Appendix A

Sample of Request Letter for Jury Coordinator Assistance

January 24, 2003Dear Ms. XXXX,I am writing to follow up on your recent telephone conversation with Mary R. Anderson. Mary is a graduate student in the Department of Political Science at Florida State University, and Mary contacted you regarding the possibility of asking citizens from your jury pool to complete a brief survey as part of a class project.

Mary is one of seven students this semester in a graduate course in political science on advanced research in American politics. I am the professor for this course. The advanced research course is taken by students who already have taken most or all of the substantive semi-nars required for the Ph.D. in political science. These students soon will be writing their dissertations, and, a few years down the road, most will be working as professors of political science. The advanced research course provides students the opportunity to conduct original research on American politics in preparation for work on the disserta-tion. It is our hope that your jurors will provide some of the data for this research.

Let me say a bit regarding what we hope to accomplish with this project, and why it is that we are asking for your assistance. The sur-veys that we seek to distribute will be brief paper-and-pencil forms. Each survey will be three or four pages in length, and include no more than 25 to 30 questions. Completion of the survey should take about 8 to 10 minutes. Two important points about the survey war-rant emphasis. First, participation is entirely voluntary. Some of us know from personal experience that there can be a great deal of

144 APPENDIX

“down time” when one is called for jury duty, and we’re hopeful that many of the citizens who have been called will be willing to fill out our surveys. Second, participation is entirely anonymous. We will ask demographic questions (year of birth, age, sex, education, etc.), but we will not ask—nor do we need—any identifying information about the people who fill out the surveys.

The research questions being examined in this project center on question wording. We know that seemingly minor changes in how survey questions are worded can produce substantial effects on the data. The students will be testing several hypotheses about the effects of changes in question wording. To do this, the surveys actually will be “survey experiments” in that different respondents will answer slightly different items. As one example, one student is interested in the extent to which Americans perceive North Korea to be a threat to the United States, and, more specifically, in whether North Korea’s status as both a Communist state and a nuclear state heighten that perceived threat. To provide data on these issues, each respondent would be asked one of four versions of a question evaluating North Korea: one that makes no mention of Communism or nuclear weap-ons, one that mentions that North Korea has a Communist govern-ment, one that mentions that North Korea has at least two nuclear weapons, and one that mentions both the Communist government and the nuclear arsenal. We expect that the perceived threat will increase with mention of Communism and nuclear weapons, but the key questions are, first, how much of an effect these pieces of infor-mation will have, and second, which respondents will be most respon-sive to these cues (for instance, we might hypothesize that older respondents will react more strongly to reference to North Korea as Communist than would younger respondents).

The students in the seminar currently are finalizing the survey instruments. They will be available for you to review by the first week of February. We hope to collect data in March. There will be a lag time of a few weeks between when you receive the draft surveys and when we ask you to distribute them because all survey research con-ducted by students and faculty at Florida State University is reviewed in advance by a human subjects committee.

Because graduate students do not have access to the resources needed to conduct national telephone surveys, research of the sort planned in this project often must make use of undergraduates as respondents. For obvious reasons, that is far less than ideal for scien-tific purposes. We have found that jury pools are an excellent alter-

145APPENDIX

nate because the respondents are so much more diverse than are undergraduates.

Mary will contact you a few days after you receive this letter to see if you have any questions or concerns. I also will be more than happy to discuss the project further with you. Again, our plan is to mail drafts of the survey instruments to you within about two weeks, and to conduct actual data collection in March.

I very greatly appreciate your assistance with this project. The edu-cation of the next generation of college professors is something that we here at Florida State University take extremely seriously. Your cooperation with this study will prove to be enormously valuable to Mary and her fellow students.

Sincerely,Professor XXXX

Appendix B

Jury Pool Questionnaire

Survey Items for Sense of Community

Based on your personal experiences please respond to the follow ques-tions about you [context here] by circling ONE of the numbers.

Note: Context rotated between the following:Circle of friendsWorkplaceChurch/place of worshipNeighborhoodAssociationCity or town

to what extent do you have a sense of community?a) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10None at all Very much

to what extent do you have a sense of belonging?b) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10None at all Very much

to what extent do you feel connected to everyone?c) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10None at all Very much

during times of crisis how often do you turn to the people there d) for support?1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10None at all Very much

148 APPENDIX

to what extent do you consider the people there like family?e) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10None at all Very much

to what extent do you have a sense of attachment?f) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10None at all Very much

Appendix C

Context Survey Documents

C.1 Sample Letter of Introduction to Churches, Organizations, and Workplaces

Club XXXXPresident XXXXXAddressTallahassee, FL

January 28, 2004Dear President XXXX,I am graduate student in the Political Science department at Florida State University and I am writing to ask for your assistance with a study I am conducting for my dissertation. For the purposes of completing my research I am surveying individuals who are members of local organiza-tions and associations. The objective of the survey is to gain a better understanding of how people develop a sense of community within an organization. I am looking for a random group of roughly 30–50 peo-ple from your association to complete the survey. I will be calling you in the next few weeks so that we can talk in greater detail about the study. I just wanted to take this time to introduce myself and give you some idea about the purpose of my call. I greatly appreciate your help with this endeavor and I am looking forward to speaking with you shortly.

Sincerely,Mary R. AndersonGraduate Student

Department of Political ScienceFlorida State University

(850) 644-8978mra8203@garnet.acns.fsu.edu

APPENDIX150

C.2 Instructions to Members

Instructions

Hello everyone, I really appreciate your participation in this study. My name is Mary Anderson and I am a graduate student at Florida State University. I am working on my dissertation in Political Science and am currently at the stage in my studies where I need to collect survey data in order to move forward with my research agenda. Please remember this survey is anonymous, so your identity will not be known to me or anyone else. Please follow the instructions below for completing the questionnaire.

1. Please read the letter attached to the survey and remove it for your own personal records.

2. Please fill out the ENTIRE questionnaire.3. Once you have finished, please place the completed survey in the

envelope marked “Completed Questionnaires.”

Thank you so much for your help and participation, it is greatly appreciated.

Mary AndersonGraduate Student

Florida State UniversityDepartment of Political Science

C.3 Cover letter to Potential Respondents

September 15, 2003Dear Citizen,I am a graduate student under the direction of Professor Jeffery Mondak in the Department of Political Science at Florida State University. I am conducting a research study on citizen involvement and political attitudes as part of my dissertation research.

I am requesting your participation, which will involve answering a questionnaire. Your participation in this study is voluntary. The ques-tionnaire is anonymous. You will be asked to answer questions related to your community. The results of the study may be published, but your name will not be known.

If you have any questions concerning the research study, please call me at (850)644-8978 or send me an email message at mra8203@garnet.acns.fsu.edu. Additionally, if you would like to speak directly

APPENDIX 151

with Professor Mondak, he can be reached at (850)644–7302 or by email at jmondak@fsu.edu.

Return of the questionnaire will be considered your consent to participate. Thank you.

Sincerely,Mary R. Anderson

Graduate Student, Florida State University

C.4 Context Survey Instrument (Sample for Places of Worship)

Please answer every question. Thank you.

On a scale from 1 to 10, 1 meaning “none at all” and 10 meaning “very much” please answer the following questions based on your personal experience. Please circle one number per question.1=none at all and 10=very much

How much do you believe your local representatives, such as city 1. commissioners, care about what you think is important for Tallahassee?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10none at all very much

Generally speaking, how much would you say you care about your 2. neighborhood?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10none at all very much

How about Tallahassee, how much would you say you care about 3. Tallahassee?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10none at all very much

How much of a difference do you believe that you can make in 4. your neighborhood?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10none at all very much

How about Tallahassee, how much of a difference do you believe 5. you can make in Tallahassee?

APPENDIX152

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10none at all very much

Now we would like to know about how likely you think you are to take part in local government. Please circle one number per question.

6. If the city of Tallahassee was about to do something you did NOT approve of, such as building a waste facility near your home, how likely would you be to

Attend a meeting about the proposal?a. Very likely Somewhat likely Not very likely Not at all likelySpeak at the meeting?b. Very likely Somewhat likely Not very likely Not at all likelySign a petition?c. Very likely Somewhat likely Not very likely Not at all likelyContact your local representative?d. Very likely Somewhat likely Not very likely Not at all likelyWrite a letter to the editor of the newspaper?e. Very likely Somewhat likely Not very likely Not at all likely

7. What if the county wanted to raise the speed limit on your street, how likely would you be to

Attend a meeting about the proposal?a. Very likely Somewhat likely Not very likely Not at all likelySpeak at the meeting?b. Very likely Somewhat likely Not very likely Not at all likelySign a petition?c. Very likely Somewhat likely Not very likely Not at all likelyContact your local representative?d. Very likely Somewhat likely Not very likely Not at all likelyWrite a letter to the editor of the newspapere.

APPENDIX 153

Very likely Somewhat likely Not very likely Not at all likely

8. Have you attended a local public meeting in the past 5 years?Yes No

9. If the answer was yes, can you tell us was that meeting about your neighborhood, school, the city, or the county? Circle as many as apply.School City County Neighborhood

10. I have a question about how often you have discussions about politics.

How often do you discuss politics with members of your a. family?Very often Somewhat often Not very often Neverwith your neighbors?b. Very often Somewhat often Not very often NeverWith people from your club(s) or association(s)?c. Very often Somewhat often Not very often NeverWith people from work?d. Very often Somewhat often Not very often NeverWith people from your church or place of worship?e. Very often Somewhat often Not very often NeverWith other friends and acquaintances?f. Very often Somewhat often Not very often Never

11. The following section contains pairs of words. On a scale from 0 to 10, which word best describes you. For example, suppose that the number zero means “bold” the number 10 means “shy” and the number 5 is exactly the middle—neither shy nor bold. On this scale what number best represents you? You can use ANY NUMBER from 0 to 10, but please circle only one number.0=efficient and 10=inefficient; 0=kind and 10=unkind, etc.

efficient/ inefficienta. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Efficient inefficientkind/ unkindb. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Kind unkindtense/ calmc.

