This study tested the influence of bridging and bonding social capital in political participation while controlling for sociodemographic and psychological factors among Mexicans and Mexican Americans in Illinois. Bridging social capital significantly predicted two types of participation. Participants who felt their lives were linked to those of Anglo-Americans and attended functions with members of this group were more likely to contact a public official. In addition, those who attended functions with Anglo-Americans were also more likely to work for or contribute to a political candidate. Bonding social capital significantly predicted attending a public meeting or demonstration. Those who felt more linked to other Latinos in the country were less likely to participate, but those who had a close experience with discrimination were more likely to do so. Overall, findings showed that an understanding of the different aspects of social capital is necessary to decipher the participation puzzle.
AbrahamsonP. R.AldrichJ. H. (1982). The decline of electoral participation in America. American Political Science Review, 76, 502-520.
2.
AlbarracinJ. (2007). New Latinos in Illinois: A comparison of non-electoral and electoral participation among Mexicans and Mexican Americans in central Illinois and nationwide. Paper presented at the Midwest Political Science Association 65th Annual Conference, April 2007, Chicago, IL.
3.
BarretoM. A.MuñozJ. A. (2003). Reexamining the “politics of in-between”: Political participation among Mexican immigrants in the United States. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 25, 427-447.
4.
BeckP. A. (2002). Encouraging political defection: The role of personal discussion networks in partisan defections to the opposition party and Perot votes in 1992. Political Behavior, 24, 309-337.
5.
BevelanderP.PendakurR. (2009). Social capital and voting participation of immigrants and minorities in Canada. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 32, 1406-1430.
6.
BrehmJ.RahnW. (1997). Individual-level evidence for the causes and consequences of social capital. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 999-1023.
7.
CookT. E.GronkeP. (2005). The skeptical American: revisiting the meanings of trust in government and confidence in institutions. Journal of Politics, 67, 784-803.
8.
De La GarzaR. O.FalconA.GarciaF. C. (1996). Will the real Americans please stand up: Anglo and Mexican-American support of core American political values. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 335-351.
9.
DownsA. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
10.
EspinalR.HartlynJ.KellyM. J. (2006). Explaining trust in government in the Dominican Republic. Comparative Political Studies, 39, 200-223.
11.
FirthD. (1993). Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates. Biometrika, 80, 27-38.
12.
GuterbockT. M.LondonB. (1983). Race, political orientation, and participation: An empirical test for four competing theories. American Sociological Review, 48, 439-53.
13.
HeinzeG.SchemperM. (2002). A solution to the problem of separation in logistic regression. Statistics in Medicine, 21, 2409-2419.
14.
HetheringtonM. J. (1999). The effect of political trust on the presidential vote, 1968-96. American Political Science Review, 93, 311-26.
15.
JacobyW. G. (2003). Ideology in the 2000 election: A study of ambivalence. In WeisbergH. F.WilcoxC. (Eds.), Models of voting in presidential elections: The 2000 election (pp. 103-119). Stanford, CA: Stanford Law & Politics.
16.
Jones-CorreaM. (1998). Different paths: Gender, immigration and political participation. International Migration Review, 32, 326-349.
17.
JunnJ. (1999). Participation in liberal democracy: The political assimilation of immigrants and ethnic minorities in the United States. American Behavioral Scientist, 42, 1417-1438.
18.
LealD. L. (2002). Political participation by Latino non-citizens in the United States. British Journal of Political Science, 32, 353-370.
19.
LeighleyJ. E.NaglerJ. E. (1992). Individual and systemic influences on turnout: Who votes? 1984. Journal of Politics, 54(3), 718-740.
20.
LeighleyA. V.VedlitzA. (1999). Race, ethnicity, and political participation: Competing models and contrasting explanations. Journal of Politics, 61, 1092-1114.
21.
LienP. (1994). Ethnicity and political participation: A comparison between Asian and Mexican Americans. Political Behavior, 15(2), 237-264.
22.
MarshallM. J. (2001). Does the shoe fit? Testing models of participation for African-American and Latino involvement in local politics. Urban Affairs Review, 37(2), 227-248.
23.
MichelsonM. R. (2003). The corrosive effect of acculturation: How Mexican-Americans lose political trust. Social Science Quarterly, 84, 918-932.
24.
PattieC.SeydP.WhiteleyP. (2003). Citizenship and civic engagement: Attitudes and behavior in Britain. Political Studies, 51, 443-468.
25.
PatulnyR. V.SvendsenG. L. H. (2007) Exploring the social capital grid: Bonding, bridging, qualitative, quantitative. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 27, 32-51.
26.
PortesA. (1998), Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1-24.
27.
PutnamR. D. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
28.
PutnamR. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
29.
RochaR.EspinoR. (2009). Segregation, immigration and Latino participation in ethnic politics. American Politics Research, XX(X), 1-20.
30.
StokesA. K. (2003). Group consciousness and political participation. American Politics Research, 31(4), 361-378.
31.
Tam ChoW. K. (1999). Naturalization, socialization, participation: Immigrants and (non-) voting. The Journal of Politics, 61, 1140-1155.
