Legislative websites are increasingly important in the practice of representation. Since adapting old practices to new technology entails uncertainty, the authors expect legislative offices to learn website representation practices from each other. Using data from the 2006 and 2007 official home pages of members of the U.S. House of Representatives, the authors find that web design practices regarding the content of legislative websites diffuse within state delegations, that is, among members hailing from the same state, but the underlying website technologies do not. These results suggest the continued importance, even in the online world, of state delegations in congressional representation.
AdlerE. ScottGentChariti E.OvermeyerCary B.1998. “The Home Style Homepage: Legislator Use of the World Wide Web for Constituency Contact.” Legislative Studies Quarterly23:585-95.
2.
AllenThomas J.1978. Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technological Information within the R&D Organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3.
AnselinLuc. 1988. Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models. Boston: Kluwer.
4.
ArnoldL. W.DeanR.PattersonS. C.2000. “Friendship and Votes: The Impact of Interpersonal Ties on Legislative Decision Making.” State and Local Government Review32:142-47.
5.
ArnoldR. Douglas. 2004. Congress, the Press, and Political Accountability. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6.
BaughmanJohn. 2006. Common Ground: Committee Politics in the U.S. House of Representatives. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
7.
BimberBruce. 2003. Information and American Democracy: Technology in the Evolution of Political Power. New York: Cambridge University Press.
BurdenCollinHysomTim. 2007. 2007 Gold Mouse Report: Lessons from the Best Web Sites on Capitol Hill. Washington, DC: Congressional Management Foundation.
10.
CaldeiraGregory A.PattersonSamuel C.1987. “Political Friendships in the Legislature.” Journal of Politics49:953-75.
11.
CliffAndrew D.OrdJ. K.1981. Spatial Processes: Models and Applications. London: Pion.
12.
ColemanJames S.KatzElihuMenzelHerbert. 1957. “The Diffusion of an Innovation among Physicians.” Sociometry20:253-70.
13.
CongdonPeter. 2003. Applied Bayesian Modelling. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
14.
CooperChristopher A.2004. “Internet Use in the State Legislature: A Research Note.” Social Science Computer Review22:347-54.
15.
DeckardBarbara. 1972. “State Party Delegations in the U.S. House of Representatives—A Comparative Study of Group Cohesion.” Journal of Politics34:199-222.
16.
DiMaggioPaul J.PowellWoody W.1983. “The Iron Cage Revisited—Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields.” American Sociological Review48:147-60.
17.
DoreianPatrick. 1980. “Linear Models with Spatially Distributed Data: Spatial Disturbances or Spatial Effects?” Sociological Methods and Research9:29-60.
18.
DruckmanJames N.HennessyCari LynnKiferMartin J.ParkinMichael. 2009. “Issue Engagement on Congressional Web Sites, 2002–2006.” Social Science Computer Review27:1-21.
19.
DruckmanJames N.KiferMartin K.ParkinMichael. 2007. “The Technological Development of Congressional Candidate Websites: How and Why Candidates Use Web Innovations.” Social Science Computer Review25:425-42.
20.
EsterlingKevin M.LazerDavid M. J.NebloMichael A.2005. “Home (Page) Style: Determinants of the Quality of House Members’ Websites.” International Journal of Electronic Government Research1:50-63.
21.
EsterlingKevin M.LazerDavid M. J.NebloMichael A.2011. “Representative Communication: Website Interactivity & ‘Distributional Path Dependence’ in the U.S. Congress.” Political Communication28:409-439.
22.
FennoRichard F.1978. Homestyle: House Members in Their Districts. Boston: Little, Brown.
23.
FerberPaulFoltzFranzPuglieseRudy. 2005. “Computer-Mediated Communication in the Arizona Legislature: Applying Media Richness Theory to Member and Staff Communication.” State and Local Government Review37:142-50.
24.
FestingerLeon. 1950. “Informal Social Communication.” Psychological Review57:271-82.
25.
FountainJane E.2001. Building the Virtual State: Information Technology and Institutional Change. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
26.
FowlerJames H.2006. “Legislative Cosponsorship Networks in the U.S. House and Senate.” Social Networks28:454-65.
27.
FowlerJames H.ChoWendy K. Tam. 2010. “Legislative Success in a Small World: Social Network Analysis and the Dynamics of Congressional Legislation.” Journal of Politics2:124-35.
28.
FowlerJames H.HeaneyMichael T.NickersonDavid W.PadgettJohn F.SinclairBetsey. 2011. “Causality in Political Networks.” American Politics Research39:437-80.
29.
GalaskiewiczJosephBurtRonald S.1991. “Interorganizational Contagion in Corporate Philanthropy.” Administrative Science Quarterly36:88-105.
