Internet and political participation

8/7/2019 Internet and political participation

1/12

University of Utah

Unraveling the Effects of the Internet on Political Participation?Author(s): Caroline J. Tolbert and Ramona S. McNealSource: Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 56, No. 2 (Jun., 2003), pp. 175-185Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. on behalf of the University of UtahStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3219896

Accessed: 30/11/2009 22:47

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sage.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

University of Utah and Sage Publications, Inc. are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend

access to Political Research Quarterly.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3219896?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sagehttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sagehttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3219896?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/12

Unraveling the Effects of the Internet onPolitical Participation?CAROLINEJ. TOLBERTANDRAMONA S. MCNEAL, KENTSTATEUNIVERSITYWhilealongtraditionofresearchdocumentsthedemographicandpsychologicaldeterminantsofpoliticalpar-ticipation,thereis also evidenceto suggestthatchangesin communicationtechnologymay playanimportantrolein influencingelectoralbehavior.Wesuggesttraditionalmodels of voter turnoutmaybe under-specifiedwith respectto changesin the media,especiallyuse of new informationtechnologies.The Internetmayenhancevoterinformationaboutcandidatesandelections,andin turnstimulateincreasedparticipation.UsingNESsurveydataandmultivariateanalysiswe findrespondentswith accessto the Internetand online electionnews weresignificantlymorelikelyto reportvotingin the 1996 and2000 presidentialelections.Thiswas trueeven aftercontrollingfor socioeconomicstatus,partisanship,attitudes,traditionalmediause, and stateenvi-ronmentalfactors.Simulationssuggestaccessto Internetand onlineelectionnewssignificantlyincreasedtheprobabilityofvotingbyanaverageof 12percentand 7.5 percent,respectively,in the2000 election.Themobi-lizing potentialof the Internetin 2000 was also associatedwith increasedparticipationbeyond voting.Thefindingshelpus understandhow technologycanimpactvotingand Americanpoliticalparticipation.

Leading behavioral theories of political participationhave shown that socioeconomic characteristicsofoters-education and income-are the most impor-tantvariablesin explainingwhetherone votes in the UnitedStates. Voterturnout is also affectedby race,ethnicity,age,genderand attitudinalfactorssuch as partisanship,politicalefficacyandpoliticalinterest(Abramson1983; Campbelletal.. 1960; Conway 1991; Wolfingerand Rosenstone1980;Rosenstone and Hansen 1993; Piven and Cloward 1983;Verbaand Nie 1972; Verba,Schlozman,and Brady1995).While a long tradition of research documents the demo-graphicand psychologicaldeterminantsof political partici-pation, there is also evidence to suggest that changes incommunicationtechnologymay play an importantrole ininfluencing electoral behavior. Research has found thatthose who read about politics in newspapers learn morethan those who watch television(Smith 1989). We suggesttraditionalmodels of voterturnoutmaybe under-specifiedwith respectto changesin the media,especiallyuse of newinformationtechnologies.In the past decadenew commu-nications technology has changed the way many peoplegathernews and participatein politics.The most importantof these new technologiesis the Internet,which is becom-ing the mass medium for the twenty-firstcentury.The Inter-net combines the audiovisual components of traditionalformsof media such as newspaperand televisionwith theinteractivityand speed of telephone and mail. It facilitatescommunicationflexibility,allowing individuals to choosewhat informationto accessand when to access. It also per-mits users to exchange large amounts of informationquicklyregardlessof geographicaldistance.Politicalscientists who ponderthe questionbelieve thatthe Internet should not be expected to boost turnout and

PoliticalResearchQuarterly,Vol. 56, No. 2 (June2003): pp. 175-185

indeed an early empiricalstudy on the subject providedsupportedfor this conclusion (Bimber2001). Ifthe Internetdoes have an effect on turnout,the findingwould not onlyrun counter to the empiricalliterature,but would requirescholarswho studyparticipationto account for and accom-modate a turnout effect of the Internet,including factorssuch as Internetuse in theoreticaland empiricalmodels ofvotingbehavior.It is difficultto predictwhich communication technol-ogywill be widely adoptedby the publicand even moredif-ficult to anticipatethe impactit may have on areassuch asthe economy and politics. It was speculatedthatVideotextand two-waycable televisionwould be adopted quickly inthe United Statesbut they have not lived up to theirprom-ise. On the other hand, radio and television spreadmorerapidly than could have been anticipated.Media systemdependency theory suggests that the differencebetweenthose forms of mediathathavea directimpacton the publicand those that do not is based on needs and resources(DeFleurand Ball-Rokeach1989: 248-51). Individualsneedmore information than they can themselves obtain due tocosts (money and time). One of the media's greatestresources is informationand the public relies on media tosubsidize them-provide them with the informationtheyneed. A medium thatprovidesthe publicwith the informa-tion it needs quicker,cheaper,or in a more convenientformis more likely to be adoptedand change patternsof behav-ior. Drawing on media system dependency theory, wehypothesize that the varietyof informationsources on theInternet(about candidatesand elections), combined withthe speed and flexibilityin obtaining informationonline,may stimulateincreasedparticipation.The next section draws on mass communicationstheoryto furtherexplorehow telecommunicationtechnology mayincreaseparticipationthroughincreasingthe availabilityofpolitical information.Section 2 discusses the relationship

175


3/12


4/12

UNRAVELING THE EFFECTS OF THE INTERNET ON POLITICAL PARTICIPATION 177that use is rising among minorityand low-income groupsincluding a 26 percent annual increaseamong Hispanics,and a 25 percent increase among households with anannual income below $15,000 (Benner2002: 1).Not only has the populationof Internetusersexpandedto include a wider demographicpopulation,but also politi-cal websites have become more sophisticated.' Candidatewebsites during the 2000 presidentialelection includedposition papers,rebuttalsagainstopponent'sstatement andwell-scriptedappealsformoney. Majornews organizations,such as C-SPANand CNN, used the latest technologicalinnovations to feature audio-streamedspeeches and webcam images to bring convention coverage to cyberspace(Solop 2000). American Online reportedthat seven of theall-timetop ten live "onlinechats"werepolitical,suggestingan increase in interest and involvement in the politicalprocess(Marlin1999: 12). While almost no grass-rootsitesexisted during the 1996 campaign, there were close to6,700 duringthe 2000 election (Wayne2000: 30).2. How DOES THE INTERNETIMPACTCITIZENPARTICIPATION?

