institutions and processes, the ontology arguments tend to the worldview in terms of objective factors(ibid: 176).

Finally, The positivist paradigm is no more than this: the study of social reality utilizing the conceptual framework, the techniques of observation and measurement, the instruments of mathematical analysis, and the procedures of inference of the natural sciences.( Corbetta,2003).

2.6.2. Sampling Method and Sample Size

Usually, the population in majority of the researches is too large and it is infeasible and too costly for the researcher to attempt to survey the whole population to get their opinions and views. Therefore, it is necessary to clearly define the target population. There is no absolute rule to define the target population and it should be defined according to the objectives and nature of the study. A small, but carefully chosen sample can be used to represent the population properly. Traditional sampling methods are classified as either probability or non probability.

. Probability sampling is most commonly associated with survey based research

where researcher needs to make inferences from the sample about a

population to answer the research questions or to meet research objectives. In

probability samples, each member of the population has a known non-zero

probability of being selected. Probability methods include random sampling,

systematic sampling, and multistage sampling

. Non-Probability sampling provides a range of alternative techniques based on

researcher's subjective judgments and samples are selected from the

population in some non random manners. In this approach the researcher uses

the subjective methods such as personal experience, convenience, expert

judgment, quota, and snowball sampling to select the elements in the sample.

As a result the probability of any element of the population being chosen is

not known (Saunders et al. 2003).

On the one hand, as the central aim of this study is to generalize to a population parameter and certain persons are not going to be contacted who can provide the desired information. On the other hand, in this study the population is too large

(263,000 students) and it is not feasible to attempt to survey the whole population to get their opinion and views. Therefore, according to the nature of the study which is pertaining to the civic participation and social capital in both heterogeneous societies the multistage sampling approach is chosen as sampling method. In the first stage both Delhi University and Tehran University are divided in four disciplines viz. Medical, Science, Engineering, and Art & Social Science.

Each discipline encompasses different faculties and allied departments; one of them is selected through simple random sampling in next step. At the end, respondents are selected through simple random sampling in each selected departments.

According to Krejcie & Morgan’s (1970) formula the sample size is 384 and 192 responded should be taken in four faculties of DU and 192 responded in four faculties of TU. The formula is as follows:

X 2 NP(1 P) (3.84)*(263,000)*(0.5)*(10.5) n  2 2 384  d (N 1)  X P(1 P) (0.0025)*(263,000)(3.84)*(0.5)(0.5)

Where, n = Sample size

N = 263,000 (population size)

X2 = 3.84 (table value of chi-square at 0.05 confidence level)

P = 0.5 (population proportion) d = 0.05 (accuracy level expressed as proportion)

2.6.3. Conceptual and Operational Definitions & Validity and Reliability of the Measurement

In order to move from general principals of theoretical framework to specific realms of facts in both universities (DU and TU), it becomes necessary to define the variables operationally and check their validity and reliability in a systematic way. Herein, after conceptual definition of the variables, the operational definition will be presented. A conceptual definition tells meaning of the concept, while operational definitions only tell us how to measure it. Operational definitions have undisputed practical application with positivism. Operational definitions of key variables are used to preserve unambiguous empirical testability of hypothesis and theory. This section, by presenting the both broad description and a clear and detailed definition of the variables, on the one hand, attempts to show what we are measuring and how we are measuring and on the other, it depicts the validity and reliability of the items. In order to check the content validity and face validity of the instrument in terms of item coverage, item relevance and clarity of the items, an expert panel is used to assess whether the items are appropriate to the

44 constructs, social capital and civic participation as independent and dependent variables.

2.6.3.1. Social capital measures:

―Social Capital refers to features of social organization, such as trust, norms and networks that can improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated actions (Putnam 1993:167)‖. Colman (1988) argues that social capital comes about through changes in relations among persons that facilitate action.

―Social capital provides the glue which facilitates co-operation, exchange and innovation (www.oecd.org/insights/37966934.pdf).‖

Social capital was measured by 43 questions which under four general indicators can be combined: ―social trust, social solidarity, social network, and social communication‖.

Social capital indicators are defined conceptually and operationally as follows:

2.6.3.2. Social trust measures:

Trust is defined in a relational term which is somehow central to the production of social glue among the social actors and cooperation in society. Trust entails a willingness to take risks in a social context based on a sense of confidence that others will respond as expected and will act in mutually supportive ways, or at least that others do not intend harm (Cook 2007: 5089-5091). In order to measure this indicator, seventeen statements in the format of five level Likert scales in the pre-test interviews were questioned from respondents. The reliability analysis

results show that seventeen items were retained to capture the social trust index.

Moreover, it shows that there is perfect internal consistency in this scale by 81

percent. However, social trust is operationally defined through seventeen items

which are presented in table.2.1

Table.2.1.Social trust items

Very low low Moderate High Very high 1 2 3 4 5 1 Most people can be trusted?

2 How much do you trust to your relatives?

3 How much do you trust to your friends?

4 How much do you trust to your neighbor?

5 How much do you trust to your police?

6 How much do you trust to your court?

7 How much do you trust to your parliament?

8 How much do you trust to your politicians?

9 How much do you trust to government officials?

10 How much do you trust to your local consular?

11 How much trust do you have in your classmate?

12 Student’s activities?

13 Teachers?

14 Officials of your university?

15 Administrators?

16 Family members?

17 Media

2.6.3.3. Social network measures:

Newman (2010) states that a social network is a theoretical construct useful in the

social sciences to study relationships between individuals, groups, organizations,

or even entire societies. The term is used to describe a social structure determined

by such interactions. This concept is measured in two stages. In the first stage the

participants are questioned whether they are member of social network items in

the table 2.2. or not? If their answers were positive, in the second stage the

respondents were questioned about their participation in the social network items

mentioned. In order to measure this indicator, ten statements in the format of five

level Likert scales in the pre-test interviews were questioned from respondents.

The reliability analysis results show that ten items were retained to capture the

social network index. Moreover, it shows that there is perfect internal consistency

in this scale by 86 percent. However, social network is operationally defined

through ten items which are presented in table 2.2.

Table.2.2. Social network items

NO YES If yes what is the level of participation? 1 2 Very low Moderate High Very low 2 3 4 high 1 5 1 Sport club

2 Literary organization

3 Political party

4 Civic organization

5 Environment group

6 Participated in a political campaign

7 Services clubs

8 Consumer organization

9 Any other

2.6.3.4. Social solidarity measures:

Solidarity emerges from the Roman concept ―in solidum‖ which means an

obligation for the whole, wherein everyone assumes responsibility for anyone

who cannot pay his debt, and he is conversely responsible for everyone else.

(Brunkhorst 2005: 2) To measure this indicator, and capture the social solidarity

index, five items based upon five level Likert response scales are prepared and

questioned from respondents. Reliability analysis result shows that the alpha scale

value is (0.77) for fourteen items, that is, there is reasonable internal consistency

and cohesion among the fourteen items by 77 percent. The items which retained to

measure the social solidarity are presented in table.2.3.

Table.2.3. Social solidarity items

Very low Moderate High Very low 2 3 4 high 1 5 1 Neighbors

2 Friends

3 Close relatives

4 Neighbors

5 Friends

6 Close relatives

7 Friends

8 Teachers

9 Seniors

01 Family members of the area

11 Friends

12 Neighbors

13 Government officials

14 Political leaders

2.6.3.5. Social communication measures:

Social communication is that of a field of study that primarily explores the ways

information can be perceived, transmitted and understood, and the impact those

ways will have on a society. Thus, the study of social communication is more

politically and socially (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_communication).

In order to measure this indicator, six statements in the format of five level Likert

scales in the pre-test interviews were questioned from respondents. The reliability

48 analysis results show that six items were retained to capture the Social communication index. Moreover, it shows that there is perfect internal consistency in this scale by 74 percent. However, Social communication is operationally defined through six items which are presented in table .2.4.

Table.2.4.Social communication items

Very low Moderate High Very low 2 3 4 high 1 5 1 How often do you speak to your parents?

2 How often do speak with your siblings?

3 How often do you speak with relatives?

4 Have often do you speak with your neighbors?

5 How often do you speak to your friends on the phone?

6 Have you visited your friends in the past week?

2.6.3.6. Civic participation measure:

Civic engagement or civic participation has been defined as "Individual and collective actions designed to identify and address issues of public concern

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_communication )."

Civic Participation is community involvement, volunteering, active membership in a group, participating in fundraising, and board membership.

Students’ civic participation was measured by 41 questions which under six general indicators can be combined:

Media and news, Election and participation, Satisfaction of life, Association of activities, Political equality and Civic activity

Civic Participation indicators are defined conceptually and operationally as follows:

2.6.3.7. Elections participation measures:

An election is a formal decision-making process by which a population chooses an individual to hold public office. Elections have been the usual mechanism by which modern representative democracy has operated since the 17th century.

Elections may fill offices in the legislature, sometimes in the executive and judiciary, and for regional and local government. This process is also used in many other private and business organizations, from clubs to voluntary associations and corporations. (Encyclopedia Britanica Online. Retrieved 18

August 2009)

In order to measure this indicator, three statements in the format of three level

Likert scales in the pre-test interviews were questioned from respondents. The reliability analysis results show that three items were retained to capture the

Elections participation index. Moreover, it shows that there is perfect internal consistency in this scale by 80 percent. However, Elections participation is operationally defined through three items which are presented in table.2.5.

Table.2.5.Elections participation items

Regularly Casually Never 1 2 3 1 Local Council elections

2 Parliament elections

3 Presidential elections of relevant to you

2.6.3.8. Media and News measures:

The media and news are those elements of the mass media that focus on delivering news to the general public or a target public. These include print media

(newspapers, newsmagazines), broadcast news (radio and television), and more

50 recently the Internet (online newspapers, news blogs, etc.). (http://en. wikipedia. org /wiki/Media and News) In order to measure this indicator, eight statements in the format of five level Likert scales in the pre-test interviews were questioned from respondents. The reliability analysis results show that eight items were retained to capture the Media and News index. Moreover, it shows that there is perfect internal consistency in this scale by 80 percent. However, Media and

News is operationally defined through eight items which are presented in table

2.6.

Table.2.6.Media and News items

Media and news Very low low Moderate High Very high 1 2 3 4 5 1 Newspapers

2 Television

3 Magazines

4 Radio

6 The Internet

7 Seminar of scientific

8 Work shop

2.6.3.8. Satisfaction of Life measures:

Life satisfaction is the way a person perceives how his or her life has been and how they feel about where it is going in the future. It is a measure of well being as well as a cognitive, global judgment (http://en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Life_ satisfaction). In order to measure this indicator, three statements in the format of five level Likert scales in the pre-test interviews were questioned from respondents. The reliability analysis results show that three items were retained to capture the Satisfaction of Life index. Moreover, it shows that there is perfect

51 internal consistency in this scale by 73 percent. However, Satisfaction of Life is operationally defined through three items which are presented in table.2.7.

Table.2.7.Satisfaction of Life items

Very low low Moderate High Very high 1 2 3 4 5 1 Considering all parts of your life vis. Physical, emotional, economic, environmental, and so on over the last year the quality of my life has been: 2 If you were to die tomorrow, would you be satisfied with what your life has meant? 2 Do you enjoy living among people of different life styles?

2.6.3.9. Associations of Activity measures:

In order to measure this indicator, fifteen statements in the format of five level

Likert scales in the pre-test interviews were questioned from respondents. The reliability analysis results show that fifteen items were retained to capture the

Associations of Activity index. Moreover, it shows that there is perfect internal consistency in this scale by 92 percent. However, Associations of Activity is operationally defined through fifteen items which are presented in table .2.8.

Table .2.8.Associations of Activity items

Very low low Moderate High Very high 1 2 3 4 5 1 Cultural and scientific activities 2 Music and theater programs 3 Technical or economic 4 Health and social services 5 Women’s group 6 Political group 7 Youth group 8 Religious group 9 Sports clubs 10 Cultural Association 11 NGOs 2 Professional Association 13 Trade Union 14 Credit/finance group (formal)

15 cooperative

2.6.3.10. Political equality measures:

All citizens have the right to participate in the government, and to choose or remove public officials by voting (http://wiki.answers.com/ What is political equality?). In order to measure this indicator, five statements in the format of five level Likert scales in the pre-test interviews were questioned from respondents.

The reliability analysis results show that five items were retained to capture the

Political equality index. Moreover, it shows that there is perfect internal consistency in this scale by 75 percent. However, Political equality is operationally defined through five items which are presented in table .2.9.

Table.2.9.Political equality items

Strongly Agree Moderate Disagree Strongly agree 1 2 3 4 disagree5 1 People should be permitted to vote even if they cannot do so intelligently 2 Few people really know what is in their best interests in

the long run. 3 Certain people are better qualified to lead this country because of their traditions and family background. 4 It will always be necessary to have a few strong, able individuals who know how to take charge. 5 Freedom of expression

2.6.3.11. Civic Activity measures:

In order to measure this indicator, eighteen statements in the format of five level

Likert scales in the pre-test interviews were questioned from respondents. The reliability analysis results show that eighteen items were retained to capture the

Civic Activity index. Moreover, it shows that there is perfect internal consistency in this scale by 90 percent. However, Civic Activity is operationally defined through eighteen items which are presented in table .2.10.

Table.2.10.Civic Activity items

Very low low Moderate High Very high 1 2 3 4 5 1 Civic or community group or organization 2 Human and civil rights group 3 Contacted a member of parliament 4 Contacted a local councilor 5 Signed a petition 6 Written a letter to the editor of a newspaper 7 Participated in a community consultation or attended a public meeting 8 Participated in a strike or picket 9 Phoned a 'talkback' radio program 10 Participation in community or special interest group activities 11 Participation in religious or spiritual activities 12 Participation in sport or physical activities 13 Doing continuing education courses or classes 14 Visited library, museum, or art gallery 15 Cinema, theatre or concert 16 Visiting friends or being visited by friends 17 Going out with a group of friends 18 Write letters to editors on issues of society concern

2.6.3.12. Education: the number of years a person has been educated officially.

2.6.3.13. Income: Income is the consumption and savings opportunity gained by an entity within a specified timeframe that is generally expressed in monetary terms.( Barr,2004:121-124 ) However, for households and individuals, "income is the sum of all the wages, salaries, profits, interests payments, rents and other forms of earnings received... in a given period of time."(Case et al, 2007:54)

2.6.3.14. Age: The chronological age or the number of full years from the birth of a person.

2.6.3.15. Gender: what's important is that whether the respondent at the nominal measurement level is male or female.

2.6.3.16. Occupation: Job (role), a regular activity performed for payment that occupies one's time. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation)

2.6.3.17. Marital status: A person's marital status indicates whether the person is married. Questions about marital status appear on many polls and forms, including censuses(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marital_status).

In the simplest sense, the only possible answers are "married" or "non-married".

Some unmarried people object to describing themselves by a simplistic term

"single", and often other options are given, such as "divorced", "widowed".

2.6.3.18. Religion: Religion is a collection of cultural systems, belief systems, and world views that relate humanity to spirituality and, sometimes, to moral values (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion).

2.6.4. Questionnaire:

A questionnaire is a research instrument consisting of a series of questions and other prompts for the purpose of gathering information from respondents.

Although they are often designed for statistical analysis of the responses, this is not always the case. (Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Questionnaire).

Responses of respondents were collected through close ended questionnaire. The tool for collecting data was employed due to the feet that all respondents were well educated and would easily understand the questionnaire. Wherever and

55 whenever they had any confusion in the understanding of any question or questions, it was properly explain.

The questionnaire was formulated in English for the students of DV and any kind of confusion was explain to them in English, where as the questionnaire was is the language pension for the students of TU.

The whole questions use consisted of 115 questions and was divided into three sections i.e. (i) Social Capital (ii) Civic participation (iii) Information about respondents.

In this study the questionnaire is three parts. 1. Social capital 2 .Civic participation

3. Information about respondent.

Social capital: The social capital is four categories.

1. Social trust: Social trust including question X1 to X17.

2. Social solidarity: Social solidarity including question X18 to 28.

3. Social network: Social network including question X29 to 46.

4. Social communication: Social communication t including question X98 to

X103.

Civic participation: Civic participation is six categories.

1. Media and News: The Media and News including question X88 to X94.

2. Elections participation: the Elections participation including question X95 to

X97.

3. Satisfaction of life: the Satisfaction of life including question X85 to X87.

4. Associations of Activity: including question X70 to X84.

5. Political Equality: the Associations of Activity including question X65 to

X69.

6. Civic Activity: the Civic Activity including question X47 to X64.

3. Information about respondent: the Information about respondent including question X104 to X 115.

2.6.5. Hypothesis:

This study is primarily concerned with exploring the relationship between social capital and civic participation among the students of DU and TU. As survey of literature is chapter number 1 explicitly shows that there is connection between social capital and civic participation is almost all societies. It was found by leading scholar of the area. Following is the dominant trend in the study social capital and civic participation. This study primary assumes that there is significant relationship between social capital and civic participation among students of DU and TU.

In order spell out this main hypothesis of the study, we formulate some their hypothesis which may be offered as secondary hypothesis of the study. There are as follows:

1. There is a significant relationship between social capital and civic

participation.

2. There is a significant relationship between social trust and civic

participation.

3. There is a significant relationship between social solidarity and civic

participation.

4. There is a significant relationship between social network and civic

participation.

5. There is a significant relationship between social communication and civic

participation.

6. There is a significant relationship between respondents’ age and civic

participation.

7. Comparison of civic participation with consideration to gender universities

D.U and T.U.

8. There is a significant relationship between respondents’ education and

civic participation.

9. Comparison of civic participation with consideration to universities D.U

and T.U. Rural and Urban.

10. There is a significant relationship between father’s education and civic

participation.

11. There is a significant relationship between mother’s education and civic

participation.

12. There is a significant relationship between father’s occupation and civic

participation.

13. There is a significant relationship between mother’s occupation and civic

participation.

14. There is a significant relationship between respondent income and civic

participation.

15. There is a significant relationship between family’s income and civic

participation.

