The Howard Journal of Communications, 19:334354, 2008
Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1064-6175 print/1096-4649 online
DOI: 10.1080/10646170802391755
Assessing Cultural and Contextual
Components of Social Capital: Is Civic
Engagement in Peril?
LINDSAY H. HOFFMAN
Department of Communication, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, USA
OSEI APPIAH
School of Communication, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA
Much research on political participation and civic engagement
centers on the question: ‘‘What motivates people to get involved?’’
Several communication variables have been purported to influence
these activities, such as television, newspaper, and Internet use.
The general conclusion is that civic and political participation is
declining. However, the rates of decline (or increase) in these
activities among certain racial and cultural groups, such as Blacks
compared with Whites, is not clear. Furthermore, the roles of
religion and the church—an important component in creating
bonds and networks that encourage such participation—have
received little attention among communication scholars. The authors
sought to examine the intricacies among race, religiosity, and political and civic engagement by expanding the current literature on
social capital to include cultural and contextual components of
church involvement. They found that in a national sample, the more
involved Blacks are with church and the more frequently they attend
services, the more involved they are in their communities. Moreover,
their findings are consistent with previous research regarding media
use; newspaper reading, and Internet use were positively related
with civic engagement and voting, whereas television use was not.
Implications for communication research, social capital, and
measurement of race and culture are discussed.
KEYTERMS church, community, culture, ethnicity, media use,
participation, race, social capital
Address correspondence to Dr. Osei Appiah, School of Communication, 3140 Derby Hall,
154 N. Oval Mall, Columbus, OH 43210. E-mail: appiah.2@osu.edu
334
Race and Social Capital
335
Some researchers contend that race does not play a role in influencing an
individual’s political participation or civic engagement (e.g., Leighley &
Vedlitz, 1999) whereas others argue that race does correlate with these activities (e.g., Abrahmson & Claggett, 1984; Musick, Wilson, & Bynum, 2000).
What is certain is that over the last few decades, voter registration, voter
turnout, and civic engagement have dropped significantly among Americans
(Cavanagh, 1991; Gilliam & Kaufman, 1998; Putnam, 2000).
Disparities in political participation by race are not as certain. Many
scholars believe that the decrease in voter participation may be greater than
average for Black Americans (e.g., Musick et al., 2000). However, there
appears to be solid evidence that the political participation gap between
Whites and Blacks may be shrinking or may even be non-existent
(Abrahmson & Claggett, 1984; Cohen, Cotter, & Couter, 1983; Southwell &
Pirch, 2003). In fact, much of the data suggesting Blacks are less politically
active compared with Whites seem to result more from differences in socioeconomic status than differences in race (Leighley & Vedlitz, 1999). For
example, Barnes’s (2003) study of poor urban neighborhoods found that
Blacks were more involved in their neighborhoods than Whites, even after
controlling for the constraints of income, transportation, and length of
residence in the neighborhood.
Communication researchers have become more involved in this
discussion of political participation, adding variables like media use, interpersonal discussion, and social networks (Nisbet, Moy, & Scheufele, 2003;
Scheufele, Nisbet, & Brossard, 2003; Scheufele & Nisbet, 2003; Scheufele &
Shah, 2000; Shah, McLeod, & Yoon, 2001). Rarely, however, do these
researchers take race into account. Nisbet et al. did measure religion and
race, but focused their attention on belief systems (i.e., doctrinal conservatism) primarily among White Protestants, and grouped non-Whites into an
‘‘other’’ category. It is our contention that the Black religious experience is
a unique cultural component and deserves attention within the ongoing
discussion of social capital. This study attempts to rectify the problem by
drawing attention to the important cultural and structural elements that could
potentially influence Black political participation and civic engagement. But
first, a general explication of social capital is required.
BUILDING SOCIAL CAPITAL
Much of the research on political and civic engagement can be classified
under the rubric of ‘‘social capital.’’ This concept has been measured in
various ways, but it can be defined generally as a multilevel concept that
manifests itself in communities through public and private processes and
organizations as well as interpersonal communication networks (Verba,
Schlozman, & Brady, 1995). Putnam claimed (2000) that the term social
336
L. H. Hoffman and O. Appiah
capital itself has been reinvented at least six times over the 20th century.
What these different interpretations offer are an understanding of what
Putnam termed the ‘‘private’’ and ‘‘public faces’’ of social capital: respectively, the individual contact that people have with each other and those
wider connections within a community that may not involve direct contact.
Both concepts are integral to social capital: ‘‘A well-connected individual
in a poorly connected society is not as productive as a well-connected
individual in a well-connected society’’ (Putnam, 2000, p. 20).
For the purposes of the present study, we have chosen to use
Silverman’s (2001) succinct definition of social capital: ‘‘a bond of mutual
trust emerging from shared values that are embedded in parochial networks’’ (p. 244). This definition reflects the important aspect of shared values
and, importantly, places them within local networks. This contextual framework is based in Coleman’s (1988) conceptualization of the term as embedded within a social context. Some of the recent literature overlooks this
fundamental contextual element of social capital, choosing instead to focus
on individual characteristics (e.g., Brehm & Rhan, 1997; Green & Brock,
1998; Scheufele & Shah, 2000; Shah, 1998; Uslaner, 1998).
The importance of examining context, as emphasized by Coleman
(1988) is echoed in other scholars’ work, including those in communication (e.g., Ball-Rokeach, Kim, & Matei, 2001). Shah et al. (2001) expanded
Silverman’s (2000) definition by incorporating the important element of
communication into the concept of social capital. Although mass communication has been labeled the culprit of declining social capital in some
circumstances (Putnam, 1995, 2000), studies have shown an indirect positive
link between media use and civic participation (McLeod, Scheufele, & Moy,
1999). Tightly knit communities, McLeod et al. argued, discuss and deliberate
about topics encountered in the media, which in turn fosters
civic participation. Wood and Judikis (2002) echoed this sentiment by stating
that in order to maintain solidarity and promote necessary social change,
communication needs to occur on a regular basis within communities to
remain strong.