How does empiricalresearchinform this largelynorma-tive debate?Earlystudies on the effects of the Internet onpolitical participationhave been mixed. Using a nationalrepresentativesample (1998 American National ElectionSurveys),Bimber(2001) found that access to the Internethad no impacton voterparticipation.With the exceptionofgiving campaigndonations, the politicalbehavior of thosewith access to the Internetand online politicalinformationdid not differ from those who did not use the Internet toseek politicalinformation.Accessto the Internetand onlinepoliticalinformationdid statisticallyincreasethe probabilitythat a respondentwould contributemoneyto politicalcam-paigns, suggesting a mobilizing potential. The research,however,is limited to one midterm election.In addition to voterturnout,anotherpotentiallyimpor-tant consequenceof the Internetis the effectit might haveon civic engagementand trust in government.A positiveimpactof the Interneton participationpatternsis supportedby recent researchbased on a nationalrepresentativesurvey(1999 DDBLifeStyle Study)which found Internet use forinformationexchange (but not social recreation,productconsumption of financial management) was positivelyrelatedto individualdifferencesin interpersonaltrust,civicengagement,and contentment (Shah, Kwak, and Holbert2001). Acrossagecohorts(generationX andbabyboomers)individualswho used the Internetfor informationexchangereported higher levels of interpersonal trust and civicengagement,aftercontrollingfor demographic,contextualand traditionalmedia use variables.Politicalparticipationis also definedby activitiessuch ascontacting political officials,attendinga rally,or signing a

The 1998 PEWsurvey reportedthat a majorityof individualsseekingpolitical information on the Internet felt candidatesites were poorly

petition.Weber and Bergman(2001) found that those indi-viduals who engagedin Internetactivitiessuch as using e-mail and chat-roomswere morelikelyto be engagedin a vari-ety of politicalactivities.WeberandBergman,however,usedSurvey2000, an on-linesurveyconducted as a joint effortbyacademic researchersand National GeographicInteractive.The surveywas self-selectedand non-randomand thereforesubjectto selectionbias,unlike the studiesreportedabove.Another area of participationthat has been singled outby researchersforstudyis citizen-initiatedcontact of publicofficials.Earlierresearchfound thatage, gender,education,politicalconnectedness and proximityto governmentinsti-tutions areimportantfactorsin determiningif a citizenwillinitiate communication. Older, educated, white citizenshave been found to be more likely to contact governmentofficials(Rosenstoneand Hansen 1993; Verbaet al. 1995),while women were less likely to instigatecontact (Rosen-stone and Hansen 1993; Verbaet al. 1995). Utilizinga self-selected,nonrandomon-linesurveyconductedin 1996 and1997 and two phone surveys Bimber (1999) examinedwhether or not the Internet altered the patternof citizencommunication.He found that when comparingtraditionalmeans of communicationto the Internet,manyof the samerelationsstill existed. The Internet,however,magnifiedthegendergap in communication,but narrowedthe differencebased on politicalconnectedness.The surveyof literaturehas found thatresearchershavelooked at a number of aspects related to Internet use andpoliticalparticipation.The findingshave been mixed, draw-ing on limited datasets and restrictedtime frame. In anattempt to address some of the weaknesses of previousresearch,we explorehow the Internetimpactsvoter turnoutand political participationover time using the 1996, 1998,and 2000 American Nation Election Surveys (NES). Byexamining Internet use for political news over time withappropriatemultivariatemethods our data overcomesmanyof the limitationsof previousresearch.Becausethe literatureon political participationfocusesattentionon voting,we began by examiningthe relationshipbetweenvotingand using the Internetforpoliticalinforma-tion with a simplelogistic regressionmodel. In order to usethe Internet to obtainpoliticalinformation,one must haveInternet access. Since individuals who are more likely tohave Internetaccess(higherincomeand education)are alsomore likely to vote, simultaneity may occur resulting inincorrect coefficients. Therefore the relationshipbetweenvotingand Internetuse forpoliticalinformationwill furtherbe examinedusinga two-stagemodel. Becausepoliticalpar-ticipation encompassesmore thanjust voting, we concludewith a two-stagemodel where the dependentvariablecon-sists of an index madeup of eight politicalactivities.

3. DATA, MEASUREMENT AND OVERVIEW OF THE ANALYSISTo examinethe impactof the Interneton voter turnoutand observechangesover time, we use data fromthe 1996,

1998, and 2000 American National Election Studies (NES);

UNRAVELING THE EFFECTS OF THE INTERNET ON POLITICAL PARTICIPATION 177

designedin termsof providinguseful information(Marlin1999: 12).


5/12

178 POLITICALRESEARCHQUARTERLY

70 '60 '50 '

C)c, 40'--ca)a) 30 '

20 '

10 '

0

- FIGURE1INCREASEIN INTERNETACCESSANDUSAGEFORPOLITICALREFERENCE,1996-2000

Ik

_63

I~ INAccess to PoliticalInformationOnline

1996 1998 2000Source:1996, 1998, 2000 NESPost-electionStudy.Inter-UniversityConsortiumfor Socialand PoliticalResearch.

nationwidelarge-scalerandomlyconducted in-person andtelephonesurveys.2Beginningin 1996, the NESbegan col-lectingdata on two questionsregardingInternetusage.Thefirst askedwhetherthe respondenthad Internetaccess andthe second asked if he/she had seen informationabout theelection on the Internet.These two questionsallow us toexaminetheInternetand its impacton politicalparticipation.Figure 1 suggestsa dramaticgrowthin Internet accessand use of online politicalinformationin the five yearsofour study In the 1996 survey,only 27 percent of respon-dents had access to the Internet,while an even lower pro-portion (7 percent)used the Internetfor politicalinforma-tion. By 1998 the percentage of respondents reportedhavingInternetaccesshad almost doubled (43 percent),butstill only 10 percentreported seeing online election infor-mation.In 2000, 63 percentof respondentsreportedhavingInternet access and a substantial, 29 percent, reportedobtainingelection informationon the web. The data sug-gestsa substantialgrowthin Internetaccessand its role as apoliticallinkageinstitutionfrom 1996 to 2000, hintingat itspotentialmobilizing impact.The Pew ResearchCenter (2000, June 11) has beentrackingmedia use in presidentialelections over time andthe findings indicate that the public is moving away fromtraditionalnews sources (network television and newspa-pers) and is placinga greaterreliance on media such as the

2 The NES is conductedeverytwoyearsandprovidesone of the most com-prehensivesources of dataregardingparticipationin Americanpolitics.

