Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 462

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 137 of the 137 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Attitudes, Opportunities and Incentives: A Field Essay on Political Participation

Leighley, Jan E.·1995·Political Research Quarterly

Abstract

One of the ironies of the behavioral movement in political science is that scholars following in its wake were more likely to study attitudes than behavior. Nonetheless, over the past several decades political scientists have produced an abundant body of research on mass political participation (for recent reviews of this research, see Conway 1989; Crotty 1991). In this essay, I provide nonspecialists a substantive overview of the major theoretical models and empirical findings of this literature I also focus part of the discussion on the assumptions and applicability of several theoretical orientations evidenced in the subfield today and propose a brief research agenda for the subfield; scholars specializing in the subfield will find these points of particular interest. Three broad conclusions drawn from my review of the literature structure the proposed research agenda presented in the concluding section. First, the discipline broadly accepts as a basic of participation the standard socioeconomic model which emphasizes individuals' socioeconomic status and civic orientations as predictors of participation. Yet a growing body of research emphasizes the importance of mobilization as a major factor influencing participation in U.S. politics. Hence, mobilization factors simply cannot be ignored if we are to develop a complete understanding of who participates and why they do so. Second, political participation is typically equated with voter turnout, although citizens participate in a variety of political activities, with varying levels of involvement over time. We will improve the theoretical rigor of our models of participation by studying this variety of political acts and how it changes over time; focusing on voter turnout alone-as discrete acts structured by the electoral calendar-offers no such advantage. We must therefore shift the focus of our study to alternative forms of participation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/106591299504800111

Cites

137 of 137 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 137 references

Cited by

See all 462

Metadata

Authors
Leighley, J. E.
Venue
Political Research Quarterly
Published
1995-03
Volume
48
Issue
1
Pages
181-209
ISSN
  • 1065-9129 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-274X
OpenAlex
W1968521523
Cited by
462
References
137
FWCI
32.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Attitudes, Opportunities and Incentives: A Field Essay on Political Participation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/106591299504800111
The paper
Leighley, J. E. (1995). Attitudes, Opportunities and Incentives: A Field Essay on Political Participation. Political Research Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1177/106591299504800111

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.