APPENDIX154

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Tense calmunsympathetic/ sympatheticd. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10unsympathetic sympatheticorganized/ disorganizede. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Organized disorganizednervous/ relaxedf. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Nervous relaxedreserved/ outgoingg. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Reserved outgoing

intelligent/ unintelligenth. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Intelligent unintelligent

neat/ sloppyi. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Neat sloppy

introverted/ extrovertedj. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Introverted extroverted

12. Now we would like to ask you about your involvement in the Tallahassee community. On a scale from 1 to 10, 1 meaning “not at all” and 10 meaning “very much” please answer the following questions based on you personal experience. Please circle one.To what extent do you feel connected1=not at all and 10=very much

in Tallahassee?a. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Not at all very muchin you neighborhood?b. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Not at all very muchin your place of worship?c. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Not at all very muchin your voluntary associations?d.

APPENDIX 155

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Not at all very muchamongst your circle of friends?e. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Not at all very muchin your workplace, or if you are recently retired, in the most f. recent place you’ve worked?1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Not at all very much

13. As far as you know, are you currently registered to vote?Yes No

14. Did you vote in the 2000 presidential election?Yes No

How about local elections, do you always vote in those, some-15. times vote, rarely vote, or never vote?Always Sometimes Rarely Never

Generally speaking, would you consider yourself to be a Democrat, 16. a Republican, or an independent? Please circle one.1=democrat 4=independent and 7=republican1 2 3 4 5 6 7Democrat Independent Republican

To what extent do you approve of the job George Bush is doing 17. as president?Strongly approve Approve Disapprove Strongly Disapprove

We are going to ask you about the government here in Tallahassee, 18. over the past 5 years do you think the local government has got-ten better, stayed about the same, or do you think it is not as good as it used to be? Please circle one.Gotten better Stayed the same Not as good as it used to be

Overall, would you rate the way the city is run as excellent, very 19. good, good enough, not so good, or not good at all? Please circle one.Excellent Very good Good enough Not so good Not good at all

How much of the time do you think you can trust your local 20. officials (eg. such as the mayor, city commissioners, School Board

APPENDIX156

members, etc) to do what is right, nearly all the time, most of the time, seldom or never?Nearly all the time Most of the time Seldom Never

How much of an effect do you think your local government (city 21. of Tallahassee) has on your daily life? Would you say it affects you a great deal, somewhat, only a little, or not at all?A great deal Somewhat Only a little Not at all

People in Tallahassee pay local taxes, do you generally think they 22. get their monies worth in services?Very much Some A little Not at all

If you think people get their monies worth only some of the 23. time, a little or not at all, what do you think is the greatest cause of this? Please circle only one answer.a. Wrong prioritiesb. Unequal service distributionc. Poor administrationd. Political corruptione. Unequal taxationf. Public apathyg. Other

How safe do you feel walking around your neighborhood at night, 24. very safe, somewhat safe, somewhat unsafe, or very unsafe?Very safe Somewhat safe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe

We want to ask you where you think increased efforts should be 25. taken in managing Tallahassee. I know there are a lot of things on this list, but I want you to circle up to three areas where you believe increased efforts are warranted.

Public schoolsa. Law enforcementb. Floodingc. Housing and welfared. Drugse. Recreationf. Public Health servicesg. Streets and transportationh.

And if some things had to be cut back, which ones would you 26. choose? Again, circle up to three?

Public schoolsa.

APPENDIX 157

Law enforcementb. Floodingc. Housing and welfared. Drugse. Recreationf. Public Health servicesg. Streets and transportationh.

As you know it costs money to keep the city running. If a choice 27. had to be made would you raise taxes or cut some of the services like those on the list we just discussed?Raise taxes Cut services

Here are several ways local governments can raise taxes, if more 28. tax money is needed, what do you think the best way to raise it is? Please circle only one.Tax on property Tax on utilities Sales tax

The statements below are some things that people might say 29. about their church or place of worship. For each statement, on a scale of 1–5, please tell me how much you agree with the state-ment. 1 is strongly disagree and 5 is strongly agree. Please circle only one.

I think my church is a good place for me to worship.a. 1 2 3 4 5strongly stronglydisagree agreePeople in my church do not share the same values.b. 1 2 3 4 5strongly stronglydisagree agreeMy fellow church members and I want the same things from c. the church.1 2 3 4 5strongly stronglydisagree agreeI can recognize most of the people who are members of my d. church.1 2 3 4 5strongly stronglydisagree agree

APPENDIX158

I feel at home in this church.e. 1 2 3 4 5strongly stronglydisagree agree

Very few church members know me.f. 1 2 3 4 5strongly stronglydisagree agree

I care about what my fellow members think of my g. actions.1 2 3 4 5strongly stronglydisagree agree

I have no influence over what this church is like.h. 1 2 3 4 5strongly stronglydisagree agreeIf there is a problem in this church people who are members i. here can get it solved.1 2 3 4 5strongly stronglydisagree agreeIt is very important to me belong to this particular church.j. 1 2 3 4 5strongly stronglydisagree agreePeople in this church generally don’t get along with each k. other.1 2 3 4 5strongly stronglydisagree agreeI expect to belong to this church for a long time.l. 1 2 3 4 5strongly stronglydisagree agreeIn general, would you say that people in your church watch m.

after each other and help out when they can, or do they pretty much go their own way?Go their own way A little of both Watch after each other

APPENDIX 159

n. Would you say that it is very important, somewhat important, or not important to you to feel a sense of community with the people in your church?Very important Somewhat important Not important

o. Would you say that you feel a strong sense of community with others in your church, very little sense of community, or some-thing in between?Very little Something in between Strong sense of community

30. Now I would like to ask you some questions about your interest in local issues. How often do you read the local newspaper?Daily About 3–4 days a week Less than 2 days a week Never

31. Earlier we asked you some general questions about political dis-cussion. Now we’d like to know about discussions you have about local politics. How often do you discuss issues affecting Tallahassee with others? Please circle one.Regularly Sometimes Rarely Almost never

32. How often do you discuss these issues withmembers of your family?a. Very often Somewhat often Not very often NeverPeople in your neighborhood?b. Very often Somewhat often Not very often NeverPeople at work?c. Very often Somewhat often Not very often NeverPeople in your church or place of worship?d. Very often Somewhat often Not very often NeverPeople in you club(s) or association(s)e. Very often Somewhat often Not very often NeverYour friends?f. Very often Somewhat often Not very often Never

33. Think of the one person with whom you’ve discussed these issues the most. Once you have this discussion partner in mind, please write his or initials here: ———

34. Is your discussion partner a close friend, just a friend, a family member, or just someone that you regularly come in contact with? Please circle one.

close frienda.

APPENDIX160

just a friendb. a family memberc. Just someone you come in contact withd.

35. Compared with your discussion partner would you say that your political views are much the same, somewhat different or very different? Please circle one.Much the same Somewhat different Very different

36. Do you think your discussion partner normally favors Republicans, Democrats or both or neither? Please circle one.Republicans Democrats BothNeither

37. Does your discussion partner have a favorable or unfavorable view of George Bush?Favorable Unfavorable

38. When you discuss politics with your discussion partner do you disagree often, sometimes, rarely, or never?Disagree often Disagree sometimes Disagree rarely Never disagree

39. Please read the following statements, for each one, please tell me how much you agree or disagree.

No matter what a person’s political beliefs are, he or she is enti-a. tled to the same legal rights and protections as anyone else.1 2 3 4 5Strongly StronglyAgree DisagreeI believe in free speech for all, no matter what their views b. might be?1 2 3 4 5Strongly StronglyAgree Disagree“a group that tolerates too many differences of opinions can-c. not survive for long.”1 2 3 4 5Strongly StronglyAgree Disagree“in the long run, the best way to live is to choose friends and d. associates have similar tastes and beliefs as your own.”1 2 3 4 5Strongly StronglyAgree Disagree

APPENDIX 161

40. Here are some values that many people think are important, but sometimes we have to choose one value over another. If you abso-lutely had to choose between the following two values, which is more important? Please circle one.

Guaranteeing law and order in society a. OR b. guaranteeing individual freedom

41. How about these two values?

Narrowing the gap between the rich and poor a. OR b. increas-ing economic growth

42. Here are a few questions about government in Washington.

Who has the final responsibility to decide if a law is constitu-a. tional or not?The president Congress The Supreme Court

Whose responsibility is it to nominate judges to the Federal b. Courts?The president Congress The Supreme Court

Which one of the political parties is more conservative than c. the other at the national level?Democrats Republicans

How much of a majority is required for the U.S. Senate and d. House to override a presidential veto?A bare majority A two-thirds majority A three-fourths majority (50% + 1)

What is the main duty of the U.S. Congress?e. To write legislation To administer the President’s policies To supervise states’ governments

43. Generally speaking, would you consider yourself to be a liberal, conservative, or a moderate?1 2 3 4 5 6 7Strongly Liberal Moderate Strongly Conservative

44. Generally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted or that you can’t be too careful in dealing with people?Most can be trusted Can’t be too careful

45. Do you think most people would try to take advantage of you if they got the chance or would they try to be fair?Take advantage Try to be fair

APPENDIX162

46. Would you say that most of the time people try to be helpful or that they are just looking out for themselves?Try to be helpful Just looking out for themselves

47. Now you are going to read a list of groups in politics. After you read the list, please circle the group you like the least. If there is some other group you like even less than those on this list, please write it in space.

The Ku Klux Klane. Christian Fundamentalistsa. Nazisf. Atheistsb. Gay Rights Activistsg. The ACLUc. Communistsh. Other: d. —————

Now we have a few questions about the disliked group you have selected.

48. As you read the following statements, please tell me how much you agree or disagree.

Members of the group should be banned from being president a. of the United States.1 2 3 4 5Strongly StronglyAgree DisagreeThe group should be outlawed.b. 1 2 3 4 5Strongly StronglyAgree DisagreeMembers of the group should be allowed to make a speech in c. Tallahassee to protest against the government.1 2 3 4 5Strongly StronglyAgree DisagreeMembers of the group should be allowed to hold public rallies d. in Tallahassee to protest against the government.1 2 3 4 5Strongly StronglyAgree DisagreeMembers of the group you should be allowed to teach in the e. public schools.1 2 3 4 5

APPENDIX 163

Strongly StronglyAgree DisagreeMembers of the group should have their phones tapped by the f. government.1 2 3 4 5Strongly StronglyAgree Disagree

49. On a scale from 0–100, suppose the number 0 means that the group you identified is not at all threatening to the country, the number 100 means that the group is extremely threatening to the country and the number 50 means it is somewhat threatening to the country. On this scale between 0 and 100, how threaten-ing do you believe the group is to the country as a whole?Please write in a number between 0 and 100. ————

50. How threatening do you believe the group is to you personally?Please write in a number between 0 and 100. ————

Thank you so much for taking time to answer these questions. I would like to ask you just a few more questions about your background.

