1

Preliminary analysis: not for circulation or citation

Bolstering social capital among lower-income Americans as a strategy for enhancing

political involvement and power
Gregory B. Markus
University of Michigan
11 Dec 2005
This paper reports preliminary results of analyses intended to accomplish two objectives. The
first is to gauge the extent to which lower-income Americans are disadvantaged personally and
politically relative to their moderate- and upper-income compatriots. The second is to explore the
opportunity to enhance the social capital of lower-income Americans. More specifically, can
involvement of lower-income Americans in civil society organizations (CSOs) bolster their
political involvement? The presumption here is not that social capital is a cure-all for political
marginalization, nor that it can or should substitute for public policy and financial resources to
address persisting inequities that unjustly limit life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness among
lower-income and working Americans. Rather, the presumption is that bolstering a groups
social capital (through its active involvement in CSOs) may be one means to enhancing its
political influence, as well as advancing other worthwhile societal objectives.
The analysis reported below is based upon the 2004 CID survey.
I. Personal and social circumstances of lower-income Americans
The annual household income variable (hinccut) used in this analysis is coded as follows: 1=<
$25,000, 2= $25-49.9K, 3=$50-74.9K 4=$75-99.9K 5=$100,000 and up.
Table 1. Distribution of reported household income
hinccut | Freq.
Percent
------------+----------------1 |
236
27.00
2 |
315
36.04
3 |
147
16.82
4 |
107
12.24
5 |
69
7.89
------------+----------------Total |
874
100.00

Lower-income Americans tend to face more personal challenges than upper-income Americans
do. Unsurprisingly, they are more likely to report financial difficulties and vulnerability to
unforeseen financial difficulties. They are also more likely to report being in less than good
health.

Table 2. Which description comes closest to how you feel about your households income
nowadays?
|
Household income
|
1
2
3
4
5 | Total
----------------------+---------------------------------------------+-----living comfortably
|
21.50
35.97
56.94
71.96
82.35 | 44.65
coping on present inc.|
43.00
50.17
38.89
25.23
14.71 | 40.27
finding it difficult |
35.50
13.86
4.17
2.80
2.94 | 15.09
----------------------+---------------------------------------------+-----Total |
200
303
144
107
68 |
822
| 100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 | 100.00
Kendall's tau-b =

-0.3874

ASE = 0.026

Table 3. If for some reason you were in serious financial difficulties and had to borrow money
to make ends meet, how difficult or easy would that be?
Household income
|
1
2
3
4
5 | Total
----------------------+------------------------------------------+------very difficult | 28.51
16.30
10.26
4.76
6.67 | 17.09
quite difficult | 33.94
28.62
16.24
11.90
17.78 | 25.71
neither easy nor diff | 22.17
30.43
32.48
26.19
17.78 | 27.05
quite easy | 15.38
24.64
41.03
57.14
57.78 | 30.15
----------------------+------------------------------------------+------Total |
221
276
117
84
45 |
743
| 100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 | 100.00
Kendall's tau-b =

0.3058

ASE = 0.028

Table 4. How is your health in general?

Household income
|
1
2
3
4
5 |
Total
-----------+------------------------------------------+------very good | 21.19
34.29
43.54
49.53
49.28 |
35.35
good | 42.80
45.08
40.82
39.25
36.23 |
42.33
fair | 28.39
17.14
14.29
10.28
13.04 |
18.54
bad |
4.66
2.22
0.68
0.93
0.00 |
2.29
very bad |
2.97
1.27
0.68
0.00
1.45 |
1.49
-----------+------------------------------------------+------Total |
236
315
147
107
69 |
874
| 100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 | 100.00
Kendall's tau-b =

-0.2163

ASE = 0.028

Lower-income people are also disadvantaged in terms of social capital. Their personal
circumstances tend to make them wary of other people. They are also generally less likely to
participate in civil society organizations.