16. Comparison of civic participation with consideration of universities DU

and TU.

17. Comparison of social capital with consideration of universities DU and

TU.

CHAPTER – 3 Social - Economic Background of Respondents

This is the comparative study of social capital and civic participation among students of DU with that of students of TU. 300 respondent were selected from each of university in order to assess the nature and the extend of the social capital and civil participation.

This chapter provides social economic background of 600 selected respondents.

300 respondents were selected from each of the two universities. In the following paragraph their gender, age and other demographic and social characteristic will be shown.

1. Gender wise distribution of the respondent.

Keeping in the view that the socio cultural importance of the gender in the civic participation and also their representation in the both universities. Equal numbers of male and female respondent were selected from both the university. Following the table Number 3.1 and figure number 1 and 2 provides gender wise information about respondent in both the university.

Table 3.1: Frequency distribution of population based on gander respondents.

Gander Gander TOTAL University male female

150 150 300 DU 50% 50% 100%

150 150 300 50% 50% 100% TU 300 300 600 TOTAL 100% 100% 100 %

Figure.1. Gender of DU Figure. 2. Gender of TU

Table 3.1 and figure 1and 2 shows that out of 600 selected sample size, 300 respondents which is 50% of the sample population belong to Delhi University in

India and with remaining were selected from the Tehran University in Iran. The above table and figure also indicate that 50% of the respondents in both universities and half of the respondent were male and female.

2. Age wise distribution of the respondent

Respondents were initially selected from their class and course of the study and not on the basis of their age. However, the analysis of the data shows that they belong to the different age groups. It was also observed that there were

conspicuous differences between Iranian and Indian students in regard to their age

group. Nontheselesss, for showing age wise of respondent we have made 3 age

groups that is 18-25, 26-34, and 35- 43. This group was indicate that the youngest

respondent was 18 years of age and eldest was of 43 years of the age.

Following the table number 3.2 exhibits age wise distribution of the both Iranian

and Indian students.

Table 3.2: Frequency distribution of population based on age respondents

AGE age TOTAL university 18-25 26-34 35-43 266 32 2 300 DU 88.7% 10.7% .7% 100%

174 95 31 300 58.0% 31.7% 10.3% 100% TU 440 127 33 600 TOTAL 73.3% 21.2% 5.5% 100%

Figure. 3. Age group of DU Figure. 4. Age Group of TU

According to the table 3.2 and figure 3and 4 respondents are classified into three

different age groups in which percentages of participants are as follows. 88, 7%

of Indian participants were at 18-25 age groups, 10.7% were at 26-34 and 07%

were at 35-43 age groups. The age distribution of Iranian respondents was as

62 follows: 58% were in 18-25 age groups, 31.7%were at 26-34 and 10.3%were in

35-43 age groups respectively. As we see in both table and graph 73.3% maximum of the respondents in both universities were in age group of 18-25 and the minimum of the respondents in both universities were in the age group of 35-

43 (5.5%).

3. Marital status wise distribution of the respondent.

Like the marked difference in the age grouping between students of DU and that of TU as shown above, we also found marked differences in the marital status.

The marital status of respondent was analyzed across four categories that is unmarried, married, divorced & widowed. The following table number 3.3 and figure 5& 6 indicated that 98.7% students of DU were unmarried is compared to that 66.3% respondent of TU were found unmarried. This is not surprisingly as we have also found that respondent of TU were more elderly than student of DU.

It follows from the above data that only four respondents (1.3%) of DU were found to be married where is the number of married respondent were 95

(31.7%) No divorced and widowed respondents was found in DU but divorced

3(1.0%) and widowed 3(1%) found in TU.

Table 3.3: Frequency distribution of population based on Marital Status respondents

Marital Status Marital Status TOTAL University Unmarried Married Divorced Widowed 296 4 0 0 300 DU 98.7% 1.3% 0% 0% 100%

199 95 3 3 300 66.3% 31.7% 1.0% 1.0% 100% TU 495 99 3 3 600 TOTAL 82.5% 16.5% .5% .5% 100%

Figure .5. Marital Status of DU Figure. 6. Marital status of TU

4. Religion wise distribution of the respondent.

This question was about religion of respondent’s in two universities of DU and

TU. The Frequency distribution of population based on data of religion in both

students universities of DU in India and TU in Iran is different groups. According

to table 3.4 and figure 7 and 8 most students of Delhi University 279(93%) were

Hindus, 13(4.3%) were Muslim whereas 8(2.7%) were Christian. In contrary to

India all the majority of T.U follow Islamic faith majority of them belong to shiah

sect.

Table 3.4: Frequency distribution of population based on Religion respondents

Religion Religion TOTAL university Islam Hindu Christian

13 279 8 300 DU 4.3% 93.0% 2.7% 100% 300 0 0 300 100% .0% .0% 100% TU 313 279 8 600 TOTAL 52.2% 46.5% 1.3% 100%

Figure. 7. Religion of DU Figure. 8. Religion of TU

5. Education wise distribution of the respondent.

The level of education between both students universities were divided into three different categories. According to the table 3.5 and figure 9 and 10 most of the students universities of DU in India and TU in Iran had undergraduate degree, and few of them had Professional courses degree. If we break this data by students universities, we will find that most of the students universities in DU in Delhi 172

(57.3%) had undergraduate degree, 88(29.3%) post graduate and 40(13.3./.)

Professional courses. The level of education among students, TU 225(75%) had undergraduate, 72(24%) post graduate and3 (1.0%) Professional courses.

Table 3.5: Frequency distribution of population based on Education respondent

Education TOTAL Education undergraduate post graduate Professional university courses 172 88 40 300 DU 57.3% 29.3% 13.3% 100%

225 72 3 300 75.0% 24.0% 1.0% 100% TU 397 160 43 600 TOTAL 66.2% 26.7% 7.2% 100%

Figure. 9. Education of DU Figure. 10. Education of TU

6. Father’s education wise distribution of the respondent.

According to the table 3.6 and figure 11and 12 the levels of father’s education were divided into six different categories in both universities of Delhi University in India and Tehran University in Iran. University in Delhi respondents level of father’s education had graduate89(29%),80(26.7% ) School level education

,50(16%) literate , 48(16%)post graduate,18 (6%)illiterate and15 (5%) had Any other degree.

Where as in TU the level of fathers education was found to be graduate 57 (19%),

112(37.3%) School level education, 76(25.3%) literate, 38(12.7 %) post graduate,

11 (3%) illiterate and16 (2%) had any other degree.

Table 3.6: Frequency distribution of population based on father’s education respondents

Father’s Education TOTAL Father’s Education illiterate literate School graduate Post Any level graduate other education University 18 50 80 89 48 15 300 DU 6.0% 16.7% 26.7% 29.7% 16.0% 5.0% 100%

11 76 112 57 38 6 300 3.7% 25.3% 37.3% 19.0% 12.7% 2.0% 100% TU 29 126 192 146 86 21 600 TOTAL 4.8% 21.0% 32.0% 24.3% 14.3% 3.5% 100%

Figure. 11. Father’s Education of DU

Figure 12. Father’s Education of TU

7. Mother’s education wise distribution of the respondent

According to the table 3.7 and figure 13 and 14 the levels of mother’s education were divided into six different categories in both universities of DU in India and

TU in Iran. In DU mothers of respondents had different level of education while

70(23.3%) were found to be graduated, the remaining were as follow 93(31% )

School level education ,57(19%)literate , 27(9%)post graduate,44 (14%)illiterate and9 (3%) had Any other degree.

Similarly in TU the level of education among mothers of respondents was not uniform 43(14.3%) were found to be graduated whereas, 121(40.3%) School level education, 100(33.3%) literate, remaining 11(3.7 %) post graduate, 25 (8.3 %) illiterate and 0 (0%) had any other degree.

Table 3.7: Frequency distribution of population based on mother’s education respondents

Mother’s Mother’s Education TOTAL Education illiterate literate School graduate Post Any university level graduate other education 44 57 93 70 27 9 300 DU 14.7% 19.0% 31.0% 23.3% 9.0% 3.0% 100%

25 100 121 43 11 0 300 8.3% 33.3% 40.3% 14.3% 3.7% .0% 100% TU 69 157 214 313 38 9 600 TOTAL 11.5% 26.2% 35.7% 18.8% 6.3% 1.5% 100%

Figure. 13. Mother’s Education of DU

Figure. 14. Mother’s Education in TU

8. Rural / urban wise distribution of the respondent.

The Frequency distribution of population based on data of rural / urban in both universities of DU in India and TU in Iran is also divided into two groups.

According to table 3.8 and figure 15 and 16 most respondents in DU 230(76.7%) were urban and 70 (23.3%) were rural. Rural / urban where as 290 (96.7%) of TU were from urban and the remaining 10 (3.3%) belonged to village.

Table 3.8: Frequency distribution of population based on state respondents

State State TOTAL

university rural urban 70 230 300 DU 23.3% 76.7% 100%

10 290 300 3.3% 96.7% 100% TU 80 520 600 TOTAL 13.3% 86.7% 100%

Figure. 15. State of rural & urban in DU Figure. 16. State of rural & urban in TU

9. Father’s Occupation wise distribution of the respondent

According to the table 3.9 and figure 17 and 18 the Occupational respondents of father’s were classified into six i, e. in both universities of DU and TU.

Occupation respondent’s of father is an important background indicator the status-social Economic and Educational of respondent’s father. Indeed,

Occupations are very important (Social indicator in both civilization i.e. India and

Iran). It is therefore, Occupations of respondent’s father were asked to show the

Economic background to which the respondents belong. Occupations were classified in six categories I.e.: casual worker, farmer, business, regular salaried got Employee, regular salaried private sector employee.

As per the data 20(6.7%) belong to the first categories of Occupation in DU whereas the number of such Occupational category was found to be 11(3.7%) in

TU. Farming was found to be the occupation of 27(9%) in India. whereas these numbers were 30(10%) for father’s TU students.

Business was found to be the occupation of 63(21%) in India, whereas these numbers were 30(10%) for father’s TU students.

Regular salaried govt. was found to be the occupation of 113(37.7%) in India, whereas these numbers were 123(41%) for father’s TU students.

Regular salaried private sector employee was found to be the occupation of

46(15.3%) in India, whereas these numbers were 19 (6.3%) for father’s TU students.

Any other was found to be the occupation of 31(10.3%) in India, whereas these numbers were 105(35%) for father’s TU students.

Table 3.9: Frequency distribution of population based on father’s Occupation respondents

Father’s Occupation TOTAL Father’s Occupation Casual Farmer Business Regular Regular Any other worker salaried salaried govt. private university employee sector employee

20 27 63 113 46 31 300 DU 6.7% 9.0% 21.0% 37.7% 15.3% 10.3% 100%

11 12 30 123 19 105 300 3.7% 4.0% 10.0% 41.0% 6.3% 35.0% 100% TU 31 39 93 236 65 136 600 TOTAL 5.2% 6.5% 15.5% 39.3% 10.8% 22.7% 100%

Figure. 17. Father’s Occupation in DU

Figure. 18. Father’s Occupation in TU

10. Mother’s Occupation wise distribution of the respondent

According to the table 3.10 and figure 19 and 20 the Occupational respondents of mother’s were classified into six i.e. in both universities of DU and TU.

Occupation respondent’s of mother is an important background indicator the status-social Economic and Educational of respondent’s mother. Indeed,

Occupations are very important (Social indicator in both civilization i.e. India and

Iran). It is therefore, Occupations of respondent’s mother were asked to show the

Economic backgrounds to which the respondent belong .Occupations were classified in seven categories I.e.: casual worker, farmer, and business, regular salaried got Employee, regular salaried private sector employee, and housewife.

As per the data 17(5.7%) belong to the first categories of Occupation in DU, whereas the number of such Occupational category was found to be 0(0%) in TU.

Farming was found to be the occupation of 7(2.3%) in India. whereas these numbers were 0(0%) for father’s TU students.

Business was found to be the occupation of 12(4%) in India. whereas these numbers were 0(0%) for father’s TU students.

Regular salaried govt. was found to be the occupation of 26(8.7%) in India. whereas these numbers were 39(13%) for father’s TU students.

Regular salaried private sector employee was found to be the occupation of

9(3.%) in India. whereas these numbers were 7 (2.3%) for father’s TU students.

Any other was found to be the occupation of 9(3.%) in India. whereas these

numbers were 18(3.%) for father’s TU students.

House wife was found to be the occupation of 220(73.3%) in India. whereas these

numbers were 245 (81.7%) for father’s TU students.

Table 3.10: Frequency distribution of population based on mother’s Occupation respondents

Mother’s Mother’s Occupation TOTAL Occupation 1-Casual 2.Farmer 3.Business 4.Regular 5.Regular 6.Any 7.House worker salaried salaried other wife govt. private university employee sector employee

17 7 12 26 9 9 220 300 DU 5.7% 2.3% 4.0% 8.7% 3.0% 3.0% 73.3% 100%

0 0 0 39 7 9 245 300 .0% .0% .0% 13.0% 2.3% 3.0% 81.7% 100% TU 17 7 12 65 16 18 465 600 TOTAL 2.8% 1.2% 2.0% 10.8% 2.7% 3.0% 77.5% 100%

Figure. 19. Mother’s Occupation in DU

Figure. 20. Mother’s Occupation in TU

11. Family income wise distribution of the respondent

Responses were also classified according to the income of this family. (Not their personal income)

Respondents return the lowest income of their family rupees 10,000 per annum. Therefore, it was taken as started point for categories income groups into six categories:

 low income group (the firmly whose income ranged between rupees

10,000 and 50,000 per annum)

 Lower than moderate: the income ranged is between rupees 50001 to 1

lakh.

 Moderate: the income ranged is between rupees 10,000 to 150000.

 Upper than moderate! The income ranged is between150001 to 200000.

 High, the income ranged is between rupees 200001 to 250000.

 Very high the income ranged is between rupees 250001 and higher.

Table 3.11: Frequency distribution of population based on family income respondents

family income TOTAL family income Low Lower than Moderate upper than High Very high

moderate moderate RP10,000- RP100,001- RP200,001- university 50,000 RP50,001- 150,000 RP150,001- 250,000 RP250,001 and higher 100.000 200,000 31 67 29 49 21 103 300 DU 10.3% 22.3% 9.7% 16.3% 7% 34% 100%

178 89 5 0% 8 21 300 59.3% 29.7% 1.7% 0% 2.7% 6.7% 100% TU 209 156 34 49 29 124 600 TOTAL 34.8% 26% 5.7% 8.2% 4.8% 20.5% 100%

Figure. 21. Family Income for DU Students

Figure22. Family Income of TU Students

12. Self income wise distribution of the respondent

Responses were also classified according to the self income. (Not their family income)

Respondents return the lowest income of their self income rupees 0 per annum. Therefore, it was taken as started point for categories income groups into six categories:

 low income group (the self income ranged between rupees 0 and 10,000

per annum)

 Lower than moderate: the income ranged is between rupees 10,001 to

20,000 per annum.

 Moderate: the income ranged is between rupees 20,001 to 30,000 per

annum.

 Upper than moderate! The income ranged is between30,001 to 40,000 per

annum.

 High, the income ranged is between rupees 40,001 to 50,000 per annum.

 Very high the income ranged is between rupees 50,001 and higher per

annum.

Table 3.12: Frequency distribution of population based on self income respondents

self income TOTAL self income low Lower moderate upper high Very than than high moderate moderate university RP0- RP10001- RP20001- RP30001- RP40001- RP50001 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 and higher 272 6 5 2 1 14 300 DU 90.7% 2% 1.7% 0.7% 0.3% 4% 100%

219 15 33 20 1 12 300 73% 5% 11% 6.7% 0.3% 4% 100% TU 491 21 38 22 2 26 600 TOTAL 81.8% 3.5% 6.3% 3.7% 3% 4.3% 100%

Figure. 23. Self Income in DU Students

Figure. 24. Self Income of TU Students

Conclusion

This chapter provides social economic background of 600 selected

respondents. 300 respondents were selected from each of the two

universities. After analyzing the social- economic background of

respondents from the two universities; we achieved the following results

and refer to the obtained differences in general:

 The results about gender in DU and TU were that 50% of the respondents

in both universities and half of the respondents were male and female.

 The three classified among respondents in DU 88.7% students were

between 18-25 age groups. The age distribution of TU’s respondents ware

older in comparative with DU, that is, 58% students were between 18-25

age groups.

 Based on research data, its indicated that 98.7% of DU students are

unmarried, and divorced and widowed cases were not found among them

but among the students of TU 31% are married, 3%widowed and 3%

percent were divorced, and the number of singles in this university was

less than D U’s. (66.3% versus 98.7%).

 In TU all of students were Muslim while in DU 93% were Hindu.

 Obtained data from students of the two universities about the respondents’

education: among the students of DU post graduate, professional courses

were more than TU students.

 There was not a significant difference between the education level of

parents of respondents in TU and DU students that is the education level

of respondents’ parents was partly alike.

 The urbanity level of TU students was higher than DU students’ (96.7%

versus 76.7%).

 There was no significant difference between the fathers’ job of students of

Delhi and Tehran universities.

 Data research on mothers’ job of Tehran and Delhi University students

suggests that students’ mothers’ job is mostly housekeeping. Mothers of a

percent of Delhi University students were businesswomen, agricultures

and seasonal workers but among the students of Tehran University those

three cases was zero.

 The family income among the students of the two universities shows that

among the students of Tehran University the percent of people with low

income was higher; it means that family income among the respondents of

Delhi University was higher.

 No significant difference between the income levels of students of the two

universities was found.

CHAPTER - 4

Social capital and civic participation: Analyzes of Data

4.1. Introduction

After analyzing the social and economic background of respondents in preceding chapter, it is logical to present the analysis of the responses of respondents in this chapter. Indeed this chapter is a corner stone of this study which contains explanation of statistical tools, used for the analysis of the data. It is this chapter which its concern to verify the hypothesis which we have proposed in second chapter.

Primarily this study begins with the assumption that there was co- relationship between social capital and civic participation. This was our main hypothesis.