51. What is your year of birth: ————52. What is the highest level of formal education you have

completed?0–11 Years College graduateHigh School graduateSome graduate schoolTechnical/trade school Master’s degreeSome collegeProfessional degree (J.D., M.D., Ph.D., etc.)

53. Are you married, single, divorced?Married single divorced

54. How long have you been living in Tallahassee? Please write the number here _________.

55. Do you have children under the age of 18?Yes No

56. Do you own or rent your home?Own Rent

APPENDIX164

57. What do you consider your racial background to be?African American Caucasian Hispanic Asian Other———

58. GenderMale Female

59. In which of these groups did your total family income, from all sources, fall last year before taxes?Under $4,999 $50,000–$64,999$5000–$9,999 $65,000–$74,999$10,000–$14,999 $75,000–$84,999$15,000–$24,999 $85,000–$94,999$25,000–$34,999 $95,000–$104,999$35,000–$49,999 Over $105,000

Thank you so much for your participation in the Tallahassee Community Survey.

Appendix D

Tallahassee Community Survey

Telephone Survey Instrument

Hello, my name is ________________, and I am calling on behalf of the Florida State University. We are conducting a Tallahassee com-munity survey for a dissertation, which is being funded in part through a grant from the National Science Foundation.

Have I reached ________________ (VERIFY PHONE #)

May I speak to the male head of the household?(IF NOT AVAILABLE, TALK TO FEMALE)

Are you at least 18 years of age or older?(IF YES, CONTINUE. IF NO, ASK FOR SOMEONE 18 OR OLDER)

The purpose of the survey is to get your opinions on how you think the local government is meeting your needs as a citizen of Tallahassee and/or Leon County. The questions will take about 15 to 25 minutes to answer, and there are no right or wrong answers, we just want to know your opinions. Also, let me assure you that we are not selling anything or asking for donations.We will consider your agreement to answer these questions as your consent to participate, and all of your answers will be strictly confi-dential.(IF NEEDED: All identifying information will be removed from our records.)Let’s begin by talking about your involvement with the Tallahassee/Leon County community.LOCAL GOVERNMENT—TALLAHASSEE / LEON COUNTY

APPENDIX166

Q1. Based on your personal experience, to what extent do you feel connected to Tallahassee/Leon County? Would you say that you feel very much connected, somewhat connected, not too connected or not connected at all?(Choose one)[ ] Very much connected[ ] Somewhat connected[ ] Not too connected[ ] Not connected at all[ ] DK (if volunteered)

Q2. Overall, during the past five years, do you think the local gov-ernment has gotten much better, gotten better, stayed about the same, or do you think it is not as good as it used to be?(Choose one)[ ] Gotten much better[ ] Gotten better[ ] Stayed about the same[ ] Not as good as it used to be[ ] DK (if volunteered)

Q3. Overall, how would you rate the way the City is run?(Choose one)[ ] Excellent[ ] Very Good[ ] Good Enough[ ] Not So Good[ ] Not Good At All[ ] DK (if volunteered)

Q4. How much of the time do you think you can trust your local officials (such as the County Commissioners and City Council members) to do what is right?(Choose one)[ ] Nearly all of the time[ ] Most of the time[ ] Seldom[ ] Never[ ] DK (if volunteered)

Q5. Generally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted or that you can’t be too careful in dealing with people?(Choose one)

APPENDIX 167

[ ] Most can be trusted[ ] Can’t be too careful[ ] DK (if volunteered)

Q6. Do you think most people would try to take advantage of you if they got the chance, or would they try to be fair?(Choose one)[ ] Take advantage[ ] Try to be fair[ ] DK (if volunteered)

Q7. Would you say that most of the time people try to be helpful or that they are just looking out for themselves?(Choose one)[ ] Try to be helpful[ ] Just looking out for themselves[ ] DK (if volunteered)

Q8. How safe do you feel in walking around your neighborhood at night?(Choose one)[ ] Very safe[ ] Somewhat safe[ ] Somewhat unsafe[ ] Very unsafe[ ] DK (if volunteered)

Q9. Again, using your personal experience, how much do you believe your local representatives (such as County Commissioners and City Council members) care about what you think is impor-tant for Tallahassee? Do they care very much, somewhat, only a little, or not at all?(Choose one)[ ] Care very much[ ] Somewhat[ ] Only a little[ ] Not at all[ ] DK

Q10. Generally speaking, how much would you say that you care about Tallahassee? Would you say that you care very much, somewhat, only a little, or not at all?(Choose one)

APPENDIX168

[ ] Very much[ ] Somewhat[ ] Only a little[ ] Not at all[ ] DK

Q11. How much of a difference do you believe you can make in Tallahassee? Do you believe that you can make a big difference, a moderate difference, a small difference, or no difference at all?(Choose one)[ ] Big difference[ ] Moderate difference[ ] Small difference[ ] No difference at all[ ] DK

Q12. Have you attended a local public meeting in the past five years, such as a school, neighborhood, County or City meeting?(Choose one)[ ] Yes[ ] No (SKIP TO Q14)

Q13. Was that meeting about your neighborhood, the city, the County, or schools?(Choose all that apply)[ ] Neighborhood[ ] City[ ] County[ ] Schools

Q14. Now, I want you to think about a hypothetical situation for the next few minutes. We are interested in knowing how likely you think you are to take part in local government.If the City of Tallahassee was about to do something that you did not approve of, such as building a waste facility near your home, how likely would you be to attend a meeting about the proposal? Would you say you are very likely, somewhat likely, not very likely or not at all likely?(Choose one)[ ] Very likely[ ] Somewhat likely[ ] Not very likely

APPENDIX 169

[ ] Not at all likely (SKIP TO Q16)[ ] DK

Q15. How likely would you be to speak at that meeting?(Choose one)[ ] Very likely[ ] Somewhat likely[ ] Not very likely[ ] Not at all likely[ ] DK

How likely would you be to:

Q16. Sign a petition?(Choose one)[ ] Very likely[ ] Somewhat likely[ ] Not very likely[ ] Not at all likely[ ] DK

Q17. Contact your local Representative?(Choose one)[ ] Very likely[ ] Somewhat likely[ ] Not very likely[ ] Not at all likely[ ] DK

Q18. Write a letter to the Editor of a newspaper?(Choose one)[ ] Very likely[ ] Somewhat likely[ ] Not very likely[ ] Not at all likely[ ] DK

Q19. What if the County or City wanted to raise the speed limit on your street? How likely would you be to attend a meeting about the proposal?(Choose one)[ ] Very likely[ ] Somewhat likely[ ] Not very likely

APPENDIX170

[ ] Not at all likely (SKIP TO Q21)[ ] DK

Q20. How likely would you be to speak at that meeting?(Choose one)[ ] Very likely[ ] Somewhat likely[ ] Not very likely[ ] Not at all likely[ ] DK

How likely would you be to:

Q21. Sign a petition?(Choose one)[ ] Very likely[ ] Somewhat likely[ ] Not very likely[ ] Not at all likely[ ] DK

Q22. Contact your local Representative?(Choose one)[ ] Very likely[ ] Somewhat likely[ ] Not very likely[ ] Not at all likely[ ] DK

Q23. Write a letter to the Editor of a newspaper?(Choose one)[ ] Very likely[ ] Somewhat likely[ ] Not very likely[ ] Not at all likely[ ] DK

For the next set of questions, many people do not know the answers. But, even if you are not sure, I would like you to give me your best guess.

(READ ALL OPTIONS TO RESPONDENT. THESE ARE NOT FILL-IN-THE-BLANK. IF NECESSARY, PROMPT RESPONDENT TO ATTEMPT TO ANSWER INSTEAD OF SAYING DK)

APPENDIX 171

Q24. Can you tell me whether the City of Tallahassee operates under a Mayoral system or a Council-Manager system?(Choose one)[ ] Mayoral[ ] Council-Manager[ ] DK

Q25. What party affiliation does the Superintendent of Schools in Leon County hold?(Choose one)[ ] Republican[ ] Democrat[ ] Independent[ ] DK

Q26. Are the offices of the Leon County Commissioner partisan or non-partisan?(Choose one)[ ] Partisan[ ] Non-Partisan[ ] DK

Q27. Who is the Chairman of the Leon County Commissioners?(Choose one)[ ] Bill Proctor[ ] Tony Grippa[ ] Bob Rackleff[ ] DK

Q28. When is the next election for the Mayor of Tallahassee?(Choose one)[ ] 2004[ ] 2006[ ] 2008[ ] DK

For the next few questions, we are interested in finding out how often the citizens of Tallahassee and Leon County think about and discuss civic issues.

Q29. How often would you say that you read the local newspaper?(Choose one)[ ] Very often[ ] Somewhat often

APPENDIX172

[ ] Not very often[ ] Never[ ] DK

Q30. What about discussions with other people? How often do you have discussions about politics with others? Would you say:(Choose one)[ ] Very often[ ] Somewhat often[ ] Not very often[ ] Never[ ] DK

Q31. Now, we’d like to know about discussions that you have about local politics. How often do you discuss issues affecting Tallahassee/Leon County with others?(Choose one)[ ] Very often[ ] Somewhat often[ ] Not very often[ ] Never (SKIP TO Q43)[ ] DK

How often do you discuss these issues with:

Q32. members of your family?(Choose one)[ ] Very often[ ] Somewhat often[ ] Not very often[ ] Never[ ] DK

Q33. people in your neighborhood?(Choose one)[ ] Very often[ ] Somewhat often[ ] Not very often[ ] Never[ ] DK

Q34. your friends?(Choose one)[ ] Very often

APPENDIX 173

[ ] Somewhat often[ ] Not very often[ ] Never[ ] DK

How often do you discuss these issues with:

Q35. people in your club(s) or associations(s)?(Choose one)[ ] Very often[ ] Somewhat often[ ] Not very often[ ] Never[ ] NA

Q36. people at your work?(Choose one)[ ] Very often[ ] Somewhat often[ ] Not very often[ ] Never[ ] NA

Q37. people at your church or place of worship?(Choose one)[ ] Very often[ ] Somewhat often[ ] Not very often[ ] Never[ ] NA

Of all the people you discuss these local issues with, think about the one whom you have discussed these with the most. We are going to refer to this person as your discussion partner for the set of questions that follow. OK?