Table 5. If you lost a wallet or purse that contained $200, how likely is it to be returned with the
money in it if it was found by someone who lives close by?
Household income
|
1
2
3
4
5 | Total
------------------+--------------------------------------------+-----very likely |
22.03
25.08
31.97
38.32
43.48 | 28.49
somewhat likely |
28.39
42.22
42.18
36.45
47.83 | 38.22
not very likely |
30.51
20.00
15.65
18.69
8.70 | 21.05
not at all likely |
19.07
12.70
10.20
6.54
0.00 | 12.24
------------------+--------------------------------------------+-----Total |
236
315
147
107
69 |
874
| 100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 | 100.00
Kendall's tau-b =

-0.1944

ASE = 0.027

Table 6. Generally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted? (0= You cant
be too careful ... 10=Most people can be trusted)
Household |
income |
Mean
Std. Dev.
Freq.
------------+--------------------------------1 |
4.6016949
2.4981349
236
2 |
5.0571429
2.4397005
315
3 |
4.829932
2.4700234
147
4 |
5.4672897
2.173241
107
5 |
5.826087
2.3574445
69
------------+--------------------------------Total |
5.006865
2.4447992
874
F(4,869) = 4.81, prob = 0.0008

Table 7. Do you think that most people would try to take advantage of you if they got the chance,
or would they try to be fair?
Household |
income |
Mean
Std. Dev.
Freq.
------------+-----------------------------------1 |
5.1059322
2.4376058
236
2 |
5.3598726
2.2183769
314
3 |
5.3197279
2.1801923
147
4 |
6.0093458
1.7238358
107
5 |
5.9855072
2.3294329
69
------------+-----------------------------------Total |
5.4135166
2.2462304
873
F(4, 868) = 4.28

Prob = 0.0020

5
Table 8. Would you say that most of the time people try to be helpful or that they are mostly
looking out for themselves?
Household |
income |
Mean
Std. Dev.
Freq.
------------+-------------------------------1 |
5.1313559
2.5838516
236
2 |
5.7079365
2.1791792
315
3 |
5.3673469
2.1456603
147
4 |
5.6635514
1.9997355
107
5 |
6.0724638
2.4272887
69
------------+-------------------------------Total |
5.5183066
2.3029955
874
F(4, 869)= 3.50

Prob = 0.0076

Table 9. Involvement in civil society organizations, by household income level. (Entries: percent
not involved)
Household income
1
2
3
4
5 |
Total
-----------------------------------------------------------+-------Sport club
90.25
82.54
77.55
71.96
57.97 |
80.55
Cultural org.
88.98
86.35
90.48
82.24
71.01 |
86.04
Trade union
99.15
93.33
91.84
93.46
88.41 |
94.28
Business/prof.
96.61
90.48
89.12
71.96
69.57 |
87.99
Consumer/auto
96.61
92.38
94.56
91.59
86.96 |
93.36
Humanitarian
91.53
92.38
91.84
84.11
84.06 |
90.39
Enviro./peace
93.22
92.70
92.52
90.65
85.51 |
91.99
Religious
72.46
70.79
63.95
57.01
62.32 |
67.73
Political party 90.25
88.25
84.35
78.50
69.57 |
85.47
Science/educ.
89.83
88.89
87.76
71.03
81.16 |
86.16
Club/fraternal
88.98
88.57
92.52
82.24
79.71 |
87.87
Nbhd/block/condo 94.49
92.70
93.20
86.92
69.57 |
90.73
Veterans org.
94.49
91.11
93.20
95.33
94.20 |
93.14
Ethnic/racial
98.31
98.10
97.96
93.46
98.55 |
97.60
Self-improvement 94.92
93.02
97.28
93.46
95.65 |
94.51
Social service
84.75
86.35
85.71
78.50
79.71 |
84.32
Other
95.76
93.02
95.92
86.92
89.86 |
93.25
-----------------------------------------------------------+--------

The digital divide presents yet another obstacle in that, compared with upper-income people,
low-income people are less likely to have access to, or to use, the Web.