Moreover, an important component of social capital is that it is more
likely to be created in closed, rather than open, networks (Coleman, 1988).
Closed networks create trustworthiness—the ‘‘glue’’ of social capital. Moreover, resources play an important role in building social capital (Verba,
Schlozman, & Brady, 1995). Verba et al. found that the lack of resources
was a major cause for inactivity in politics. Civic skills were one of the most
important resources, and these skills were enhanced through the major
institutions with which citizens were involved—including churches.
The difference in resources among Blacks and Whites has been
documented in studies from a variety of disciplines, such as adolescent psychology (Hirsch, Mickus, & Boerger 2002), urban sociology (Barnes, 2003),
anthropology (Shimkin, Shimkin, & Frate, 1978), aging studies (Johnson,
Race and Social Capital
337
1995), and Black studies (Bridges, 2001; Pinn, 2002). What is maintained
across the literature, though, is the overwhelming influence of the Black
church, spirituality, religiosity, and a common cultural history on Blacks’
feelings of connectedness with community.
In addition to studies of interpersonal communication and social capital,
a fruitful area of communication research has proliferated to assess the
relationship between media use and social capital. Media use has been
shown to be an important variable in predicting citizens’ civic and political
participation. For example, Putnam (1995) maintained that the decline in
social capital within the past few decades is associated with the rapid growth
in time spent viewing television. He argued that television viewing displaces
time that could be better spent working with others on civic or political
activities. This ‘‘time displacement hypothesis’’ has sparked an ongoing
debate about whether the mass media truly contribute to the overall decline
(or increase) in civic and political participation (see Kanervo, Zhang, &
Sawyer, 2005; Putnam, 1995, 2000; Schudson, 1999). Given this debate, this
study controlled for the role mass media use play in predicting Black and
White church-goers’ civic and political participation.
POLITICAL MOBILIZATION WITHIN THE BLACK CHURCH
Putnam (2000) claimed that churches, or ‘‘faith communities,’’ are the ‘‘single
most important repository of social capital in America’’ (p. 66). Yet political
communication scholars have not fully addressed the role of the Black
church vis-
a-vis the White church as a catalyst and mobilizing force for political and community involvement. Religious involvement for many Blacks
reflects spiritual, economic, social, cultural, and political dimensions (Barnes,
2003). As the centers of community and religious life, Black churches have
historically been the primary sponsors of political leadership (CalhounBrown, 1996; Chaves & Higgins, 1992; Putnam, 2000). Black churches across
denominations have a long history and commitment to political issues such
as voter registration and the movement of clergy into political office, most
notably during the civil rights movement (Pinn, 2002). Indeed, Black
churches ‘‘are an important organizational resource for disseminating
information about elections, encouraging church members to get involved
in politics, providing a space for them to talk about politics, and exposing
them to local and national leaders’’ (Harris, 1999, p. 115). Brown and
Wolford (1994) referred to this as church-based political action, and argued
that this type of Black religious culture encourages members to become
politically active.
Black congregations also provide churchgoers with communication
networks that can be used to coordinate social and political activities within
Black communities (Harris, 1999). The organizational skills learned from
338
L. H. Hoffman and O. Appiah
church participation—along with the political communication found
therein—are particularly prevalent in the Black church and may promote
Blacks’ involvement in politics to a greater extent than White churchgoers.
Harris (1999) maintained that Blacks learn a great deal about politics through
religious networks and are motivated to participate in political affairs from
political stimuli received in church. In fact, studies demonstrate Blacks’
exposure to political stimuli in church increases their political involvement
(see Brown & Wolford, 1994; Tate & Brown, 1991). Moreover, through participation in church activities such as choirs, deacon boards, worship teams,
missionary societies, user boards, pastor’s aide clubs, and teaching Sunday
school, many Blacks acquire the necessary organizational skills to effectively
participate in secular politics through the Black church (Calhoun-Brown,
1985; Federico & Luks, 2005; Harris, 1999; Putnam, 2000; Verba, Schlozman,
& Brady, 1995).
In Black congregations, a genuine commitment to politics is often
reflected from the pulpit. In Black churches, ministers often include political
material in their sermons, give political groups access to their congregations,
and mention opportunities to campaign for political candidates (Greenberg,
2000). The involvement of Black clergy in politics coupled with the strong
emphasis placed on political discussion in the Black church has led several
researchers to conclude that the Black church has played a critical role in
mobilizing Black political participation (e.g., Calhoun-Brown, 1996; Leighley
& Vedlitz, 1999). The Black church’s ability to politically mobilize their congregation is even more remarkable when compared with political mobilization by White mainstream churches. According to a Northwestern University
survey (cited in Harris, 1999), Blacks were nearly three times more likely
than Whites to state that their religious leaders discussed politics during
religious services nearly all the time. Blacks were also twice as likely as
Whites to hear frequent discussions of politics from their clergy and to be
encouraged to vote (Harris, 1999). Whereas White churches often stop short
of urging members to vote for particular candidates (Greenberg, 2000), ministers in the Black church frequently allow political candidates from both
sides to speak to the congregation during church services, and strongly
encourage political and civic engagement among the members (Greenberg,
2000). Moreover, clergy discussion of political matters has been found to
be relatively infrequent in White churches, when compared with Black
churches, and such discussions appeared not to stimulate political participation (Harris, 1999). This is evidenced by research that demonstrates
Black churches are more than twice as likely as Whites to receive visits from
political candidates and to have had money collected for a candidate during
church service (Harris, 1999).
