Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-txr5j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-15T11:06:46.234Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Citizen-Initiated Contacting of Government Officials and Socioeconomic Status: Determining the Relationship and Accounting for It

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Elaine B. Sharp*
Affiliation:
University of Kansas

Abstract

The topic of citizen-initiated contacting of government officials has received increasing attention, but research has yielded conflicting findings on the relationship of socioeconomic status to contacting behavior. Various studies find that the two are negatively, positively, parabolically, or negligibly related. Data are presented supporting the claim of a positive relationship, and reasons for the conflicting findings are explored. The need-awareness model, associated with the finding of a parabolic relationship between socioeconomic status and contacting at the aggregate level, is tested at the individual level of analysis. While the importance of the need and awareness factors is affirmed, the overall model is not supported. As with other modes of political participation, sense of efficacy is found to be an important predictor of contracting, but the positive relationship between socioeconomic status and contacting remains when efficacy is controlled.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Campbell, Angus, Gurin, Gerald, and Miller, Warren (1954). The Voter Decides. Evanston, Ill.: Row Peterson.Google Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Gurin, Gerald, and Miller, Warren (1960). The American Voter. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Eisinger, Peter (1972). “The Pattern of Citizen Contacts with Urban Officials.” In Hahn, Harlan (ed.), People and Politics in Urban Society. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage.Google Scholar
Gamson, William (1968). Power and Discontent. Homewood, Ill.: Dorsey Press.Google Scholar
Jacob, Herbert (1972). “Contact with Government Agencies: A Preliminary Analysis of the Distribution of Government Services.” Midwest Journal of Political Science 16: 123–46.10.2307/2110413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Bryan, Greenberg, Saadia, Kaufman, Clifford, and Drew, Joseph (1977). “Bureaucratic Response to Citizen Initiated Contacts: Environmental Enforcement in Detriot.” American Political Science Review 72: 148–65.10.1017/S0003055400259352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, Frank, Meltsner, Arnold, and Wildavsky, Aaron (1974). Urban Outcomes. Berkeley: University of California Press.10.1525/9780520315303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lineberry, Robert (1977). Equality and Urban Policy. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage.Google Scholar
Lipsky, Michael (1980). Street-Level Bureaucracy. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
Mladenka, Kenneth (1978). “Citizen Demand and Bureaucratic Response: Direct Dialing Democracy in a Major American City.” In Lineberry, Robert (ed.), The Politics and Economics of Urban Services. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage.Google Scholar
Seligson, Mitchell (1980). “A Problem-Solving Approach to Measuring Political Efficacy.” Social Science Quarterly 60: 630–42.Google Scholar
Stone, Clarence (1980). “Systemic Power in Community Decision-Making: A Restatement of Stratification Theory.” American Political Science Review 74: 978–90.10.2307/1954317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vedlitz, Arnold, and Veblen, Eric (1980). “Voting and Contacting: Two Forms of Political Participation in a Suburban Community.” Urban Affairs Quarterly 16: 3148.10.1177/107808748001600102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vedlitz, Arnold, Dyer, James, and Durand, Roger (1980). “Citizen Contacts with Local Governments: A Comparative View.” American Journal of Political Science 24: 5067.10.2307/2110924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verba, Sidney, and Nie, Norman (1972). Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.