Q38. Is your discussion partner a close friend, just a friend, a family member, or just someone you regularly come in contact with?(Choose one)[ ] Close friend[ ] Just a friend[ ] Family member[ ] Just someone you come in contact with[ ] DK

APPENDIX174

Q39. Compared with your discussion partner, would you say that your political views are much the same, somewhat different or very different?(Choose one)[ ] Much the same[ ] Somewhat different[ ] Very different[ ] DK

Q40. Do you think your discussion partner normally favors Republicans, Democrats, both or neither?(Choose one)[ ] Republicans[ ] Democrats[ ] Both[ ] Neither

Q41. Does your discussion partner have a favorable or unfavorable view of George W. Bush?(Choose one)[ ] Favorable[ ] Unfavorable[ ] DK

Q42. When you discuss politics with your discussion partner, do you disagree very often, somewhat often, not very often, or never?(Choose one)[ ] Very often[ ] Somewhat often[ ] Not very often[ ] Never[ ] DK

PERSONALITY / CHARACTERISTICS

Part of the project is aimed at understanding the characteristics of Tallahasseeans who may and may not participate in local government. Therefore, we want to ask you a few questions about yourself.The following section contains pairs of words. On a scale of zero to ten, which word best describes you? For example, the number zero means “confident,” the number 10 means “unconfident,” and the number 5 is exactly the middle—neither confident nor unconfident.

APPENDIX 175

On this scale, what number best represents you? You can use any number from zero to ten.

Q43. Zero is confident. Ten in unconfident.(Choose one)[ ] 0[ ] 1[ ] 2[ ] 3[ ] 4[ ] 5[ ] 6[ ] 7[ ] 8[ ] 9[ ] 10[ ] DK[ ] RF

Q44. Zero is kind. Ten is unkind.(Choose one)[ ] 0[ ] 1[ ] 2[ ] 3[ ] 4[ ] 5[ ] 6[ ] 7[ ] 8[ ] 9[ ] 10[ ] DK[ ] RF

Q45. Zero is tense. Ten is calm.(Choose one)[ ] 0[ ] 1[ ] 2[ ] 3[ ] 4

APPENDIX176

[ ] 5[ ] 6[ ] 7[ ] 8[ ] 9[ ] 10[ ] DK[ ] RF

Q46. Zero is unsymparthetic. Ten is sympathetic.(Choose one)[ ] 0[ ] 1[ ] 2[ ] 3[ ] 4[ ] 5[ ] 6[ ] 7[ ] 8[ ] 9[ ] 10[ ] DK[ ] RF

Q47. Zero is organized. Ten is disorganized.(Choose one)[ ] 0[ ] 1[ ] 2[ ] 3[ ] 4[ ] 5[ ] 6[ ] 7[ ] 8[ ] 9[ ] 10[ ] DK[ ] RF

Q48. Zero is nervous. Ten is relaxed.(Choose one)

APPENDIX 177

[ ] 0[ ] 1[ ] 2[ ] 3[ ] 4[ ] 5[ ] 6[ ] 7[ ] 8[ ] 9[ ] 10[ ] DK[ ] RF

Q49. Zero is reserved. Ten is outgoing.(Choose one)[ ] 0[ ] 1[ ] 2[ ] 3[ ] 4[ ] 5[ ] 6[ ] 7[ ] 8[ ] 9[ ] 10[ ] DK[ ] RF

Q50. Zero is intelligent. Ten is unintelligent.(Choose one)[ ] 0[ ] 1[ ] 2[ ] 3[ ] 4[ ] 5[ ] 6[ ] 7[ ] 8[ ] 9

APPENDIX178

[ ] 10[ ] DK[ ] RF

Q51. Zero is neat. Ten is sloppy.(Choose one)[ ] 0[ ] 1[ ] 2[ ] 3[ ] 4[ ] 5[ ] 6[ ] 7[ ] 8[ ] 9[ ] 10[ ] DK[ ] RF

Q52. Zero is introverted. Ten is extroverted.(Choose one)[ ] 0[ ] 1[ ] 2[ ] 3[ ] 4[ ] 5[ ] 6[ ] 7[ ] 8[ ] 9[ ] 10[ ] DK[ ] RF

Q53. Generally speaking, would you consider yourself to be a liberal, conservative or a moderate?

(PROBE) Would you say strong liberal/conservative or just lib-eral/conservative?(Choose one)[ ] Liberal[ ] Strong Liberal

APPENDIX 179

[ ] Conservative[ ] Strong Conservative[ ] Moderate[ ] DK

Q54. To what extent do you approve of the job George W. Bush is doing as a president?(Choose one)[ ] Strongly approve[ ] Approve[ ] Disapprove[ ] Strongly Disapprove[ ] DK

Q55. As far as you know, are you currently registered to vote?(Choose one)[ ] Yes[ ] No[ ] DK

Q56. Are you planning to vote in the upcoming 2004 Presidential election?(Choose one)[ ] Yes[ ] No[ ] Maybe[ ] DK

Q57. In local elections do you vote always, somewhat often, rarely or never?(Choose one)[ ] Always[ ] Somewhat often[ ] Rarely[ ] Never[ ] DK

Q58. Generally speaking, would you consider yourself to be a Democrat, a Republican, or an Independent?(PROBE) Would you say strong Democrat/Republican or just Democrat/Republican?(Choose one)[ ] Strong Democrat (SKIP TO Q60)

APPENDIX180

[ ] Democrat (SKIP TO Q60)[ ] Strong Republican (SKIP TO Q60)[ ] Republican (SKIP TO Q60)[ ] Independent (GO TO Q59)[ ] DK (SKIP TO Q60)

Q59. As an Independent, would you say that you lean towards the Democratic party, the Republican party or neither?(Choose one)[ ] Democratic[ ] Republican[ ] Neither

Next, I am going to ask you some questions about government in Washington and national politics. Many people do not know the answers to these questions, but even if you are not sure, I’d like you to give me your best guess.

(READ ALL OPTIONS. THESE ARE NOT FILL-IN-THE-BLANK. IF NECESSARY, PROMPT RESPONDENT TO ATTEMPT TO ANSWER INSTEAD OF DK)

POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE

Q60. First, who has the final responsibility to decide if a law is con-stitutional or not? Would you say:(Choose one)[ ] The President[ ] Congress[ ] Supreme Court[ ] DK

Q61. Whose responsibility is it to nominate judges to the Federal Courts?(Choose one)[ ] The President[ ] Congress[ ] Supreme Court[ ] DK

Q62. Which of the political parties is more conservative than the other at the national level, Democrats or Republicans?(Choose one)[ ] Democrats

APPENDIX 181

[ ] Republicans[ ] DK

Q63. How much of a majority is required for the U.S. Senate and House to override a presidential veto?(Choose one)[ ] Bare majority (50% +1)[ ] Two-thirds majority[ ] Three-fourths majority[ ] DK

Q64. What is the main duty of the U.S. Congress?(Choose one)[ ] To write legislation[ ] To administer the President’s policies[ ] To supervise States’ governments[ ] DK

SENSE OF COMMUNITY—NEIGHBORHOODS, CHURCHES, ASSOCIATIONS, WORKPLACES, FRIENDS

Now we want you to take a few moments and think about your involvements in Tallahassee, such as your church or synagogue, sports teams, PTO, neighborhood associations, and your place of employ-ment.

Q65. Thinking about your life these days, do you ever attend reli-gious services, apart from occasional weddings, baptisms, or funerals?(Choose one)[ ] Yes (GO TO Q66)[ ] No (SKIP TO Q79)[ ] RF (SKIP TO Q79)

Q66. Do you go to religious services every week, almost every week, once or twice a month, a few times a year, or never?(Choose one)[ ] Every week[ ] Almost every week[ ] Once or twice a week[ ] A few times a year[ ] Never[ ] DK

APPENDIX182

Now, I am going to read you a series of statements that many people may make about their church or place of worship. Please tell me if you strongly agree, agree, disagree or strongly disagree with each statement.

CHURCH/ PLACE OF WORSHIP

Q67. I think my church is a good place for me to worship.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q68. People at my church do not share the same values.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q69. My fellow church members and I want the same things from this church.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q70. I can recognize most of the people who belong to my church.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q71. I feel at home in this church.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree

APPENDIX 183

[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q72. I care about what my fellow members think of my actions.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q73. I have no influence over what this church is like.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q74. If there is a problem, people who belong to this church can get it solved.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q75. It is very important for me to belong to this particular church.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q76. People in this church generally don’t get along with each other.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree

APPENDIX184

[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q77. I expect to belong to this church for a long time.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q78. Based on your personal experience, to what extent do you feel connected in your place of worship?(Choose one)[ ] Very much[ ] Somewhat[ ] Only a little[ ] Not at all[ ] DK

How about your neighborhood? Please tell me if you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree with each statement.

Q79. I think my neighborhood is a good place for me to live.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q80. People in my neighborhood do not share the same values.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q81. My neighbors and I want the same things from the neighborhood.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree

APPENDIX 185

[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q82. I can recognize most of the people who live in my neighborhood.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q83. I feel at home in this neighborhood.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q84. I care about what my neighbors think of my actions.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q85. I have no influence over what this neighborhood is like.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q86. If there is a problem, people who live here can get it solved.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree

APPENDIX186

[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q87. It is very important for me to live in this particular neighborhood.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q88. People in this neighborhood generally don’t get along with each other.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q89. I expect to live in this neighborhood for a long time.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q90. Based on your personal experience, to what extent do you feel connected in your neighborhood?(Choose one)[ ] Very much[ ] Somewhat[ ] Only a little[ ] Not at all[ ] DK

Q91. Do you belong to a club or association such as the Kiwanis, PTO or a sports league?(Choose one)[ ] Yes[ ] No (SKIP TO Q104)[ ] RF (SKIP TO Q104)

APPENDIX 187

With this association in mind, please tell me if you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree with the following statements.