Therefore, it appears that Blacks may receive more political communication stimuli at their place of worship than Whites, and, as a result, the Black
church has led several researchers to conclude that the Black church has
Race and Social Capital
339
played a critical role in mobilizing Black political participation (e.g.,
Calhoun-Brown, 1996; Leighley & Vedlitz, 1999). However, much of this
participation could vary depending upon Black individuals’ church attendance and involvement.
CHURCH ATTENDANCE AND POLITICAL INVOLVEMENT
Several studies have found a positive link between church attendance and
voter turnout (Brown & Brown, 2003; Macaluso & Wanat, 1979, Martinson
& Wilkening, 1987; Strate et al., 1989). Research has shown that regular
church attendance among Blacks promotes political involvement, increases
awareness of policy issues, and instills in its congregation a sense of civic
obligation that increases willingness to participate in elections (Brown &
Brown, 2003; Harris, 1999). Church attendance also helps develop a sense
of civic duty, and exposes Black church members to political information that
is likely to lead them to vote (Harris, 1999). In support, Taylor and Thornton
(1993) found that church attendance was positively related to both presidential, state, and local voting among Blacks.
Attending church services and participating in other church activities
that develop civic skills, such as retreats, choir, or serving on church committees enhances individuals’ civic skills, civic duty, and motivates them to
become politically active (Brown, McKenzie, & Taylor, 2003). It is important
to determine the extent to which both church attendance and church
involvement are significant predictors of Blacks’ political involvement and
civic participation. This is important in light of evidence that suggests church
attendance may be a weaker predictor of Blacks’ political behavior. For
example, in their examination of both the 1980 National Survey on Black
Americans and the 1994 National Black Politics Study, Brown and colleagues
(2004) discovered that, although church attendance was positively associated
with certain political behavior, church involvement was shown to be a stronger and more consistent predictor of Blacks’ political activism. Brown et al.
(2003) argued that simply attending church is not a consistent predictor of
voting or other political behavior, and may not provide sufficient social
and political activities to adequately move Blacks to vote or engage in civic
work. Therefore, church participation may be a more reliable predictor of a
range of political behavior among Black church-goers.
Recent research, however, has suggested a decline in religious participation (Putnam, 2000). Putnam acknowledged, though, that this decline
has not affected the fraction of the population that is intensely involved in
church life. Moreover, there is a marked difference among denominations;
Protestant and Jewish congregations have lost membership, whereas other
denominations (such as Southern Baptist) have grown. There appears to
be a difference, then, in attendance among denominations characterized
340
L. H. Hoffman and O. Appiah
by different cultural compositions. In fact, Taylor et al. (1996) found that
Blacks exhibited higher levels of religious participation than Whites regardless of socioeconomic status, region, and religious affiliation. These authors
concluded, ‘‘Given the prominence of the church, it is conceivable that race
differences in religious involvement are partially explained by the integral
and comprehensive functions that religious institutions perform in Black
communities’’ (p. 409).
Given the emphasis Black churches and ministers place on politics and
the amount of political communication that occurs in Black churches, it is
reasonable to expect that Black churchgoers will be more politically active
than White churchgoers.
This leads to the first set of hypotheses:
H1: Blacks with high levels of church attendance will be more likely to
have voted in a national election than will Whites with either high
or low levels of church attendance.
H2: Blacks with high levels of church involvement will be more likely to
have voted in a national election than will Whites with either high or
low levels of church involvement.
THE BLACK CHURCH AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT
Civic engagement is an essential component of social capital—and the one
that many scholars fear is declining across the United States (e.g., Putnam,
2000). Such community outreach, however, is often stressed by religious
institutions, particularly the Black church (Greenberg, 2000; Pinn, 2002).
Black churches are also more engaged in civic activities than White churches
(Chaves & Higgins, 1992, Harris, 1999; Pinn, 2002). Other researchers argue
that Black churches, overall, are more socially active in their communities
than White churches and that they also tend to participate in a greater range
of community programs (Chaves & Higgins, 1992).
According to Pattillo-McCoy (1998), ‘‘the black church is the anchoring
institution in the African American community’’ and ‘‘is often the center of
activity in the black communities’’ (p. 769). In addition to being more
involved in the community, Black congregations are significantly more likely
to participate in community programs that benefit the needy and disadvantaged than White congregations (Chaves & Higgins, 1992; McCarthy
& Castelli, 1998). The Black church’s commitment to the community has
centered on problem areas such as housing, welfare, police and community
relations, and local community events (Greenberg, 2000; Lincoln & Mamiya,
1990).
In addition, Black ministers typically preach that civic duty is part of the
obligation of being a Christian and stress the importance of Christian voices
being heard in the community (Greenberg, 2000). In addition to being
Race and Social Capital
341
exposed to this call to civic duty, Black churchgoers could have a deepseated interest in participating in their communities. Historical connectedness, or a sense of a ‘‘linked fate’’ (Federico & Luks, 2005, p. 662), as well
as residential segregation, economic problems, and discrimination encourage
civic involvement ‘‘as a response to spatial compression and the inability to
travel outside local boundaries’’ (Barnes, 2003, p. 465).
This genuine interest in the community may explain why Blacks rate
their communities—even communities where they are the numeric
minority—more favorably than Whites rate their own communities (Krysan,
2002). Studies on urban neighboring show that Blacks establish friendships
and connections to voluntary organizations in their neighborhoods more
often than Whites (Oliver, 1998). Moreover, Blacks vis-a-vis Whites are also
more likely to know their neighbors, and be involved in religious, political,
and social groups in their neighborhoods (Oliver, 1998). Although churchgoing Blacks tend to participate more in their communities than Whites
(Barnes, 2003), it should be noted that Blacks who are less religious and less
involved in the church are less likely to get involved in community activities
compared with more religious and church-going Blacks (Sherkat & Ellison,
1991; Pattillo-McCoy, 1998). Given that Blacks tend to find their communities more desirable—combined with the emphasis of the church to work
in the communities—churchgoing Blacks are perhaps more likely than
Whites to engage in community activities. This leads to the next set of
hypotheses:
H3: Blacks with high levels of church attendance will demonstrate more
civic engagement than will Whites with either high or low levels of
church attendance.