Internet. In 1992, 55 percent of those surveyed indicatedthat television was one their main source for presidentialnews coverageand 57 percent used newspapersas a pri-marysource. By the 2000 election, the numbers fell to 22percentfor network televisionand 39 percentfor newspa-pers. The Internet(on the otherhand) rose from a negligi-ble amountin 1992 to 11 percentin 2000. In addition,thePEWsurveysfound that even for those who do not considerit their main source of electionnews, the Internetis becom-ing a tool for gatheringelection information.In 1996, sur-veys found that only 4 percent of the generalpublic wentonline seeking election news. This figure increased to 18percent in 2000. For individuals who regularlyuse theInternet these figuresrose from 22 percent in 1996 to 33percentin 2000. The datasuggeststhe Internetis relatedtodeclinesin televisionand newspaperuse for election news.The dependentvariablein our primarystatisticalmodelis voting measuredby a dummyvariablewhere 1 indicatesthat the individualvotedin the election and 0 otherwise.Themainexplanatoryvariablesare Internetaccess and observingonline electioninformation.Both aredummyvariables,withInternetaccess andpoliticalinformationcoded 1 and 0 oth-erwise. The models are analyzed separatelyfor the threeyearsbut are not pooled because of changesin NESsurveycoding in 2000.3 If the Internet affectsvoting behavior,we

3 The income categorieswere substantiallyaltered in 2000, making itnearly impossible to recode or otherwise make adjustmentsso that thethreeyearswere compatible.For the 1996 and 1998 surveys,income is


OP.-


6/12

UNRAVELING THE EFFECTS OF THE INTERNET ON POLITICAL PARTICIPATION 179would expectaccess and use of election news to accountforsome variationin an individual'sdecisionto vote.A number of variableswere used to controlfor individ-ual level attitudinal and demographic factors. Previousresearch(Lewis-Beckand Rice 1992; Wolfingerand Rosen-stone 1980) found that socioeconomicfactors,particularlyincome and education, influence individual decisionswhetherornot to vote. Graphs(notshown) of the participa-tion score versus income categoriesfor each election yearindicateda nonlinearrelationshipbetween income and thepercentof individualsin anincomecategorywho werelikelyto vote. Given this nonlinear (quadratic) relationship,squaredincome plus income was found to best model therelationshipbetween income and citizenparticipation.4TheNES contains a 7-point scale measurespartisanshipwithpossible responsesrangingfrom1 = strongDemocratto 7 =strong Republican.We used this scale to createa series ofthreedummyvariablesis used to account for politicalatti-tudes, including strong Democrat,strong Republicanandpure independents, with weak partisansas the referencegroup. Education was measuredon a 7-point scale and adummyvariablefor femalerespondentwasmade.Tocontrolforraceand ethnicity,AfricanAmericans,AsianAmericans,and Latinoswere coded 1 and 0 otherwise,with non-His-panicwhites as the referencegroup. Graphssuggest votingincreasessteadilyfrom 18 to 65 yearsof age and then levelsoff.A logarithmicrelationshipwas the most efficientway tomeasurethe relationshipbetweenageand voterturnout,andwas calculatedby takingthe log of age in years.5We also control forgeneralmediaconsumption,includ-ing the number of days the previousweek that the respon-dent readthe newspaperand watched the nationalnightlynews. Since political interest is an importantpredictorofvoting,we use a scalerangingfromverymuch interestedinthe campaignto not much interested.We control for exter-nal efficacyby combining the scores from two questions"Peopledon't have say in government"and "Publicofficialsdon'tcare about people like me"into a 5-point scale rang-ing fromstronglydisagreeto strongly agree. Higherscoresmeasure increased externalefficacyor confidence in gov-ernmentresponsiveness.In addition to individuallevel factors,previousresearchsuggests the importance of state institutional and social

measuredon a 24-point scale where 1 indicates familyincome rangingfrom$0 to $2,999 and 24 indicates thatfamilyincomeis $105,000 peryearandover. For the 2000 survey,incomewasmeasuredon a22-pointscale where 1 indicatesfamilyincomerangingfrom$0 to $4,999 and22indicatesthat familyincomeis $200,000 per yearand over.4 Other nonlinear transformations,including log income and squaredincomeproducedsimilarfindings.5 Graphsof the percentageparticipationversusage for the differentyearsindicateda nonlinearrelationshipbetween age and the percentageofindividualsin an age groupwho were likely to vote. The graphsexhib-ited a graduallyincreasingcurve that leveled off afterage 65. This pat-ternsuggesteda logarithmicrelationship.When age,ratherthanthe logof age, is used in the statisticalmodels, the substantiveinterpretationofthe modelsis unchanged.

context in shaping voter turnout. By merging the surveydata with state level data,we are able to explore the envi-ronmentsin which individualsmake choices about partici-pating in elections. Previous researchsuggests state elec-torates with frequentexposureto direct democracy(ballotinitiatives)have higher voter turnout over the past thirtyyearsthan states without this process(Smith2001; Tolbert,Grummel,and Smith2001), as well ashigherlevelsof polit-ical efficacy(Bowlerand Donovan 2002). The number ofinitiatives appearing on state election ballots for 1996,1998, and 2000 wasused to measurevariationin state insti-tutional environments (Initiativeand ReferendaInstitute,Washington,D.C.). Basedon previousstudies,we anticipaterespondentslivingin states with frequentexposureto ballotinitiativesto reportan increasedprobabilityof voting.Researchalsoshows thatstate social context is importantin shapingvoter turnoutin the Americanstates.Stateswithhigher racial diversityare associated with lower levels ofvoter mobilization, weaker mobilizing institutions andhigherbarriersto voterparticipation.Researchshows stateswith higherracialdiversityhave significantlylower turnoutrates, aftercontrollingfor other factors(Hill and Leighley1999). For 1996 and 1998 we measure state racial contextby an index of racialand ethnicpercentages,createdfor thefiftystatesusing 1996 demographicdataon the size of theblack, Latino,AsianAmericanand non-Hispanicwhite pop-ulationsfromCurrentPopulationSurveys(HeroandTolbert1996; Hero 1998). State racialand ethnic percentagesfromthe 2000 census were used to createthe minoritydiversityindex for 2000. We expect citizens living in states withhigherracialand ethnicdiversityto be less likelyto vote.