Q92. I think my association is a good place for me to spend my time.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q93. People in my association do not share the same values.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q94. My fellow members and I want the same things from this asso-ciation.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q95. I can recognize most of the people who belong to this association.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q96. I feel at home in this association.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

APPENDIX188

Q97. I care about what my fellow members think of my actions.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q98. I have no influence over what this association is like.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q99. If there is a problem, people who belong to this association can get it solved.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q100. It is very important for me to belong to this particular asso-ciation.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q101. People in this association generally don’t get along with each other.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

APPENDIX 189

Q102. I expect to belong to this association for a long time.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q103. Based on your personal experience, to what extent do you feel connected in your association or club?(Choose one)[ ] Very much[ ] Somewhat[ ] Only a little[ ] Not at all[ ] DK

We would also like to know about your circle of friends, people with whom you spend your free time socializing. Please tell me if you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree with the follow-ing statements.

Q104. I think spending time with my friends is a good thing for me to do.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q105. My friends and I do not share the same values.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q106. My friends and I want the same things out of life.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree

APPENDIX190

[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q107. I can lean on my friends during times of crisis.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q108. I feel at home with my friends.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q109. I care about what my friends think of my actions.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q110. I have no influence over what my friends are like.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q111. If there is a problem, my friends and I can get it solved.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

APPENDIX 191

Q112. It is very important for me to have these particular friends.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q113. My friends and I generally don’t get along with each other.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q114. I expect to have these friends for a long time.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q115. Based on your personal experience, to what extent do you feel connected with your friends?(Choose one)[ ] Very much[ ] Somewhat[ ] Only a little[ ] Not at all[ ] DK

Q116. Have you ever worked?(Choose one)[ ] Have worked[ ] Have not worked (SKIP TO Q129)

Please indicate whether you strongly disagree, disagree, agree or strongly agree to the following statements about your workplace.

Q117. I think my workplace is a good place for me to work.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree

APPENDIX192

[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q118. People at my workplace do not share the same values.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q119. My co-workers and I want the same things from this office.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q120. I can recognize most of the people who I work with in this office.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q121. I feel at home in this office.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q122. I care about what my co-workers think of my actions.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree

APPENDIX 193

[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q123. I have no influence over what this workplace is like.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q124. If there is a problem, people who work here can get it solved.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q125. It is very important for me to work in this particular office.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q126. People in this office generally don’t get along with each other.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q127. I expect to work in this office for a long time.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

APPENDIX194

Q128. Based on your personal experience, to what extent do you feel connected in your workplace?(Choose one)[ ] Very much[ ] Somewhat[ ] Only a little[ ] Not at all[ ] DK

VALUES/TOLERANCE

When we talk about political issues and governance, often times val-ues come up in the discussion. If you absolutely had to choose between each of the following two values, which is more important?

Q129. Guaranteeing law and order in society OR guaranteeing indi-vidual freedom?(Choose one)[ ] Guaranteeing law and order in society[ ] Guaranteeing individual freedom[ ] DK

Q130. Narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor OR increas-ing economic growth?(Choose one)[ ] Narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor[ ] Increasing economic growth[ ] DK

Please indicate whether you strongly disagree, disagree, agree or strongly agree to the following statements about values and tolerance.

Q131. No matter what a person’s political beliefs, he or she is entitled to the same legal rights and protections as anyone else.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q132. I believe in free speech for all, no matter what their views might be.(Choose one)

APPENDIX 195

[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q133. A group that tolerates too many differences of opinion cannot survive for long.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q134. In the long run, the best way to live is to choose friends and associates that have similar tastes and beliefs as your own.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q135. Now, I am going to read you a list of groups in politics. As I read the list, please tell me the group you like the LEAST. If there is some other group you like even less than those on the list, please tell me.(Choose one)[ ] The Ku Klux Klan[ ] Nazis[ ] Gay Rights Activists[ ] Communists[ ] DK[ ] Other [ ]

Now, keep in mind the group that you just selected. For each of the following statements I am about to read, please tell me whether you strongly disagree, disagree, agree or strongly agree.

Q136. Members of the group should be banned from being President of the U.S.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree

APPENDIX196

[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q137. The group should be outlawed(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q138. Members of the group should be allowed to make a speech in Tallahassee to protest against the government.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q139. Members of the group should be allowed to hold public rallies in Tallahassee to protest against the government.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q140. Members of the group should be allowed to teach in the public schools.(Choose one)[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q141. Members of the group should have their phones tapped by the government.(Choose one)

APPENDIX 197

[ ] Strongly Disagree[ ] Disagree[ ] Agree[ ] Strongly Agree[ ] No Opinion

Q142. On a scale from 0–100, where zero means that the group you identified is not at all threatening, the number 100 means extremely threatening, and 50 means it is somewhat threaten-ing, how threatening do you believe the group is to the coun-try as a whole?(ENTER 999 FOR DK)(Enter text answer)[ ]

Q143. How threatening do you believe the group is to you person-ally on a scale of 0–100?(ENTER 999 FOR DK)(Enter text answer)[ ]

DEMOGRAPHICS

Finally, since this project is being funded partly through a grant from the National Science Foundation, we need to ask a few questions about your background.

Q144. In what year were you born?(ENTER 999 FOR RF / DK)(Enter text answer)[ ]

Q145. What is the highest level of formal education that you have completed?(READ LIST)(Choose one)[ ] 0–11 Years[ ] High School Graduate[ ] Technical/Trade School[ ] Some College[ ] College Graduate[ ] Some Graduate School

APPENDIX198

[ ] Master’s Degree[ ] Professional Degree (J.D., M.D., Ph.D., etc . . . )[ ] RF/DK

Q146. Are you married, single or divorced?(Choose one)[ ] Married[ ] Single[ ] Divorced[ ] RF[ ] Other [ ]

Q147. How long have you been living in Tallahassee?(ENTER 999 FOR DK)(Enter text answer)[ ]

Q148. Are you currently employed in the private sector, by the gov-ernment, or are you currently unemployed?(Choose one)[ ] Private Sector[ ] Government[ ] Unemployed[ ] DK

Q149. Do you have children under the age of 18?(Choose one)[ ] Yes[ ] No[ ] DK/RF

Q150. Do you own or rent your home?(Choose one)[ ] Own[ ] Rent[ ] RF

Q151. What is your race?(READ OPTIONS)(Choose one)[ ] White[ ] Black[ ] Hispanic[ ] Asian

APPENDIX 199

[ ] RF[ ] Other [ ]

Q152. What is the name of your neighborhood? (DK FOR DON’T KNOW AND 999 FOR RF)(Enter text answer)[ ]

Q152A. May I have your zip code? (DK FOR DON’T KNOW AND 999 FOR RF)(Enter text answer)[ ]

Q153. In which of the following groups did your family’s 2003 income, from all sources, fall into?(READ OPTIONS)(Choose one)[ ] Under $10,000[ ] $10,000—$25,000[ ] $25,000—$50,000[ ] $50,000—$75,000[ ] $75,000—$100,000[ ] $100,000—$200,000[ ] $200,000—$500,000[ ] Over $500,000[ ] RF

Q153A. May I please have your initials or first name so that my supervisor may verify that I completed this survey?(ENTER 999 FOR RF)(Enter text answer)[ ]

That completes the survey. I would like to thank you very much for your time and participation. Have a nice evening/day. Good bye.

Q154. Gender(Choose one)[ ] Male[ ] Female

Q155. Date(Enter text answer)[ ]

APPENDIX200

Q156. County (from sample)(Choose one)

[ ] Leon[ ] Other [ ]

Q157. Phone number (from sample)(Enter text answer)[ ]

Q158. Interviewer number(Enter text answer)[ ]

Q159. Page number (from sample)(Enter text answer)[ ]

Appendix E

Telephone Survey Dispositions

FSU Community Survey

Sampling Methodology

The FSU Community Survey is based on a straight random tele-phone survey sample of the Tallahassee/Leon County area’s adult population, aged 18 or older. Affordable Samples, Inc., located in Old Greenwich, CT, was contracted to generate the sample. Telephone survey methodology provides a nearly ideal sampling frame since almost the entire population in Florida has access to a phone.

The selection of telephone numbers (households with telephones) was based on a simple random sample of all telephone numbers in the Tallahassee/Leon County area. From that list, telephone exchanges exclusively assigned to non-household populations were excluded. Ultimately, a computer randomly generated 11,000 telephone num-bers, and interviewers called 8,309 of the numbers to complete the desired number of questionnaires (800). If a final disposition could not be reached on the first call, two follow-up attempts were made. A total of 17,860 telephone calls were attempted, and 822 surveys were completed.

All surveys are subject to sampling error, which refers to the extent to which sample results differ from what would be obtained if the entire population had been interviewed. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus four percentage points. If the sampling was repeated in the same time period, results could vary by plus or minus four percentage points 95 percent of the time. Thus, the study’s con-fidence level is 95 percent.

APPENDIX202

Table E.1 Final Disposition Breakdown and Response Rate

CM CB RF IEHousehold Contacts

DS(determined

after first call)

NA/AM FX

Non-Household Contacts TOTAL

822 210 366 1060 2458 2675 2724 452 5851 8309

IE = households never reached after initial contactEligible Respondents = Household contacts—ineligible = 1398Response Rate = Completed Interviews / eligible respondents = 58.8%

Appendix F

Table F.1 Descriptive Statistics of Key Variables Telephone Survey

Variable NameNumber of

Observations Mean (SD) Range

Total Sense of Community 822 158 (36.8) 46–263Number of Contexts 822 3.79 (.744) 2–5Internal Efficacy 819 2.62 (.87) 1–4External Efficacy 813 2.93 (.78) 1–4Personal Trust 801 4.92 (1.12) 3–6Political Trust 807 2.77 (.63) 1–4Participation 684 33.82 (5.31) 19–40Attend a Meeting 816 6.76 (1.51) 2–8Speak at a Meeting 696 6.48 (1.61) 2–8Sign a Petition 811 7.21 (1.28) 2–8Contact an Official 810 6.63 (1.67) 2–8Write a Letter 804 5.53 (2.11) 2–8Local Vote 818 3.32 (.979) 1–4Local Discussion 822 2.74 (.95) 1–4General Discussion 822 3.16 (.91) 1–4Age 803 45.9 (17.2) 18–94Education 820 4.7 (1.88) 1–8Gender 822 .43 (.494) 0=male

