IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v112y2018i03p494-508_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Makes a Good Neighbor? Race, Place, and Norms of Political Participation

Author

Listed:
  • ANOLL, ALLISON P.

Abstract

Social norms are thought to motivate behaviors like political participation, but context should influence both the content and activation of these norms. I show that both race and neighborhood context moderate the social value of political participation in the United States. Using original survey data and a survey experiment, I find that Whites, Blacks, and Latinos not only conceptualize participation differently, but also asymmetrically reward those who are politically active, with minority Americans often providing more social incentives for participation than Whites. I combine this survey data with geographic demography from the American Community Survey and find that neighborhood characteristics outpace individual-level indicators in predicting the social value of political participation. The findings suggest that scholars of political behavior should consider race, place, and social norms when seeking to understand participation in an increasingly diverse America.

Suggested Citation

  • Anoll, Allison P., 2018. "What Makes a Good Neighbor? Race, Place, and Norms of Political Participation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 112(3), pages 494-508, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:112:y:2018:i:03:p:494-508_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055418000175/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Charles S. Bullock & Charles M. Lamb & Eric M. Wilk, 2021. "African American and Latino discrimination complaints: comparing volume and outcomes," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2676-2688, November.

    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:cup:apsrev:v:112:y:2018:i:03:p:494-508_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    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.