Search

Local community involvement has long been regarded as central to citizens' participation in the political process because it is believed to create attitudes of generalized trust that encourage citizens to become involved in governance. Recently Putnam (1995a) has argued that declining opportunities for community involvement have led to decreased trust in others, and this contributes to declining rates of voting in elections. This paper directly tests the validity of Putnam's argument. It shows that civic participation is related to political participation, but only through the mediating mechanism of generalized trust. The paper further examines why citizens participate in their communities. It finds that people participate more in their communities when they feel that they are respected members of those communities. Implications for psychological theory and political mobilization are discussed.

Two studies examine how decision makers' goals of enhancing organizational effectiveness and promoting positive interpersonal relations shape their decision making when they are allocating scarce resources among group members. Past research has conceptualized this problem as one of balancing between the use of two distributive justice principles: equity and equality. The studies reported examine the degree to which authorities are also concerned about issues of procedural justice. The results suggest that experienced decision makers--both managerial and administrative--believe that when trying to maintain positive interpersonal relations it is an important to use decision-making procedures that will be regarded as fair (procedural justice) as it is to allocate outcomes in ways which will be regarded as fair (distributive justice). Decision makers' definitions of procedural justice are also examined.

Recent public opinion polls have suggested that there is a striking lack of public support for national political leaders and institutions. The two studies discussed in this paper explore why public evaluations of political leaders and institutions are low. In particular, they examine the role of perceived injustice in creating dislike for and distrust of leaders and institutions. This focus upon justice is contrasted with the more traditional focus upon the level of outcomes received from the political system and upon congruence in citizen-leader policy preferences. The results strongly support a focus upon justice by showing that judgments of injustice exercise an influence upon leadership evaluations and institutional endorsements which is independent of beliefs about the level of outcomes the political system is providing to citizens or of public support for government policies. In fact, both studies suggest that judgments of justice or injustice have more influence upon the endorsement of political leaders and institutions than do outcome-related concerns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two random telephone surveys were conducted—one in Evanston, Illinois and one in Morton Grove, Illinois—to assess the motivations underlying public support for handgun control. The data from both surveys suggested that such support was linked most strongly to citizen beliefs about the effect of a handgun ban on the overall crime rate. Little support was found for either the suggestion that gun control opposition is linked to concerns about personal protection against crime or for the suggestion that views about gun control are part of a more general ideological orientation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]