6
Table 10. How often do you use the Internet, the WWW or e-mail whether at home or at work
for your personal use (that is, not in connection with your work)?
Household income
|
1
2
3
4
5 | Total
----------------------+-------------------------------------------+------no access at home or |
52.33
34.33
27.37
9.09
19.35 | 35.91
never use |
22.28
24.89
17.89
14.55
19.35 | 21.75
less than once/month |
2.59
5.15
4.21
7.27
6.45 |
4.45
once a month |
4.15
2.58
2.11
1.82
3.23 |
2.97
several times a month |
4.66
10.30
14.74
16.36
9.68 |
9.72
once a week |
4.66
5.58
7.37
12.73
9.68 |
6.43
several times a week |
9.33
17.17
26.32
38.18
32.26 | 18.78
----------------------+-------------------------------------------+------Total |
193
233
95
55
31 |
607
| 100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 | 100.00
Kendall's tau-b =

0.2690

ASE = 0.031

II. Political involvement of lower-income Americans

As compared with their more financially secure compatriots, lower-income Americans tend
to be less involved in politicsas indicated by their lower expressed interest in politics (Table
11), their lower frequency of discussing politics and public affairs (Table 12), and their lower
rates of participation in various political actions (Tables 13-15). They are also less likely to feel
effective politically (Tables 16 and 17) or to be effective politically, as gauged by having
experienced success in collective action to solve a neighborhood problem (Tables 18 and 19).
Table 11. How interested would you say you are in politics?
Household income
|
1
2
3
4
5 |
Total
----------------------+------------------------------------------+------very interested |
13.56
18.41
15.65
22.43
37.68 |
18.65
somewhat interested |
46.61
50.79
56.46
52.34
40.58 |
50.00
not very interested |
19.92
22.86
20.41
15.89
13.04 |
20.02
not at all interested |
19.92
7.94
7.48
9.35
8.70 |
11.33
----------------------+------------------------------------------+------Total |
236
315
147
107
69 |
874
| 100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 | 100.00
Kendall's tau-b =

-0.1330

ASE = 0.030

7
Table 12. How often would you say you discuss politics and current affairs?
Household income
|
1
2
3
4
5 |
Total
----------------------+------------------------------------------+-------every day |
9.36
16.56
11.56
19.63
21.74 |
14.56
several times a week | 16.17
16.24
25.17
22.43
23.19 |
19.04
once a week | 10.64
15.29
12.93
13.08
15.94 |
13.42
several times a month | 10.21
10.19
6.80
13.08
10.14 |
9.98
once a month | 13.62
12.74
8.16
7.48
7.25 |
11.12
less often | 25.96
19.11
22.45
16.82
11.59 |
20.64
never | 14.04
9.87
12.93
7.48
10.14 |
11.24
----------------------+------------------------------------------+-------Total |
235
314
147
107
69 |
872
| 100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 100.00 | 100.00
Kendall's tau-b =

-0.1149

ASE = 0.027

Table 13. During the last 12 months, have you done any of the following? (% yes)
Household income
1
2
3
4
5 | Total
------------------------------------------------------------------+-----Contact official
13.98
20.70
19.05
27.10
43.48 | 21.19
Work in party/action grp 5.93
8.57
4.76
8.41
14.49 |
7.67
Campaign work
4.24
7.30
10.96
9.43
19.12 |
8.27
Political org. work
4.24
5.41
2.74
1.89
8.82 |
4.48
Campaign badge/sticker
13.98
21.66
21.23
29.91
42.03 | 22.13
Sign petition
26.27
33.76
38.10
45.79
52.17 | 35.40
Demonstration
5.08
4.47
6.16
4.67
4.35 |
4.94
Boycott product
10.17
21.34
18.37
30.84
21.74 | 19.01
Bought product
17.02
22.83
24.49
28.97
31.88 | 23.01
Donated money
13.14
19.35
21.77
28.04
34.78 | 20.37
Illegal protest
2.12
1.29
1.36
0.94
0.00 |
1.38
Visit polit website
9.17
17.21
14.97
30.19
33.33 | 17.58
Forward polit email
7.79
12.09
15.65
22.43
31.88 | 14.42
Internet polit partic.
4.76
7.17
5.44
14.95
15.94 |
7.90
------------------------------------------------------------------+------

A five-level index of political participation was created from the 14 activities listed above.
Table 14. Number of reported participatory acts in the preceding 12 months.
Household income
polpartcut |
1
2
3
4
5 |
Total
-----------+---------------------------------------------+-------No activity | 57.46
45.00
40.69
31.73
20.90 |
44.08
1 activity | 14.04
14.00
15.86
14.42
20.90 |
14.93
2-3 | 14.91
18.33
20.00
19.23
19.40 |
17.89
4-5 |
6.14
13.00
13.10
16.35
14.93 |
11.73
6+ |
7.46
9.67
10.34
18.27
23.88 |
11.37
-----------+---------------------------------------------+-------Total |
228
300
145
104
67 |
844
| 100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 | 100.00

Kendall's tau-b =

0.1839

ASE = 0.028

Table 15. Voted in the 2004 presidential election?

