IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v95y2014i5p1259-1277.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Participation, Online and Otherwise: What's the Difference for Policy Preferences?

Author

Listed:
  • Jennifer Oser
  • Jan E. Leighley
  • Kenneth M. Winneg

Abstract

type="main"> One explanation for why voters’ preferences are privileged by policymakers is that voters are likely to communicate their preferences through additional avenues as well. We examine this “communication hypothesis” by comparing the policy preferences of different types of political participators. We analyze the National Annenberg Election Survey (2008) using latent class analysis to identify different types of political participators and multinomial logistic regression to compare the policy preferences of these participator types. Voters who also engage in additional online and/or offline political acts have policy preferences that differ in a number of meaningful ways from those who “only” vote. The findings indicate that prior research has overlooked important evidence on the connection between citizen participation and political outcomes due to a primary focus on the act of voting. This study suggests how future research can assess the impact of citizens’ broader patterns of political participation.

Suggested Citation

  • Jennifer Oser & Jan E. Leighley & Kenneth M. Winneg, 2014. "Participation, Online and Otherwise: What's the Difference for Policy Preferences?," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1259-1277, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:95:y:2014:i:5:p:1259-1277
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/ssqu.12100
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul S. Martin, 2003. "Voting's Rewards: Voter Turnout, Attentive Publics, and Congressional Allocation of Federal Money," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(1), pages 110-127, January.
    2. Ansolabehere, Stephen & Hersh, Eitan, 2012. "Validation: What Big Data Reveal About Survey Misreporting and the Real Electorate," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 437-459.
    3. Hicks, Alexander M. & Swank, Duane H., 1992. "Politics, Institutions, and Welfare Spending in Industrialized Democracies, 1960–82," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 86(3), pages 658-674, September.
    4. Brady, Henry E. & Verba, Sidney & Schlozman, Kay Lehman, 1995. "Beyond SES: A Resource Model of Political Participation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(2), pages 271-294, June.
    5. Young Min Baek, 2010. "To Buy or Not to Buy: Who are Political Consumers? What do they Think and How Do they Participate?," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58, pages 1065-1086, December.
    6. Verba, Sidney & Schlozman, Kay Lehman & Brady, Henry & Nie, Norman H., 1993. "Citizen Activity: Who Participates? What Do They Say?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(2), pages 303-318, June.
    7. Jill E. Fuller, 2004. "Equality in Cyberdemocracy? Gauging Gender Gaps in On‐Line Civic Participation," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 85(4), pages 938-957, December.
    8. Russell J. Dalton, 2008. "Citizenship Norms and the Expansion of Political Participation," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56, pages 76-98, March.
    9. Htun, Mala & Weldon, S. Laurel, 2012. "The Civic Origins of Progressive Policy Change: Combating Violence against Women in Global Perspective, 1975–2005," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 106(3), pages 548-569, August.
    10. Russell J. Dalton, 2008. "Citizenship Norms and the Expansion of Political Participation," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56(1), pages 76-98, March.
    11. Brady, Henry E. & Schlozman, Kay Lehman & Verba, Sidney, 1999. "Prospecting for Participants: Rational Expectations and the Recruitment of Political Activists," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 93(1), pages 153-168, March.
    12. Young Min Baek, 2010. "To Buy or Not to Buy: Who are Political Consumers? What do they Think and How Do they Participate?," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(5), pages 1065-1086, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ilya Somin, 2021. "Freedom through foot voting," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 141-152, February.
    2. Jennifer Oser, 2017. "Assessing How Participators Combine Acts in Their “Political Tool Kits”: A Person-Centered Measurement Approach for Analyzing Citizen Participation," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 133(1), pages 235-258, August.
    3. David Johann & Markus Steinbrecher & Kathrin Thomas, 2020. "Channels of participation: Political participant types and personality," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-13, October.