H4: Blacks with high levels of church involvement will demonstrate more
civic engagement than will Whites with either high or low levels of
church involvement.
METHOD
Sample
Data for this study were obtained from a research study undertaken by the
Saguaro Center at the John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard
University. This ‘‘Social Capital Benchmark Study’’ was conducted nationally
as well as in 41 communities. The purpose of the survey was to provide a
large dataset on social capital to academics, and to provide communities with
tools to assess their levels of social capital and measure progress (Social
Capital Community Benchmark Survey, 2001). The survey was conducted
by telephone using random digit dialing (RDD) during the period from July
to November, 2000.1 Response rates averaged 28.9% for the community
samples and 28.7% for the national sample, using the AAPOR RR2 formula
342
L. H. Hoffman and O. Appiah
(Saguaro Seminar, 2001). Interviews averaged 26 minutes in length. The
majority of the local community survey used proportionate sampling and
samples ranged from 500 to 1,500 interviews (N ¼ 26,230).2 The national
sample oversampled Blacks so we were able to include 2,942 Blacks in the
present analyses and 17,115 Whites. This was one of the major advantages
of this data set, as it is often difficult to obtain such a large number of Black
respondents in a national sample.
Measurement
INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
The primary independent variable in this study was race. Only Blacks and
Whites were examined in the analyses, with Whites coded as ‘‘0’’ and Blacks
coded as ‘‘1.’’ We also included both church attendance and church involvement. Attendance was measured by asking a single item: ‘‘Not including weddings and funerals, how often do you attend religious services?’’ Responses
were less than a few times a year, a few times a year, once or twice a month,
almost every week, or every week or more often. Church involvement was
measured by a single item: ‘‘In the past 12 months, have you taken part in
any sort of activity with people at your church or place of worship other than
attending services? This might include teaching Sunday school, serving on a
committee attending choir rehearsal, retreat, or other things.’’ Answers were
coded dichotomously as either yes or no, so scores range from 0 to 1.
Demographic variables were also included as controls in our regression
analyses. Education was measured as a trichotomous variable, as high school
or less, some college, or college degree(s). Total household income was
measured on a scale of 0 to 7 in ordinal categories that represented
$20,000 or less to $100,000 or more.
Media use was analyzed based on respondents’ television, newspaper,
and Internet use. Television use was measured by asking respondents how
many hours per day they spend watching television on an average weekday.
Newspaper use was measured by asking respondents how many days in the
past week they read a daily newspaper. Internet use was measured by asking
respondents how many hours did they spend using the Internet in a typical
week. Similar to previous studies, the media use variables are entered into
the model after controlling for the effects of demographic variables (see
Kanervo et al., 2005 for a review). The demographic variables were education and total household income.
DEPENDENT VARIABLES
Voting was measured by a single item, which asked whether respondents
voted in the presidential election in 1996 when Bill Clinton ran against
Race and Social Capital
343
Bob Dole and Ross Perot. Answers were coded ‘‘1’’ if respondents voted and
‘‘0’’ if they did not.
Civic engagement combined 15 variables that measured participation in
a variety of community activities in the past 12 months: an adult sports club
or league, or an outdoor activity club; a youth organization like youth sports
leagues, the scouts, 4-H clubs, and Boys & Girls Clubs; a parents’ association,
like the PTA or PTO, or other school support or service groups; a veterans’
group; a neighborhood association, like a block association, a homeowner
or tenant association, or a crime watch group; clubs or organizations for
senior citizens or older people; a charity or social welfare organization that
provides services in such fields as health or service to the needy; a labor
union; a professional, trade, farm, or business association; service clubs or
fraternal organizations such as the Lions or Kiwanis or a local women’s club
or a college fraternity or sorority; ethnic, nationality, or civil rights organizations, such as the National Organization for Women, The Mexican American
Legal Defense, or the NAACP; other public interest groups, political action
groups, political clubs, or party committees; any other hobby, investment,
or garden clubs or societies; and other. This was also a yes=no response item
with a range from 0 to 15 (Cronbach’s a ¼ .701).
RESULTS
A series of regression analyses were conducted to test the hypotheses. Education and total household income were included in the first block. Although
not central to this study’s hypotheses, three types of media use—newspaper,
Internet, and television use—were added in the second block as control
variables. The race and religious variables were added in the final block.
The first two hypotheses predicted that voting in a presidential election
would be predicted by the interaction between race and church attendance
or involvement. Hypothesis 1 proposed that Blacks with high levels of
church attendance would be more likely to have voted in the presidential
election than Whites. The effect of race on voting was significant, but in
the opposite direction. That is, Whites were more likely to vote in a presidential election, controlling for education, income, media use, and church
involvement, b ¼ .026, p < .10. The interaction between race and church
attendance was not a significant predictor of voting, b ¼ .008, p ¼ .565.
Hypothesis 1 was not supported.
Hypothesis 2 predicted that Blacks with high levels of church involvement would be more likely to have voted in a national election than Whites,
controlling for church involvement. Church involvement was a measure of
participation in church activities outside of attending sermons or mass. The
results from this analysis mirror those of Hypothesis 1, such that Whites were
more likely to vote, even when controlling for church involvement, income,
344
L. H. Hoffman and O. Appiah
media use, and education, b ¼ .028, p < .05 (see Table 1) The interaction
between race and church involvement was also not significant in predicting
voting, b ¼ .005, p ¼ .585. Figure 1 visually depicts this relationship. Hypothesis 2 was not supported.