Household income
|
1
2
3
4
5 |
Total
-------------+-----------------------------------------+-------yes | 59.75
67.94
77.55
84.11
79.71 |
70.25
no | 38.56
30.16
22.45
15.89
18.84 |
28.49
not eligible |
1.69
1.90
0.00
0.00
1.45 |
1.26
-------------+-----------------------------------------+-------Total |
236
315
147
107
69 |
874
| 100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 | 100.00
Kendall's tau-b =

-0.1639

ASE = 0.029

Table 16. Do politicians in general care what people like you think?
Household income
|
1
2
3
4
5 | Total
--------------+--------------------------------------------+------hardly any |
25.96
16.29
10.20
10.38
15.94 | 17.13
very few care |
30.21
31.63
26.53
31.13
8.70 | 28.51
some care |
33.19
38.66
46.94
43.40
53.62 | 40.34
many care |
7.23
9.27
13.61
10.38
13.04 |
9.89
most care |
3.40
4.15
2.72
4.72
8.70 |
4.14
--------------+--------------------------------------------+------Total |
235
313
147
106
69 |
870
| 100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 | 100.00
Kendall's tau-b =

0.1486

ASE = 0.028

Table 17. Politics seems so complicated that you can't really understand...
Household income
|
1
2
3
4
5 | Total
-------------+--------------------------------------------+------never |
5.08
6.98
6.85
8.49
10.29 |
6.89
seldom |
23.31
19.05
21.92
24.53
33.82 | 22.50
occasionally |
31.36
44.13
40.41
41.51
32.35 | 38.81
regularly |
22.88
19.05
23.97
16.98
17.65 | 20.55
frequently |
17.37
10.79
6.85
8.49
5.88 | 11.25
-------------+--------------------------------------------+------Total |
236
315
146
106
68 |
871
| 100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 | 100.00
Kendall's tau-b =

-0.0974

ASE = 0.029

9
Table 18. Have you ever tried to get your neighbors to work together to fix or improve
something in your neighborhood?
Household income
|
1
2
3
4
5 |
Total
--------------------+------------------------------------------+-------no |
77.97
78.27
76.19
76.64
68.12 |
76.83
yes; tried once |
11.44
9.58
13.61
10.28
11.59 |
11.01
yes, more than once |
10.59
12.14
10.20
13.08
20.29 |
12.16
--------------------+------------------------------------------+-------Total |
236
313
147
107
69 |
872
| 100.00
100.00
100.00 100.00 100.00 |
100.00
Kendall's tau-b =

0.0393

ASE = 0.031

Table 19. Thinking of your most recent attempt, to what degree were you successful in fixing
the problem?
Household income
|
1
2
3
4
5 |
Total
----------------------+------------------------------------------+-------very successful | 26.92
32.35
31.43
45.83
45.45 |
33.83
somewhat successful | 36.54
35.29
34.29
41.67
31.82 |
35.82
not very successful | 19.23
16.18
17.14
8.33
4.55 |
14.93
not at all successful | 17.31
16.18
17.14
4.17
18.18 |
15.42
----------------------+------------------------------------------+-------Total |
52
68
35
24
22 |
201
| 100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 | 100.00
Kendall's tau-b =

-0.1149

ASE = 0.058

Finally, lower-income Americans are comparatively less likely to be contacted and urged to
vote (Table 20), to be asked to get involved in political activity (Table 21), or to be asked for
their political opinions (Table 22).
Table 20. During the past year, did you receive any mail, e-mails, phone calls or visits from a
political party, candidate, or political organization urging you to vote a particular way?
Household income
|
1
2
3
4
5 | Total
-----------+-------------------------------------------+-----yes | 41.53
56.41
65.75
73.83
66.67 | 56.90
no | 58.47
43.59
34.25
26.17
33.33 | 43.10
-----------+-------------------------------------------+-----Total |
236
312
146
107
69 |
870
| 100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 | 100.00
Kendall's tau-b =

