Rural political participation in the United States: alienation or action?

IF 1.2 Q3 SOCIOLOGY
Chelsea N. Kaufman
{"title":"Rural political participation in the United States: alienation or action?","authors":"Chelsea N. Kaufman","doi":"10.1080/10371656.2019.1645429","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Globally, concern has risen over support for authoritarian populism, in some cases specifically among rural populations. Rural influence, however, may be limited by relatively low political participation. This article examines participation in the United States, where past evidence shows rural Americans have been less involved in politics than their urban counterparts. Analysis of American National Election Studies (ANES) data from 1952 to 2012 shows historically less participation for rural residents relative to suburban and urban residents. Between 1988 and 2008, low political trust, a negative economic outlook, high external efficacy, and being more ideological and partisan are associated with increased political participation. These findings imply rural Americans with polarised views who feel deprived of political and economic power may participate more frequently in future political activities. Concurrently, similarly polarised circumstances in urban areas and low rural political efficacy may lead the rural-urban participation gap to persist.","PeriodicalId":45685,"journal":{"name":"Rural Society","volume":"28 1","pages":"127 - 143"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10371656.2019.1645429","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rural Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10371656.2019.1645429","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

ABSTRACT Globally, concern has risen over support for authoritarian populism, in some cases specifically among rural populations. Rural influence, however, may be limited by relatively low political participation. This article examines participation in the United States, where past evidence shows rural Americans have been less involved in politics than their urban counterparts. Analysis of American National Election Studies (ANES) data from 1952 to 2012 shows historically less participation for rural residents relative to suburban and urban residents. Between 1988 and 2008, low political trust, a negative economic outlook, high external efficacy, and being more ideological and partisan are associated with increased political participation. These findings imply rural Americans with polarised views who feel deprived of political and economic power may participate more frequently in future political activities. Concurrently, similarly polarised circumstances in urban areas and low rural political efficacy may lead the rural-urban participation gap to persist.
美国农村政治参与:异化还是行动?
摘要在全球范围内,对独裁民粹主义的支持越来越令人担忧,在某些情况下,尤其是在农村人口中。然而,农村的影响力可能受到政治参与度相对较低的限制。这篇文章考察了美国的参与情况,过去的证据表明,美国农村地区比城市地区更少参与政治。对1952年至2012年美国国家选举研究(ANES)数据的分析显示,与郊区和城市居民相比,农村居民的参与率历来较低。1988年至2008年间,政治信任度低、经济前景消极、外部效能高以及意识形态和党派色彩浓厚都与政治参与的增加有关。这些发现表明,观点两极分化、感觉被剥夺政治和经济权力的美国农村地区可能会更频繁地参与未来的政治活动。与此同时,城市地区类似的两极分化和农村政治效能低下可能导致城乡参与差距持续存在。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Rural Society
Rural Society SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信