The second set of hypotheses predicted that the interaction of race and
church attendance (and involvement) would significantly predict individuals’
civic engagement. We expected these results because of prior research indicating that civic engagement tends to differ from voting, and Blacks tend to
participate more actively in their communities than Whites. Hypothesis 3 predicted that Blacks with high levels of church attendance would demonstrate
greater levels of civic engagement than Whites, controlling for church attendance. Race was not a significant predictor of civic engagement when examined alone, b ¼ .007, p ¼ .70. Yet, when examined alone controlling for
other variables, church attendance significantly predicted civic engagement,
b ¼ .117, p < .001. Importantly, when the interaction between church attendance and race was included, this produced a positive prediction of civic
engagement, b ¼ .103, p < .001 (see Figure 2). Hypothesis 3 was supported.
However, as we have suggested, church attendance is not the only way
to measure involvement in religious cultural activities. Church involvement—
measured by the involvement in church-related activities outside of attending
service—might yield different results than the simple measure of frequency
of attending service. Hypothesis 4 predicted that Blacks with high levels of
church involvement would demonstrate more civic engagement than Whites
TABLE 1 SES, Media Use, Race, and Church Involvement as Predictors of Voting.
Predictor
Model 1
Education
Total household income
Model 2
Education
Total household income
Days in past week read a daily newspaper
Hours of TV watched on average weekday
Hours spent using the Internet in typical week
Model 3
Education
Total household income
Days in past week read a daily newspaper
Hours of TV watched on average weekday
Hours spent using the Internet in typical week
Race (White ¼ 0, Black ¼ 1)
Church involvement (no ¼ 0, yes ¼ 1)
Race Church Involvement interaction
F
b
718.597
.208
.088
422.414
.196
.065
.165
.030
.017y
298.571
.187
.059
.161
.020
.013y
.028
.103
.005
Notes. Adjusted R2 ¼ .065 for Model 1; Adjusted R2 ¼ .092 for Model 2; Adjusted R2 ¼ .103 for Model 3.
p < .01. p < .001. y p < .05.
Race and Social Capital
FIGURE 1 The interaction of race and church involvement by voting.
FIGURE 2 The interaction of race and church attendance by civic engagement.
345
346
L. H. Hoffman and O. Appiah
TABLE 2 SES, Media Use, Race, and Church Involvement as Predictors of Civic Engagement.
Predictor
F
b
Model 1
Education
Total household income
Model 2
Education
Total household income
Days in past week read a daily newspaper
Hours of TV watched on average weekday
Hours spent using the Internet in typical week
Model 3
Education
Total household income
Days in past week read a daily newspaper
Hours of TV watched on average weekday
Hours spent using the Internet in typical week
Race (White ¼ 0, Black ¼ 1)
Church involvement (no ¼ 0, yes ¼ 1)
Race Church Involvement interaction
1290.660
.247
.141
643.339
.223
.112
.140
.051
.051
648.799
.206
.109
.136
.052
.057
.027
.211
.074
Notes. Adjusted R2 ¼ .107 for Model 1; Adjusted R2 ¼ .129 for Model 2; Adjusted R2 ¼ .193 for Model 3.
p < .01. p < .001.
with either high or low levels of church involvement. The results from this
analysis are presented in Table 2. Regression coefficients are positive and
significant for both race and church involvement, and the interaction
between these two is also significant in predicting civic engagement.
Figure 3 illustrates this interaction, showing that Blacks are more civically
engaged the more they are involved in church activities outside of attendance. Figure 3. Hypothesis 4 was supported.
DISCUSSION
It was expected that political and civic participation would be greater for
Blacks than for Whites based on their levels of church attendance and church
involvement. The findings suggest that although greater levels of church
attendance and involvement outside of church services do lead to more
political participation for both racial groups, Whites overall displayed a stronger tendency to vote in the 1996 presidential election than Blacks. However,
our findings suggest that regular church attendance (i.e., every week, more
often than that, or almost every week) and involvement with church, such
as in church committees and choir, significantly relate to more civic engagement among Blacks than Whites.
The first area in which these results have important implications is for
the study of social capital and communication. Although communication
Race and Social Capital
347
FIGURE 3 The interaction of race and church involvement by civic engagement.
scholars have examined religiosity and communication in the creation of
social capital (Nisbet et al., 2003; Scheufele et al., 2003) their studies have
for the most part been specific to individual religious beliefs, such as adherence to doctrinal conservativism. These studies also overlook the differences
between Whites and Blacks (where Blacks are often grouped into one category of non-Whites), even though Blacks have been shown to attend church
at different rates and participate differently (Putnam, 2000; Taylor, Chatters,
Jayakody, & Levin, 1996). The present study sought to bring attention to this
measurement issue within the communication research on social capital.
This area is ripe for future research that examines the rich contextual
and structural differences within church networks, where social capital is
extremely likely to be formed (Putnam, 2000; Verba, Schlozman, & Brady,
1995). We see a need to not only examine the relations among members
of churches, but also to draw attention to the different facets of social capital
that can be obtained via racial and cultural means. The inclusion of such considerations, as demonstrated in the present study, could influence differences
in political and civic participation.
Furthermore, the literature shows that Black and White religiosity are in
fact very different from each other, so to test the relationship between church
attendance or religious networks without respect to race is to ignore an
important element of those networks. Religion and community need to
share a strong bond if religious involvement is to increase social capital. As
348
L. H. Hoffman and O. Appiah
McConkey (2000) put it, ‘‘religious people are likely to generate increased
social capital only when ‘religious capital’ is a widely shared community
resource’’ (p. 86). Clearly, more research is needed to assess what makes
the social capital gained in Black church networks different from those in
White church networks. This study alerts communication and other scholars
to differences among the ‘‘glue’’ within seemingly similar groups.