    4. Georgios Kyroglou & Matt Henn, 2017. "Political Consumerism as a Neoliberal Response to Youth Political Disengagement," Societies, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-16, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jennifer Oser, 2017. "Assessing How Participators Combine Acts in Their “Political Tool Kits”: A Person-Centered Measurement Approach for Analyzing Citizen Participation," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 133(1), pages 235-258, August.
    2. Lucy Atkinson, 2012. "Buying In to Social Change," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 644(1), pages 191-206, November.
    3. Gail Pacheco & Barrett Owen, 2015. "Moving through the political participation hierarchy: a focus on personal values," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(3), pages 222-238, January.
    4. Hilde Coffe & Catherine Bolzendahl, 2011. "Gender Gaps in Political Participation Across Sub-Saharan African Nations," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 102(2), pages 245-264, June.
    5. Ramírez-Álvarez, Aurora Alejandra, 2019. "Land titling and its effect on the allocation of public goods: Evidence from Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-1.
    6. Kwangho Jung & Seung-Hee Lee & Jane Workman, 2018. "Purchasing Counterfeits and Citizenship: Public Service Motivation Matters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, December.
    7. Jennifer Oser & Marc Hooghe & Zsuzsa Bakk & Roberto Mari, 2023. "Changing citizenship norms among adolescents, 1999-2009-2016: A two-step latent class approach with measurement equivalence testing," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(5), pages 4915-4933, October.
    8. Tore Ellingsen & Benedikt Herrmann & Martin A. Nowak & David G. Rand & Corina E. Tarnita, 2012. "Civic Capital in Two Cultures: The Nature of Cooperation in Romania and USA," CESifo Working Paper Series 4042, CESifo.
    9. Jae Young Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2020. "Examining the Moderation Effect of Political Trust on the Linkage between Civic Morality and Support for Environmental Taxation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-15, June.
    10. Piatak Jaclyn, 2023. "Do Sociocultural Factors Drive Civic Engagement? An Examination of Political Interest and Religious Attendance," Nonprofit Policy Forum, De Gruyter, vol. 14(2), pages 185-204, April.
    11. Carolin V. Zorell & Mundo Yang, 2019. "Real-World Sustainable Citizenship between Political Consumerism and Material Practices," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-22, November.
    12. Sofie Marien & Marc Hooghe & Ellen Quintelier, 2010. "Inequalities in Non‐institutionalised Forms of Political Participation: A Multi‐level Analysis of 25 countries," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(1), pages 187-213, February.
    13. Li, Xuan, 2020. "The critical assessment of the youth policy and youth civic engagement in Denmark and three Danish municipalities," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    14. Nuno Tiago Baptista & Ricardo Gouveia Rodrigues, 2018. "Clustering consumers who engage in boycotting: New insights into the relationship between political consumerism and institutional trust," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 15(1), pages 87-104, March.
    15. Jesús Granados-Sánchez, 2023. "Sustainable Global Citizenship: A Critical Realist Approach," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-22, March.
    16. Piotr Koc, 2021. "Measuring Non-electoral Political Participation: Bi-factor Model as a Tool to Extract Dimensions," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 271-287, July.
    17. Roberto Foa & Anna Nemirovskaya, 2014. "State Formation And Frontier Society: An Empirical Examination," HSE Working papers WP BRP 13/PS/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    18. Georgios Kyroglou & Matt Henn, 2022. "On Measuring Political Consumerism: An Exploratory Study Among Young People in the UK and in Greece," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1191-1220, October.
    19. Cato Waeterloos & Peter Conradie & Michel Walrave & Koen Ponnet, 2021. "Digital Issue Movements: Political Repertoires and Drivers of Participation among Belgian Youth in the Context of ‘School Strike for Climate’," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-19, September.
    20. Susan L. Prescott & Alan C. Logan & Glenn Albrecht & Dianne E. Campbell & Julian Crane & Ashlee Cunsolo & John W. Holloway & Anita L. Kozyrskyj & Christopher A. Lowry & John Penders & Nicole Redvers &, 2018. "The Canmore Declaration: Statement of Principles for Planetary Health," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-18, July.

    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:95:y:2014:i:5:p:1259-1277. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.