FindingsFor each year, the dependentvariableis coded so thathigher scores are associatedwith increasedvoter turnout.Since the dependent variable is binary,we first estimate asimple logistic regressionmodel in Table 1. The data sug-gests in presidentialelections the Internet may increasevoter turnoutby giving individualsgreateraccess to politi-cal information,and in turn stimulatingincreased turnout.In recent presidentialelections (1996 and 2000), respon-dents who reported viewing online election informationwere more likely to report voting, after controlling forsocioeconomic conditions, partisanship, race, ethnicity,

gender,age, traditionalmedia use, politicalinterest,politi-cal efficacy,and state environmentalfactors.Similarly,indi-viduals with access to the Internetwere significantlymorelikely to vote, aftercontrollingfor other factors(data notshown due to space constraints).In the 2000 elections, thecoefficients for both viewing Internet news and Internetaccess are positive and statisticallysignificant,and almosttwice that of 1996, likely underscoringthe growingsize ofthe population with Internetaccess. The findings providestrongand consistentevidence that the Internetis affectingthe political landscape in presidentialelections. The rela-tionship between online politicalnews and voting did not

179UNRAVELING THE EFFECTS OF THE INTERNET ON POLITICAL PARTICIPATION


7/12

180 POLITICALRESEARCHQUARTERLYTABLE1

THE INTERNETANDVOTING2000 1998 1996

Variables (3(se) p > Izl 3 (se) p > Izl 3 (se) p > zlMediaInternetNews .558(.199) .005 -.232(.236) .326 .928(.372) .013Newspaper .039(.028) .160 .010(.026) .697 .034(.026) .197Television(National) .002(.030) .930 -.015(.026) .565 -.024(.028) .398EnvironmentalVar.Number of Initiatives -.013(.022) .558 .050(.020) .017 .019(.015) .202MinorityDiversityIndex .785(.529) .138 -1.04(.475) .027 -1.141(.518) .028Individual Level Var.StrongDemocrat .461(.227) .042 .947(.192) .000 .060(.198) .760StrongGOP .586(.308) .058 1.685(.275) .000 -.038(.222) .861PureIndependent -.661(.224) .003 .037(.225) .869 -.219(.255) .389LogAge 2.438(.524) .000 2.342(.202) .000 .394(.216) .068Female .135(.155) .382 -.219(.139) .115 .204(.142) .151Latino -.400(.291) .169 .268(.250) .284 .395(.272) .147Black .312(.261) .232 -.006(.222) .978 .094(.238) .691Asian .556(.674) .410 .240(.733) .743 -.390(.570) .494Education .279(.059) .000 .409(.044) .000 .025(.048) .605SquareIncome -.009(.003) .010 -.000(.001) .878 .004(.001) .006Income .243(.067) .000 .005(.038) .896 -.046(.046) .309Efficacy .129(.035) .000 .110(.034) .747 .007(.035) .826Interest .437(.059) .000 .070(.052) .173 .152(.110) .167Constant -5.646(.984) .000 -10.317(.892) .000 -1.190(.907) .189Pseudo R-Square .2489 .2190 .0657LRChi-Square(18) 367.50 .000 359.79 .000 88.47 .000N 1329 1191 1215Source:1996, 1998 and 2000 NESPost-electionstudy. Logitmaximumlikelihoodestimates,standarderrorsin parentheses.Reportedprobabilitiesbasedontwo-tailed test. For 1996, blacks constituted 12.1 percent,Asians 1.4 percentand Latinos8.7 percentof the originalsample.For 1998, blacks constituted11.9 percent,Asians 1.2 percentand Latinos 10.7 percent.For2000, blacks constituted 11.6 percent,Asians1.8 percentand Latinos7.6 percent.Analysisnot shown indicates that Internetaccess alone is a statisticallysignificantpredictorof increasedvoter turnoutfor all three electionyears,aftercontrollingforother factors.

hold for the 1998 midtermelection, consistent with previ-ous research(Bimber2001). This suggeststhat the Internetmay not be sufficient to overcomelow public interest asso-ciated with low profile contests such as those associatedwith midtermelections.AnInterneteffectin presidentialelectionsis supportedbyrecentsurveydatashowinganincreasedrelianceon theInter-net for election informationduring presidentialelections(1996 and 2000) comparedto midtermelections(1998). In1996 and 2000, 34 and 35 percent respectively,of respon-dentswho went online to get informationabout the electionsregisteredtheiropinionsby participatingin an electronicpoll,comparedto 26 percentin the 1998 midtermelection(PewResearchCenterforthe Peopleand the Press2000).Two-StageRegressionModel

Becauseindividuals who aremore likely to have Inter-net access (higher income and education) are also more

likely to vote, simultaneityin the binary choice modelsreportedin the previousanalysismay resultin biased coef-ficients,and thereforeincorrectinferences.We thus estimatea two-stage binarylogit model for viewing online politicalnews. In Table2 voterturnoutis a functionof a set of con-trolvariables,as well as thepredictedprobabilityof Internetelection news from a first-stagebinary logistic model (seefootnote in Table2 for details).The primaryinstrumentisInternetaccess.Table2 suggestssimultaneitydid not lead to biasedesti-matesof the effectsof Internetuse forelectionnews on voterturnout.Aftercontrollingfor endogenietyusing a two-stagelogit model,we find that Internetnews is a strongpredictorof increasedpoliticalparticipationin the 1996 and2000 pres-identialelections,but not in the 1998 midtermelection.Thesize of the second stagecoefficientsfor onlinepoliticalnewsin 1996 and2000 arestrongandstatisticallysignificant.Evenafterusinga morerigorousmodel,we findthatonlinepoliti-cal informationhas a positiveimpacton votingbehavior.