This study also demonstrates that media use variables continue to influence citizens’ civic and political participation. These findings show reading
the newspaper and time spent using the Internet were each positively linked
to civic engagement and voting. Moreover, results from this study reveal a
negative relationship between television viewing and both civic engagement
and voting. These findings are consistent with previous studies that have
shown newspaper reading is positively linked to civic and political participation (Keum et al., 2003; McLeod et al., 1999; Shah et al., 2001; Wilkins,
2000) whereas general television viewing has shown a significant but weaker
negative association to civic and political participation (see Brehm & Rahn,
1997; Jeffries, Guowei, Neuendorf, & Bracken, 2004; Norris, 1996). It should
be noted however, that general television and newspaper use measures are
not ideal since they fail to examine different types of media forms and content
which may produce different effects. For example, watching television entertainment has shown to have significantly negative effects on civic or political
participation (see Keum et al., 2002; Norris, 1996; Scheufele, 2000), whereas
viewing television news or political affairs shows can have some positive
effects on participation (see Keum et al., 2003; Norris, 1996; Wilkins, 2000).
Future research should include media variables that are content-specific
and examine how specific media and content may affect Black and White
respondents’ participation differently. For instance, research generally shows
that viewing television is negatively associated with participation whereas
newspaper reading is positively associated with participation. However,
some researchers argue that Blacks may be an exception to this rule given
their heavier use of and reliance on television as a source of information
(Allen & Chaffee, 1980). In fact, in the CPS American National Election study,
75% of Blacks reported television as their most important source for campaign information (Latimer, 1983). Allen and Chaffee (1980) concluded that
‘‘politically active Blacks are distinguished by more specific and motivated
uses of the news media than are others,’’ (p. 517) and that this principle
extends to their use of television.
There are those scholars who argue, however, that although Blacks do
rely on television for political information, those Blacks who actually vote in
elections are more likely to use both television and newspapers (Latimer,
1983) and seek out ethnic media to inform them on political issues that are
pertinent to Black Americans (Jeffries, 2000) Future research should examine
these relationships in terms of how they might vary depending on church
attendance and involvement.
Race and Social Capital
349
We see this study as an important step toward including race and culture
as variables in studies of social capital. Not only can researchers use this
information to further explore the religious participation differences by race
and culture, they can assess finer-tuned communication variables within
church networks. Beneficial contributions to the field would be interviews
with church members of different denominations and possibly observation
of the political communication that occur therein. Such hands-on research
could provide greater insights into racial differences by acknowledging structural, cultural, and organizational components of church networks.
A second major direction that research in this area can take is the
examination of Black voter turnout at the local level. Although at first glance,
these findings echo others that suggest Blacks are not as politically involved
as their White counterparts (e.g., Musick et al., 2000), it has been suggested
that Blacks demonstrate higher turnout rates in local elections (e.g., for
mayoral, school board, and city council races) because there they have a
greater sense of political efficacy (Calhoun-Brown, 1996; Gilliam & Kaufman,
1998; Marger, 2005). As such, Black churchgoers with greater political efficacy may be more politically active (Mangum, 2003; Wald, 1987). In addition,
‘‘symbolic politics’’ suggests that the presence of Black candidates stimulates
Black voters to turn out at the polls. Gilliam and Kaufman (1998), for
example, argued that Blacks become more engaged in the political process
when they become more visible in political office, particularly at the local
level. However, much of the empirical research on political participation
has focused on voting in national elections rather than turnout during such
local elections. Although this can serve as a baseline measure and ultimately
lead to more generalizable findings, bringing the measure to the local political level might provide richer data about Black participation.
The results from this study indicate, as expected, that Black respondents
with high levels of church attendance and involvement demonstrated greater
levels of civic engagement than Whites with high or low church attendance
or involvement. As the data indicate, active Black churchgoers are intimately
involved in their communities. The implications of this relationship are that
frequent civic engagement could influence a perceived investment in the
community, which in turn could lead Blacks to participate more in local elections. These findings suggest that future research should compare White and
Black voter participation in local and national elections and include church
involvement as a mediator in that relationship. Moreover, the influence of
political efficacy on participation in both local and national elections, and
the differences in efficacy between Blacks and Whites, should continue to
be explored.
Finally, future research should also examine the role that specific church
denominations may play in stimulating political and civic involvement. For
example, research suggests that conservative congregations are much less
likely than liberal or moderate congregations to offer programs or services
350
L. H. Hoffman and O. Appiah
to the community or address social and economic problems through political
involvement (Greenberg, 2000). This is particularly relevant given that White
conservative congregations like the evangelical church are the fastest growing churches (Greenberg, 2000).
It is clear that these results suggest race doesplay a significant role in the
distribution of political and civic participation in the United States, particularly when religiosity is taken into account. Both church attendance and
participation in church-related activities are associated with civic engagement
among Blacks at a higher rate than among Whites. A rich history of linked
heritage and strong religiosity contribute, at least in part, to these differences
found among Blacks and Whites. This finding is particularly relevant in an
age where politicians are taking a market-segmentation approach to appeal
to more voters (Bannon, 2004). This is evident among many campaign strategists who often develop and tailor campaign messages to voters using morality and religious imagery as a way to connect with citizens searching for
issues that fit their religious values (see Scheufele et al., 2003). Given that
people participate more when there are political issues that they feel strongly
about in an election, the focus on political issues such as Voting Rights Act
renewal, racial profiling, school vouchers, reparations, gay marriage, and
stem cell research during certain national and local campaigns may increase
Black churchgoers’ mobilization, providing scholars an even richer understanding of the role Black religiosity plays in civic and political participation.
But perhaps more importantly, this study suggests that by acknowledging
cultural differences between Blacks and Whites—specifically in terms of
religious involvement—communication researchers can add a level of depth
and understanding that is capable of parsing out unique cultural differences
and is ultimately more inclusive.