-0.1948

ASE = 0.030

10
Table 21. In the past year, did someone you know ask you to vote, or to contribute money to a
political cause, or to engage in some other type of political activity?
Household income
|
1
2
3
4
5 |
Total
------+---------------------------------------------+------yes |
29.24
32.91
40.00
53.27
50.72 |
37.01
no |
70.76
67.09
60.00
46.73
49.28 |
62.99
------+---------------------------------------------+------Total |
236
313
145
107
69 |
870
| 100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 | 100.00
Kendall's tau-b =

-0.1467

ASE = 0.031

Table 22. How often do other people ask your opinions about political matters?
Household income
|
1
2
3
4
5 |
Total
---------------+------------------------------------------+-------very often |
5.51
6.39
3.42
9.35
17.65 |
6.90
only sometimes | 30.08
35.78
39.73
40.19
44.12 |
36.09
hardly ever | 64.41
57.83
56.85
50.47
38.24 |
57.01
---------------+------------------------------------------+-------Total |
236
313
146
107
68 |
870
| 100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 | 100.00
Kendall's tau-b =

-0.1152

ASE = 0.030

III. Income effects upon political involvement are not an artifact of age or education level
Age. Preliminary analysis indicated that, generally speaking, people under age 40 are less
interested in politics than are people aged 40 and older. Therefore, a fortyup dummy variable
was created for use in subsequent analysis.
Education. For purposes of analysis here, respondents highest level of formal education was
classified initially into four categories: less than high school diploma, high school graduate (or
GED), some post-secondary education, and college graduate. Preliminary analysis revealed that,
with regard to the political outcome variables of interest, the first two categories did not differ
significantly. Those two categories were therefore merged. In the regression analyses to follow,
two binary (0,1) education variables were created: one designating respondents with some postsecondary education, and one designating college graduates.
As shown in Tables 23 and 24, the effects of income upon political interest and political
discussion persist even when education and age are taken into account.

11

Table 23. OLS Regression of political interest on income, education and age.
Source |
SS
df
MS
-------------+-----------------------------Model | 47.2653614
4 11.8163404
Residual | 607.548399
838 .724998089
-------------+-----------------------------Total |
654.81376
842 .777688552

Number of obs
F( 4,
838)
Prob > F
R-squared
Adj R-squared
Root MSE

=
=
=
=
=
=

843
16.30
0.0000
0.0722
0.0678
.85147

polintr |
Coef.
Std. Err.
t
P>|t|
-------------+----------------------------------------hinccut |
-.058632
.025791
-2.27
0.023
posths | -.3455063
.0688469
-5.02
0.000
collgrad | -.4063642
.0820792
-4.95
0.000
fortyup | -.1846555
.0589615
-3.13
0.002
_cons |
2.687716
.0746488
36.00
0.000
-------------------------------------------------------

Table 24. OLS Regression of reported frequency of political discussion on income, education
and age.
Source |
SS
df
MS
-------------+-----------------------------Model | 209.933328
4 52.4833319
Residual | 3280.70639
836 3.92428994
-------------+-----------------------------Total | 3490.63971
840 4.15552347

Number of obs
F( 4,
836)
Prob > F
R-squared
Adj R-squared
Root MSE

=
=
=
=
=
=

841
13.37
0.0000
0.0601
0.0556
1.981

discpol |
Coef.
Std. Err.
t
P>|t|
-------------+---------------------------------------hinccut | -.1311265
.0600274
-2.18
0.029
posths | -.7018245
.1603412
-4.38
0.000
collgrad | -.8765259
.1910909
-4.59
0.000
fortyup | -.3620697
.1373065
-2.64
0.009
_cons |
4.840376
.1738249
27.85
0.000
------------------------------------------------------

V. Involvement in Civil Society Organizations as a Means of Bolstering Political

Involvement
Involvement in each of four types of civil-society organizations is considered here: religious,
educational, neighborhood, and cultural. In each OLS regression displayed below, CSO
involvement is indicated by two dummy variables. The first denotes inactive membership; the
second, some kind of active involvement in the preceding 12 months (participation, donating
money, or volunteer work).
The analysis suggests that active participation in civil society organizations (CSOs)but
generally not mere membership in such organizationsis linked to political involvement,
even when education, age, and income are taken into account. The implication is that
efforts to invite and involve lower-income Americans in CSOs can foster their political

12
involvement, and ultimately their political power. In the absence of such intentional efforts,
however, the analysis displayed previously in this report indicates that CSO involvement
tends to over-represent upper-income Americansthat is, a case of the rich getting richer in
terms of political influence.
[NOTE: The next step in the analysis should be to focus the analysis on lower-income
respondents and gauge the impact of CSO involvement upon their political involvement and
efficacy.]