8/12

UNRAVELING THE EFFECTS OF THE INTERNET ON POLITICAL PARTICIPATION 181TABLE2

TWO-STAGE ESTIMATESOF INTERNET USE AND VOTING2000 1998 1996

Variables P (se) p > Izl 3 (se) p > Izl 3 (se) p > zliMediaPredictedprobabilityof InternetNewsa 1.560(.419) .000 1.601(4.269) .708 1.714 (.631) .007Newspaper .038(.028) .179 .009(.026) .716 .033(.026) .215Television(National) .001(.030) .961 -.014(.026) .589 -.029(.028) .315EnvironmentalVar.Number of Initiatives -.018(.022) .412 .049(.020) .019 .020(.015) .186MinorityDiversityIndex -.831(.531) .118 -1.064(.475) .025 -1.105(.518) .033Individual Level Var.StrongDemocrat .506(.229) .027 .954(.193) .000 .047(.198) .810StrongGOP .558(.308) .070 1.660(.279) .000 -.037(.222) .866PureIndependent -.596(.225) .008 -.028(.272) .917 -.228(.256) .374LogAge 3.143(.583) .000 2.343(.202) .000 .467(.220) .034Female .191(.156) .221 -.228(.140) .105 .206(.142) .148Latino -.396(.292) .175 .245(.257) .340 .422(.273) .122Black .373(.264) .157 -.038(.233) .868 .087(.239) .715Asian .449(.676) .507 .377(.801) .638 -.092(.625) .882Education .230(.061) .000 .404(.044) .000 .022(.048) .649SquareIncome -.009(.003) .009 -.001(.003) .651 .004(.001) .016Income .234(.067) .000 .029(.068) .667 -.036 (.046) .431Efficacy .124(.035) .001 .022(.043) .605 .008(.035) .805PoliticalInterest .400(.060) .000 .041(.087) .636 .152(.110) .166Constant -6.719(1.057) .000 -10.335(.859) .000 -1.524(.926) .100Pseudo R-Square .2527 .2185 .0660LRChi-Square(18) 373.09 .000 358.97 .000 88.85 .000N 1329 1191 1215Source:1996, 1998, 2000 NES Post-electionstudy.Logitmaximumlikelihoodestimates,standarderrorsin parentheses.Reportedprobabilitiesbasedon two-tailedtest. In these models,blacks constituted11.6 percent,Asians1.8 percentand Latinos7.6 percent.To controlforpossibleinterdependencebetween theInternetvariablesandvoting,we estimateda 2-stagebinarylogit model.a Predictedprobabilitiesfrom firststagebinarylogit regressionwhere the dependentvariableis exposureto Internetelection news, and independentvari-ables areincome,squaredincome,education, Latino,female,black,Asian,strongDemocrat,strongGOP,independent,log age, efficacy,politicalinterestandInternetaccess. Internetaccessis the instrumentalvariable.

Logistic regression coefficients for individual demo-graphicvariablesare in the expected directions and rela-tively consistent over time.6 Across election years, olderindividualswere morelikelyto participatein elections thanthe young. Consistentwith earlierstudies the participationmodels show that strongpartisans(Republicanor Democ-ratic)are more likely to vote in both 1998 and 2000, thanindependentsor individuals with weak partisanship.Con-sistent with a long traditionof previousresearch,individu-als with higher education, income and efficacywere morelikely to vote, as well as those with more politicalinterest6 Many of the traditionaldemographicand attitudinalcontrol variablesare not statisticallysignificantin 1996. While the datahas been doubleand tripledchecked forcoding errors,the findings likely stem fromthefact that the election was a low-turnout,non-competitive presidentialelection.

(2000 election only). Aftercontrollingfor Internet accessand use, consumption of traditional media, such asnewsprintor televisionhadno measurableimpacton votingbehavior.Enhancingrecent aggregatestate level analyses (Smith

2001; Tolbert, Grummel,Smith 2001), respondentslivingin stateswith frequentexposure to directdemocracyweremore likely to vote in the 1998 midterm,but not in thepresidentialelections of 1996 or 2000. This suggests thatballot initiativesmaybe particularlyimportantin stimulat-ing increasedinterestin off-yearelections,when issue cam-paignsdo not competewith presidentialraces.Confirmingpreviousresearchbased on aggregatestate level data (Hilland Leighley 1999), individuals residing in states withhigherracialdiversitywere significantlyless likely to vote,aftercontrollingfor other factorsin two of the three elec-tion years.

UNRAVELING THE EFFECTS OF THE INTERNET ON POLITICALPARTICIPATION 181


9/12

182 POLITICALRESEARCH QUARTERLYTABLE3

TWO-STAGEESTIMATESOF INTERNETUSE AND INDEXOF POLITICALPARTICIPATION2000 1998 1996

Variables 13(se) p >lzl (se) p > Izl 13(se) p > zlMediaPredictedprobabilityof InternetNewsa .267(.128) .037 3.010(1.499) .045 .289(.196) .140Newspaper .017(.008) .040 .028(.011) .011 .016(.009) .079Television(National) .005(.008) .571 .008(.011) .448 -.009(.010) .356Environmental Var.Number of Initiatives -.003(.006) .596 .014(.008) .062 .010(.004) .043MinorityDiversityIndex -.444(.151) .003 -.362(.199) .069 -.365(.178) .041Individual Level Var.StrongDemocrat .153(.059) .010 .218(.078) .005 .080(.066) .229StrongGOP .139(.064) .031 .184(.093) .047 .263(.066) .000PureIndependent -.287(.099) .004 -.059(.119) .621 -.054(.107) .609Log Age .530(.202) .009 .461(.081) .000 .158(.078) .044Female -.027(.046) .558 -.066(.059) .268 -.047(.049) .339Latino -.056(.101) .581 .154(.105) .143 -.018(.100) .852Black .015(.084) .851 -.099(.101) .327 -.111(.092) .230Asian -.084(.184) .647 .260(.353) .461 -.176(.254) .488Education .031(.018) .085 .064(.017) .000 .054(.016) .000Square Income -.002(.001) .004 -.000(.001) .590 .000(.000) .324Income .078(.020) .000 .022(.028) .427 -.007(.017) .664Efficacy .030(.010) .005 .007(.017) .654 .017(.012) .146PoliticalInterest .183(.021) .000 .134(.035) .000 .284(.039) .000Constant -1.523(.357) .000 -2.928(.358) .000 -1.218(.335) .000Pseudo R-Square .0988 .0813 .0560LRChi-Square(18) 397.59 .000 250.37 .000 196.69 .000N 1327 1188 1212Source:1996, 1998 and 2000 NES Post-electionstudy Poissonregressionmaximum likelihood estimates,standarderrorsin parentheses.Reportedproba-bilities based on two-tailedtest. In these models, blacks constituted11.6 percent,Asians 1.8 percentand Latinos 7.6 percent.Tocontrolforpossibleinter-dependencebetween the Internetvariablesand voting,a 2-stageleastsquares regressionwas estimated.a Predictedprobabilitiesfrom firststagebinarylogit regressionwhere the dependentvariableis exposureto Internet electionnews, and independentvari-ables areincome, incomesquared,education,Latino,female,black, Asian,strongDemocrat,strongGOP,independent, log age,politicalinterest,politicaleffi-cacyand Internetaccess. Internetaccess is the instrumentalvariable.InternetUse andPoliticalParticipation

