2005
DOI: 10.2307/3595617
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Generational Cohorts, Group Membership, and Political Participation by People with Disabilities

Abstract: JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
24
0
2

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
(11 reference statements)
1
24
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…This is important because, for example, studies of US national elections reveal that persons with disabilities tend to be 10-21% less politically inclined than non-disabled persons. This also varies among persons with disabilities in that women, older individuals, those with severe disabilities, lower education and income tend to be even less politically inclined (Schur, 1998(Schur, , 2003Schur, Shields & Schriner, 2005). observed that persons with disabilities were underrepresented in local, provincial and federal elections and pointed to negative public attitudes, public awareness and funding issues that Levesque & Langford, "The role of disability groups" CDSA 5.4 (December 2016) 68 needed to be addressed.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is important because, for example, studies of US national elections reveal that persons with disabilities tend to be 10-21% less politically inclined than non-disabled persons. This also varies among persons with disabilities in that women, older individuals, those with severe disabilities, lower education and income tend to be even less politically inclined (Schur, 1998(Schur, , 2003Schur, Shields & Schriner, 2005). observed that persons with disabilities were underrepresented in local, provincial and federal elections and pointed to negative public attitudes, public awareness and funding issues that Levesque & Langford, "The role of disability groups" CDSA 5.4 (December 2016) 68 needed to be addressed.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Notes 1. Schur et al (2005) include the following activities in the index: making an economic contribution to a political party or a political candidate, writing or speaking to an elected representative or public employee, attending a political meeting, writing to a newspaper, making an economic contribution to organizations that try to influence governmental policy or legislation, working in other ways with groups or on their own to change governmental policy or legislation, working with others on issues in their own local communities, and voting in an election. 2.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…At an individual level, political participation depends in part on the candidate's resources and her/his motivation. Disabled people have to varying degrees resources such as education, income, organizational affiliation, and social capital (Schur et al 2005, Rogstad 2007). In addition, the motivation to participate politically also varies among disabled people.…”
Section: Participation In Representative Democracymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Internal political efficacy is a sense of personal competence to understand and participate in politics, while external efficacy is a sense that one's political activities will have an influence on what the government and leaders actually do (Schur, Shields, & Schriner, 2005). Internal efficacy is recognized as a significant predictor of voting among people with and without disabilities (Gastil, 2000;Schur, Shields, & Schriner, 2003).…”
Section: Engagementmentioning
confidence: 98%