1=femaleParty Strength 794 3.06 (.894) 1–4Income 715 3.67 (1.51) 1–8Marital Status 762 1.54 (.716) 1–3Employment Status 807 1.32 (.469) 1–2Agreeableness (warm) 822 16 (3.97) 0–20Emotional Stability (emotional)

822 6.2 (4.62) 0–20

Conscientiousness(conscientious)

822 13.9 (4.74) 0–20

Extroversion(extroverted)

822 12.63 (5.22) 0–20

Openness to Experience(intelligence)

822 15.3 (4.11) 0–20

Continued

APPENDIX204

Table F.1 Continued

Variable NameNumber of

Observations Mean (SD) Range

Home Ownership 817 1.3 (.46) 1–2Political Knowledge 822 3.78 (1.4) 0–5Local Political Knowledge 822 3.34 (1.2) 0–5Read Newspaper 821 3.19 (.94) 1–4Frequency of Local Discussion 822 1.25 (.95) 0–3Frequency of General Discussion

822 .83 (.91) 0–3

Closeness of Discussion Partner

722 2.08 (1.03) 0–3

Discussion Partner Agreement 724 1.43 (.78) 0–3SOC X No. of Contexts 822 624(251) 92–1315

Table F.2 Descriptive Statistics of Key Variables Context Survey

Variable NameNumber of

Observations Mean (SD) Range

Total Sense of Community 253 31.8 (9.5) 5–50Context Specific Sense of Community

285 46.1 (7.7) 12–60

Age 287 41.4 (15.05) 18–83Education 297 4.94 (1.75) 1–8Gender 284 1.56 (.49) 1=male

2=femaleParty Strength 298 3.09 (1.14) 1–4Income 282 7.68 (3.02) 1–12Marital Status 295 1.5 (.7) 1–3Agreeableness (warm) 291 15.0 (3.5) 0–20Emotional Stability (emotional) 296 8.2 (4.20) 0–20Conscientiousness(conscientious)

299 13.2 (4.2) 0–20

Extroversion(extroverted)

296 12.4 (4.7) 0–20

Openness to Experience (intelligence)

298 14.52 (3.4) 0–20

Appendix G

Adapted Sense of Community Index based on McMillan et al (1986)

Instructions: I am going to read you a series of statements that many people may make about their (type of context inserted here). Please tell me if you strongly agree, agree, disagree or strongly disagree with each statement (no opinion was coded also when offered by the respondent).

1. I think my (neighborhood) is a good place for me to live. 2. People on this (neighborhood) do not share the same values. 3. My (neighbors) and I want the same things from the

(neighborhood). 4. I can recognize most of the people who live in my (neighborhood). 5. I feel at home in this (neighborhood). 6. I care about what my (neighbors) think of my actions. 7. I have no influence over what this (neighborhood) is like. 8. If there is a problem in this (neighborhood) people who live here

can get it solved. 9. It is very important to me to live in this particular (neighbor-

hood).10. People in this (neighborhood) generally don’t get along with

each other.11. I expect to live in this (neighborhood) for a long time.

Total Sense of Community Index= Q1 through Q11The questions in Table I were altered for the various contexts by

replacing the word(s) in parentheses with another context. For exam-ple, for the church context, item would read as follows: “I think my (church or synagogue) is a good place for me to worship.”

Note: Question left out from original SCI: “Very few of my (neigh-bors) know me”.

Appendix H

Simple Membership Models

Table H.1 Ordered Logit Regression Estimates of Political Trust for the Simple Membership Model

Variable

Political TrustSimple Membership Model

Coefficient (se)

Total Sense of CommunityNumber of Contexts –.056 (.116)

Gender –.17 (.177)Age .002 (.03)Age Squared .00 (.00)Education .19 (.05)***Strength of Party .13 (.09)Income .04 (.07)Marital Status –.03 (.13)Employment Status .12 (.22)

Warm .07 (.02)**Emotional .00 (.02)Conscientious .02 (.02)Extroverted .00 (.02)Intelligence –.07 (.02)**LR Chi2 (df) 43.5 (14)No. of observations (pseudo R2) 635 (.04)

Notes: # p<=.10, * p<=.05, ** p<=.01, *** p<=.001.

APPENDIX208

Table H.2 Ordered Logit Regression Estimates of Internal Efficacy for the Simple Membership Model

Variable

Internal EfficacySimple Membership Model

Coefficient (se)

Number of Contexts .24 (.10)*

Gender –.06 (.16)Age .09 (.03)***Age Squared –.00 (.00)***Education .04 (.05)Strength of Party .15 (.08)#Income –.02 (.06)Marital Status –.11 (.11)Employment Status –.01 (.19)

Warm .01 (.02)Emotional –.04 (.02)*Conscientious .01 (.02)Extroverted .03 (.02)#Intelligence .03 (.02)LR Chi2 (df) 57.91 (14)No. of observations (pseudo R2) 641 (04)

Notes: # p<=.10, * p<=.05, ** p<=.01, *** p<=.001.

Table H.3 Ordered Logit Regression Estimates of Local Voting for the Simple Membership Model

Variable

Local VoteSimple Membership Model

Coefficient (se)

Number of Contexts .37 (.11)***

Internal Efficacy .23 (.10)*External Efficacy .19 (.12)*Political Trust –.19 (.14)Personal Trust .11 (.08)Gender –.11 (.17)Age .05 (.03)*Age Squared –.00 (.00)Education .07 (.05)Strength of Party .35 (.09)***Warm .01 (.02)Emotional –.01 (.02)Conscientious .00 (.02)

Continued

APPENDIX 209

Table H.4 Ordered Logit Regression Estimates of Local Political Discussion for the Simple Membership Model

Variable

Local Political DiscussionSimple Membership Model

Coefficient (se)

Number of Contexts .24 (.10)**Internal Efficacy .52 (.09)***External Efficacy –.07 (.10)Political Trust –.42 (.13)***Personal Trust .07 (.07)Read Newspaper .48 (.08)***Political Knowledge .09 (.06)Gender –.13 (.14)Age .01 (.02)Age Squared –.00 (.00)Education .07 (.04)#Strength of Party .02 (.08)Warm –.02 (.02)Emotional .00 (.02)Conscientious .04 (.02)*Extroverted .02 (.01)#Intelligence .01 (.02)LR Chi2 (df) 151.47 (17)No. of observations (pseudo R2) 748 (.08)

Notes: # p<=.10, * p<=.05, ** p<=.01, *** p<=.001.

Table H.3 Continued

Variable

Local VoteSimple Membership Model

Coefficient (se)

Extroverted .01 (.02)Intelligence .00 (.02)LR Chi2 (df) 173.41 (15) No. of observations (pseudo R2) 747 (.11)

Notes: # p<=.10, * p<=.05, ** p<=.01, *** p<=.001.

APPENDIX210

Table H.5 Ordered Logit Regression Estimates of Local Political Knowledge for the Simple Membership Model

Variable

Local Political KnowledgeSimple Membership Model

Coefficient (se)

Number of Contexts .11 (.10)

Internal Efficacy .02 (.10)External Efficacy .15 (.11)Political Trust –.17 (.13)Personal Trust .04 (.07)Read Newspaper .19 (.09)*Frequency of local discussion –.25 (.10)**Frequency of general discussion –.02 (.10)Gender .27 (.15)#Age .06 (.02)*Age Squared –.00 (.00)*Education .14 (.04)***Strength of Party .35 (.09)Home ownership –.46 (.19)*Income –.02 (.06)Warm –.02 (.02)Emotional .01 (.02)Conscientious –.02 (.02)Extroverted .01 (.01)Intelligence .02 (.02)LR Chi2 (df) 109.83 (20)No. of observations (pseudo R2) 666 (.05)

Notes: # p<=.10, * p<=.05, ** p<=.01, *** p<=.001.

Notes

1 Introduction

1. For a full review of this literature see Zuckerman (2005).2. There exist other measures of sense of community in the literature

however, the McMillian and Chavis SCI is the most used and broadly validated measure of SOC (Chipuer and Pretty 1999).

3. Davidson and Cotter (1989) f irst explored the relationship between sense of community and political participation. They provide an excellent review of the studies up to 1989 in which the relationship between the idea of sense of community and political processes is implied. Yet these studies fail to measure sense of community in the intricate and nuanced matter that Davidson and Cotter (1989) are able to do with their SCS scale. This study builds on the work of Davidson and Cotter (1989). The major point of departure from Davidson and Cotter (1989) is that it examines individuals involved several different types of communities and it uses an adapted ver-sion of the Sense of Community Index created by Chavis et al. (1986).

4. See note 3.

2 A Research Design for Studying Sense of Community and Political Behavior:

Methodological Considerations

1. See appendix A for a sample copy of the Jury Coordinator Letter.2. See appendix B for question wording of the sense of community items

used in the jury survey.3. See appendix C.1 for a sample copy of the Letter of Introduction for

context survey.4. Unfortunately, two of the four organizations were unable to follow

through and complete the survey.5. See appendix C.3 for a sample of the context survey instrument.6. See appendix E for the final dispositions for the telephone survey.

NOT ES212

3 Measuring Sense of Community

1. At this point, we will assume that variance in sense of community can exist and that such variance can be captured via survey instruments. With these assumptions in place, we can consider the hypothetical sig-nificance of variance in sense of community regardless of how sense of community is actually ultimately measured. These hypothetical sce-narios provide a framework for assessment of the empirical findings to be reported momentarily.

2. The mean differences for the following pairs are significant at the p <.05 level: workplace and place of worship, workplace and neighbor-hood, workplace and association, place of worship and circle of friends.

3. On the basis of the results from this data, sense of community reduces to one large dimension, not four separate elements as theorized by McMillian and Chavis. Therefore, for the purposes of this study, sense of community will be approached as one large dimension.

4. The sense of community battery has 11 items on the telephone survey. Based on telephone pretest results, one item was dropped from the battery (“Very few of my _______ know me.”). Respondents seemed to answer the twelfth item on paper but did not when it was asked during the telephone interview. The correlation between the scales using 11 items compared to 12 items is .989.

5. Neighborhoods in this case are defined by zip code. While we acknowledge that zip codes are a rough indicator of neighborhood (although it is not uncommon to use as an indicator) it is the only way to break down the data into smaller units for analysis. Ideally one would want neighborhood names for such an analysis yet that data is unavailable to us.