As the social capital and also civic participation where determine by multiple variables, we formulated secondary hypothesis which were in numbers.

Indeed this chapter presents the analysis of the data, in order to show the position of the hypothesis-verified are rejected.

We have attended to use different statistical tools for the analysis of the data and every statistical tool is well explained.

4.2. Inferential Results

In the first step of this section, bivariate correlation analysis describes the strength, direction and assessment of the significance level of the linear correlation between two variables. These features will help us to test our hypotheses. There are numbers of different statistics available from SPSS in order to test the hypotheses, but depending on the level of our measurements, all of which are in interval level, we used Pearson Product-Moment Correlation

Coefficient to test secondary hypotheses. In order to test primary hypotheses and the theoretical model of the study, to test the relationship between social capital and Civic participation and their differences in both universities, the multiple linear regressions (stepwise method) and path analysis, as a high level of statistical analysis, were used in the second step of this section. In the table provided by Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient there are a number of different aspects of the output that should be considered. Herein, the first thing to be considered is assessment of the significance level to test the hypothesis. If the

Sig. value is less than 0.05, then with 95% confidence there is correlation between two variables and, consequently, the Null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis is accepted. If the P value is less than 0.01, then with 99% confidence there is correlation between variables and again Null hypothesis is rejected. Finally, if the Sig. value is greater than 0.05, then we can conclude that there is no relationship between variables and accordingly the Null hypothesis is accepted. In order to determine the direction of relationships, the negative or positive sign in front of the r value will be considered. A negative sign means that

there is a negative correlation between the two variables (i.e. high scores on one variable is associated with low scores on the other) and a positive sign means that there is a positive correlation between the two variables (i.e. high scores on one variable is associated with high scores on the other) (Ounagh and Onagh 2011).

For determining the strength of the relationships, Cohen's guideline will be followed as shown in table 4.1:

Table 4.1: Cohen's guideline to determine the strength of the relationship

Correlation Strength Of The Correlation

R =0.10 To 0.29 Or R = –0.10 To –0.29 Small

R =0.30 To 0.49 Or R = –0.30 To –0.49 Medium

R =0.50 To 1.0 Or R = –0.50 To –1.0 Large

Source: Pallant, Julie F. (2005), SPSS survival manual: a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS. Sydney: Allen & Unwin publication, p.126.

4.3. Testing first primary hypothesis based on DU and TU’ S data

1. There is a significant relationship between social capital and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two, dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used. Correlation coefficient between these two variables is 0.65(for DU) and 0.46(for TU) and its significant level for DU and TU is Sig=0.000, suggesting a relatively strong relationship between these two variables, and its significant le vel is acceptable

and could be generalized to statistical population, So this hypothesis has been confirmed.

4.2: Pearson correlation between social capital and civic participation

Social Capital Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Civic Participation Pearson correlation coefficient .652 Significant level 0.000 DU Number of respondent 300

Civic Participation Pearson correlation coefficient .458 Significantlevel 0.000 TU Number of respondent 300

This hypothesis was also tested by single-variable regression. Tables 4.2 and 4.3 show that 0.42(for DU) and 0.21(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic participation) is due to social capital. Regarding T (14.860 for DU) and T (8.904 for TU) and with their significant level (Sig=0.000), this correlation for both countries in a level, higher than 99 percent is significant. The obtained

Positive sign, Beta is (0.65 for DU), (0.46 for TU) reveals that there is a direct relation between social capital and civic participation relationship. It says that, as social capital among the students enhances, their civic participation would increase as well.

4.3: The correlation between the social capital and civic participation (single variable regression) for DU

Name of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant variable of Error Coefficient value level social capital .652 .426 .057 .840 .652 14.860 .000

4. 4: The correlation between the social capital and civic participation (single variable regression) for TU

Name of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant variable of Error Coefficient value level social capital .458 .210 .072 .643 .458 8.904 .000

2. There is a significant relationship between social trust and civic participation.

Table 4.5, examines the relation between trust and students’ civic participation.

The given hypothesis in this project is that, as the students’ trust among them rise

their civic participation will rise also. Since the trust variable and the variable of

civic participation are at the interval measurement level, so to obtain the

correlation between these variables, Pearson statistic has been used. According to

the correlation coefficient between these two variables, hypothesis 2 is confirmed

and the correlation between these two variables is 0.42(for DU) and 0.14(for TU).

This correlation is direct and their P value (Sig = 0.000 for DU and sig=0.016 for

TU) that are significant; it means it could be generalized to statistical population

and it's not by chance or random.

4.5: Pearson correlation between social trust and civic participation

Social Trust Independent Variable Dependent Variable Civic Participation Pearson correlation coefficient .419 DU Significant level 0.000 Number of respondent 300 Civic Participation Pearson correlation coefficient .139 TU Significant level 0.000 Number of respondent 300

4.6: The correlation of the social trust and civic participation

(Single variable regression) for DU

Name of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant variable of Error Coefficient value level social trust .419 .175 .172 1.372 .419 7.958 .000

4.7: The correlation of the social trust and civic participation

(Single variable regression) for TU

Name of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant variable of Error Coefficient value level social trust 139 .019 .150 .364 .139 2.429 .016

For this hypothesis, simple regression has also been used. It can be deduced from

the table 4.6 and 4.7 that determination coefficient shows that 0.175(for DU) and

0.019 (for TU) of variance changes of the dependent variable is due to the trust

variable for students. Considering T value (7.958 for DU) and (2.429 for TU) and

their p value (sig= 0.000 for DU and sig=0.016 for TU), in a level higher TU 95

percent are significant, it says that, the more the trust among the students increase

the more civic participation they will have.

3. There is a significant relationship between social solidarity and civic

participation.

4.8: Pearson correlation between social solidarity and civic participation

Independent Variable Social Solidarity

Dependent Variable

Civic Participation Pearson correlation coefficient .449

DU Significant level 0.000

Number of respondent 300

Civic Participation Pearson correlation coefficient .324

TU Significant level 0.000

Number of respondent 300

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two

dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

Correlation coefficient between these two variables is 0.45 (for DU) and 0.32(for

TU) and its significant level for DU and TU is Sig=0.000, suggesting a relatively

strong relationship between these two variables and its significant level is

acceptable and could be generalized to statistical population, So this hypothesis has been confirmed.

4.9: The correlation of the social solidarity and civic participation

(Single variable regression) for DU

Name of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant variable of Error Coefficient value level

solidarity .449 .201 .211 1.825 .449 8.666 .000

4.10: The correlation of the social solidarity and civic participation

(Single variable regression) for TU

Name of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant variable of Error Coefficient value level

solidarity .324 .105 .200 1.185 .324 5.910 .000

For this hypothesis, simple regression has also been used. It can be deduced from the table 4.9 and 4.10 that determination coefficient shows that 0.201(for DU) and

0.105 (for TU) of variance changes of the dependent variable is due to the solidarity variable among the students. Considering T value (8.666 for DU) and

(5.910 for TU) and their significant level (Sig= 0.000), in a level higher than 99 percent is significant, it says that, the more the solidarity among the students increase the more civic participation they will have.

4. There is a significant relationship between social network and civic

participation.

4.11: Pearson correlation between social network and civic participation

Independent variable Social Network

Dependent variable Civic Participation Pearson correlation coefficient .557

DU Significant level 0.000 Number of respondent 300

Civic Participation Pearson correlation coefficient .572 TU Significant level 0.000

Number of respondent 300

Table 4.11: examines the relation between social network and civic participation.

The given hypothesis in this project is that, as social network among the students

rise their civic participation will raise also. Since social network variable and the

variable of civic participation are at the interval measurement level, so to obtain

the correlation between these variables, Pearson statistic has been used. According

to the correlation coefficient between these two variables, hypothesis 4 is

confirmed and the correlation between these two variables is 0.56(for DU) and

0.57(for TU). This correlation is direct and it’s Sig= 0.000 is significant; it means

it could be generalized to statistical population and it's not by chance or random.

4.12: The correlation of social network and civic participation

(Single variable regression) for DU

Name of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant variable of Error Coefficient value level

social .557 .310 .123 1.426 .557 11.568 .000

network

4.13: The correlation of social network and civic participation

(Single variable regression) for TU

Name of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant variable of Error Coefficient value level

social .567 .327 .210 2.522 .572 12.029 .000 network

This hypothesis was also tested by single-variable regression. Tables 4.12 and

4.13 show that 0.310(for DU) and 0.327(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic participation) is due to social network variable.

Regarding T (11.568 for DU) and T (12.029 for TU) and with their significant level (Sig=0.000), this correlation for both universities in a level, higher than 99 percent is significant. The obtained Positive sign, Beta is (0.56 for DU), (0.57 for

TU) reveals that there is a direct relation between variable of social network and

civic participation. It says that, as the social network among the students increase, their civic participation would increase as well.

4.14: Pearson correlation between Social Communication and civic participation

Independent Variable Social Communication

Dependent Variable Civic Participation Pearson Correlation Coefficient .331

DU Significant Level 0.000

Number Of Respondent 300

Civic Participation Pearson Correlation Coefficient .352

TU Significant Level 0.000

Number Of Respondent 300

5. There is a significant relationship between social communication and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two, dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used. Correlation coefficient between these two variables is 0.33(for DU) and 0.35(for TU) and its significant level for DU and TU is Sig=0.000, suggesting a relatively strong relationship between these two variables, and its significant level is acceptable and could be generalized to statistical population, So this hypothesis has been confirmed.

4.15: The correlation of social communication and civic participation

(Single variable regression) for DU

Name of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant variable of Error Coefficient value level

social .331 .109 .353 2.132 .331 6.049 .000 communication

4.16: The correlation of social communication and civic participation

(Single variable regression) for TU

Name of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant variable of Error Coefficient value level

social .352 .124 .34 2.244 .352 6.501 .000 communication

This hypothesis was also tested by single-variable regression. Tables 4.15 and

4.16 show that 0.109(for DU) and 0.124(for TU) of variance changes of

dependent variable (civic participation) is due to social communication.

Regarding T (6.049 for DU) and T (6.501 for TU) and with their significant level

(Sig=0.000), this correlation for both universities in a level, higher than 99 percent

is significant. The obtained Positive sign, Beta is (0.33for DU), (0.35 for TU)

reveals that there is a direct relation between social communication and civic

participation. It says that, as social communication among the students enhance,

their civic participation would increase as well.

6. There is a significant relationship between respondents’ age and civic participation.

Given hypothesis is that, different ages have different civic participation. Since

both dependent and independent variables have interval measurement level, for

measuring the correlation between them, Pearson statistic has been used.

It is deducible from table 17, that correlation coefficient between these two

variables (for DU and for TU) is less; (for DU 0.011, for TU – 0.001. Their

significant level is not acceptable (for DU Sig=0.843) and (for TU Sig= 0.982), so

because of not being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis

has not been confirmed.

4.17: Pearson correlation between respondents’ age and civic participation

Independent Variable age

Dependent Variable

Civic Participation Pearson Correlation Coefficient .011 DU Significant Level 0.843

Number Of Respondent 300

Civic Participation Pearson Correlation Coefficient - .023 TU Significant Level 0.982

Number Of Respondent 300

7. Comparison of civic participation with consideration to gender.

The descriptive statistic (number, mean, standard deviation and standard error

mean) of Civic participation with consideration of universities is mentioned in the

following table:

Table 4.18: Descriptive statistics of Civic participation with consideration of gender

Variables universities Gender N Mean S.D Std. Error Mean

Male 150 143.81 28.349 2.315 DU Female 150 139.64 23.490 1.918 Civic

Participation Male 150 114.35 23.860 1.948 TU Female 150 114.17 23.282 1.901

For responding to the question “Is there significant difference between the scores of Civic participation with consideration of gender”, independent T-test should be run. One of the assumptions of independent T-test that should be tested is normal distribution of variable in both countries. For testing of this assumption one sample kolmogrov-smirnov is run as follow:

4.19: Normality test (civic participation) for both countries

Variable DU TU universities (K-S)Z Sig Result (K-S)Z Sig Result

Civic 0.761 0.609 Normal 0.827 0.501 Normal participation

As seen in the above table, the scores of Civic participation are satisfied the criterion of normal distribution, then independent T-test is run as follow:

Table 4.20: Independent t-test in Civic participation with consideration of

gender for both countries

Leven’s Sig T D.F Sig Mean Std. E. Variable universities F Dif. Dif

Civic DU 5.262 0.022 1.386 288.052 0.167 4.17 3.006

Participation TU 0.271 0.603 0.069 297.821 0.945 0.19 2.722

As the level of significant in Leven’F is less than 0.05, we should consider the

second row “Equal variances not assumed”. Because of (P=0.167 for DU and

p=0.945 for TU >0.05) there isn’t any significant difference between DU and TU

students (Male and Female) in the scores of civic participation.

8. There is a significant relationship between respondents’ education and civic

participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two

dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

It is deducible from table 4.21, that correlation coefficient between these two

variables for India is less (for DU 0.052). Its significant level is not acceptable

(for DU Sig=0.370), so because of not being a correlation between these two

variables, this hypothesis has not been confirmed for DU, but correlation

coefficient between these two variables for TU is (0.141). Its significant level is

acceptable (sig=015), so because of being a correlation between these two

variables, this hypothesis has been confirmed for TU.

4.21: The correlation of respondents’ education and Civic participation

Independent Variable Education

Dependent Variable

Civic Participation Pearson Correlation .047 DU Significant Level .413

Number Of Respondent 300

Civic Participation Pearson Correlation Coefficient .149 TU Significant Level 0.010

Number Of Respondent 300

9. Comparison of civic participation with consideration to Rural and Urban.

The descriptive statistic (number, mean, standard deviation and standard error

mean) of the Civic participation with consideration of universities is mentioned in

the following table:

Table 4.22: Descriptive Statistics of Civic Participation Relationship

Variables universities State N Mean S.D Std. Error Mean

Rural 70 148.50 21.730 2.597 DU Urban 230 139.66 26.964 1.778

Civic Participation Rural 10 112.00 31.521 9.968 TU Urban 290 114.34 23.278 1.367

For responding to the question “Is there significant difference between the scores

of Civic participation with consideration of Rural and Urban”, independent T-test

should be run. One of the assumptions of independent T-test that should be tested

is normal distribution of variable in both universities. For testing of this

assumption one sample kolmogrov-smirnov is run as follow:

Table 4.23: Normality test (Civic participation)

Variable DU TU Universities (K-S)Z Sig Result (K-S)Z Sig Result

Civic 0.761 0.609 Normal 0.827 0.501 Normal Participation

As seen in the above table, the scores of Civic participation are satisfied the

criterion of normal distribution, then independent T-test is run as follow:

Table 4.24: Independent t-test in Civic participation with consideration of Rural and Urban

Leven’s Sig T D.F SIG Mean Std. E. Variable universities F Dif. Dif

Civic DU 7.838 0.005 2.808 139.584 0.006 8.84 3.147

Participation TU 6.172 0.014 -0.232 9.342 0.821 -2.34 10.061

As the level of significant in Leven’F is less than 0.05, we should consider the

second row “Equal variances not assumed”. Because of P=0.006<0.05 for DU,

there is significant difference between DU students with consideration of rural

and urban in the scores of civic participation. But because of p=0.821>0.05 for

TU, there isn’t any significant difference between TU students with consideration

of rural and urban in the score of civic participation.

100

10. There is a significant relationship between father’s education and civic

participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two

dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

It is deducible from table 4.25, that correlation coefficient between these two

variables for India is less (0.018). Its significant level is not acceptable (for India

Sig=0.759), so because of not being a correlation between these two variables,

this hypothesis has not been confirmed for DU, but correlation coefficient

between these two variables for TU is (0.136). Its significant level is acceptable

(sig=018), so because of being a correlation between these two variables, this

hypothesis has been confirmed for TU but level of correlation coefficient is low.

4.25: Pearson correlation between father’s education and Civic participation

Independent Variable Father’s Education

Dependent Variable

Civic Participation Pearson Correlation Coefficient .018

DU Significant Level 0.759

Number Of Respondent 300

Civic Participation Pearson Correlation Coefficient 136

TU Significant Level 0.018

Number Of Respondent 300

101

4.26: The correlation of father’s education and civic participation (single variable regression) for DU

Name of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant Variable Of Error Coefficient Value Level

Father’s 0.018 .000 1.206 0.371 0.018 0.307 .759 Education

4. 27: The correlation of father’s education and civic participation (single variable regression) for TU

Name Of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant Variable Of Error Coefficient Value Level

Father’s 0.136 .0.018 1.208 2.862 .136 2.369 .018 Education

This hypothesis was also tested by single-variable regression. Relationship

between these two variables is confirmed only for Iran and it doesn’t show any

relationship between two variables for DU. Tables 4.26 and 4.27 show that

0.000(for DU) and 0.018(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic

participation) is due to father’s education. Regarding T (.307 for DU) and T

(2.369 for TU) and with their significant level (Sig=0.759 for DU and Sig=0.018

for TU). The obtained Positive sign, Beta is (0.018 for DU), (0.136 for TU)

reveals that there is a direct relation between father’s education and civic

participation only for Iran. It says that, as father’s education among the TU

students’ enhance, their civic participation would increase as well.

102

11. There is a significant relationship between mother’s education and civic

participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two

dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

It is deducible from table 4.28, that correlation coefficient between these two

variables for DU is less (0.082). Its significant level is not acceptable (for DU

Sig=0.158), so because of not being a correlation between these two variables,

this hypothesis has not been confirmed for DU, but correlation coefficient

between these two variables for TU is (0.135). Its significant level is acceptable

(sig=019), so because of being a correlation between these two variables, this

hypothesis has been confirmed for TU but level of correlation coefficient is low.