Table 25. Effects of CSO involvement upon frequency of political discussion, holding constant
education (in the form of education dummy variables), age (under 40 vs. 40+), and household
income level.
A. Religious organization involvement
Source
SS
df
MS
------------------------------------------Model
269.242719
6 44.8737866
Residual
3221.397
834 3.86258633
------------------------------------------Total
3490.63971
840 4.15552347

Number of obs
F( 6,
834)
Prob > F
R-squared
Adj R-squared
Root MSE

=
=
=
=
=
=

841
11.62
0.0000
0.0771
0.0705
1.9653

discpol
Coef.
Std. Err.
t
P>|t|
----------------------------------------------------posths
-.6906258
.1604731
-4.30
0.000
collgrad
-.8338471
.1907281
-4.37
0.000
fortyup
-.3702468
.1364494
-2.71
0.007
hinccut
-.1285774
.0596397
-2.16
0.031
religinact
.3959853
.2550868
1.55
0.121
religactiv
-.5210978
.1604721
-3.25
0.001
_cons
4.922892
.1746737
28.18
0.000
-----------------------------------------------------

B. Science/Education/Teachers & Parents Organizational Involvement

Source
SS
df
MS
------------------------------------------Model
235.66121
6 39.2768684
Residual
3254.9785
834 3.90285192
------------------------------------------Total
3490.63971
840 4.15552347

Number of obs
F( 6,
834)
Prob > F
R-squared
Adj R-squared
Root MSE

discpol
Coef.
Std. Err.
t
P>|t|
-----------------------------------------------------posths
-.664152
.1610361
-4.12
0.000
collgrad
-.7943603
.1948236
-4.08
0.000
fortyup
-.3766226
.1370497
-2.75
0.006
hinccut
-.1261443
.059974
-2.10
0.036
educinact
-.0631363
.4006588
-0.16
0.875
educactiv
-.5783754
.2253913
-2.57
0.010
_cons
4.867641
.1737206
28.02
0.000

=
=
=
=
=
=

841
10.06
0.0000
0.0675
0.0608
1.9756

13
------------------------------------------------------

14
Table 25 (continued)
C. Neighborhood organizational involvement
Source
SS
df
MS
------------------------------------------Model
228.612685
6 38.1021142
Residual
3262.02703
834 3.91130339
------------------------------------------Total
3490.63971
840 4.15552347

Number of obs
F( 6,
834)
Prob > F
R-squared
Adj R-squared
Root MSE

=
=
=
=
=
=

841
9.74
0.0000
0.0655
0.0588
1.9777

discpol
Coef.
Std. Err.
t
P>|t|
-----------------------------------------------------posths
-.6814034
.160465
-4.25
0.000
collgrad
-.8329311
.1928236
-4.32
0.000
fortyup
-.3400245
.1375445
-2.47
0.014
hinccut
-.1132886
.0604884
-1.87
0.061
nbhdinact
-.455754
.324391
-1.40
0.160
nbhdactiv
-.5955466
.3364364
-1.77
0.077
_cons
4.816581
.1739223
27.69
0.000
------------------------------------------------------

D. Cultural organizational involvement

Source
SS
df
MS
------------------------------------------Model
255.971638
6 42.6619397
Residual
3234.66808
834 3.87849889
------------------------------------------Total
3490.63971
840 4.15552347

Number of obs
F( 6,
834)
Prob > F
R-squared
Adj R-squared
Root MSE

discpol
Coef.
Std. Err.
t
P>|t|
----------------------------------------------------posths
-.6374237
.1607329
-3.97
0.000
collgrad
-.7666886
.1926669
-3.98
0.000
fortyup
-.383192
.1366645
-2.80
0.005
hinccut
-.122228
.0597483
-2.05
0.041
cultinact
-.668169
.3712457
-1.80
0.072
cultactiv
-.7027323
.2279504
-3.08
0.002
_cons
4.877708
.1733251
28.14
0.000
-----------------------------------------------------