4 Sense of Community, Efficacy, and Trust

1. Indeed Sampson, McAdam, MacIndoe, and Weffer-Elizondo (2005) examine what they term “blended social action” in which they com-bine the theoretical perspectives of the social movement literature and collective efficacy to develop a hybrid approach to studying civic events—which includes political behavior such as attending a protest.

2. Some efforts (although dated) have been made to examine group con-sciousness as a factor influencing efficacy (Gamson 1971, Gurin and Epps 1975, Gurn, Gurin, and Beattie 1969, Shingles 1981). Verba et al. (1995) speak to the idea in terms of individual-level traits influencing “roots in the community” and therefore concern about local issues. Most recently, Rudolph, Gangl, and Stevens (2000) con-ducted research on emotions, efficacy (particularly anxiety), and cam-paign involvement.

NOT ES 213

3. This idea is wholly consistent with Schattschnieder’s contagiousness of conflict theory. As he notes “the first proposition is that the outcome of every conflict is determined by the extent to which the audience becomes involved in it. That is, the outcome of all conflict is deter-mined by the scope of its contagion. The number of people involved in any conflict determines what happens . . .” (Schattsneider 1975, p. 2).

4. Brehm and Rahn (1997) demonstrate that “experience with crime and fear of walking in their neighborhood at night undermine trust in others” (p. 1018) and that age may also play a factor.

5. Although the theoretical framework outlined here posits that sense of community influences efficacy and trust, alternate causal connections are possible. The most likely alternate scenario is that any identified relationship is spurious, tracing not to the influence of sense of com-munity on trust and efficacy, but rather to some common underlying force that influences all three of these variables. Given the construc-tion of the sense of community index, a less likely scenario is that effi-cacy and trust influence sense of community. As is always the case in cross-sectional analyses, there is no definitive means to exclude these possibilities. However, cognizant of these concerns, I included in the survey items designed to capture an important array of individual-level traits, the Big Five personality characteristics. Inclusion of the Big Five as control variables does much to allay concerns about spuriousness because the variables account for the most obvious forces—extrover-sion, warmth and agreeableness, conscientiousness, and so on—that might incline an individual both to feel efficacious and trustworthy and to develop a strong sense of community.

6. Some respondents may have scores in fewer than the five contexts in which they were asked about because some individuals may not belong to a church or an organization, in which case they would have opted out of the battery of questions associated with those contexts.

7. The SCI used in this survey was adapted to contain only 11 items, correlational tests conducted on a pilot study reveals that the 11 item battery is highly correlated with the 12 item battery at .989.

8. On the context survey, the response for this question contained a scale ranging from 1 “none at all” to 10 “very much.” For the benefit of the respondent and the interviewer the question was converted to a four-point response on the telephone survey worded as you see above.

9. Two of the items used to measure sense of community, item 7 and 8, speak directly to the perceived capacities of the individual. Because these items arguably capture a facet of efficacy, I removed those two items and ran correlations between the index with and without those items. The indices are correlated at .996. Additionally, I ran a second set of models with sense of community constructed with these items omitted. Precisely the same pattern of results emerged bringing added confidence to the causal account presented here.

NOT ES214

10. In fact, every respondent for the telephone survey answered at least two of the five batteries related to the sense of community ques-tions.

11. The full model also includes an interaction term for total sense of community X summary contexts. While the interaction terms fail to reach significance, joint-F tests confirm an interaction effect exists.

12. For all calculations, control variables are held constant at their mean values.

13. For the context survey this question has a 10 point scale, but was revised for the telephone survey.

14. These are the same questions used by Brehm and Rahn (1997) for their measure of interpersonal trust.

15. Context-specific sense of community just misses significance at the .10 level with a significance score of .107.

16. Again, the simulation for those with average sense of community was run and the results reveal null effects—the predicted probabilities are relatively similar when adding contexts for an individual with average sense of community.

17. Although the net positive varies for each dependent variable, across all four, the effect is either positive or no effect exists, in no case do we see a net negative effect.

5 Political Participation and Sense of Community

1. General discussion of the literature in this area can be found in Milbrath and Goel 1977, Bennett and Bennett 1986, Leighley 1995, Brady 1999, Conway 2000, and Schlozman 2002.

2. The second scenario dealt with raising the speed limit on your street.

3. Had I asked about actual incidents of past participation, it would have been impossible for me to rule out the scenario that participa-tion itself contributed to the development of sense of community. This risk of reverse causation is especially prominent with social acts such as attending, and speaking at, meetings. With my approach, I can be certain that the specific acts of participation under consideration did not cause sense of community; that is, a true case of reverse causality can be ruled out. That said, it still remains possible that past acts of political participation give rise to both sense of community and future participation. Hence, I make no claim—nor is any such claim necessary—that participation is irrelevant for the generation of sense of community. Instead, my argument is that the results presented here are appropriately inter-preted as revealing the extent to which an individual’s present level of sense of community contributes to this person’s likelihood of future political activity.

NOT ES 215

4. Because the correlation between the two separate scenario scales was highly correlated, they were combined into one general participation scale.

5. The net effect of adding contexts however, is extremely small, for the average individual, adding a context only increases the predicted value of participation from 0.33 to 0.34. when moving from two contexts to five.

6. The scale is an additive scale for both types of scenarios presented to the respondents. They could respond with 1 not at all likely or 4 very likely. The two were highly correlated and thus were combined into one scale ranging from 2 to 8.

7. Total effects could not be ascertained because the dependent vari-ables are ordinal thus the models used to calculate the coefficients are ordered logit models.

8. Recall that each context has a minimum score of 11 and a maximum score of 55. Thus for 2 contexts the minimum and maximum scores are 22 and 110 respectively, for 3 contexts the scores are 33 and 165 and so on. Every respondent had a score in at least two contexts.

9. These models were also run with an interaction term for sense of community X summary context but no significant results emerged, thus for ease of presentation and clarity, the more parsimonious model is presented here.

10. Figure 5.2 depicts graphically the results of the predicted probabili-ties; the figures are similar to ones in chapter 4. The vertical axis is the predicted probability and the horizontal is the number of con-texts, the three lines represent minimum, average, and maximum sense of community scores.

11. It is impossible with this data to examine that scenario due to the fact that nearly everyone (98%) of those interviewed said they voted in the last national election. Clearly this lack of variation makes it impossi-ble to conduct empirical tests.

6 The Interplay between Sense of Community and Political Discussion

1. Although Cramer-Walsh’s “Talking about Politics: Informal Groups and Social Identity in American Life” is a well conducted analysis of informal discussions about politics and a notable exception.

Bibliography

Abramson, P.R. 1983. Political Attitudes in America: Formation and Change. San Francisco: Free Press.

Balch, George. 1974. “Multiple Indicators in Survey Research: The Concept ‘Sense of Political Efficacy.’ ” Political Methodology 1:1–43.

Bennett, Stephen E. 1986. Apathy in America, 1960–1984: Causes and Consequences of Citizen Political Indifference. New York: Transnational Publishers.

Bess, Kimberly, Adrian Fisher, Christopher Sonn, and Brian Bishop. 2002. “Psychological Sense of Community: Theory, Research, and Application.” In A. Fisher, Christopher Sonn, and Brian Bishop (eds.), Psychological Sense of Community: Research, Applications, and Implications, pp. 3–22. New York: Kluwer Academic.

Brady, Henry. 1999. “Conceptualizing and Measuring Political Participation,” In J. Robinson, P. Shaver, L. Wrightsman (eds.), Measures of Political Attitudes. San Diego: Academic Press.

Brehm, John and Wendy Rahn. 1997. “Individual-Level Evidence for the Causes and Consequences of Social Capital.” American Journal of Political Science 41:999–1023.

Browning, Christopher, Seth L. Feinberg, and Robert D. Deitz. 2004. “The Paradox of Social Organization: Networks, Collective Efficacy, and Violent Crime in Urban Neighborhoods.” Social Forces 83(2):503–534.

Catano, Victor, Grace Pretty, Robert Southwell, and Greg Cole. 1993. “Sense of Community and Union Participation.” Psychological Reports 72: 333–334.

Chavis, David, James Hogge, and David McMillan, Abraham Wandersman. 1986. “Sense of Community through Brunswick’s Lens: A First Look.” Journal of Community Psychology 14:24–40.

Coleman, Kenneth M. and Charles L. Davis. 1976. “The Structural Context of Politics and Dimensions of Regime Performance: Their Importance for the Comparative Study of Political Efficacy.” Comparative Political Studies 9:189–206.

Converse, Philip. 1972. Change in the American Electorate. In Angus Campbell and Philip E. Converse (eds.), The Human Meaning of Social Change, pp. 263–337. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

BIBLIOGR APHY218

Conway, M. Margaret. 2000. Political Participation in the United States. Washington, DC: CQ Press

Craig, Stephen C., Richard G. Niemi, and Glenn E. Silver. 1990. “Political Efficacy and Trust: A Report on the NES Pilot Study Items.” Political Behavior 12: 289–314.

Cramer-Walsh, Katherine. 2004. Talking about Politics: Informal Groups and Social Identity in American Life. University of Chicago Press.

Davidson, William B. and Patrick R. Cotter. 1989. “Sense of Community and Political Participation.” Journal of Community Psychology 17: 119–125.

Delli Carpini, Michael and Scot Keeter. 1993. “Measuring Political Knowledge: Putting First Things First.” American Journal of Political Science 37:4 1179–1206.

———. 1996. What Americans Know about Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Dow, Jay. 2009. “Gender Differences in Political Knowledge: Distinguishing Characteristics Based and Returns based Differences” Political Behavior. 31(1): 117–136.

Gamson, W.A. 1971. Political Trust and Its Ramifications. In G. Abearian and J.W. Soule (eds.), Social Psychology and Political Behavior, pp. 40–55. New York: Merrill.

Gurin, P. and E. Epps. 1975. Black Consciousness, Identity and Achievement. New York: Wiley.

Gurin P., G. Gurin, and L.M. Beattie. 1969. “Internal-External Control in the Motivational Dynamics of Negroes.” Journal of Social Issues 25:29–53.

Gurin, P., A.H. Miller, and G. Gurin. 1980. “Stratum Identification and Consciousness.” Social Psychology Quarterly, 43, 30–47.

Hetherington, Marc J. 1998. “The Political Relevance of Political Trust.” The American Political Science Review 92:791–808.