4.28: Pearson correlation between mother’s education and Civic participation

Independent Variable Mother’s Education And Civic Participation

Dependent Variable Civic Participation Pearson Correlation Coefficient .082

DU Significant Level 0.158

Number Of Respondent 300

Civic Participation Pearson Correlation Coefficient 135

TU Significant Level 0.019

Number Of Respondent 300

103

4.29: The correlation of mother’s education and civic participation (single variable regression) for DU

Name Of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant Variable Of Error Coefficient Value Level

Father’s 0.082 .007 1.174 1.660 0.082 1.415 .158 Education

4. 30: The correlation of mother’s education and civic participation (single variable regression) for TU

Name Of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant Variable Of Error Coefficient Value Level

Father’s 0.135 .0.018 1.440 3.393 .135 2.356 .019 Education

This hypothesis was also tested by single-variable regression. Relationship

between these two variables is confirmed only for TU and it doesn’t show any

relationship between two variables for DU. Tables 4.29 and 4.30 shows that

0.007(for DU) and 0.018(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic

participation) is due to mother’s education. Regarding T (1.415 for DU) and T

(2.356 for TU) and with their significant level (Sig=0.158 for DU and Sig=0.019

for TU). The obtained Positive sign, Beta is (0.082 for DU), (0.135 for TU)

reveals that there is a direct relation between mother’s education and civic

104

participation only for Iran. It says that, as mother’s education among the TU students’ enhance, their civic participation would increase as well.

12. There is a significant relationship between father’s occupation and civic participation.

For responding to this hypothesis ANOVA test was run. As seen in the table 4.31 total significant of ANOVA test between groups is accepted for both universities.

Among of father’s occupation, two variables are different with consideration of civic participation for DU. that is; whose father had business occupation was higher level in civic participation than the other students whose father had regular salaried govt employee. (For DU, see table 4.32)

Table 4.31: ANOVA test for Civic participation and father’s occupation with consideration of universities

universities Name Of DF MEAN F SIG

Variable SQUARE

Civic DU 5 1508.509 2.266 0.048

Participation TU 5 2292.965 4.374 0.001

105

Table 4.32: ANOVA Between groups for father’s Occupation with

consideration of universities DU

Name Of universities Between Groups Mean Std. Std. Sig

Variable Deviation Error

Civic DU Regular Salaried 136.05 23.827 2.241 0.001 Govt. Employee Participation 149.10 22.918 2.887 Business

Table 4.33: ANOVA Between groups for father’s Occupation with consideration of universities TU

Name Of universities Between Groups Mean Std. Std. Sig Variable Deviation Error

Regular Salaried 113.57 21.490 1.938 0.001 Govt. Employee 135.00 15.754 4.448 Farmer Civic TU Participation Casual Worker 96.18 15.536 4.684 0.000

Farmer 135.00 15.754 4.548

Casual Worker 96.18 15.536 4.684 0.003

Business 122.03 25.348 4.628

For TU, among of fathers’ occupation six variables were different with

consideration of civic participation. That is, whose fathers had farmer occupation

was higher level in civic participation than the other occupations in table 4.33.

106

13. It seems that there is a significant relationship between mother’s occupation and civic participation.

For responding to this hypothesis ANOVA test was run. As seen in the table 4.34 total significant of ANOVA test between groups is accepted for TU only. That is, there isn’t any difference among DU students of civic participation with consideration mother’s occupation.

Among of mother’s occupation, two variables are different with consideration of civic participation for TU. That is, whose mother had regular salaried govt. employee occupation was higher level in civic participation than the other students whose mother had house-wife occupation. (For TU, see table 4.35)

Table 4.34: ANOVA test for Civic participation and mother’s occupation with consideration of universities

Name Of Universities DF Mean F SIG

Variable Square

Civic DU 6 1328.841 1.994 0.066

Participation TU 3 2120.261 3.941 0.009

107

Table 4.35: ANOVA Between groups for mother’s Occupation with consideration of universities TU

Name Of universities Between Groups Mean Std. Std. Sig Variable Deviation Error

Civic TU Regular Salaried 125.77 21.250 3.403 0.001 Participation Govt. Employee 112.28 23.203 1.482 House Wife

14. There is a significant relationship between respondent income and civic

participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two

dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

It is deducible from table 4.36, that correlation coefficient between these two

variables for DU is less (-0.048). Its significant level is not acceptable (for DU

Sig=0.407), so because of not being a correlation between these two variables,

this hypothesis has not been confirmed for DU, but correlation coefficient

between these two variables for TU is (0.125). Its significant level is acceptable

(sig=031), so because of being a correlation between these two variables, this

hypothesis has been confirmed for TU but level of correlation coefficient is low.

108

4.36: Pearson correlation between respondent’s income and Civic

participation

Independent Variable Respondent’s Income

Dependent Variable

Civic Participation Pearson Correlation Coefficient -.048 DU Significant Level 0.407

Number Of Respondent 300

Civic Participation Pearson Correlation Coefficient 125

TU Significant Level 0.031

Number Of Respondent 300

4.37: The correlation of respondent’s income and civic participation (single variable regression) for DU

Name of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant Variable Of Error Coefficient Value Level

Respondent’s 0.048 .002 0.000 -5.799 -.048 -.830 .407 Income

4. 38: The correlation of respondent’s income and civic participation (single variable regression) for TU

Name Of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant Variable Of Error Coefficient Value Level

Respondent’s 0.125 .0.016 0.000 5.790 .125 2.172 .031 Income

109

This hypothesis was also tested by single-variable regression. Relationship between these two variables is confirmed only for TU and it doesn’t show any relationship between two variables for DU. Tables 4.37 and 4.38 show that

0.002(for DU) and 0.016(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic participation) is due to respondent’s income. Regarding T (-.830 for DU) and T

(2.172 for TU) and with their significant level (Sig=0.407 for DU and Sig=0.031 for TU). The obtained Positive sign, Beta is (-0.048 for DU), (0.125 for TU) reveals that there is a direct relation between respondent’s income and civic participation only for TU. It says that, as respondent’s income among the TU students’ enhance, their civic participation would increase as well.

15. There is a significant relationship between family’s income and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

It is deducible from table 4.39, that correlation coefficient between these two variables for DU is (-0.119). Its significant level is acceptable (for DU

Sig=0.040), so because of being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has been confirmed for DU and its correlation coefficient is low and direction of coefficient is negative that is, as family’s income among the DU students’ enhance, their civic participation would decrease as well. Correlation coefficient between these two variables for TU is less (0.018). Its significant level is not acceptable (sig=.758), so because of not being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has not been confirmed for TU.

110

4.39: Pearson correlation for family’s income and Civic participation

Independent Variable Family’s Income

Dependent Variable

Civic Participation Pearson Correlation Coefficient -.119

DU Significant Level 0.040

Number Of Respondent 300

Civic Participation Pearson Correlation Coefficient .018 TU Significant Level 0.758

Number Of Respondent 300

4.40: The correlation of family’s income and civic participation (single variable regression) for DU

Name Of R R2 Standard B Beta T Value Significant Variable Of Error Coefficient Level

Family’s 0.119 0.014 0.000 -2.21 -0.119 -2.063 0.040 Income

4. 41: The correlation of family’s income and civic participation (single variable regression) for TU

Name of R R2 Standard B Beta T Significant variable of Error Coefficient value level

family’s 0.018 0.000 0.000 3.801 0.018 2.172 0.031

income

111

This hypothesis was also tested by single-variable regression. Relationship

between these two variables is confirmed only for DU and it doesn’t show any

relationship between two variables for TU. Tables 4.40 and 4.41 show that

0.014(for DU) and 0.000(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic

participation) is due to family’s income. Regarding T (-2.063 for DU) and T

(0.309 for TU) and with their significant level (Sig=0.040 for DU and Sig=0.758

for TU). The obtained Positive sign, Beta is (-0.119 for DU), (0.018 for TU)

reveals that there is a negative direct relation between family’s income and civic

participation only for DU. It says that, as family’s income among the Indian

students’ enhance, their civic participation would decrease as well.

16. Comparison of civic participation with consideration of universities DU and TU

The descriptive statistic (number, mean, standard deviation and standard error

mean) of Civic participation with consideration of universities is mentioned in the

below table:

Table 4.42: Descriptive statistics of Civic participation relationship

variables universities N Mean S.D Std. error mean

DU 300 141.72 26.073 1.505

Civic participation TU 300 114.26 23.533 1.359

Response to the question “Is there significant difference between the scores of

civic participation with consideration of universities”, independent T-test should

be run. One of the assumptions of independent T-test that should be tested is

112

normal distribution of variable in both universities. For testing of this assumption one sample kolmogrov-smirnov is run as follows:

Table 4.43: Normality test (Civic participation)

Variable DU TU universities (K-S)Z Sig Result (K-S)Z Sig Result

Civic 0.761 0.609 Normal 0.827 0.501 Normal Participation

As seen in the above table, the scores of civic participation have satisfied the criterion of normal distribution, independent t-test is run for it as follows:

Table 4.44: Independent t-test in Civic participation with consideration of universities

Variable Leven’s Sig T D.F Sig Mean Std. E. F Dif. Dif

Civic 2.232 0.136 13.543 598 0.000 27.46 2.028 Participation

As the level of significant in Leven’ F is more than 0.05, we should consider the second row “Equal variances assumed”. Because of (P=0.000<0.05) there is significant difference between DU and TU students in the scores of civic participation. According to the Mean of two universities in score of civic participation (table 4.42), DU students have higher score than TU students in civic participation.

113

17. Comparison of social capital with consideration of universities DU and TU

The descriptive statistic (number, mean, standard deviation and standard error mean) of Civic participation with consideration of universities is mentioned in the below table:

Table 4.45: Descriptive statistics of Social capital relationship

Variables universities N Mean S.D Std. Error Mean

Civic DU 300 115.85 20.248 1.169 Participation TU 300 96.39 16.776 0.969

Response to the question “Is there significant difference between the scores of

social capital with consideration of universities”, independent T-test should be

run. One of the assumptions of independent T-test that should be tested is normal

distribution of variable in both universities. For testing of this assumption one

sample kolmogrov-smirnov is run as follows:

Table 4.46: Normality test (Social capital)

Variable DU TU universities (K-S)Z Sig Result (K-S)Z Sig Result

Social Capital 0.674 0.754 Normal 0.923 0.361 Normal

As seen in the above table, the scores of Social capital have satisfied the criterion

of normal distribution, independent t-test is run for it as follows:

114

Table 4.47: Independent t-test in Social capital with consideration of universities

Variable Leven’s Sig T D.F Sig Mean Std. E. F Dif. Dif

Social Capital 10.743 0.001 12.816 578.028 0.000 19.46 1.518

As the level of significant in Leven’s F is less than 0.05, we should consider the second row “Equal variances not assumed”. Because of (P=0.000<0.05) there is significant difference between DU and TU students in the scores of social capital.

According to the Mean of two universities in score of social capital (table 4.45),

DU students have higher score than TU students in social capital.

115

116

Respondent 16% Income

Respondent ‘s 12% Social Network Education 50% 10% 14% Father’s 11% Education 20% 16%

Social 19% Civic Communication Participation Mother’s Education 12% 29%

32% 11% Social Trust 36% Social Solidarity

Figure 5.2 Path analysis for TU

14167 (ii)

70%

Father’s Mother’s Education Education 11%

13% Civic Father’s Income Social Network 40% Participation

13%

32% 16%

17% 20% Social Solidarity 59%

21% 35% 51% Social Trust Social

Communication

Figure 5.1 Path analysis for DU

141 (i) 68

CHAPTER – 5

Path analysis and the modeling of finding

5.1. Introduction

This chapter presents and advanced quantitative analysis of the data by using statistical tools like multicollinearity, Normality, Outliers , Linearity of the data and Path analysis.

5.2. Testing second primary hypothesis based upon data of DU

In order to carry out multivariate analysis of data in DU and to determine social capital factors responsible for Civic participation among students in DU located in

New Delhi city of India, a multiple linear regression has been used. The multiple linear regressions is not just one technique but a family of techniques that can be used to explore relationships between one continuous dependent variable, and a number of independent variables or predictors. This study can tell us how well a set of social capital indicators among residents educating in DU is able to predict a particular outcome in their Civic participation. Additionally, it provides us with information about an optimum model as a whole, and the relative contribution that each of the social capital indicators as predictors make up the model. This model will tell us which indicator of social capital is the best predictor of Civic participation in both universities as well. Before starting this step preliminary analyses will be performed to ensure no violation of the assumptions of multicollinearity, normality, outliers, and linearity.

116

5.3. Checking multicollinearity, Normality, Outliers and Linearity of the data

Table 4.50 labelled coefficients shows that tolerance value for all independent variables are more than 0.10 (0.453, 0.197, 0.168, 0.106 and 0.127 respectively), therefore we have not violated the multicollinearity assumption. This is also supported by the VIF value in the same table, which is for all independent variables below cut-off point of 10 (1.125, 1,557, 1.148, 1.011 and 1.753 respectively).

In order to check the normality, the normal probability plot of the regression standardized residuals has been used. According to normal probability plot (see

Appendix II) our points are laid in a reasonably straight diagonal line from bottom left to top right. This suggests that there is no deviation from normality. In order to check the outliers, Cook‟s Distance is produced by multiple regression programs. According to Tabachnik and Fidell's (2001: 69), cases with values larger than 1 are a potential problem. In this study, the maximum value for Cook‟s distance given towards the bottom of the residual statistics table (see Appendix

III) is below 1 (0.125) which suggests that there is no problem with distribution of the data, and strange cases do not have any undue influence on the results for our model as a whole. In other words this value shows that our sample is normally distributed. After preliminary checking the data we will go through the evaluation of the model.

117

5.4. Evaluating the model

Table: 5.1: Model Summary

Std. Error Of The R R Square Adjusted R Square Estimate

0.675 0.456 0.447 19.397

Table 5.2: ANOVA

Sum Of Means D f F Sig. Squares Square

Regression 92657.917 5 18531.583

Residual 110610.12 294 376.225 49.257 0.000

Total 203268.0 299

Table 5.3: Coefficients

Std. Part Tolerance VIF Variables B Beta T Sig Error

Constant 49.480 8.486 5.831 0.000

Social Network 1.160 0.117 0.453 9.925 0.000 0.427 0.889 1.125

Social Trust 0.649 0.176 0.197 3.673 0.000 0.158 0.642 1.557

Social 0.000 0.157 0.871 1.148 1.082 0.297 0.168 3.639 Communication

Mother‟s Education 2.162 0.879 0.106 2.459 0.014 0.106 0.990 1.011

Social Solidarity 0.517 0.232 0.127 2.230 0.026 0.096 0.570 1.753

118

R square value in table 5.1 indicates that 67 percent of the variance in students‟

Civic participation is explained by the model. Table 5.2 assesses the statistical significance of the result and, depicts that since sig= 0.000 (P<0.01), the null hypothesis is rejected and social capital model reaches statistical significance. In other words, with 99 percent confidence there is a significant relationship between social capital and students‟ Civic participation in DU.

Table 5.3 shows that all of the three variables viz. Social network, Social trust,

Social communication, Mother‟s education and Social solidarity included in the model, contributed to the prediction of conjugal relationships and none of them were excluded from the model. The Beta column in this table indicates that Social network has largest beta value (0.453) that means it makes the strongest unique contribution to explain the Civic participation model. In the same column, the beta value of trust was lower (0.282) indicating that it has second unique contribution in explaining the relationship model. The Mother‟s education had lower beta value (0.106) and consequently lower contribution in explaining the

Civic participation model. Since the sig. values of five variables are less than 0.05 therefore the variables make significant unique contribution to the prediction of the Civic participation in DU. In addition, the Standardized Beta values also indicate that if we could increase students‟ Civic participation scores by one standard deviation then the students‟ Civic participation scores would likely increase by 0.453standard deviation units. Also, at the same time, one unit increase in Social trust, Social communication, Mother‟s education and Social solidarity‟s standard deviation will lead to 0.197, 0.168, 0.106 and 0.127 units

119 increase in students‟ Civic participation‟s standard deviation scores respectively.

If we square the part value in table 5.3, it will tell us what percentage of the total variance in the students‟ Civic participation could be uniquely explained by each of the independent variables while the rest of the variables are controlled as is shown in table 5.4.

Table 5.4: Squared part values

Independent Variables Part Value Part Value Squared

Social Network 0.427 0.182

Social Trust 0.158 0.025

Social Communication 0.157 0.025

Mother‟s Education 0.106 0.011

Social Solidarity 0.096 0.009

Table 5.4 indicates that Social network while the rest of predictors are controlled uniquely explains the 18.2 percent of total variance of students‟ Civic participation. Social trust, Social communication, Mother‟s education and Social solidarity could uniquely explain the 2.5 percent, 2.5 percent, 1.1 percent and 0.9 percent of the total variance of students‟ Civic participation respectively while the rest of the predictors are controlled. Finally, according to table 5.4, we conclude that accepted variables as predictors of students‟ Civic participation and equation of the empirical model in DU are described as follows.

120

Y = a + bX1+ bX2+ bX3

Where,

Y = Civic participation a = the intercept (constant) b = the slope or regression coefficient(X-coefficient)

X1 = Social network

X2 = Social trust

X3 = Social communication

X4= Mother‟s education

X5= Social solidarity

Civic participation = 49.480 + (1.160)* Social network + (0.646) * Social trust +

(1.082)* Social communication+ (2.162)* Mother‟s education+ (0.517)* Social solidarity

According to the aforementioned equation and our empirical model in DU (see

Figure 4.1) the optimum combination of social capital factors is shaped by five indicators, Social network, Social trust, Social communication, Mother‟s education, Social solidarity proportionately. The empirical model in DU also shows that 21.6 percent of total variance in Civic participation is uniquely explained by cognitive indicators of social capital (Social network, Social trust,

121 and Social solidarity), whereas only 3.6 percent of total variance in Civic participation is uniquely explained by structural indicators of social capital, Social communication and Mother‟s education (see table 5.4).

5.5. Testing second primary hypothesis based upon data of TU

In order to carry out multivariate analysis of data in Iran, and to determine factors responsible for Civic participation in TU again a multiple linear regression was used. It depicts how well a set of social capital indicators among residents in TU is able to predict a particular outcome in their Civic participation. Before starting this step also preliminary analysis was performed to ensure no violation of the assumptions of multicollinearity, normality, outliers, and linearity.