=
=
=
=
=
=

841
11.00
0.0000
0.0733
0.0667
1.9694

15
The OLS regression analyses displayed in Table 26 repeat the previous analysis, this time using
the five-level political participatory acts index as the dependent variable.
Table 26. Effects of CSO involvement upon political participatory acts index, holding constant
education, age, and household income level.
A. Religious organization involvement
Source
SS
df
MS
------------------------------------------Model
227.094914
6 37.8491524
Residual
1418.01565
807 1.75714455
------------------------------------------Total
1645.11057
813 2.02350623

Number of obs
F( 6,
807)
Prob > F
R-squared
Adj R-squared
Root MSE

=
=
=
=
=
=

814
21.54
0.0000
0.1380
0.1316
1.3256

polpartcut
Coef.
Std. Err.
t
P>|t|
---------------------------------------------------posths
.5950751
.1096402
5.43
0.000
collgrad
.862711
.1313623
6.57
0.000
fortyup
.0823294
.0934502
0.88
0.379
hinccut
.131927
.0407593
3.24
0.001
religinact
.1625824
.1756248
0.93
0.355
religactiv
.5205739
.110071
4.73
0.000
_cons
.4182218
.1192321
3.51
0.000
----------------------------------------------------

B. Science/Education/Teachers & Parents Organizational Involvement

Source
SS
df
MS
------------------------------------------Model
247.549511
6 41.2582518
Residual
1397.56105
807 1.73179808
------------------------------------------Total
1645.11057
813 2.02350623

Number of obs
F( 6,
807)
Prob > F
R-squared
Adj R-squared
Root MSE

polpartcut
Coef.
Std. Err.
t
P>|t|
---------------------------------------------------posths
.5739601
.108774
5.28
0.000
collgrad
.7945184
.1320934
6.01
0.000
fortyup
.1072148
.0926726
1.16
0.248
hinccut
.1334885
.0405182
3.29
0.001
educinact
.263256
.2772552
0.95
0.343
educactiv
.8986148
.1533705
5.86
0.000
_cons
.4650695
.1171908
3.97
0.000
-----------------------------------------------------

=
=
=
=
=
=

814
23.82
0.0000
0.1505
0.1442
1.316

16
Table 26 (continued)
C. Neighborhood organizational involvement
Source
SS
df
MS
------------------------------------------Model
199.257846
6 33.2096409
Residual
1445.85272
807 1.79163906
------------------------------------------Total
1645.11057
813 2.02350623

Number of obs
F( 6,
807)
Prob > F
R-squared
Adj R-squared
Root MSE

=
=
=
=
=
=

814
18.54
0.0000
0.1211
0.1146
1.3385

polpartcut
Coef.
Std. Err.
t
P>|t|
----------------------------------------------------posths
.6238448
.1100187
5.67
0.000
collgrad
.8901695
.1330552
6.69
0.000
fortyup
.0673534
.0945743
0.71
0.477
hinccut
.127188
.0415118
3.06
0.002
nbhdinact
.442612
.2173352
2.04
0.042
nbhdactiv
.3808503
.2310376
1.65
0.100
_cons
.5247866
.1191385
4.40
0.000
-----------------------------------------------------

D. Cultural organizational involvement

Source
SS
df
MS
------------------------------------------Model
286.050943
6 47.6751571
Residual
1359.05962
807 1.68408875
------------------------------------------Total
1645.11057
813 2.02350623

Number of obs
F( 6,
807)
Prob > F
R-squared
Adj R-squared
Root MSE

polpartcut
Coef.
Std. Err.
t
P>|t|
----------------------------------------------------posths
.5547731
.1073302
5.17
0.000
collgrad
.7672179
.1296827
5.92
0.000
fortyup
.1159848
.0914168
1.27
0.205
hinccut
.1305718
.0398886
3.27
0.001
cultinact
.6486912
.2488103
2.61
0.009
cultactiv
1.111911
.1506127
7.38
0.000
_cons
.4426193
.1156125
3.83
0.000
-----------------------------------------------------

=
=
=
=
=
=

814
28.31
0.0000
0.1739
0.1677
1.2977