This study contributes to the communication research and theory in at
least three ways. First, unlike previous research that has focused almost
exclusively on either White (e.g., Brehm & Rhan, 1997; Scheufele & Shah,
2000; Shah et al., 2001) or Black (e.g., Brown et al., 2004; Brown & Wolford,
1994; Taylor & Thornton, 1993) respondents, this study compares civic and
political participation between both Blacks and Whites. Second, this study
suggests that the gap in Blacks’ and Whites’ political participation may not
be as wide as some may suspect (e.g., Musick et al., 2000), particularly when
considering individuals’ church involvement. Although Whites tend to be
further ahead of Blacks in voting, when examining the influence of church
involvement on civic engagement, Whites trail significantly behind their
Black counterparts.
Finally, this research contributes to our understanding of the role both
traditional media (e.g., newspaper, television) and new media (e.g., Internet)
play in influencing political and civic participation. The findings here suggest
that, with the exception of television exposure, there is a positive link
between individual’s media use (e.g., read newspaper, Internet use) and their
Race and Social Capital
351
civic participation. This study should encourage communication researchers
to explore more direct comparisons between Blacks and Whites and the role
religiosity and media play in the political process. Further examination of
racial and cultural differences in civic participation could help uncover the
factors most likely to increase political participation and social capital in
our society. Such research may reveal institutions and practices specific to
certain cultural groups, like the Black church, that effectively stimulate civic
and political participation among sub-groups and society at large.
NOTES
1. Except for the West Oakland, California survey, which ran from December 2000 to February 2001.
2. Some sponsoring organizations requested oversampling. The Boston Foundation requested an
oversample of 200 people in four zip codes; the Cleveland Foundation requested an oversample of 100
Latinos in Cuyahoga County, OH; the New Hampshire Charitable Foundation requested an oversample
of 160 in Cheshire County and 40 in the I-93 corridor; and the Rochester County C.F. requested an oversample to achieve a minimum of 100 Blacks and 100 Latinos.
REFERENCES
Abrahmson, P. R. & Claggett, W. (1984). Race-related differences in self-reported and
validated turnout. The Journal of Politics, 46, 719738.
Allen, R. L. & Chaffee, S. H. (1980). Mass communication and the political participation of black Americans. Communication Yearbook, 3, 507522.
Ball-Rokeach, S. J., Kim, Y., & Matei, S. (2001). Storytelling neighborhood: Paths to
belonging in diverse urban environments. Communication Research, 28,
392428.
Bannon, D. P. (2004, November). Marketing segmentation and political marketing.
Paper presented at the annual conference for Contemporary Political Studies,
Lincoln University, England.
Barnes, S. L. (2003). Determinants of individual neighborhood ties and social
resources in poor urban neighborhoods. Sociological Spectrum, 23, 463497.
Brehm, J. & Rahn, W. (1997). Individual-level evidence for the causes and consequences of social capital. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 9991023.
Bridges, F. W. (2001). Resurrection song: African-American spirituality. Maryknoll,
NY: Orbis Books.
Brown, R. K. & Brown, R. E. (2003). Faith and works: Church-based social
capital resources and African American political activism. Social Forces, 82,
617641.
Brown, R. K., McKenzie, B. D., & Taylor, R. J. (2003, Winter). A multiple sample comparison of church involvement and Black political participation in 1980 and
1994. African American Research Perspectives, 9, 117132.
Brown, R. & Wolford, M. L. (1994). Religious resources and African American political action. The National Political Science Review, 4, 3048.
352
L. H. Hoffman and O. Appiah
Calhoun-Brown, A. (1996). African American churches and political mobilization:
The psychological impact of organizational resources. Journal of Politics, 58,
935953.
Cavanagh, T. E. (1991). When turnout matters: Mobilization and conversion as determinants of election outcomes. In W. Crotty (Ed.), Political participation and
American democracy (pp. 89112). New York: Greenwood.
Chaves, M. & Higgins, L. M. (1992). Comparing the community involvement of Black
and White congregations. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 31,
425440.
Cohen, J. E., Cotter, P. R., & Coulter, P. B. (1983). The changing structure of southern
political participation: Matthews and Prothro 20 years later. Social Science
Quarterly, 64, 536549.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. The American
Journal of Sociology, 94S, S95S120.
Federico, C. M. & Luks, S. (2005). The political psychology of race. Political
Psychology, 26, 661666.
Gilliam, F. D. & Kaufman, K. M. (1998). Is there an empowerment life cycle?
Long-term black empowerment and its influence on voter participation. Urban
Affairs Review, 33, 741766.
Green, M. C. & Brock, T. C. (1998). Trust, mood, and outcomes of friendship determine preferences for real versus ersatz social capital. Political Psychology, 19,
527544.
Greenberg, A. (2000). The church and the revitalization of politics and community.
Political Science Quarterly, 115, 377393.
Harris, F. C. (1999). Something within: Religion in African-American political
activism. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hirsch, B. J., Mickus, M., & Boerger, R. (2002). Ties to influential adults among black
and white adolescents: Culture, social class, and family networks. American
Journal of Community Psychology, 30, 289303.
Jeffries, L. W. (2000). The impact of ethnicity and ethnic media on presidential voting
patterns. Journalism & Communication Monographs, 199, 197262.
Jeffries, L. W., Guowei, J., Neuendorf, K., & Bracken, C. (2004, November). Social
capital: community engagement vs. political participation. Paper presented at
the annual conference of the Midwest Association of Public Opinion Research,
Chicago.
Johnson, C. L. (1995). Adaptation of very old Blacks. Journal of Aging Studies, 9,
231244.
Kanervo, E., Zhang, W., & Sawyer, C. (2005). Communication and democratic
participation: A critical review and synthesis. The Review of Communication,
5, 193236.
Keum, H., Cho, J., Rojas, H., Shah, D. V., McLeod, D. M., & Pan, Z. (2003,
November). Rethinking the virtuous circle: Reciprocal relationships between
communication and civic engagement. Paper presented at the annual meeting
of the Midwest Association for Public Opinion Research, Chicago.
