IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v101y2020i1p240-255.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Disparities in Modes and Content of Civic Engagement: An Analysis Using Data from the Current Population Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Kenneth Shores
  • Sigal Ben‐Porath
  • Michael Jefferson

Abstract

Objective We describe disparities in civic engagement along two axes: the modal, describing the extent to which civic engagement is structured, and its content, describing the extent to which civic engagement has partisan objectives. Accordingly, this structure creates four domains of civic engagement: associational–partisan (e.g., voting), social–partisan (e.g., boycotting), associational–civic (e.g., participating in parent–teacher organizations), and social–civic (e.g., talking with neighbors). Method Using data from the Current Population Survey and item response theory methods, we generate civic engagement scores in each of these domains for as many as 35,618 U.S. respondents. Results and Conclusions Similar to prior studies, income and educational attainment are associated with large disparities in civic engagement across all domains. However, in contrast to prior studies, young Americans are not outpacing older Americans in social–partisan engagement; rather, older Americans are more engaged in every sector of engagement we measure.

Suggested Citation

  • Kenneth Shores & Sigal Ben‐Porath & Michael Jefferson, 2020. "Disparities in Modes and Content of Civic Engagement: An Analysis Using Data from the Current Population Survey," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(1), pages 240-255, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:101:y:2020:i:1:p:240-255
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12725
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12725
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12725?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:101:y:2020:i:1:p:240-255. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.