5.6. Checking the multicollinearity, Normality, Outliers and Linearity of the data

Table 5.7 shows that tolerance values for all independent variables are more than

0.10 (0.494, 0.192, and 0.104 respectively), therefore we have not violated the multicollinearity assumption. This is also supported by the VIF value in the same table, which is for all independent variables below cut-off point of 10 (1.111,

1.187, and 1.215 respectively).

In order to check normality, normal probability plot of regression, standardized residuals has been used. According to the normal probability plot (see Appendix

IV) our points lied in a reasonably straight diagonal line from bottom left to top right. This suggests that there is no deviation from normality.

122

In order to check the outliers, Cook‟s Distance is produced by the multiple regression programs. In this study, the maximum value for Cook‟s Distance given towards the bottom of the residual statistics table (see Appendix V) is below 1

(0.037) which suggests that there is no problem with distribution of the data and strange cases do not have any undue influence on the results for our model as a whole. In other words this value shows that our sample is normally distributed, after preliminary checking the data and having gone through the evaluation of the model.

5.7. Evaluating the model

Table 5.5: Model Summary

Std. Error Of The R R Square Adjusted R Square Estimate

0.622 0.387 0.381 18.510

Table 5.6: ANOVA

Sum Of Means D f F Sig. Squares Square

Regression 64073.587 3 21357.862

Residual 101516.1 296 342.960 62.275 0.000

Total 165589.7 299

123

Table 5.7: Coefficients

Std. Part Tolerance VIF Variables B Beta T Sig Error

Constant 69.530 5.900 11.784 0.000

Social Network 2.178 0.212 0.494 10.294 0.000 0.468 0.900 1.111

Social Communicati 1.223 0.316 0.192 3.873 0.000 0.176 0.843 1.187 on Social Solidarity .418 0.183 0.114 2.276 0.024 0.104 0.823 1.215

R square value in table 5.5 indicates that 59 percent of the variance in Civic participation is explained by independent variables included in the model.

Table 5.6 assesses the statistical significance of result and this depicts that since sig= 0.000 (P<0.01), the null hypothesis is rejected and the social capital model reaches the statistical significance. In other words, with 99 percent confidence there is a significant relationship between social capital and students‟ Civic participation in among the respondent families in TU.

Table 5.7 shows that three independent variables viz. Social network, Social communication, and Social solidarity included in the model, contributed to the prediction of the students‟ Civic participation in TU. The Beta column in this table indicates that Social network has largest beta value (0.494) which means that it makes the strongest unique contribution to explain the students‟ Civic participation variances in the model. In the same column, the beta value of Social

124 solidarity was lower (0.114) indicating that it has second unique contribution in explaining the students‟ Civic participation model. Then, the Social communication had lowest beta value (0.192) and consequently lowest contribution in explaining the students‟ Civic participation model. Since the sig. values of three variables are less than 0.05 therefore the variables make significant unique contribution to the prediction of the students‟ Civic participation in TU. In addition, the Standardized Beta values also indicate that if we could increase

Social network‟s scores by one standard deviation then civic participation scores would be likely to increase by 0.494 standard devi ation units. Also at the same time, one unit increase in students‟ social communication and participation's standard deviation will lead to 0.192 and 0.114 units increase in civic participation standard deviation scores respectively. If we square the part value in table 5.7, it will tell us what percentage of the total variance in the civic participation could be uniquely explained by each of independent variables while rest of the variables are controlled as is shown in table 5.8.

Table 5.8: Squared part values

Independent Variables Part Value Part Value Squared

Social Network 0.468 0.219

Social Communication 0.176 0.031

Social Solidarity 0.104 0.011

Table 5.7 indicates that Social network, while the rest of predictors are controlled, uniquely explains the 21.9 percent of the total variance of Civic participation.

125

Social communication and Social solidarity uniquely explain the 3.1 percent, 1.1 percent of the total variance of Civic participation, respectively, while the rest of the predictors are controlled. Finally, according to table 4.44 we conclude that accepted variables as predictors of Civic participation and equation of the empirical model in TU are described as follows.

Y = a + bX1+ bX2+ bX3

Where,

Y = Students „civic participation a = the intercept (constant) b = the slope or regression coefficient(X-coefficient)

X1 = Social network

X2 = Social communication

X3 = Social solidarity

Students „civic participation = 69.530 + (2.178)* Social network + (1.223) *

Social communication + (0.418)* Social solidarity

According to the aforementioned equation and our empirical model in TU (see

Figure 4.2) the optimum combination of social capital factors is shaped by three indicators of Social network, Social communication, and Social solidarity proportionately. The empirical model in TU of Iran also shows that 23 percent of total variance in Students „civic participation is uniquely explained by cognitive

126 indicators of social capital (Social network and Social solidarity) whereas only 3.1 percent of total variance in Students „civic participation is uniquely explained by structural indicators of social capital (Social communication) (see table 5.8).

5.8. Multi-variable analysis

The impact of various raw or impure variables on dependent variable: civic participation has so far been discussed. Some of the hypotheses have been confirmed and some others have been modified.

In this section all the influential indexes have been together, so that, firstly the pure impact of each on dependent variable be measured, and then, to shed light on correlation between influential variables, if any. Thus, multi-variables regression was used to point out and predict dependent variable through independent variables.

In simple regression also the changes of Y through X is estimated and in multi variables regression the variance of Y is analyzed based on accumulation and linear combination of two or more independent variables (X,X,X….). Therefore, the task of regression is to clarify and predict. (Saei, 2003:151-152)

In this research also, stepwise regression was used to determine the relative ratio of independent variables in dependent variables.

The adoption of stepwise method for entering independent variables into the equation might be the most common method used in regression. In fact, it is a combination of regressive and progressive methods. In case the variable does not

127 have condition for entering (P in or F in), the mentioned method terminates without any independent variables, but if this variable exceed the criteria level, the second variable is selected based on individual correlation coefficiency. If the second variable exceeds the entry criteria level, it will enter the equation. From now on, stepwise selection takes a turn different from that of progressive selection: the first variable which has entered the equation will be investigated so that it becomes evident whether it has been according to F out (the minimum amount of F necessary for it to remain in the equation. Or P OUT (the maximum of required probability for the variable to remain in the equation) whether the regressive should be left out or not? In the next stage variables out of the equation will be considered for leaving out of the equation. All the variables will be left out of the equation so that no variables with exit criteria remain. If no variable has the criteria for entering or leaving out, the selection of variables ends. (Ali Babaei,

1999: 74)

5.9. The evaluation of the equation for prediction of civic participation by stepwise method

In this section investigation and clarification of the equation of prediction of dependent variable (civic participation) by stepwise method is done. The investigation of the results presented in table 5.8 indicates that the prediction equation has five stages for DU and three stages for TU. According to the table, the multi-variable correlation coefficiency ® in the 5th stage is 0.675 for DU and

3th stage 0.622 for TU. The obtained R square in the fifth stage indicates the three variables entered into the equation i.e. (Social network, Social trust, Social

128

communication, Mother‟s education and Social solidarity) can predict or

determine the variance of dependent variable (civic participation) about 0.46 for

India. The obtained R square in the third stage indicates the three variables

entered into the equation i.e. (Social network, Social communication and Social

solidarity) can predict or determine the variance of dependent variable (civic

participation) about 0.39 for TU.

Table 5.9: The main components of multi-variable analysis by stepwise method, from first stage to fifth stage, for predicting dependent variable (civic participation) for DU

Variables R R Adjusted R Std. Error Entered Square Square Of The Estimate

Stage 1 Social Network 0.557 0.310 0.308 21.696

Stage 2 Social Trust 0.630 0.397 0.393 20.317

Social Stage 3 Communication 0.659 0.435 0.429 19.704

Mother‟s Stage 4 0.668 0.447 0.439 19.527 Education

Stage 5 Social Solidarity 0.675 0.456 0.447 19.397

129

Table 5.10: The main components of multi-variable analysis by stepwise

method, from first stage to third stage, for predicting dependent variable

(civic participation) for TU

Variables R R Adjusted R Std. Error Entered Square Square Of The Estimate

Stage 1 Social Network 0.572 0.327 0.325 19.340

Social Stage 2 0.613 0.376 0.372 18.649 Communication Social Stage 3 0.622 0.387 0.381 18.519 Solidarity

The obtained R square in all stages with the certainty level of 99 % was

statistically significant, taking into consideration the fact that 46 % of the variance

of civic participation for India has been determined by the fifth variables of

Social network, Social trust, Social communication, Mother‟s education and

Social solidarity; and 39% of the variance of civic participation for TU has been

determined by the three variables of Social network, Social communication and

Social solidarity. 54% (1-0.46), 61 %( 1-0.39) of civic participation for DU and

TU has not been analyzed for independent variables and it predicts about half of

the variance of dependent variables. Other statistical indexes for variables of the

equation such as regression coefficient (B) for raw scores and Beta for standard

scores as well as T test are shown in table 5.11. T test indicates that B coefficient

for the whole five variables for DU and three variables for TU at the level of 99%

is statistically significant.

130

Table 5.11: The components of variables in equation for prediction of civic

participation in the fifth stages for DU

Row Name Of B Beta T Sig. T

Variables

1 Social Network 1.160 0.453 9.925 0.000

2 Social Trust 0.646 0.197 3.637 0.000

3 Social 1.082 0.168 3639 0.000 Communication

Mother‟s 4 Education 2.162 0.106 2.459 0.014

Social 5 Solidarity 0.517 0.127 2.230 0.026

R= 0.675 Sig =0.000

R Square =0.456

131

Table 5.12: the components of variables in equation for prediction of civic

participation in the third stages for TU

Name Of

Row Variables B Beta T Sig. T

1 Social Network 2.178 0.494 10.294 0.000

Social Communication 2 1.223 0.192 3.873 0.000

3 Social Solidarity 0.418 0.114 2.276 0.024

R= 0.622 Sig=0.000

R Square =0.387

Table 5.12 for DU and table 5.13 for TU Show that only 5 variables out of 10 for

DU and 3 variables out of 10 for TU could enter the regression equation and other variables did not have enough correlation with dependent variable to enter regression equation and were left excluded. Statistical descriptions of these variables are shown in table 4.79for DU and table 5.13 for TU.

Tables 5.13, 5.14 show statistical indexes of excluded variables in the five stages for DU and third stages for TU. T test for correlation of excluded variables indicates that none of the 5 variables for DU and 7 variables for TU could

132 increase R square significantly, in the other words the amount increased to R square by these variables at 95% certainly have not been significant and none of these 5 variables for DU and 7 variables for TU could enter the equation, and the analysis of stepwise multi-variable regression ends here in this way. It should be noted that Excluded variable‟s not entering is not indicative of their little importance, but is due to the fact that there is a correlation between Excluded variables in-equation variables.

Table 5.13: statistical indexes of Excluded variables in the fifth stage for DU

Row Name Of Variables Partial T Sig. T

Correlation

1 Age -0.003 -0.059 0.953

2 Education Of Students 0.091 1.569 0.118

3 Father‟s Education -0.069 -1.181 0.239

4 Income Of Students 0.009 0.151 0.880

5 Income Of Family -0.085 -1.463 0.145

133

Table 5.14: statistical indexes of Excluded variables in the seventh stage for TU

Row Name Of Variables Partial T Sig.T

Correlation

1 Social Trust -0.007 -0.127 0.899

2 Age 0.039 0.678 0.499

3 Education Of Students 0.084 1.446 0.149

4 Father‟s Education 0.034 0.576 0.546

5 Mother‟s Education 0.068 1.168 0.245

6 Income Of Students 0.038 0.661 0.509

7 Income Of Family -0.080 -1.370 0.170

Meanwhile, these Excluded variables will enter the equation during analysis so that their indirect impact is obtained. The overall shape of the obtained five- variable regression equation, regarding obtained data for predicting civic participation is as follows:

Y=a+b1(x1) +b2(x2) +b3(x3)+b4(x4)+b5(x5)

The components of the equation are:

Y= prediction score of dependent variable a = calculation coefficient for multi-variable regression equation b = regression coefficient for pure scores

134

X = independent variable which have entered the equation.

Therefore, the equation will finally be like:

For DU:

Y = 49.480+ (1.160) (Social network) + (0.646) (Social trust) + (1.082) (Social communication) + (2.162) (Mother‟s education) + (0.517) (Social solidarity)

For TU:

Y =69.530+(2.178)( Social network)+(1.223)( Social communication)+(0.418)

( Social solidarity)

5.10. Path Analysis

Path Analysis is an advanced statistical technique which shows how casual effect of independent variables on dependent variables and each other is; that is to say, it shows the direct effect of variables as well as the indirect effect of variables by means of route coefficient. Path coefficients are Beta or Standardized regression coefficients which show the level of importance of each index.

To draw the path diagram, first, a regression equation with dependent variables couple‟s – relation with all dependent variables was carried out as shown in Table

5.11 for DU and 5.12 for TU. Results indicated that independent variables for DU and TU, only 5 independent variables for DU and for TU have direct and unchanged (i.e., under control or with keeping other variables of the model):

For DU:

135

1. Variable of Social network :( with coefficient 0.45)

2. Variable of Social trust (with coefficient 0.20)

3. Variable of Social communication (with coefficient 0.17)

4. Variable of Mother‟s education (with coefficient 0.11)

5. Variable of Social solidarity (with coefficient 0.13)

For TU:

1. Variable of Social network (with coefficient 0.50)

2. Variable of Social communication :( with coefficient 0.20)

3. Variable of Social solidarity (with coefficient 0.11)

Of 10 independent variables, five variables for DU and three variables for TU, each separately, were considered more important than other in regression method and show pure correlation with dependent variables (Civic participation) without the impact of factors and other variables.

To get the Path Analysis Model, each time one of the indexes is put in the place of a dependent variable, the impact of 9 other variables on it, will be obtained through multi-variables regression and the relevant B. will be extracted and put in its place. Figures 4.1 and 4.2 show that there is mutual interaction among the three indexes of Social network, Social communication and Social solidarity for Iran

136

and Social network ,Social trust ,Social solidarity, Mother‟s education and Social

communication for India which has been shown by diverging direction.

Statistics related to the conducting regression were done 4 times, and the figures

4.1 and 4.2 are based on their results, more classification is provided in the table

5.15 and 5.16 below:

Table 5.15: Statistics related to the conducting regression were done 6 times, and the figure 4.1 is based on its results: For DU

Std.

Dependent Independent R R Adjusted R Error F

Variables Variables Square Square Of &

Mean (Sig) 1.Social Network Civic 2.Social Trust Participation 3.Social Communication 0.675 0.465 0.447 19.397 49.257 4. Mother‟s Education (0.000) 5. Social Solidarity Social Network 1. Social Solidarity 0.340 0.115 0.109 9.604 19.368 2. Income Of Family (0.000)

Social Trust Social Solidarity 0.595 0.355 0.352 6.404 163.660 (0.000) Social Communicat Social Solidarity 0.354 0.125 0.122 3.788 42.728 ion (0.000)

Mother‟s Father‟s Education 0.702 0.493 0.491 0.915 289.510 Education (0.000) 1.Social Network Social 2.Social 0.655 0.429 0.423 4.869 74.056 Solidarity Communication (0.000)

137

Table5.16: Statistics related to the conducting regression were done 4 times, and the figure 4.2 is based on its results: For TU

Std.

Dependent Independent R R Adjusted R Error F

Variables Variables Square Square Of &

Mean (Sig)

1.Social Network

Civic 2.Social 0.622 0.387 0.381 18.519 62.275 Participation Communication (0.000) 3.Social Solidarity

1. Social Communication 2. Social Network Social Solidarity 3. Mother‟s Education 4. 0.388 0.151 0.139 4.951 13.078 Father‟s Education (0.000) 5. Income Of Students

Social 1. Social Network 0.414 0.172 0.163 3.381 20.425 Communication 2. Social Solidarity (0.000) 3. Mother‟s Education

Social Social Trust 0.549 0.302 0.295 5.402 42.659 Solidarity (0.000)

Multi-Variable Correlation coefficient (R) between the index of the Civic

participation (dependent variable) and the five independent indexes (Social

network, Social trust, Social communication, Mother‟s education and Social

solidarity) for DU(0.67) and the three independent indexes (Social network,

138

Social communication and Social solidarity) for TU (0.62), which is high figure, when doubled will be (0.46) for DU and (0.39) for TU or (46%) of the changes of variables or dependent variable index “Civic participation” are determined by these five indexes which is a high figure and indicative of the fact that these indexes have rightly been selected to determine dependent variable indexes of

“Civic participation”.

If there is intention to generalize the result of statistical sample to include whole statistical community, adjusted R square should be used instead of R square which is a significant figure, (0.45 for DU, and 0.38 for TU). The figures (4.1, 4.2) show that some of the indexes have direct and indirect effect on dependent variable, and some others have only indirect, effect and do not have on a Civic participation, such as age and Father‟s education.

The size of direct of the path on vector of the beginning of is the name of independent variable and at the end is dependent variable. For example: the direct impact of “Social network” on the index of Students civic participation is 0.45 and

.50 in DU and TU, respectively. It has been written on the vector in the path of independent variable to dependent variable.

The size of indirect impact is also obtained through multiplying the path vectors coefficients-from independent variable to dependent variable, and it is the independent variable which effects in two or more ways. Its impacts coefficient shall be calculated separately and the results of these impacts are summed and finally an independent i.e. cumulative impact, index will be obtained through

139

summing direct and indirect impacts. Direct, indirect impact and cumulative

impact are shown in the following table.