Huckfeldt, Robert and John Sprague. 1995. Citizens, Politics, and Social Communication: Information and Influence in an Election Campaign. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Huckfeldt, Robert, Paul E. Johnson, and John Sprague. 2004. Political Disagreement: The Survival of Diverse Opinions within Communication Networks. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Huckfeldt, Robert, Eric Plutzer, and John Sprague. 1993. “Alternative Contexts of Political Behavior: Churches, Neighborhoods, and Individuals.” Journal of Politics 55 (May): 365–381.

Huddy, Leonie. 2003. “Group Identity and Political Cohesion.” In David Sears, Leonie Huddy, and Robert Jarvis (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, pp. 511–558. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jerit, Jennifer, Jason Barabas, and Toby Bolsen. 2006. “Citizens, Knowledge, and the Information Environment.” American Journal of Political Science 50:2 266–282.

Katz, Elihu and Paul Lazarsfeld. Personal Influence. 1955. New York: Free Press.

BIBLIOGR APHY 219

Katznelson, Ira and Helen V. Milner (eds.). 2002. Political Science State of the Discipline. New York: W.W. Norton.

Lazarsfeld, Paul, Bernard Berelson, and Hazel Gaudet. 1944. The People’s Choice. New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce.

Leighley, Jan. 1995. “Attitudes, Opportunities, and Incentives: A Field Essay on Political Participation.” Political Research Quarterly 48(1):181–209.

Long, D. Adam and Douglas D. Perkins. 2003. “Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Sense of Community Index and Development of a Brief SCI.” Journal of Community Psychology 31(3):279–296.

McClurg, Scott D. 2006. “The Electoral Relevance of Political Talk: Examining Disagreement and Expertise in Effects in Social Networks on Political Participation.” Journal of Politics 50:737–754.

McMillan, David and David Chavis. 1986. “Sense of Community: A Definition and Theory.” Journal of Community Psychology 14: 6–23.

Milbrath,L. and Goel, M. 1977. Political Participation. How and Why do People Get Involved in Politics? Boston: Rand McNally Publishing.

Miller, A.H., P. Gurin, G. Gurin, and O. Malanchuk. 1981. “Group Consciousness and Political Participation.” American Journal of Political Science 25:494–511.

Mondak, Jeffery J. 2000. “Reconsidering the Measurement of Political Knowledge.” Political Analysis 8 (Winter): 57–82.

———. 2001. “Developing Valid Knowledge Scales.” American Journal of Political Science 45 (January): 224–238.

Mondak, Jeffery J. and Mary R. Anderson. 2004. “The Knowledge Gap: A Reexamination of Gender Based Differences in Political Knowledge.” Journal of Politics. 66:2 492–512.

Mondak, Jeffery J. and Belinda Creel Davis. 2001. “Asked and Answered: Knowledge Levels When We Will Not Take ‘Don’t Know’ for an Answer.” Political Behavior 23 (September): 199–224.

Mondak, J. and K. Halperin. 2008. “A Framework for the Study of Personality and Political Behavior.” British Journal of Political Science 38:335–362.

Mondak, Jeffery J. and Diana Mutz. 2001. “Involuntary Association: How the Workplace Contributes to American Civic Life.” Prepared for the 2001 Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, April, Chicago, Illinois.

———. 2002. “Talkin’ at the Texaco: How Workplaces Help and Hinder the Flow of Political Information.” Prepared for the 2002 Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, April, Chicago, Illinois.

Morenoff, Jeffrey D., Robert J. Sampson, and Stephen W. Raudenbush. 2001. “Neighborhood Inequality, Collective Efficacy, and the Spatial Dynamics of Urban Violence.” Criminology 39: 517–560.

Mutz, Diana. 2002. “Cross-cutting Social Networks: Testing Democratic Theory in Practice.” American Political Science Review 96:111–126.

———. 2006. Hearing the Other Side: Deliberative versus Participatory Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.

BIBLIOGR APHY220

Mutz, Diana C., and Jeffery J. Mondak. 2006. “The Workplace as a Context for Cross-Cutting Political Discourse.” Journal of Politics 68:140–155.

Niemi, Richard G., Stephen C. Craig, and Franco Mattei. 1991. “Measuring Internal Political Efficacy in the 1998 National Election Study.” The American Political Science Review 85:1407–1413.

Obama, Barack. 2006. The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream. New York: Three Rivers Press

Perkins, D.D., P. Florin, R.C. Rich, A. Wandersman, and D. Chavis. 1990. “Participation and the Social and Physical Environment of Resident Blocks: Crime and Community Context.” American Journal of Community Psychology 17:83–115.

Perkins, D.D., Joseph Hughey, and Paul Speer. 2002. “Community Psychology Perspectives on Social Capital Theory and Community Development Practice.” Journal of Community Development Society 33:1.

Pretty, Grace. 1990. “Relating Psychology Sense of Community to Social Climate Characteristics.” Journal of Community Psychology 18:60–65.

Pretty, Grace and M. McCarthy. 1991. “Exploring Psychological Sense of Community Among Women and Men of the Corporation.” Journal of Community Psychology 19:351–361.

Pretty, Grace, L. Andrews, and C. Collett. 1994. “Exploring Adolescents’ Sense of Community and its Relationship to Loneliness.” Journal of Community Psychology 22:346–358.

Pretty, Grace, C. Conroy, J. Dugay, K. Fowler, and D. Williams. 1996. “Sense of Community and Its Relevance to Adolescents of All Ages.” Journal of Community Psychology 24:351–361.

Putnam, Robert D. 1993. Making Democracy Work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

———. 1995. “Bowling Alone.” Journal of Democracy 6 (January):65.———. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American

Community. New York: Simon and Schuster.Rosenfeld, Richard, Steven F. Messner, and Eric P. Baumer. 2001. “Social

Capital and Homicide.” Social Forces 80:283–309.Rosenstone Steven J. and John Mark Hansen. 1993. Mobilization,

Participation, and Democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.Rudolph, Thomas J., Amy Gangl, and Dan Stevens. 2000. “The Effects of

Efficacy and Emotions on Campaign Involvement.” The Journal of Politics 62:1189–1197.

Sampson, Robert J., Doug McAdam, Heather MacIndoe, and Simon Weffer-Elizondo. 2005. “Civil Society Reconsidered: The Durable Nature, and Community Structure of Collective Civic Action.” American Journal of Sociology 111: 673–714.

Sampson, Robert J., Jeffrey D. Morenoff, and Felton Earls. 1999. “Beyond Social Capital: Spatial Dynamics of Collective Efficacy.” American Sociological Review 64:633–660.

BIBLIOGR APHY 221

Sampson, Robert J., Stephen W. Raudenbush, and Felton Earls. 1997. “Neighborhoods and Violent Crime: A Multilevel Study of Collective Efficacy.” Science 227:918–923.

Sarason, S.B. 1974. The Psychological Sense of Community: Prospects for a Community Psychology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Scheufele, Dietram, James Shanahan, and Sei-Hill Kim. 2002. “Who Cares about Local Politics? Media Influences on Local Political Involvement, Issue Awareness, and Attitude Strength.” Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 79(2):427–444.

Schlozman, Kay Lehman. 2002. Citizen Participation in America: What Do We Know? Why Do We Care? In Ira Katznelson and Helen V. Milner (eds.), Political Science State of the Discipline. New York: W.W. Norton.

Schur, Lisa, Todd Shields, and Kay Schriner. 2003. “Can I Make a Difference? Efficacy, Employment, and Disability.” Political Psychology 24:119–149.

Shingles, R.D. 1981. “Black Consciousness and Participation: The Missing Link.” American Political Science Review. 75(1):79–91.

Simon, Bernd and Klandermans. 2005. Politicized Collective Identity: A Social Psychological Analysis. In J. Jost and Jim Sidanius (eds.), Political Psychology, pp. 449–465. New York: Psychology Press.

Steinbeck, John. 1961. Travels with Charley. New York: Curtis Publishing.Uslaner, Eric M. 2002. The Moral Foundations of Trust. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.U.S Census Bureau: State and County Quickfacts and Census 2000 Summary

FileVerba, Sidney, Nancy Burns, and Kay Lehman Schlozman. 1997. “Knowing

and Caring about Politics: Gender and Political Engagement.” The Journal of Politics 59:1054–1072.

Verba, Sidney, Kay Lehman Schlozman, and Henry E. Brady. 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wald, Kenneth, Dennis E. Owen, and Samuel S. Hill. 1988. “Churches as Political Communities.” American Political Science Review. 82:531–548.

———. 1990. “Political Cohesion in Churches.” Journal of Politics. 52:197–215.

Zuckerman, Alan S. (ed.). 2005. The Social Logic of Politics: Personal Networks as Contexts for Political Behavior. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Index

Bess, K. 6–7Big 5 Personality Traits 13

Coleman 79, 97collective efficacy theory 10, 53–54community psychology 3, 5–6, 22community satisfaction 140context research 3context survey 44–46Cramer-Walsh 12

Davidson, W 9discussion partner 98–99, 104–107

efficacy 10, 53–56, 59–65, 122–123, 134

external efficacy 63–66

general discussion 101–104general participation 80–83general political knowledge 111,

114–115Gurin, P 4

Huckfeldt, Robert 1, 3, 4Huddy, L 4

identity research 3, 5internal efficacy 59–63

jury pool survey 40–44

Katz, E 3

Lazarsfeld, P 3letter writing 86–87local discussion 100–104,

122, 127local political knowledge 112,

115–117, 123, 128locational community 7

McMillan, D. 8, 22Miller, A.H. 4multi-context approach 37–39Mutz, D 3

network research 3

participation 9, 77–79, 123, 125–127

Perkins, D.D 2personal trust 67–71personality 13petition signing 88–89political discussion 11–12,

95–104, 134political knowledge 11, 109–118,

123, 137political psychology 2–3political trust 71–72Putnam, R 4

relational community 7

Sarason, S.B. 6Schlozman, K 78

INDEX224

sense of community 2, 6–9, 58, 121, 133–138

sense of community index (SCI) 45sense of community items 40sense of community scale 41–44Simon, B 4simple membership 119single context approach 36–38social capital 3, 4–5social interaction 96–98,

113–114

Tallahassee Community Survey 47Tallahassee, FL 24telephone survey 47tolerance 139–140total sense of community 98trust 10, 53, 56–58, 66, 121–123,

134

voting 89–92, 122

Zuckerman, A 77