Voting only representsone facet of political participa-tion. We also recognize that problems of over-reportingvoter turnout in survey data may influence the results.Tocheck the findingsof the previous analysisand avoid someof the problemswith over-reportingin surveydata,we esti-mate additionaltwo-stagemodels for the 1996, 1998, and2000 NES surveydatawhere the dependentvariableis anindex of responsesto eight politicalparticipationquestionsabout the elections-did the respondentvote, talkto othersabout candidatesor parties,displaybuttons or signs, workfor a partyor candidate,attendrallies,givemoneyto candi-dates, give money to parties, and give money to interestgroups-and the primary explanatoryvariableis the pre-dicted probabilityof exposureto Internetnews froma firststagemodel. In addition to allowingus to look at the impactof politicalinformationon a fullrangeof activities,using anindex helps us to have a more complete understandingof

the relationshipbetween online politicalnews and citizenparticipation.Since the dependent variablein the secondstagemodel is a count of eight formsof political participa-tion Poisson regressionis used. Control variablesare thesameas those used in Tables1 and 2.Estimatesreportedin Table 3 confirm that use of theInternetfor election news in 2000 and 1998 has a positiveinfluenceon politicalparticipation.Thatis, individualswhouse the Internetforpoliticalnews are more likelyto partic-ipatein politics.Use of the Internetforpoliticalinformationwas not statisticallysignificantin 1996. This makes sensebecause the number of individualsusing the Internetwasverylimitedin 1996. The analysislends additionalsupportto the resultsreportedin Table1 when votingalone is usedas the dependentvariable.7The resultssuggestit took time

7 The benefits of the Internetmay not be limited to just voting and par-ticipation, but might stimulate increased political interest, political



10/12

UNRAVELINGTHE EFFECTSOF THEINTERNETON POLITICALPARTICIFATION 183= TABLE4

EXPECTEDPROBABILITYOFVOTINGVARYINGINTERNETACCESSDifferenceNo Internet Internet Column2 -Year Election News Election News Column 1

1996 76.50%(.022) 83.46% (.026) 6.96%1998 40.50% (.032) 47.33% (.038) 6.83%2000 72.83%(.034) 85.34% (.018) 12.51%before the Internetbeganhavinga major impactin shapingparticipationin Americanelections.EstimatingtheMagnitudeof the Interneton theProbabilityofParticipation

To facilitateinterpretationof the statisticalfindings,thecoefficientsreportedin Table1 were converted to expectedvalues(probabilities)of votingin the 1996, 1998, and 2000generalelectionsusing a Monte Carlosimulationtechnique(King et al. 2000). The estimates provide an interestingcomparison of voting behavior between individuals withandwithout access to the Internetand onlinepoliticalinfor-mation.Probabilitysimulationswerecalculatedholdingfre-quency of exposureto state ballot contests, state racial andethnic diversity,efficacy,political interest,newspaper andtelevisionconsumption,log age,education and incomecon-stant, at their mean values. Genderwas set at female andstrongDemocrat,strongRepublicanandpure Independentswere set at 0, restrictingvoters to those without strongpar-tisanship.Giventhatrace/ethnicityis not statisticallysignif-icant in the models of political participation,probabilitiesareonly reportedforwhite voters(ie. the behaviorof whitescan be used to estimatethe effects of the Interneton partic-ipation levels for AfricanAmericans,AsianAmericansandLatinovoters as well).Table4 providesestimatesof the expectedprobabilityofvoting in the three elections forrespondentswith and with-out Internetaccess. Across racialand ethnic groups, accessto the Internet significantlyincreased the probabilityofvoting.Afterholding otherfactorsconstant,Internetaccessincreasedthe probabilityof voting by 7 percentin the 1996presidentialelection and the 1998 midterm election and12.5 percent in the 2000 presidentialelection. In 2000,white females without Internet access had a 73 percentprobabilityof voting in the election, compared to whitefemales with Internet access, which had an 85 percentprobabilityof voting.Table5 parallelsTable4 with estimates of the expectedprobabilityof voting varyingonlinenews consumption.Theeffectof viewing online election informationtranslatesintoan 11.7 percentincreasein theprobabilityof votingin 1996and a 7.7 percentboost in theprobabilityof participatingin

- TABLE 5EXPECTEDPROBABILITYOFVOTINGVARYING

INTERNETELECTIONNEWSDifferenceNo Internet Internet Column 2 -Year Access Access Column 1

1996 77.76% (.020) 89.49% (.037) 11.73%1998 52.99% (.025) 47.38% (.057) -5.61%2000 79.35% (.022) 87.05% (.021) 7.70%Note: Standarddeviationsare in parentheses.To simulatedifferentlevelsof Internetexposure, access was set at yes and no, and seeing electioninformation was set at yes and no. Values for age, education, squareincome, income, political efficacy,newspaperuse, televisionuse, politicalinterest,state initiative use and state minority diversityset at their mean.Gender was set at female, race at white and strong Democrat, strongRepublicanandpure independentswere set at 0, restrictingvoters to thosewithout strong partisanship.Estimations were produced using Clarify:Softwarefor the Interpretingand PresentingStatisticalResults.ByMichaelTomz,JasonWittenberg,and GaryKing.2000. Internetaccess and online politicalinformationhavethe smallestimpacton the probabilityof voting in the 1998off-yearelection,consistent with previousresearch.Twoimportantfindingsareimmediatelyapparent.First,the Internetand online election news appearto provideanimportantsourceof information,potentiallymobilizingnewvoters to participatein elections. In 1996, when only 27percent of survey respondentshad access to the Internet,there remainsa significantInterneteffect on political partic-ipation, but less dramaticthan in the 2000 elections. Thefindingsare consistentwith Crigleret al. (2000), who foundthat the Internetproved most useful for enhancing voterinformation,regardlessof race, in case studies of voters inCalifornia,Baltimore,and Philadelphia.Secondly,the find-ings suggestthat online election informationfacilitatesvoterparticipationin the highest visibility,presidentialelections,ratherthan lower stimulus elections.