30.
GelmanAndrewRubinDonald B.1992. “Inference from Iterative Simulation Using Multiple Sequences.” Statistical Science7:434-55.
31.
HagerstrandTorsten. 1967. Innovation Diffusion as a Spatial Process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
32.
HansenBen B.BowersJake. 2008. “Covariate Balance in Simple, Stratified and Clustered Comparative Studies.” Statistical Science23:219-36.
33.
HansenMorten T.1999. “The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organizational Units.” Administrative Science Quarterly44:82-111.
34.
HaunschildPamela R.MinerAnne S.1997. “Modes of Interorganizational Imitation: The Effects of Outcome Salience and Uncertainty.” Administrative Science Quarterly42:472-500.
ImaiKosukeKeeleLukeTingleyDustinYamamotoTeppei. 2010. “Unpacking the Black Box of Causality: Learning about Causal Mechanisms from Experimental and Observational Data.” American Political Science Review105:765-89.
37.
JacobsonGary C.1987. The Politics of Congressional Elections. Boston: Little, Brown.
38.
JohnsonDennis W.2004. Congress Online: Bridging the Gap Between Citizens and Their Representatives. New York: Routledge.
39.
KesselJohn H.1964. “The Washington Congressional Delegation.” Midwest Journal of Political Science8:1-21.
40.
KingdonJohn W.1989. Congressmen’s Voting Decisions. 3rd. ed.Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
41.
KrautRobert E.EgidoCarmenGalegherJolene. 1990. “Patterns of Contact and Communication in Scientific Research Collaboration.” In Intellectual Teamwork: Social and Technological Foundations of Cooperative Work, edited by GalegherJoleneKrautRobert E.EgidoCarmen, 149-172. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42.
KrehbielKeith. 1992. Information and Legislative Organization. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
43.
LazerDavid M. J.2001. “Coevolution of Network and Individual.” Journal of Mathematical Sociology25:69-108.
44.
LazerDavid M. J.NebloMichael A.EsterlingKevin M.2011. “The Internet and the Madisonian Cycle: Possibilities and Prospects for Consultative Representation.” In Connecting Democracy: Online Consultation and the Flow of Political Communication, edited by ColemanStephenShanePeter M., 265-285. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
45.
MintromMichael. 1997. “Policy Entrepreneurs and the Diffusion of Innovation.” American Journal of Political Science41:738-70.
46.
MongePeter R.RothmanLinda W.EisenbergEric M.MillerKatherine I.KirsteKenneth K.1985. “The Dynamics of Organizational Proximity.” Management Science31:1129-41.
47.
OwenDianaDavisRichardStricklerVincent James. 1999. “Congress and the Internet.” Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics4:10-29.
48.
PadgettJohn F.1990. “Mobility as Control: Congressmen through Committees.” In Social Mobility and Social Structure, edited by BreigerRonald L., 27-58. New York: Cambridge University Press.
49.
PitkinHanna Fenichel. 1967. The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
50.
RiceRonald E.AydinCarolyn. 1991. “Attitudes toward New Organizational Technology: Network Proximity as a Mechanism for Social Information Processing.” Administrative Science Quarterly36:219-44.
51.
RyanBryceGrossNeal C.1943. “The Diffusion of Hybrid Seed Corn in Two Iowa Communities.” Rural Sociology8:15-24.
SpiegelhalterDavidThomasAndrewBestNickyGilksWally. 1996. “BUGS 0.5: Bayesian Inference Using Gibbs Sampling Manual (version ii).” Technical report. MRC Biostatistics Unit.
54.
Stromer-GalleyJennifer. 2000. “On-Line Interaction and Why Candidates Avoid It.” Journal of Communication50:111-32.
55.
TannerMartin A.WongWing Hung. 1987. “The Calculation of Posterior Distributions by Data Augmentation.” Journal of the American Statistical Association82:528-40.
56.
TrumanDavid B.1956. “State Delegations and the Structure of Party Voting in the United State House of Representatives.” American Political Science Review50:1023-45.
57.
ValenteThomas W.1995. Network Models of the Diffusion of Innovations. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
58.
Van den BulteChristopheMoenaertRudy K.1998. “The Effects of R&D Team Co-Location on Communication Patterns among R&D, Marketing, and Manufacturing.” Management Science44 (11): S1-S18.
59.
WalkerJack L.1969. “The Diffusion of Innovations among the American States.” American Political Science Review63:880-99.
ZahnG. Lawrence1991. “Face-to-Face Communication in an Office Setting: The Effects of Position, Proximity, and Exposure.” Communication Research18:737-54.
