Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T13:33:38.345Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Citizen Evaluations of Legislator–Constituent Communication

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 January 2020

Mia Costa Open the ORCID record for Mia Costa [Opens in a new window]
Mia Costa*
Affiliation:
Department of Government, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: mia.costa@dartmouth.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Keywords

elite responsivenessconstituency servicesurvey experimentlegislative behavioremaillegislator–constituent communication
Type
Letter
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 51 , Issue 3 , July 2021 , pp. 1324 - 1331
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adman, P and Jansson, H (2017) A field experiment on ethnic discrimination among local Swedish public officials. Local Government Studies 44(1), 44–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, N (1998) Letters by phone or speech by other means: the linguistics of email. Language & Communication 18(2), 133–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berinsky, A, Huber, G and Lenz, G (2012) Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon. com's Mechanical Turk. Political Analysis 20(3), 351–368.Google Scholar
Bishin, B and Hayes, T (2016) Do Elected Officials Service the Poor? A Field Experiment on the U.S. Congress. Paper Presented at the Annual Southern Political Science Associate Conference, San Juan, Puerto Rico, 9 January.Google Scholar
Broockman, D (2013) Black politicians are more intrinsically motivated to advance Blacks’ interests: A field experiment manipulating political incentives. American Journal of Political Science 57(3), 521–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broockman, D and Butler, D (2017) The causal effects of elite position-taking on voter attitudes: field experiments with elite communication. American Journal of Political Science 61(1), 208–221.Google Scholar
Butler, D (2014) Representing the Advantaged: How Politicians Reinforce Inequality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carnes, N and Holbein, J (2019) Do public officials exhibit social class biases when they handle casework? Evidence from multiple correspondence experiments. PLoS One 14(3), e0214244.Google ScholarPubMed
Chen, J, Pan, J and Xu, Y (2016) Sources of authoritarian responsiveness: A field experiment in China. American Journal of Political Science 60(2), 383–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, M (2017) How responsive are political elites? A meta-analysis of experiments on public officials. Journal of Experimental Political Science 4(3), 241–254.Google Scholar
Costa, M (2019) “Replication Data for: Citizen Evaluations of Legislator-Constituent Communication”, https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/4C1KJT, Harvard Dataverse, V1, UNF:6:406lEkAzzIXLqvxrBw5bRw==[fileUNF]Google Scholar
Dai, X (2007) Political ethics online: parliamentarians’ use of email in Europe. The Journal of Legislative Studies 13(3), 458–476.Google Scholar
Dynes, A, Hassell, H and Miles, M (2018) Political ambition and constituent service: Does ambition influence how local officials respond to electoral and non-eelectoral service requests? Unpublished. Available at http://adamdynes.com/documents/WP_2018_dynes-etal_ambition-and-responsiveness.pdf (accessed 31 August 2019).Google Scholar
Einstein, K and Glick, D (2017) Does race affect access to government services? An experiment exploring street level bureaucrats and access to public housing. American Journal of Political Science 61(1), 100–116.Google Scholar
Gell-Redman, M et al. (2018) It's all about race: how state legislators respond to immigrant constituents. Political Research Quarterly 71(3), 517–531.Google Scholar
Germany, J and McGowen, M (2008) E-constituent relationship management for state legislators. White Paper. Washington, DC: George Washington University.Google Scholar
Goldschmidt, K (2011) Communicating with Congress: Perceptions of Citizen Advocacy on Capitol Hill. Washington, DC: Congressional Management Foundation.Google Scholar
Grimmer, J (2013) Representational Style in Congress: What Legislators Say and Why it Matters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grohs, S, Adam, C and Knill, C (2016) Are some citizens more equal than others? Evidence from a field experiment. Public Administration Review 76(1), 155–164.Google Scholar
Grose, C, Malhotra, N and Van Houweling, RP (2015) Explaining explanations: how legislators explain their policy positions and how citizens react. American Journal of Political Science 59(3), 724–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemker, J and Rink, A (2017) Multiple dimensions of bureaucratic discrimination: evidence from German welfare offices. American Journal of Political Science 61(4), 786–803.Google Scholar
Holm, S (1979) A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian journal of statistics 6(2), 65–70.Google Scholar
Huang, J-H and Shyu, SH-P (2009) Building personalised relationships with customers via emails. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 20(6), 585–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jilke, S, Van Dooren, W and Rys, S (2018) Discrimination and administrative burden in public service markets: does a public private difference exist? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 28(3), 423–439.Google Scholar
Kalla, JL, Rosenbluth, FM and Teele, D (2018) Are you my mentor? A field experiment on gender, ethnicity, and political self-starters. The Journal of Politics 80(1), 337–341.Google Scholar
Lajevardi, N (2018) Access denied: exploring Muslim American representation and exclusion by state legislators. Politics, Groups, & Identities. doi: 10.1080/21565503.2018.1528161.Google Scholar
Lavecchia, L and Stagnaro, C (2019) There ain't no such thing as a free deed: the case of Italian notaries. European Journal of Law and Economics 47(2), 277–290.Google Scholar
Lewin-Jones, J and Mason, V (2014) Understanding style, language and etiquette in email communication in higher education: a survey. Research in Post- compulsory Education 19(1), 75–90.Google Scholar
McClendon, G (2016) Race and responsiveness: an experiment with South African politicians. Journal of Experimental Political Science 3(1), 60–74.Google Scholar
Millar, S (2009) Technologies and techniques. The (N)etiquette of telephone and e-mail communication. In Language and New Media. Linguistic, Cultural and Technological Evolutions. New York: Hampton Press, pp. 285–311.Google Scholar
Montgomery, J, Nyhan, B and Torres, M (2018) How conditioning on post-treatment variables can ruin your experiment and what to do about it. American Journal of Political Science 62(3), 760–775.Google Scholar
Sheer, V and Fung, T (2007) Can email communication enhance professor–student relationship and student. Journal of Educational Computing Research 37(3):289–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terechshenko, Z et al. (2019) Evaluating the influence of international norms and shaming on state respect for rights: an audit experiment with foreign embassies. International Interactions 45(4), 720–735.Google Scholar
White, A, Nathan, N and Faller, J (2015) What do I need to vote? Bureaucratic discretion and discrimination by local election officials. American Political Science Review 109(1), 129–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, EV, Hall-Phillips, A and Djamasbi, S (2015) Cognitive predictors of consumers’ intention to comply with social marketing email appeals. Computers in Human Behavior 52, 307–314.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Costa Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/4C1KJT
Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Costa supplementary material

Online Appendix

Download Costa supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 218 KB