Table 5.17: Direct Impact, Indirect Impact And Cumulative Impact Of All Existing Impact Are Shown In Figure 4.1 On The Index Of Civic Participation. (For DU)

Name Of Direct Impact Indirect Impact Cumulative Indicator Impact

1)0.016*0.035*0.17=0.01 1.Social Network 0.45 2)0.16*0.59*0.20=0.02 0.50 3)0.16*0.13=0.02

2.Social Trust 0.20 1)0/51*0.13=0.07 0.37

2)0.51*0.32*0.45=0.07

3)0.51*0.35*0.17=0.03

3.Social 0.17 1)0.21*0.32*0.45=0.03 0.25 Communication 2)0.21*0.59*0.20=0.02 3)0.21*0.13=0.03

4. Mother‟s 0.11 ------0.11 Education

5.Social Solidarity 0.13 1)0.32*0.45=0.14 0.45 2)0.59*0.20=0.12 3)0.35*0.17=0.06 6.Father‟s …………… 0.70*0.11= 0.08 Education

7. Income Of Family …………… -0.13*0.50=-0.07 -0.07

140

Table 5.18: Direct Impact, Indirect Impact And Cumulative Impact Of All Existing Impact Are Shown In Figure 4.2 On The Index Of Civic Participation. (For TU)

Name Of Direct Impact Indirect Impact Cumulative Indicator Impact

1.Social Network 0.50 1) 0.16*0.32*0.19=0.01 2) 0.14*0.29*0.11=0.01 0.57 3)0.16*0.11= 0.02 4)0.14*0.19= 0.03 2. Social Communication 0.19 1) 0.29*0.20*0.50=0.03 0.34 2)0.15*0.16*0.11=0.01 3)0.15*0.50= 0.08 4)0.29*0.11=0.03

1)0.20*0.14*0.19=0.01 3.Social Solidarity 0.11 2)0.32*0.15*0.50=0.02 0.30 3)0.20*0.50= 0.10 4)0.32*0.19=0.06 4.Income Of …………… 0.16*0.57=0.09 0.09 Students

…………… 0.07 5.Students‟ 0.12*0.57=0.07 Education

0.11*0.57=0.06 6.Father‟s ...... 0.06 Education

…………… 0.04 7.Mother‟s 0.12*0.34=0.04 Education

…………… 0.11 8.Social Trust 0.36*030=0.11

141

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 5.11. Introduction

Social capital is held to be an important driver of civic action(Civic participation) because it facilitates the development of the type of co-operative social relations that are a prerequisite of collective action, in the process reducing the „transaction costs‟ associated with the collective action problem. This process heavily influences the civic voluntarism approach to understanding political participation, most notably in relation to the significance of community and social networks in minimizing the transaction costs associated with civic engagement (Civic participation) (e.g. Verba et al., 1995).

Today, civic participation is very important in national and international development programs, and the increased role of civic participation is evident from the growth of varieties of voluntary of government. It has received considerable renewed emphasis in recent years. In particular, developing countries governments have promoted civic participation as part of their civil renewal agenda (Gilbertson, J. and Manning, J. 2006).

Civic participation is not in decline. Indeed, much of the evidence suggests it is currently vibrant. Key drivers of the changing nature of civic participation include the rise of affluence and access to higher education, the growing authority of

Expertise and the attendant trend to transfer political subjects to „neutral‟ expert bodies, and the related transformations in social and political trust.

Civic participation or civic engagements are central to the realization of the progressive vision and the progressive agenda. Progressives are increasingly

142 coming to recognize that participation in political institutions, political processes, and civic life are critical indicators of political inclusion.

On the one hand, the foundation of social capital, on civic participation is important element in development both universities.

This research study relationship between social capital and civic participation among the students of DU and TU.

In this chapter we are going discuss about overview of the study, discussion, conclusion, limitation and recommendation.

5.12. Overview of the study

This study aims to describe of relationship between social capital and civic participation among the students of DU and TU these two universities were chosen because of ancient cultural history, and a variety of traditions and cultures which have certain commonalities and, due to the conditions of passing from tradition to modernity.

This research has tried to analyze the relation between social capital and Civic participation, and as the subject of the research shows, the manner of Civic participation in two different universities according to their social capital level.

The aim is to search to see if there is any relation between the parameters of social capital such as: social trust, social network, social solidarity, and social communication.

143

Positivist methodology was used in this research. This is based on the dependent cycle of theory and observation. According to the principles of Positivist theory always takes precedence over action. Hereby, it has attempted to create a link between theoretical framework through observation of social capital relations, and

Civic participation in this research.

So, after conceptualizing and reviewing the wordings of social capital and Civic participation, we fixed it within the theoretical framework of Putnam. In this theoretical and conceptual framework, Atria Raul et all (2004) and Uphoof (1999) discriminates between structural and cognitive social capital. Structural social capital includes different forms of social networks and relations which bring more civil cooperation and participation. Co gnitive social capital includes: norms, values, attitudes, beliefs, common understanding and variables that bind people together. Structural and cognitive social capitals are definable. Drawing structural and cognitive aspects of social capital may convey that there is no single structure under the name of social capital, but preferably, social capital is understood as a compound of central concept of social capital.

This is the framework of empirical research which link, the cognitive and structural aspects of social capital in two universities, DU - TU and Civic participation among the students.

When conceptual definition of social capital and Civic participation relations is made, social capital conceptually and generally refers to institutions, relations and

144 norms, which form the quality and quantity of social interactions and binds them like glue (woolcock and Narayan: 2000).

5.13. Discussion:

To infer subject theory, and moving from general principles of theoretical framework toward certain real principles, observation must be done and hypotheses be tested, research plan and research approach were stated as a plan, in chapter two. This chapter shows that, what we mean practically by social capital and Civic participation, according to theoretical framework of social capital was defined as an extensive method including cognitive and structural forms. Five parameters of social capital have distinguished as independent variables: Social network, Social solidarity and social trust (as cognitive social capital), Social communication and Mother‟s education (as structural social capital). Furthermore,

Students‟ civic participation was measured by 41 questions which under six general indicators can be combined:

Media and news, Election and participation, Satisfaction of life, Association of activities, Political equality and Civic activity

Chapter Four gives the conclusions of this research, provides testing of theoretical concepts by concrete data, and also shows tested hypotheses and theoretical model. This chapter helps to discuss the findings and compare them with empirical documents which have been presented in research wordings.

145

1. First hypothesis considers the relation between social capital and civic

participation.

Over recent decades despite many researches done on social capital and

different aspects of society such as development.(Gilbertson, J. and

Manning, J. 2006.Putnam 1999, Hall 1999, Goetz and Jenkins 2007 and

Inglehart 1997).

2. Second hypothesis measures the relations between social trust and their

civic participation.

Trust as a cognitive parameter of social capital, plays an important role in social life and social action. John Field (2003) states that though, Bourdieu doesn‟t specially refer to trust, yet this point apparently is hidden in his discussion about social reproduction; people who marry each other, or establish a club together to develop their useful bonds, must do it based on trust.

Fukuyama believes that, trust is the main basis of social order: societies are dependent on mutual trust and without it won't be established on their own.

(Fukuyama, 1995:25)

The importance of trust can be seen in various positions, in interaction with others. (Sztomka 1999, , Glaeser et all 2000, , Luman 1988, Misztal 1996)

3. Third hypothesis talks of the relations between social solidarity and civic participation.

146

Solidarity in social affairs strengthens the bond and tie among members of group..

Various studies show that social solidarity as one of the most important elements of social capital brings bonding in society. (Putnam 1995 1993, Alderidge2002,

Woolcock 2000 and Macgillivray2002)

4. Fourth hypothesis shows the relations between social network and civic participation.

Recently many researchers suggested relationship between social network and civic participation (Putnam2000, Baker 2000, Jacobs1961, Putnam1993, and

Bourdieu1985).

5. Fifth hypothesis considers the relations between social communication and civic participation.

Many scholars suggested relationship between social communication and civic participation (Baker2000, Bourdieu1985, Woolcock2001 and Halpern2005).

5.14. Conclusion:

This section set out to discover the impact of social capital on civic participation.

This ambitious undertaking required a theory for social capital to be formulated, building on complementary theories for social capital and civic participation.

Some innovative methods needed to be developed to both access source data for the research and then generate models that could be tested in a statistically rigorous manner.

147

The results achieved found theoretical support, adding a degree of validation to the methods adopted. As with any research of a pioneering nature, limitations exist in terms of the degree to which the approach can be verified and validated by others.

This research has hopefully been just an initial tentative step along the path to gaining a full understanding of the beneficial impacts of social capital on civic participation. It is hoped that other researchers will adopt and improve on some of the methods pioneered in this thesis, to provide the much needed empirical support to the foundational theories for social capital on civic participation.

1. There is a significant relationship between social capital and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two, dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used. Correlation coefficient between these two variables is 0.65(for DU) and 0.46(for TU) and its significant level for India and Iran is Sig=0.000, suggesting a relatively strong relationship between these two variables, and its significant level is acceptable and could be generalized to statistical population, So this hypothesis has been confirmed.

148

2. There is a significant relationship between social trust and civic participation.

Table 4.5, examines the relation between trust and students‟ civic participation.

The given hypothesis in this project is that, as the students‟ trust among them rise their civic participation will rise also. Since the trust variable and the variable of civic participation are at the interval measurement level, so to obtain the correlation between these variables, Pearson statistic has been used. According to the correlation coefficient between these two variables, hypothesis 2 is confirmed and the correlation between these two variables is 0.42(for DU) and 0.14(for TU).

This correlation is direct and their P value (Sig = 0.000 for DU and sig=0.016 for

TU) that are significant; it means it could be generalized to statistical population and it's not by chance or random.

For this hypothesis, simple regression has also been used. It can be deduced from the table 4.6 and 4.7 that determination coefficient shows that 0.175(for DU) and

0.019 (for TU) of variance changes of the dependent variable is due to the trust variable for students. Considering T value (7.958 for DU) and (2.429 for TU) and their p value (sig= 0.000 for DU and sig=0.016 for TU), in a level higher than 95 percent are significant, it says that, the more the trust among the students increase the more civic participation they will have.

149

3. There is a significant relationship between social solidarity and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

Correlation coefficient between these two variables is 0.45 (for DU) and 0.32(for

TU) and its significant level for DU and TU is Sig=0.000, suggesting a relatively strong relationship between these two variables and its significant level is acceptable and could be generalized to statistical population, So this hypothesis has been confirmed.

For this hypothesis, simple regression has also been used. It can be deduced from the table 4.9 and 4.10 that determination coefficient shows that 0.201(for DU) and

0.105 (for TU) of variance changes of the dependent variable is due to the solidarity variable among the students. Considering T value (8.666 for DU) and

4. There is a significant relationship between social network and civic participation.

Table 4.11, examines the relation between social network and civic participation.

150 the correlation between these variables, Pearson statistic has been used. According to the correlation coefficient between these two variables, hypothesis 4 is confirmed and the correlation between these two variables is 0.56(for DU) and

0.57(for TU). This correlation is direct and it‟s Sig= 0.000 is significant; it means it could be generalized to statistical population and it's not by chance or random.

This hypothesis was also tested by single-variable regression. Tables 4.12 and

4.13 show that 0.310(for DU) and 0.327(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic participation) is due to social network variable.

Regarding T (11.568 for DU) and T (12.029 for TU) and with their significant level (Sig=0.000), this correlation for both countries in a level, higher than 99 percent is significant. The obtained Positive sign, Beta is (0.56 for DU), (0.57 for

TU) reveals that there is a direct relation between cooperation variable of couples and couples' relationship. It says that, as the social network among the students increase, their civic participation would increase as well.

5. There is a significant relationship between social communication and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two, dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used. Correlation coefficient between these two variables is 0.33(for DU) and 0.35(for TU) and its significant level for DU and TU is Sig=0.000, suggesting a relatively strong relationship between these two variables, and its significant level is acceptable

151 and could be generalized to statistical population, So this hypothesis has been confirmed.

This hypothesis was also tested by single-variable regression. Tables 4.15 and

4.16 show that 0.109(for DU) and 0.124(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic participation) is due to social communication.

Regarding T (6.049 for DU) and T (6.501 for TU) and with their significant level

(Sig=0.000), this correlation for both countries in a level, higher than 99 percent is significant. The obtained Positive sign, Beta is (0.33for DU), (0.35 for TU) reveals that there is a direct relation between social communication and civic participation. It says that, as social communication among the students enhance, their civic participation would increase as well.

6. There is a significant relationship between respondents‟ age and civic participation.

Given hypothesis is that, different ages have different civic participation. Since both dependent and independent variables have interval measurement level, for measuring the correlation between them, Pearson statistic has been used.

It is deducible from table 17, that correlation coefficient between these two variables (for DU and for TU) is less; (for DU 0.011, for TU – 0.001. Their significant level is not acceptable (for DU Sig=0.843) and (for TU Sig= 0.982), so because of not being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has not been confirmed.

152

7. Comparison of civic participation with consideration to gender.

As seen in the above table, the scores of Civic participation are satisfied the criterion of normal distribution, then independent T-test is run as follow:

As the level of significant in Leven‟F is less than 0.05, we should consider the second row “Equal variances not assumed”. Because of (P=0.167 for DU and p=0.945 for TU >0.05) there isn‟t any significant difference between Indian and

Iranian students (Male and Female) in the scores of civic participation.

8. There is a significant relationship between respondents‟ education and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

It is deducible from table 4.21, that correlation coefficient between these two variables for DU is less (for DU 0.052). Its significant level is not acceptable (for

153 acceptable (sig=015), so because of being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has been confirmed for TU.

9. Comparison of civic participation with consideration to Rural and Urban.

For responding to the question “Is there significant difference between the scores of Civic participation with consideration of Rural and Urban”, independent T-test should be run. One of the assumptions of independent T-test that should be tested is normal distribution of variable in both countries. For testing of this assumption one sample kolmogrov-smirnov is run as follow:

As seen in the above table22, the scores of Civic participation are satisfied the criterion of normal distribution, then independent T-test is run as follow:

As the level of significant in Leven‟F is less than 0.05, we should consider the second row “Equal variances not assumed”. Because of P=0.006<0.05 for India, there is significant difference between DU with consideration of rural and urban in the scores of civic participation. But because of p=0.821>0.05 for Iran, there isn‟t any significant difference between TU with consideration of rural and urban in the score of civic participation.

10. There is a significant relationship between father‟s education and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

It is deducible from table 4.25, that correlation coefficient between these two

154 variables for DU is less (0.018). Its significant level is not acceptable (for DU

Sig=0.759), so because of not being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has not been confirmed for DU, but correlation coefficient between these two variables for TU is (0.136). Its significant level is acceptable

(sig=018), so because of being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has been confirmed for TU but level of correlation coefficient is low.

This hypothesis was also tested by single-variable regression. Relationship between these two variables is confirmed only for TU and it doesn‟t show any relationship between two variables for DU. Tables 4.26 and 4.27 show that

0.000(for DU) and 0.018(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic participation) is due to father‟s education. Regarding T (.307 for DU) and T

(2.369 for TU) and with their significant level (Sig=0.759 for DU and Sig=0.018 for TU). The obtained Positive sign, Beta is (0.018 for DU), (0.136 for TU) reveals that there is a direct relation between father‟s education and civic participation only for TU. It says that, as father‟s education among the TU enhance, their civic participation would increase as well.

11. There is a significant relationship between mother‟s education and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

It is deducible from table 4.28, that correlation coefficient between these two variables for DU is less (0.082). Its significant level is not acceptable (for DU

155

Sig=0.158), so because of not being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has not been confirmed for DU, but correlation coefficient between these two variables for TU is (0.135). Its significant level is acceptable

(sig=019), so because of being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has been confirmed for TU but level of correlation coefficient is low.

0.007(for DU) and 0.018(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic participation) is due to mother‟s education. Regarding T (1.415 for DU) and T

(2.356 for TU) and with their significant level (Sig=0.158 for DU and Sig=0.019 for TU). The obtained Positive sign, Beta is (0.082 for DU), (0.135 for TU) reveals that there is a direct relation between mother‟s education and civic participation only for TU. It says that, as mother‟s education among the TU enhance, their civic participation would increase as well.

12. There is a significant relationship between father‟s occupation and civic participation.

For responding to this hypothesis ANOVA test was run. As seen in the table 4.31 total significant of ANOVA test between groups is accepted for both countries.

Among of father‟s occupation, two variables are different with consideration of civic participation for DU. That is, whose father had business occupation was

156 higher level in civic participation than the other students whose father had regular salaried govt. employee. (For DU, see table 4.32)

For TU, among of fathers‟ occupation six variables were different with consideration of civic participation. That is, whose fathers had farmer occupation was higher level in civic participation than the other occupations in table 4.33.

13. It seems that there is a significant relationship between mother‟s occupation and civic participation.

For responding to this hypothesis ANOVA test was run. As seen in the table 4.34 total significant of ANOVA test between groups is accepted for TU only. That is, there isn‟t any difference among DU students of civic participation with consideration mother‟s occupation.

Among of mother‟s occupation, two variables are different with consideration of civic participation for TU. That is, whose mother had regular salaried govt. employee occupation was higher level in civic participation than the other students whose mother had house-wife occupation. (For TU, see table 4.35)

14. There is a significant relationship between respondent income and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

It is deducible from table 4.36, that correlation coefficient between these two variables for DU is less (-0.048). Its significant level is not acceptable (for DU

157

Sig=0.407), so because of not being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has not been confirmed for DU, but correlation coefficient between these two variables for TU is (0.125). Its significant level is acceptable

(sig=031), so because of being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has been confirmed for TU but level of correlation coefficient is low.

0.002(for DU) and 0.016(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic participation) is due to respondent‟s income. Regarding T (-.830 for DU) and T

(2.172 for TU) and with their significant level (Sig=0.407 for DU and Sig=0.031 for TU). The obtained Positive sign, Beta is (-0.048 for DU), (0.125 for TU) reveals that there is a direct relation between respondent‟s income and civic participation only for TU. It says that, as respondent‟s income among the TU students‟ enhance, their civic participation would increase as well.

15. There is a significant relationship between family‟s income and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

It is deducible from table 4.39, that correlation coefficient between these two variables for DU is (-0.119). Its significant level is acceptable (for DU

Sig=0.040), so because of being a correlation between these two variables, this

158 hypothesis has been confirmed for India and its correlation coefficient is low and direction of coefficient is negative that is, as family‟s income among the DU students‟ enhance, their civic participation would decrease as well. Correlation coefficient between these two variables for TU is less (0.018). Its significant level is not acceptable (sig=.758), so because of not being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has not been confirmed for TU.

