sorry for the delay. i'm just back in town. more below...
On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 cdmoore(a)fas.harvard.edu wrote:
Here's our abstract. Any comments are greatly appreciated.
Best,
Dan and Colin
Crowded Cities, Crowded Streets: How Population Density Affects Local
Participation
this title is the topic. instead, make it your point. every sentence you
put in your paper, especially the title, should make your point. so say
how pop density affects local participation.
Dan Hopkins and Colin Moore
Drawing on a survey of 29,000 Americans from communities throughout the
United States, this paper expands on J. Eric Oliver's (2000) argument
that living in a larger city decreases the probability that one will
engage in a variety of forms of local political participation. By
shifting the causal emphasis from a city¡¯s size to its population
density, we illustrate that the effects of an individual¡¯s environment
depend crucially on the kind of participation in question. As
population density increases, an individual is 2.7% less likely to
attend a public meeting, but 2.0% more likely to participate in a
demonstration, boycott, or protest.
not bad, but it is not entirely clear to me what contribution you're
making. so its not size, its density. does that mean that Oliver is
using something like square feet or number of peoploe and you're using
people/sq feet? is this important? why should we care? would Oliver
care that you have a different result? was Oliver wrong in some way?
tell me who's mind you're going to change about what..
i take it that the central issue here that oliver found is that big cities
reduce participation. that is important of course to political
scientists, and its pretty clear. how does your result differ and what
does it tell us?
Gary
_______________________________________________
gov2001-l mailing list
gov2001-l(a)fas.harvard.edu
http://www.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/gov2001-l