CONCLUSIONTo most political analysts, it is clear we are at a cross-roads in terms of understandingthe impact of the newinformationtechnology on Americandemocracy.Bridgingthe previousliteratureon mass communicationsand votingbehavior,we find the Internetmayserve to fill a void in the

coverageof politicalelectionsvacatedto some degreeby themain-streammedia. Ratherthan interruptpre-seasonfoot-ball, for example, ABCsqueezed convention coverageforthe 2000 elections during football halftime programming.Overall, there was significantlyreduced coverage of theDemocraticand Republicannationalconventionsby the bigthree broadcastnetworksin 2000 increasingthe migrationof coverageto cable and the Internet(Hall 2000). Therisingimportanceof the Internetin politicsand electionsmaybedue to shifts in coverage by television and newspapermedia, or it may be a response to citizen need. Citizensdiscussion, contacting elected representatives,political efficacy Futureresearchshould examine these questions. reportusing the Internetforpoliticalnews becausethey are



11/12

184 POLITICAL RESEARCHQUARTERLY

dissatisfied with traditional media.8 Our findings suggestthe Internet meets citizen demand for political informationin a more convenient form and at a lower cost (price andtime) than traditional media, consistent with media systemsdependency theory (DeFleur and Ball-Rokeach 1989).In contrast to the previous research based on single-state case studies or the 1998 midterm election, we explorewhether the Internet has an impact on individual politicalparticipation over time. We find individuals with access tothe Internet and online election news was significantly morelikely to vote in the 1996 and 2000 presidential elections.The same relationship at two points in time, despite chang-ing Internet user populations, provides additional confi-dence in the findings. Internet access and use for electionnews also was associated with increased participationbeyond voting in the 1998 and 2000 elections, overcomingconcerns about over-reporting voting in survey data. Sim-ulations indicate that individuals with Internet access wereon average 12.5 percent more likely to vote, and those thatviewed online political information were 7.5 percent morelikely to vote, all else equal in the 2000 elections. Unliketraditional mass media, such as television and newspaper,the data suggests the mobilizing potential of the Internetduring elections.Over the past century voter turnout had declined fromnearly 85 percent of eligible voters to 50.7 percent in presi-dential elections (2000). The Internet (either as a means forelection news, political communication, or even conductingelections) may provide a means of updating American polit-ical institutions for a new information-based, economy,thereby improving citizens' perceptions and trust in govern-ment. While it appears that the Internet should increase par-ticipation, there is also the possibility that the Internet mayin the long run have a negative impact on political activities.Scholars and policymakers have long recognized differentialturnout rates by socioeconomic status in American elections;individuals with higher income and education are signifi-cantly more likely to vote (Campbell et al.. 1960; Wolfingerand Rosenstone 1980). Because of unequal access to tech-nology, use of information technology for political participa-tion may expand turnout rates among those who are alreadypredisposed to vote in elections, magnifying existing demo-graphic disparities in the composition of the electorate(Norris 2001; Mossberger, Tolbert, and Stansbury 2003).While not a panacea for the disenfranchised, the Inter-net may nevertheless represent an important new venue forpolitical information and communication, and counterdeclining civic engagement in America. It also raises broaderquestions about democratic participation. The research may

8 Recentsurveydatafound29 percentofrespondentswhowentonlinetogetnewsandinformationaboutthe 2000 electionsdid so because"youdon'tgetallthe news andinformationyouwantfromtraditionalnewsourcessuchasthedailynewspaperor thenetworkTVnews."Amajor-ity,56 percent,said"gettinginformationonline is moreconvenient"(PewResearchCenterfor the Peopleand the Press2000, generalpopu-

provide support for contextual effects, suggesting the cre-ation of virtual communities is important in stimulatingcivic participation (Huckfeldt 1979; Huckfeldt and Sprague1988). However, new communication technologies maynarrow the focus of attention, reducing citizen exposure toconflicting views and political tolerance (Sunstein 2001;Putnam 2000). Thus the Internet may foster more "bond-ing" among individuals with similar perspectives and inter-ests, but less "bridging"or tolerance (Putnam 2000).

REFERENCESAbramson, P R. 1983. Political Attitudes in America. San Francisco:Freeman.Benner,J. 2002, Feb. 7. "BushPlan 'DigitalDistortion"'WiredNews. Available [Online]: http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,50279,00.html.Bimber,B. 1999. "TheInternetand CitizenCommunicationwithGovernment:Does the Medium Matter?"PoliticalCommunica-tion16 (4): 409-28.

_ . 2001. "Informationand PoliticalEngagementin America:The Searchfor Effectsof InformationTechnologyat the Indi-vidual Level."PoliticalResearchQuarterly54(1): 53-67.Bower, S., and T. Donovan. 2002. "Democracy,InstitutionsandAttitudes about Citizen Influence on Government."BritishJournalof PoliticalScience32: 371-390.Campbell,A., P E. Converse,W E. Millerand D. E. Stokes. 1960.TheAmericanVoter.Chicago,Ill.:Universityof ChicagoPress.Cappella,J. N., and H. K.Jamieson.1997. Spiralof Cynicism:ThePressand the PublicGood.New York:OxfordUniversityPress.Chaffee,S. and Kanihan,S. E 1997. "LearningAbout Politicsfromthe Media."PoliticalCommunication14 (4): 421-30.

Cigler,A.,J. Marion,and S. B. Green. 2000. "Connectingwith theInternet in Political Campaigns:Experimentson Race andUser Satisfaction."Presented at the 2000 Annual Meetingofthe AmericanPoliticalScienceAssociation,Washington,D.C.,August31-September3, 2000.Conway,M. 1991. PoliticalParticipationin the UnitedStates,2d ed.Washington,DC:CQ Press.Crotty,W J., andG. C.Jacobson.1980. AmericanPartiesin Decline.Boston:Little,Brown.Davis, R., ed. 1994. Politicsand the Media.EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:PrenticeHall.

DeFleur,M. L., and S. Ball-Rokeach.1989. TheoriesofMassCom-munication5th ed. New York:Longman.Entman, R .M. 1989. DemocracyWithoutCitizens.New York:OxfordUniversityPress.Fallows,J. 1996. Breakingthe News: How the Media UndermineAmericanDemocracy.New York:Patheon.Gibson,R. 2002. "ElectionsOnline:AssessingInternetVotinginLight of the Arizona Democratic Primary."PoliticalScienceQuarterly116 (4): 561-83.Graber,D. A. 1989. Mass Media and AmericanPolitics,3rd ed.Washington,DC:CQ Press.Hall,J. 2000. "ANation,not a Niche."ColumbiaJournalismReview39 (2): 12.Hero,Rodney.1998. Facesof Inequality:SocialDiversityinAmericanPolitics.New York:OxfordPress.