This hypothesis was also tested by single-variable regression. Relationship between these two variables is confirmed only for DU and it doesn‟t show any relationship between two variables for TU. Tables 4.40 and 4.41 show that

0.014(for DU) and 0.000(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic participation) is due to family‟s income. Regarding T (-2.063 for DU) and T

(0.309 for TU) and with their significant level (Sig=0.040 for DU and Sig=0.758 for TU). The obtained Positive sign, Beta is (-0.119 for DU), (0.018 for TU) reveals that there is a negative direct relation between family‟s income and civic participation only for India. It says that, as family‟s income among the Indian students‟ enhance, their civic participation would decrease as well.

16. Comparison of civic participation with consideration of universities DU and

TU.

159 normal distribution of variable in both countries. For testing of this assumption one sample kolmogrov-smirnov is run as follows:

As seen in table 4.43, the scores of civic participation have satisfied the criterion of normal distribution, independent t-test is run for it as follows:

As the level of significant in Leven‟F is more than 0.05, we should consider the second row “Equal variances assumed”. Because of (P=0.000<0.05) there is significant difference between DU and TU student in the scores of civic participation. According to the Mean of two countries in score of civic participation (table 4.42), DU students have higher score than TU students in civic participation.

17. Comparison of social capital with consideration of universities DU and TU.

Response to the question “Is there significant difference between the scores of social capital with consideration of universities”, independent T-test should be run. One of the assumptions of independent T-test that should be tested is normal distribution of variable in both countries. For testing of this assumption one sample kolmogrov-smirnov is run as follows:

As seen in the above table, the scores of Social capital have satisfied the criterion of normal distribution, independent t-test is run for it as follows:

As the level of significant in Leven‟F is less than 0.05, we should consider the second row “Equal variances not assumed”. Because of (P=0.000<0.05) there is significant difference between DU and TU students in the scores of social capital.

160

According to the Mean of two countries in score of social capital (table 4.45), DU students have higher score than TU students in social capital.

161

Discussion and Conclusion Introduction

Expertise and the attendant trend to transfer political subjects to „neutral‟ expert bodies, and the related transformations in social and political trust.

Civic participation or civic engagements are central to the realization of the progressive vision and the progressive agenda. Progressives are increasingly

143 coming to recognize that participation in political institutions, political processes, and civic life are critical indicators of political inclusion.

On the one hand, the foundation of social capital, on civic participation is important element in development both universities.

This research study relationship between social capital and civic participation among the students of DU and TU. we are going discuss about overview of the study, discussion, conclusion,

Overview of the study

The aim is to search to see if there is any relation between the parameters of social capital such as: social trust, social network, social solidarity, and social communication.

Positivist methodology was used in this research. This is based on the dependent cycle of theory and observation. According to the principles of Positivist theory

144 always takes precedence over action. Hereby, it has attempted to create a link between theoretical framework through observation of social capital relations, and

Civic participation in this research.

So, after conceptualizing and reviewing the wordings of social capital and Civic participation, we fixed it within the theoretical framework of Putnam. In this theoretical and conceptual framework, Atria Raul et all (2004) and Uphoof (1999) discriminates between structural and cognitive social capital. Structural social capital includes different forms of social networks and relations which bring more civil cooperation and participation. Cognitive social capital includes: norms, values, attitudes, beliefs, common understanding and variables that bind people together. Structural and cognitive social capitals are definable. Drawing structural and cognitive aspects of social capital may convey that there is no single structure under the name of social capital, but preferably, social capital is understood as a compound of central concept of social capital.

This is the framework of empirical research which link, the cognitive and structural aspects of social capital in two universities, DU - TU and Civic participation among the students.

When conceptual definition of social capital and Civic participation relations is made, social capital conceptually and generally refers to institutions, relations and norms, which form the quality and quantity of social interactions and binds them like glue (woolcock and Narayan: 2000).

145

Discussion:

Students‟ civic participation was measured by 41 questions which under six general indicators can be combined:

Media and news, Election and participation, Satisfaction of life, Association of activities, Political equality and Civic activity

Chapter Four gives the conclusions of this research, provides testing of theoretical concepts by concrete data, and also shows tested hypotheses and theoretical model. This chapter helps to discuss the findings and compare t hem with empirical documents which have been presented in research wordings.

1. First hypothesis considers the relation between social capital and civic

participation.

146

Over recent decades despite many researches done on social capital and

different aspects of society such as development.(Gilbertson, J. and

Manning, J. 2006.Putnam 1999, Hall 1999, Goetz and Jenkins 2007 and

Inglehart 1997).

2. Second hypothesis measures the relations between social trust and their

civic participation.

Fukuyama believes that, trust is the main basis of social order: societies are dependent on mutual trust and without it won't be established on their own.

(Fukuyama, 1995:25)

The importance of trust can be seen in various positions, in interaction with others. (Sztomka 1999, , Glaeser et all 2000, , Luman 1988, Misztal 1996)

3. Third hypothesis talks of the relations between social solidarity and civic participation.

Solidarity in social affairs strengthens the bond and tie among members of group..

Various studies show that social solidarity as one of the most important elements

147 of social capital brings bonding in society. (Putnam 1995 1993, Alderidge2002,

Woolcock 2000 and Macgillivray2002)

4. Fourth hypothesis shows the relations between social network and civic participation.

Recently many researchers suggested relationship between social network and civic participation (Putnam2000, Baker 2000, Jacobs1961, Putnam1993, and

Bourdieu1985).

5. Fifth hypothesis considers the relations between social communication and civic participation.

Many scholars suggested relationship between social communication and civic participation (Baker2000, Bourdieu1985, Woolcock2001 and Halpern2005).

Conclusion:

This section set out to discover the impact of social capital on civic participation.

This ambitious undertaking required a theory for social capital to be formulated, building on complementary theories for social capital and civic participation.

Some innovative methods needed to be developed to both access source data for the research and then generate models that could be tested in a statistically rigorous manner.

The results achieved found theoretical support, adding a degree of validation to the methods adopted. As with any research of a pioneering nature, limitations

148 exist in terms of the degree to which the approach can be verified and validated by others.

1. There is a significant relationship between social capital and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two, dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used. Correlation coefficient between these two variables is 0.65(for DU) and 0.46(for TU) and its significant level for India and Iran is Sig=0.000, suggesting a relatively strong relationship between these two variables, and its significant level is acceptable and could be generalized to statistical population, So this hypothesis has been confirmed.

Positive sign, Beta is (0.65 for DU), (0.46 for TU) reveals that there is a direct relation between social capital and civic participation relationship. It says that, as

149 social capital among the students enhances, their civic participation would increase as well.

2. There is a significant relationship between social trust and civic participation.

Table 4.5, examines the relation between trust and students‟ civic participation.

This correlation is direct and their P value (Sig = 0.000 for DU and sig=0.016 for

TU) that are significant; it means it could be generalized to statistical population and it's not by chance or random.

For this hypothesis, simple regression has also been used. It can be deduced from the table 4.6 and 4.7 that determination coefficient shows that 0.175(for DU) and

3. There is a significant relationship between social solidarity and civic participation.

150

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

Correlation coefficient between these two variables is 0.45 (for DU) and 0.32(for

For this hypothesis, simple regression has also been used. It can be deduced from the table 4.9 and 4.10 that determination coefficient shows that 0.201(for DU) and

0.105 (for TU) of variance changes of the dependent variable is due to the solidarity variable among the students. Considering T value (8.666 for DU) and

4. There is a significant relationship between social network and civic participation.

Table 4.11, examines the relation between social network and civic participation.

The given hypothesis in this project is that, as social network among the students rise their civic participation will raise also. Since social network variable and the variable of civic participation are at the interval measurement level, so to obtain the correlation between these variables, Pearson statistic has been used. According to the correlation coefficient between these two variables, hypothesis 4 is

151 confirmed and the correlation between these two variables is 0.56(for DU) and

0.57(for TU). This correlation is direct and it‟s Sig= 0.000 is significant; it means it could be generalized to statistical population and it's not by chance or random.

This hypothesis was also tested by single-variable regression. Tables 4.12 and

4.13 show that 0.310(for DU) and 0.327(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic participation) is due to social network variable.

5.There is a significant relationship between social communication and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two, dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used. Correlation coefficient between these two variables is 0.33(for DU) and 0.35(for TU) and its significant level for DU and TU is Sig=0.000, suggesting a relatively strong relationship between these two variables, and its significant level is acceptable and could be generalized to statistical population, So this hypothesis has been confirmed.

152

This hypothesis was also tested by single-variable regression. Tables 4.15 and

4.16 show that 0.109(for DU) and 0.124(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic participation) is due to social communication.

Regarding T (6.049 for DU) and T (6.501 for TU) and with their significant level

6. There is a significant relationship between respondents‟ age and civic participation.

7. Comparison of civic participation with consideration to gender.

For responding to the question “Is there significant difference between the scores of Civic participation with consideration of gender”, independent T-test should be

153 run. One of the assumptions of independent T-test that should be tested is normal distribution of variable in both countries. For testing of this assumption one sample kolmogrov-smirnov is run as table (4.19).

As seen in the above table, the scores of Civic participation are satisfied the criterion of normal distribution, then independent T-test is run as follow:

Iranian students (Male and Female) in the scores of civic participation.

8. There is a significant relationship between respondents‟ education and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

It is deducible from table 4.21, that correlation coefficient between these two variables for DU is less (for DU 0.052). Its significant level is not acceptable (for

DU Sig=0.370), so because of not being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has not been confirmed for India, but correlation coefficient between these two variables for TU is (0.141). Its significant level is acceptable (sig=015), so because of being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has been confirmed for TU.

9. Comparison of civic participation with consideration to Rural and Urban.

154

As seen in the above table22, the scores of Civic participation are satisfied the criterion of normal distribution, then independent T-test is run as follow:

10. There is a significant relationship between father‟s education and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

It is deducible from table 4.25, that correlation coefficient between these two variables for DU is less (0.018). Its significant level is not acceptable (for DU

155

(sig=018), so because of being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has been confirmed for TU but level of correlation coefficient is low.

0.000(for DU) and 0.018(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic participation) is due to father‟s education. Regarding T (.307 for DU) and T

11. There is a significant relationship between mother‟s education and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

It is deducible from table 4.28, that correlation coefficient between these two variables for DU is less (0.082). Its significant level is not acceptable (for DU

156

(sig=019), so because of being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has been confirmed for TU but level of correlation coefficient is low.

0.007(for DU) and 0.018(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic participation) is due to mother‟s education. Regarding T (1.415 for DU) and T

12. There is a significant relationship between father‟s occupation and civic participation.

For responding to this hypothesis ANOVA test was run. As seen in the table 4.31 total significant of ANOVA test between groups is accepted for both countries.

Among of father‟s occupation, two variables are different with consideration of civic participation for DU. That is, whose father had business occupation was higher level in civic participation than the other students whose father had regular salaried govt. employee. (For DU, see table 4.32)

157

13. It seems that there is a significant relationship between mother‟s occupation and civic participation.

14. There is a significant relationship between respondent income and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

It is deducible from table 4.36, that correlation coefficient between these two variables for DU is less (-0.048). Its significant level is not acceptable (for DU

158

(sig=031), so because of being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has been confirmed for TU but level of correlation coefficient is low.

0.002(for DU) and 0.016(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic participation) is due to respondent‟s income. Regarding T (-.830 for DU) and T

(2.172 for TU) and with their significant level (Sig=0.407 for DU and Sig=0.031 for TU). The obtained Positive sign, Beta is (-0.048 for DU), (0.125 for TU) reveals that there is a direct relation between respondent‟s income and civic participation only for TU. It says that, as respondent‟s income among the TU students‟ enhance, their civic participation would increase as well.

15. There is a significant relationship between family‟s income and civic participation.

To investigate this hypothesis, because of interval measured level of two dependent and independent variables, Pearson statistics has been used.

It is deducible from table 4.39, that correlation coefficient between these two variables for DU is (-0.119). Its significant level is acceptable (for DU

Sig=0.040), so because of being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has been confirmed for India and its correlation coefficient is low and direction of coefficient is negative that is, as family‟s income among the DU students‟ enhance, their civic participation would decrease as well. Correlation

159 coefficient between these two variables for TU is less (0.018). Its significant level is not acceptable (sig=.758), so because of not being a correlation between these two variables, this hypothesis has not been confirmed for TU.

0.014(for DU) and 0.000(for TU) of variance changes of dependent variable (civic participation) is due to family‟s income. Regarding T (-2.063 for DU) and T

16. Comparison of civic participation with consideration of universities DU and

TU.

Response to the question “Is there significant difference between the scores of civic participation with consideration of universities”, independent T-test should be run. One of the assumptions of independent T-test that should be tested is normal distribution of variable in both countries. For testing of this assumption one sample kolmogrov-smirnov is run as follows:

As seen in table 4.43, the scores of civic participation have satisfied the criterion of normal distribution, independent t-test is run for it as follows:

160

17. Comparison of social capital with consideration of universities DU and TU.

As seen in the above table, the scores of Social capital have satisfied the criterion of normal distribution, independent t-test is run for it as follows:

According to the Mean of two countries in score of social capital (table 4.45), DU students have higher score than TU students in social capital.

161

BIBLIOGRAGHY & REFERENCES

Adler, R.P., and J. Goggin.(2005). „What do we mean by civic engagement‟? Journal

of Transformative Education. 3: 236-253.

Alibabaei .Y(1998), “Multiple Regression in software of SPSS” ,Jahad press , 1 st ed.

Almond, G. A. and S. Verba. (1963). The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and

Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Alreck, P., and R. Settle. (1995). The survey research handbook. Boston: McGrew-

Hill.

American Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

American Psychological Association (2010). ‘Civic Engagement’. Retrieved from

http://www.apa.org/education/undergrad/civic-engagement.aspx

Atria.R , Siles.M , Arriagada.i , Rabison.L.J and Whiteford. S (2004) , “Social

Capital and poverty reduction in Latin America and the caribbean: towards a

new paradigm” ,United Nations Publication,ISBN:92-1-12133-5.

Baker, W.E. (2000). Achieving success through social capital: taping the hidden

resources in your personal and business networks. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Inc.

Barr, N. (2004). Problems and definition of measurement. In Economics of the

welfare state. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 121-124

Berkman, L., and T. Glass. (2000). „Social integration, social networks, social

support and health‟, in L. Berkman and I. Kawachi (Eds.): Social

Epidemiology (137-173). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

162

Bertucci, G.( 2007). „Civic Engagement in Public Policies: A Toolkit‟. Economic and

Social Affairs, United Nations. New York, USA: United Nations publication.

Bobek, D.L., Zaff, J., Li, Y., and R.M. Lerner. (2009). „Cognitive, emotional, and

behavioral components of civic action: Towards an integrated measure of civic

engagement‟. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30(5), 615-627.

Bourdieu, P. (1985). „The forms of capital‟, in J.G. Richardson (ed.): Handbook for

theory and research for the sociology of education (241-258). New York:

Greenwood.

Brehm, J. and W. Rahn. (1997). „Individual-Level Evidence for the Causes and

Consequences of Social Capital‟, American Journal of Political Science 41, 3:

999–1023.

Brehm, J. and W. Rahn. (1997). „Individual-Level Evidence for the Causes and

Consequences of Social Capital‟, American Journal of Political Science 41, 3:

999–1023.

Bromley, C., Curtice, J., and B. Seyd. (2001). „Political Engagement, Trust and

Constitutional Reform‟, in Alison Park, John Curtice, Katarina Thomson,

Lindsey Jarvis and Catherine Bromley (eds.), British Social Attitudes: The

18th Report. London: Sage.

Burde, D.(2004). ‟Weak State, Strong Community? Promoting Community

Participation in Post-Conflict Countries‟. Current Issues in Comparative

Education. 6(2), 73-87.

Carpenter, J.P., A.G. Daniere., and L.M. Takahashi. (2004). „Social capital and trust

in South-East Asian cities‟. Urban Studies, 41(4): 853-874. 163

Case, K. & Fair, R. (2007). Principles of Economics. Upper Saddle River, NJ:

Pearson Education. p. 54.

Cattell, V. (2001). „Poor people, poor places, and poor health: the mediating role of

social networks and social capital‟. Social Science and Medicine 52 (10):

1501-16.

Coalition for Civic Engagement and Leadership, University of Maryland. Available

at: www.terpimpact.umd.edu

Cohen, L., and A. Maldonado. (2007). „Research methods in education‟. British

Journal of Educational Studies, 55: 9.

Coleman, J. (1988). „Social capital in the creation of human capital‟. American

Journal of Sociology, 94: 95-120.

Coleman, J. 1990. Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.

Coleman, J. (1994). Foundations of Social Theory, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard

University Press.

Cox, E. (1998). „Measuring Social Capital as Part of Progress and Well-being‟, in R.

Eckersley (Ed.): Measuring Progress is Life Getting Better? (157-167).

Collingwood, Victoria: CSIRO Publishing.

Cullen, M. and H. Whiteford. (2001). The interrelations of social capital with health

and mental health. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

Dekker, K. (2007). „Social Capital, neighborhood attachment and participation in

distressed urban areas: a case study in the Hague and Utrecht, the Netherlands‟.

Housing Studies, 22(3): 355-379.

164

Delli Carpini, M. Public Policy, the Pew Charitable Trusts. Retrieved from:

http://www.apa.org/education/undergrad/civic-engagement.aspx

Earl, Babbie (1995), "The practice of social research" Seventh edition, USA.

Wadsworth Publishing Company (ITP), An International Thomson Publishing

Company.

Economic Survey of Delhi, (2007-2008). Available at: http://delhiplanning .nic.in/

Economic%20Survey/ES2007-08/ES2007-08.htm

Erlich, T. (2000). Civic Responsibility and Higher Education. Westport, CT: Oryx

Press.

Ferguson, K.M. (2006). „Social capital and children's well-being: a critical synthesis

of the international social capital literature‟. International Journal of Social

Welfare, 15: 2-18.

