Social Participation and Status Crystallization

The conclusion concerning the relationship of ethnic origin and class position to casual neighboring relations is a general confirmation of the hypothesis proposed. When considered in terms of the two variables defined, predisposition to interpersonal contact and actual neighboring behavior, it was found that casual neighboring is a function both of the respondent's class position and of his ethnic membership. In a general sense members of lower-class groups engage in less casual neighboring than members of upperclass groups. In addition, there would seem to be marked differences among the specific ethnic groups as well as between the two generalized ethnic categorizations, Europeans and non-Europeans, with respect to casual neighboring behavior. It was observed that the major differentials between desire and performance in this area of casual neighboring appeared in the middle and lowest class non-European groups. As a whole the non-Europeans were described as characterized by more extensive and more highly ritualized concepts of hospitality and neighboring relations. Since neighboring relations apparently imply to them a more elaborate configuration of rituals and amenities of hospitality involving the availability of considerable means and facilities, it was suggested that the lower class non-Europeans are the least able of all the groups in the community to realize their predisposition to interpersonal contact. The Europeans, on the other hand, since their initial predisposition is lower and since their concept of the amenities and obligations of hospitality is less elaborate, are apparently able to realize their predisposition to interpersonal contact, even in the lowest socioeconomic status group.