Hero, R., and C. Tolbert.1996. "A Racial/EthnicDiversityInter-pretationof Politics and Policyin the Statesof the U.S."Amer-lation,N = 3,234).


icanJournal of Political Science 40: 851-71.


12/12


Hill,K.,andJ. Leighley.1999. "RacialDiversity,VoterTurnout,andMobilizingInstitutionsin the United States."AmericanPoliticsQuarterly27: 275-95.Huckfeldt,R. 1979. "PoliticalParticipationand the NeighborhoodSocialContext."AmericanJournalofPoliticalScience23: 579-92.HuckfeldtR., andJ. Sprague.1988. "Choice,SocialStructure,andPolitical Information:The InformationCoercion of Minori-ties."AmericanJournalofPoliticalScience32: 467-82.Iyengar,S., D. R. Kinder.1987. News ThatMatters:Agenda-SettingandPrimingin a TelevisionAge.Chicago:Universityof ChicagoPress.Kerbel,M. R. 1995. Remoteand Controlled:MediaPoliticsin a Cyn-icalAge.Boulder,CO:WestviewPress.

_ . 1998. Editedfor Television:CNN, ABC, and American Presi-dentialElections.Boulder,CO:WestviewPress.King,G.,M.Tomz,andJasonWittenberg.2000. "Makingthe Mostof StatisticalAnalysis:ImprovingInterpretationand Presenta-tion."AmericanJournalofPoliticalScience44: 347-61.Lewis-Beck,M. S., and T. W Rice. 1992. ForecastingElections.Washington,DC:CQ Press.Marlin,A.S. 1999. "Politicson the Web,Why and Where?"Cam-

paignsandElections20 (3): 11-12.McChesney,R. W 1999. RichMedia,PoorDemocracy;CommunicationPoliticsinDubiousTimes.Chicago:Universityof IllinoisPress.McComb,M.E., and D. L. 1972. "TheAgenda-SettingFunctionofthe Mass Media."PublicOpinionQuarterly36 (2): 176-87.McLeod,J., and D. McDonald. 1985. "BeyondSimple Exposure:MediaOrientationsand TheirImpacton the PoliticalProcess."CommunicationResearch12: 3-34.Mossberger,K., C. Tolbert,and M. Stansbury.Forthcoming2003.BeyondtheDigitalDivide.Washington,DC: GeorgetownUni-versityPress.Nie, Norman H., and Lutz Erbring.2000. InternetandSociety:APreliminaryReport.Stanford,CA: Stanford Institute for theQuantitativeStudyof SocietyNorris,Pippa. 2001. DigitalDivide:CivicEngagement,InformationPoverty,and the InternetWorldwide.Cambridge,MA: Cam-bridge UniversityPress.O'Keefe,G.J., and K.Reid-Nash.1987. "SocializationFunctions."In C. R.Bergerand S. H. Chaffee,eds., Handbookof Communi-cationScience,(pp. 419-55). NewburyPark,CA:Sage.Pew ResearchCenterfor the People and the Press, 2000. Cam-paign and InternetSurvey October 10-November 25, N =1,435.Piven,F E, and R. A. Cloward.1983. WhyAmericansDon'tVote.New York:Pantheon.Putnam,R. 2000. BowlingAlone:TheCollapseandRevivalofAmeri-canCommunity.New York:Simonand Schuster.Rosenstone,S.J., and M.Hansen. 1993. Mobilization,Participation,

andDemocracyin America.New York:Macmillan.Shah, D., N. Kwak,and R. Holbert.2001. "'Connecting'and 'Dis-connecting'withCivicLife:Patternsof InternetUse and the Pro-ductionof SocialCapital."PoliticalCommunication18: 141-62.

Smith,E. 1989. TheUnchangingAmericanVoter.Berkeley:Univer-sity of CaliforniaPress.Smith, M. 2001. "TheContingentEffectsof BallotInitiativesandCandidateRaceson Turnout."AmericanJournalofPoliticalSci-ence 45: 700-06.Solop, E I. 2000. "DigitalDemocracyComes of Age in Arizona:Participationand Politics in the First BindingInternet Elec-tion."Presented at Annual Meetingof the AmericanPoliticalScience Association,Washington,D.C.August 31-September3, 2000.Sunstein,C. 2001. "Freedomof Expressionin the United States:The Future,"In T. Hensley,ed., TheBoundariesof FreedomofExpressionand Orderin AmericanDemocracy.Kent,OH: KentStateUniversityPress.Tolbert,C.J., J. Grummel,and D. A. Smith.2001. "TheEffectsofBallotInitiativeson VoterTurnoutin the UnitedStates."Amer-icanPoliticsResearch29 (6): 625-48.U.S. Departmentof Commerce.NationalTelecommunicationsandInformationAdministration.2002. A NationOnline:HowAmer-icansAreExpandingTheirUseoftheInternet.Available[Online]:http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/dn/anationonline2.pdf/.Verba,S., K.L.Schlozman,and H. E.Brady1995. VoiceandEqual-ity:CivicVoluntarisminAmericanPolitics.Cambridge,MA:Har-vardUniversityPress.Verba,S., and N. H. Nie. 1972. ParticipationinAmerica.New York:Harperand Row.Verba,S., K. Schlozman,and H. Brady.1995. VoiceandEquality:CivicVoluntarisminAmericanPolitics.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.Wayne,L. (2000, May21). "OnWeb,VotersReinventGrass-RootsActivism."NewYorkTimes,p. 30, sec 1.Weaver,D. H. 1996. "WhatVotersLearn from Media."AnnualoftheAAPSSJuly:34-47.Weaver,D. H., and D. Drew. 1993. "VoterLearningin the 1990Off-YearElection:Did the MediaMatter?"JournalismQuarterly70: 356-68.Weaver,D. H., D. A. Graber,M. E. McCombs,and C. H. Eyal.1981. MediaAgenda-Settingin a PresidentialElection:Issues,Imagesand Interest.New York:Praeger.Weber,L. M., andJ. Bergman.2001. "WhoParticipatesand How?A Comparisonof Citizens 'Online'and the MassPublic."Pre-sented at the AnnualMeetingof the WesternPoliticalScienceAssociation,March15-17, 2001, LasVegas,NVWolfinger,R., and S.J. Rosenstone.1980. WhoVotes?New Haven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.

Received: July 5, 2002Accepted for Publication: November 11, 2002ctolber [email protected]@kent.edu

UNRAVELINGTHEEFFECTSOF THEINTERNETON POLITICALPARTICIPATION 185

Documents

Internet and political participation