Flanagan, C. And P. Levine.( 2010). „Civic Engagement and the Transition to

Adulthood‟. The Future of Children, 20 (1), 159-179. DOI: 10.1353/

foc.0.0043

Flanagan, C. And P. Levine.( 2010). „Civic Engagement and the Transition to

Adulthood‟. The Future of Children, 20 (1), 159-179. DOI: 10.1353/

foc.0.0043

Fountain, J.E. (1998). „Social capital: a key enabler of innovation‟, in L.M.

Branscomb and J.H. Keller (Eds.): Investing in Innovation: Creating a

Research and Innovation Policy that Works (85-111). Cambridge, MA: MIT

Press.

165

Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: the social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New

York: The Free Press.

Fukuyama, F. (1999). The great disruption: human nature and the reconstitution of

social order. New York: The Free Press.

Fukuyama, F. (2002). „Social Capital and Development: The Coming Agenda‟. SAIS

Review, 22(1): 23-37.

Galston, W.A. (2001). „Political knowledge, political engagement, and civic

education‟. American Political Science Review, 4, 217‐34.

Gibson, C., and P. Levine. (2003). The civic mission of schools. New York and

Washington, DC: The Carnegie Corporation of New York and the Center for

Information and Research on Civic Learning.

Gilbertson, J. and J., Manning (2006). „Social participation and social capital in South

Yorkshire Coalfield Communities‟. Voluntary action, 8 (1), 22-38.

Gilbertson, J. and J., Manning (2006). „Social participation and social capital in

Goetz, Anne Marie and Rob Jenkins. (2007). “Citizen activism and public

accountability: lessons from case studies in India.” In Global Accountabilities:

Participation, Pluralism, and Public Ethics . Eds. Alnoor Ebrahim and Edward

Weisband, (65-85). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Granovetter, M.S. (1985). „Economic action and social structure: the problem of

embeddedness‟. American Journal of Sociology, 91: 481-510.

Hall, P.A. (1999). „Social capital in Britain‟. British Journal of Political Science,

29(3): 417-461.

Halpern, D. (2005). Social capital. Cambridge: Polity Press.

166

Healy, K. and A. Hampshire. (2002). „Social capital: a useful concept for social

work?‟. Australian Social Work, 55: 227-238. http- Kottak, Conrad Philip (2002), Cultural anthropology, The University of

Michigan, NewYork: McGraw-Hill.

Huchinson, S.R. (2004). „Survey Research‟, in Kathleen deMarrais and Stephen D.

Lapans (eds.): Foundations for research: methods of inquiry in education and

the social sciences (300-318). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associa

Inglehart, R. J. (1997). Modernization and Postmodernization. Princeton, NJ:

Princeton University Press.

Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities. New York: Random.

James, J. 2009. „Sharing mechanisms for information technology in developing

countries, social capital and quality of life‟. Social indicators research, 94: 43-

59.

Job, J. (2006). „Building Social and Political Trust: The Role of Civic Engagement‟,

The International Scope Review. 8 (13): 1-23.

Kahne, J., Chi,B., and E. Middaugh. (2006). „Building Social Capital for Civic and

Political Engagement: The Potential of High-School Civics Courses‟.

Canadian Journal of Education, 29, 2: 387‐409.

Karner T.X. (2000). „Social Capital‟, in E.F. Borgatta, and R.J.V. Montgomery

(Eds.): Encyclopedia of Sociology (2637-2641). New York: Macmillan.

Kawachi, I., B. Kennedy., K. Lochner., and D. Prothrow-Stith. (1997). „Social

capital, income inequality, and mortality‟. American Journal of Public Health,

87 (9): 1491-1498.

167

Knack, S., and Ph. Keefer. (1997). „Does social capital have an economic payoff? a

cross- country investigation‟. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112: 1251-88.

Krejcie, R.V. and D.W. Morgan. (1970). „Determining sample size for research

activities’. Educational and psychological measurement, 30: 607-610.

Matin, Abdul. (2004). Research Methods, Statistics, IT and e-Methods. New Delhi:

Icon Publications Pvt. Ltd.

McKenzie, K. and T. Harpham. (2006). Social Capital and Mental Health. London,

UK: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

McLaren, L. and Baird, V. (2006). „Of Time and Causality:A Simple Test of the

Requirement of Social Capital in Making DemocracyWork in Italy‟, Political

Studies, 54 (4), 889–97.

Michelsen, E., Zaff, J. F., and Hair, E. C. (2002). Civic engagement programs and

youth development: A synthesis. Washington, DC: Child Trends. Retrieved

from http://www.childtrends.org/ files/Civic Engagement Programsand

Youth Development

Neuman, W.L. (2007). Basics of social research: qualitative and quantitative

approaches, Pearson.

Newman, M.E.J. (2010) . Networks: An Introduction. Oxford University Press.

Orenstein, D.M. and Ashley, D. 2005. Sociological theory: Classical statements (6th

Ed.). Boston, MA, USA: Pearson Education.

168

Ounagh .N and M. Onagh. )2011(, “Social Capital and Quality of Life: A

Comparative Study of Delhi and Tehran” , Journal of Exclusion Studies, 1: 19-

35.

Pallant, Julie F. (2005), SPSS survival manual: a step by step guide to data analysis

using SPSS. Sydney: Allen & Unwin publication. p.126.

Pattie, C., Seyd, P., and P. Whiteley. (2003).„Citizenship and Civic Engagement:

Attitudes and Behaviour in Britain‟. Political Studies. 51: 443–468.

Pattie, C., Seyd, P., and P., Whiteley. (2004). Citizenship in Britain: Values,

Participation and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pickering, M. (2006). „Auguste Comte‟, in Ritzer, G. (Ed.): The Blackwell

Companion to Major Classical Social Theories (13-40). Malden, USA:

Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Piergiorgio Corbetta.(2003). Social research theory, methods and techniques, Sage

publications.

Portes, A. and J. Sensenbrenner. (1993). „Embeddedness and Immigration: Notes on

the Social Determinants of Economic Action‟. American Journal of Sociology

98:1320-1350.

Print, M., & Coleman, D. (2003). Towards understanding of social capital and

citizenship education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(1), 123‐149.

Putnam, R.D. (1993). Making democracy work: civic traditions in modern Italy.

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Putnam, R.D. (1995a). „Turning in, turning out: the strange disappearance of social

capital in America‟. Political science and politics, 28: 664-683. 169

Putnam, R.D. (1995b). „Bowling alone: America's declining social capital‟. Journal of

democracy, 6: 65-78. (Online: http:muse.jhu.edu./ demo/journal _of_

democracy/ v006/putnam.html).

Putnam, R.D. (2000). Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of America's civic

community. New York: Simon Schuster.

Randall, C.F. (1975). Conflict Sociology: Toward an Explanatory Science. New

York: Academic Press.

Requena, F. (2003). 'Social Capital, Satisfaction and Quality of Life in the Work

Place'. Social indicators research, 61: 331-360.

Retrieved from: (http://www.britannica.com/ EBchecked/topic/174299 /Emile-

Durkheim).

Retrieved from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_colleges_and_ universities

_in_Tehran.

Saei .A (2003), “Statistic analysis in social sciences with software SPSS for

windows”, Tehran, Kianmehr Publication, 3rd Ed.ISBN:964-94147-03.

Sapsford, R. (2006). „Methodology‟, in V. Jupp (Ed): The SAGE Dictionary of Social

Research Methods (175-177). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Saunders, M.N.K., P. Lewis, and A. Thornhill. 2003. Research methods for business

students (3rd Ed). Harlow: FT Prentice Hall.

Siisiainen, M. (2000). „Two concepts of social capital: Bourdieu vs. Putnam‟ (Paper

presented at ISTR Fourth International Conference on „The Third Sector: for

what and for whom?‟ Dublin, Ireland. 5-8 July 2000).

South Yorkshire Coalfield Communities‟. Voluntary action, 8 (1), 22-38.

170

Stern, M. J. and S. C. Seifert. (2009). „Civic Engagement and the Arts: Issues of

Conceptualization and Measurement‟. Animating Democracy, a program of

Americans for the Arts. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.

Stone, W. and J. Hughes.(2002). Social capital: empirical meaning and measurement

validity. Research Paper (No.27). Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family

Studies.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th Ed.).

New York: HarperCollins.

Tarrow, S. (1996). „Making Social Science Work across Space and Time: A Critical

Reflection on Robert Putnam‟s Making DemocracyWork‟. The American

Political Science Review, 90 (2), 389–97.

Turner, J. H. (2001). „The origins of positivism: the contributions of Auguste Comte

and Herbert Spencer‟, in G. Ritzer, and B. Smart. (Eds.): Hand Book of Social

Theory (35-37). London: Sage Publication Ltd.

Uphoff, N. (1999). „Understanding Social Capital: Learning from the Analysis and

Experiences of Participation‟, in Dasgupta and Seregeldin (Eds.): Social

Capital: A Multifaceted Perspective (215-253), Washington DC: World Bank.

Verba, S., Schlozman, K.L. and Brady, H.E. (1995) Voice and Equality: Civic

Voluntarism in

Weisberg, H.F., J.A. Krosnick, and B.D. Bowen. (1996). An Introduction to Survey

Research, Polling, and Data Analysis (3rd Ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Publications. wikipedia.org/wiki/Questionnaire.

171

Woolcock, M. (2000). „Social capital: the state of the nation‟, in J. Kajanoja and J.

Simpura (Eds.): ‘Social Capital: Global and Local Perspectives‟ (15-40).

Helsinki: VATT Publication.

Woolcock, M. (2001). „The place of social capital in understanding social and

economic outcomes‟. ISUMA Canadian Journal of Policy Research, 2(1): 11-

17.

Woolcock, M. and D. Narayan, (2000). „Social capital: implications for development

theory, research and policy‟. The World Bank Observer, 15(2): 225-249.

Youniss, J. and P., Levine.( 2009). Engaging Young People in Civic Life. Tennessee:

Vanderbilt University Press.

Zukin, C., Keeter, S., Andolina, M., Jenkins, K., and Delli Carpini, M. (2006). A New

Engagement? Political Participation, Civic Life, and the Changing American

Citizen. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

172

Appendix I: Normal P-P plot of R Regression Standardized Residual Dependent Variable: Compute of Civic Participation for India

1.00

.75

.50

.25

Expected Cum Prob 0.00 0.00 .25 .50 .75 1.00

Observ ed Cum Prob

Appendix II: The Maximum of Cook’s Value to evaluate outliers in Indian’s Data

Residuals Statisticsa

Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation N Predicted Value 99.88 184.75 141.72 17.604 300 Std. Predicted Value -2.377 2.444 .000 1.000 300 Standard Error of 1.493 5.883 2.664 .656 300 Predicted Value Adjusted Predicted Value 100.92 187.45 141.74 17.631 300 Residual -63.07 65.29 .00 19.234 300 Std. Residual -3.252 3.366 .000 .992 300 Stud. Residual -3.299 3.404 -.001 1.004 300 Deleted Residual -64.91 66.78 -.02 19.703 300 Stud. Deleted Residual -3.356 3.467 .000 1.009 300 Mahal. Distance .775 26.510 4.983 3.156 300 Cook's Distance .000 .125 .004 .010 300 Centered Leverage Value .003 .089 .017 .011 300 a. Dependent Variable: compute of civic participation

173

Appendix III: Normal P-P plot of R Regression Standardized Residual Dependent Variable: Compute of Civic Participation for Iran

1.00

.75

.50

.25

Expected Cum Prob 0.00 0.00 .25 .50 .75 1.00

Observ ed Cum Prob

Appendix IV: The Maximum of Cook’s Value to evaluate outliers in Iranian’s Data

Residuals Statisticsa

Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation N Predicted Value 86.47 172.03 114.26 14.639 300 Std. Predicted Value -1.898 3.946 .000 1.000 300 Standard Error of 1.093 5.206 2.047 .620 300 Predicted Value Adjusted Predicted Value 86.30 171.95 114.25 14.610 300 Residual -42.67 67.12 .00 18.426 300 Std. Residual -2.304 3.625 .000 .995 300 Stud. Residual -2.325 3.642 .000 1.001 300 Deleted Residual -43.44 67.79 .01 18.667 300 Stud. Deleted Residual -2.342 3.721 .001 1.007 300 Mahal. Distance .045 22.636 2.990 2.715 300 Cook's Distance .000 .037 .003 .006 300 Centered Leverage Value .000 .076 .010 .009 300 a. Dependent Variable: compute of civic participation

174

Appendix V, Questionnaire Form applied:

Dear respondent

The present questionnaire is related to an academic research and it does not concern any organization. Please help us with your accurate responses. I express my thanks and gratitude to you all who cooperated in a sensitive situation.

Very low low Moderate High Very high 1 2 3 4 5 X1 Most people can be trusted?

X2 How much do you trust to your relatives?

X3 How much do you trust to your friends?

X4 How much do you trust to your neighbor?

X5 How much do you trust to your police?

X6 How much do you trust to your court?

X7 How much do you trust to your parliament?

X8 How much do you trust to your politicians?

X9 How much do you trust to government officials?

X10 How much do you trust to your local consular?

X11 How much trust do you have in your classmate?

X12 Students activities?

X13 Teachers?

X14 Officials of your university?

X15 Administrators?

X16 Family members?

X17 Media

Suppose if your family member suddenly falls ill or meets an accident, how much help will you get fromyour?

Very low Moderate High Very low 2 3 4 high 1 5 X18 Neighbors

X19 Friends

X20 Close relatives

Suppose you lag behind your class fellows in study or for the preparation of exam. How much cooperation /Help you get from your?

Very low Moderate High Very low 2 3 4 high 1 5 X21 Friends

X22 Teachers

X23 Seniors

175

Suppose if you want to work for the welfare of destitute in your neighborhoods. How much cooperation you get from:

Very low Moderate High Very low 2 3 4 high 1 5 X24 Family members of the area

X25 Friends

X26 Neighbors

X27 Government officials

X28 Political leaders

Member of organization and level of participation: NO YES If yes what is the level of participation? 1 2 Very low Moderate High Very low 2 3 4 high 1 5 X29 Sport club X38

X30 Literary organization X39

X31 Political party X40

X32 Civic organization X41

X33 Environment group SX4 2 X34 Participated in a political campaign X43

X35 Services clubs X44

X36 Consumer organization X45

X37 Any other X46

Kingly provide information about your level of engagement with civic activities? Very low low Moderate High Very high 1 2 3 4 5 X47 Civic or community group or organization

X48 Human and civil rights group

X49 Contacted a member of parliament

X50 Contacted a local councilor

X51 Signed a petition

X52 Written a letter to the editor of a newspaper

X53 Participated in a community consultation or

attended a public meeting X54 Participated in a strike or picket

X55 Phoned a 'talkback' radio program

X56 Participation in community or special interest group activities X57 Participation in religious or spiritual activities

X58 Participation in sport or physical activities

X59 Doing continuing education courses or classes

176

X60 Visited library, museum, or art gallery X61 Cinema, theatre or concert

X62 Visiting friends or being visited by friends

X63 Going out with a group of friends

X64 Write letters to editors on issues of society concern

What are your views about the following:

Strongly Agree Moderate Disagree Strongly agree 1 2 3 4 disagree5 XE65 People should be permitted to vote even if they cannot do so intelligently XE66 Few people really know what is in their best interests in the long run.

XE67 Certain people are better qualified to lead this country because of their traditions and family background. XE68 It will always be necessary to have a few strong, able individuals who know how to take charge. XE69 Freedom of expression

Your level of participation:

Very low low Moderate High Very high 1 2 3 4 5 X70 Cultural and scientific activities X71 Music and theater programs X72 Technical or economic X73 Health and social services X74 Women’s group X75 Political group X76 Youth group X77 Religious group X78 Sports clubs X79 Cultural Association X80 NGOs X81 Professional Association X82 Trade Union X83 Credit/finance group (formal)

X84 cooperative

Your level of satisfaction of life: Very low low Moderate High Very high 1 2 3 4 5 X85 Considering all parts of your life vis. Physical, emotional, economic, environmental, and so on over the last year the quality of my life has been: X86 If you were to die tomorrow, would you be satisfied with what your life has meant? X87 Do you enjoy living among people of different life styles?

177

Type of media you use for promotion of civic participation or sharing information:

Media and news Very low low Moderate High Very high 1 2 3 4 5 X88 Newspapers

X89 Television

X90 Magazines

X91 Radio

X92 The Internet

X93 Seminar of scientific

X94 Work shop

In which of the following elections you cast your vote?

regularly casually never 1 2 3 X95 Local Council elections

X96 Parliament elections

X97 Presidential elections of relevant to you

How often do you participate in your following social communication? Very low Moderate High Very low 2 3 4 high 1 5 X98 How often do you speak to your parents?

X99 How often do speak with your siblings?

X100 How often do you speak with relatives?

X101 Have often do you speak with your neighbors?

X102 How often do you speak to your friends on the phone?

X103 Have you visited your friends in the past week?

Information about respondent

-Name (if you wish to X104 -Age(years): X105 -Gender: X106 -Religion: X107 -State: mention) 1:Male 1.Rural 2:Female 2.Urban X108 Education: 1.Undergraduate: 2.Postgraduate: 3.Professional courses: 1.B.A 2.B.SC 1.MA2.M.SC3.M.COM 1.MBA2.MSW3.MASS communication/ 3.B.COM B.tech/Medical / X109 Marital status: 1.Single 2.married 3.Divorced 4.Widowed

Information about your father and mother: Education

Education 1-Illiterate 2-Literate 3-School 3-Graduate 4-Post 5-Any level graduate other education X110 Father

X111 Mother

178

Information about your father and mother: Occupation

O ccupation 1-Casual 2.Farmer 3.Business 4.Regular salaried 5.Regular 6.Any other worker govt. employee salaried private sector employee

X112 Father

X113 Mother 7.House wife

X114 –Income of family (per anum): ……………………………………………………………….

X115-Income of yourself (per anum): ……………………………………………………………….

179