Krysan, M. (2002). Community undesirability in Black and White: Examining racial
residential preferences through community perceptions. Social Problems, 49,
521543.
Race and Social Capital
353
Latimer, M. K. (1983). The newspaper: How significant for Black voters in presidential elections? Journalism Quarterly, 60, 1623.
Leighley, J. E. & Vedlitz, A. (1999). Race, ethnicity, and political participation:
Competing, models, and contrasting explanations. The Journal of Politics, 61,
10921114.
Lincoln, C. E. & Mamiya, L. (1990). The Black church in the African American
experience. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Macaluso, T. F. & Wanat, J. (1979). Voting turnout and religiosity. Polity, 12,
158169.
Mangum, M. (2003). Psychological involvement and black voter turnout. Political
Research Quarterly, 56(1), 4148.
Marger, M. (2005). Race and ethnic relations: American and global perspectives.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth=Thomson Learning.
Martinson, O. B. & Wilkening, E. A. (1987). Religious participation and involvement in local politics throughout the life cycle. Sociological Forces, 20,
309318.
McCarthy, J. & Castelli, J. (1998). Religion-sponsored social service providers:
The non-so-independent sector. Working Paper Series. Washington, DC: The
Aspen Institute.
McConkey, D. (2000). Religion, social capital, and the significance of community.
In D. McConkey & P. A. Lawler (Eds.), Social structures, social capital, and
personal freedom (pp. 8397). Westport, CT: Praeger.
McLeod, J. M., Scheufele, D. A., & Moy, P. (1999). Community, communication, and
participation: The role of mass media and interpersonal discussion in local political participation. Political Communication, 16, 315336.
Musick, M. A., Wilson, J., & Bynum, W. B. (2000). Race and formal volunteering: The
differential effects of class and religion. Social Forces, 78, 15391571.
Nisbet, M. C., Moy, P., & Scheufele, D. A. (2003, May). Religion, communication,
and social capital. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International
Communication Association, San Diego, CA.
Norris, P. (1996). Does television erode social capital? A reply to Putnam. PS:
Political Science & Politics, 29, 474477.
Oliver, M. (1998). The urban Black community as network: Toward a social network
perspective. The Sociological Quarterly, 29, 623645.
Pattillo-McCoy, M. (1998). Church culture as a strategy of action in the Black
community. American Sociological Review, 63, 767784.
Pinn, A. P. (2002). The Black church in the post-Civil Rights era. Maryknoll, NY:
Orbis.
Putnam, R. D. (1995). Tuning in, tuning out: The strange disappearance of social
capital in America. PS: Political Science & Politics, 27, 664683.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American
community. New York: Touchstone.
Saguaro Seminar. (2001). Social capital community benchmark study: Executive summary. Retrieved August 3, 2007, from http://www.cfsv.org/communitysurvey/
docs/exec_summ.pdf
Scheufele, D. A. & Nisbet, M. C. (2003). Being a citizen online: New opportunities
and dead ends. Harvard International Journal of Press-Politics, 7, 5575.
354
L. H. Hoffman and O. Appiah
Scheufele, D. A., Nisbet, M. C., & Brossard, D. (2003). Pathways to participation?
Religion, communication contexts, and mass media. International Journal of
Public Opinion Research, 15, 300324.
Scheufele, D. A. & Shah, D. V. (2000). Personality strength and social capital: The
role of dispositional and informational variables in the production of civic
participation. Communication Research, 27, 107131.
Schudson, M. (1999). The good citizen: A history of American civic life. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Shah, D. V. (1998). Civic engagement, interpersonal trust, and television use: An
individual-level assessment of soc’ial capital. Political Psychology, 19, 469496.
Shah, D. V., McLeod, J. M., & Yoon, S. (2001). Communication, context, and
community: An exploration of print, broadcast, and Internet influences.
Communication Research, 28, 464506.
Sherkat, D. E. & Ellison, C. G. (1991). The politics of Black religious change:
Disaffiliation from black mainline denominations. Social Forces, 70, 431454.
Shimkin, D. B., Shimkin, E. M., & Frate, D. A. (Eds.). (1978). The extended family in
Black societies. The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton Publishers.
Silverman, R. M. (2001). CDCs and charitable organization in the urban south: Mobilizing social capital based on race and religion for neighborhood revitalization.
Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 30, 240268.
Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey. (2001). Frequently Asked Questions
Regarding Benchmark Survey. Retrieved August 3, 2007, from http://www.
cfsv.org/communitysurvey/faqs.html
Southwell, P. L. & Pirch, K. D. (2003). Political cynicism and the mobilization of
Black voters. Social Science Quarterly, 84, 906917.
Strate, J. M. et al. (1989). Life span civic development and voting participation. The
American Political Science Review, 83, 443464.
Tate, K. & Brown, R. (1991, April). Black political participation revisited. Paper presented at the meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.
Taylor, R. J., Chatters, L. M., Jayakody, R., & Levin, J. S. (1996). Black and White
differences in religious participation: A multisample comparison. Journal for
the Scientific Study of Religion, 35, 403410.
Taylor, R. J., Thornton, M. C., & Chatters, L. M. (1988). Black Americans’ perceptions
of sociohistorical role of the church. Journal of Black Studies, 18, 123138.
Uslaner, E. M. (1998). Social capital, television, and the ‘‘mean world’’: Trust,
optimism, and civic participation. Political Psychology, 19, 441467.
Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wald, K. (1987). Religion and politics in the United States. New York: St. Martin’s
Press.
Wilkins, K. G. (2000). The role of media in public disengagement from political life.
Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 44, 569.
Wood, G. S. Jr. & Judikis, J. C. (2002). Conversations on community theory. West
Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.