Perceptions of Identity in Policymaker Responsiveness to Citizen Communication

• In Event: Online Political Discourse, Identity, and the Future of Democracy

Abstract

Communication with policymakers is now easier than ever due to a range of digital platforms for citizen input. The extent to which elected officials use these platforms and reciprocally engage with members of the public through them are thus important for evaluating government responsiveness and democratic accountability in the 21st century. While previous studies have separately explored politician responsiveness to online and offline communication (e.g., Chen et al. 2018) and responsiveness to different members of the pubic (e.g., Carnes and Holbein 2019, Butler and Dynes 2016, and Butler and Broockman 2011), this study addresses the important intersections between citizen identity and choice of communication channel that affect political communication. In particular, this study seeks to answer the following related questions: 1) How do local policymakers respond to messages through different channels?, 2) How do policymakers perceive that different citizens communicate with them?, 3) Do perceptions of messenger identity drive responsiveness to different channels?, and 4) Do policymakers’ perceptions of citizen political communication match citizens’ reports of use? Based on theories of constituency perceptions (e.g., Fenno 1977 and Bishin 2000) and costly signaling (e.g., Spence 1973 and Crawford and Sobel 1982), I expect that politicians perceive that their supporters are more likely to use more costly communication channels and that politicians respond at higher rates to channels that they think supporters are more likely to dominate.

To examine these hypotheses, I partner with CivicPulse to survey 242 local policymakers (mayors and city council members). I find that policymakers are more likely to respond to phone calls (95% likely), emails (92% likely), and letters (81% likely) than tweets (42% likely). The high level of responsiveness to emails suggests a divide in politician perceptions of digital communication (emails versus tweets) that cannot be fully explained by costly signaling theories alone. Importantly, perceptions of messenger identity are part of the puzzle. Policymakers perceive that their supporters are more likely to contact them through all communication channels, but even non-residents are relatively likely to use Twitter to reach out. Therefore, supporters are viewed as more likely to dominate emails than tweets. Moreover, across communication channels, policymakers are more willing to respond when supporters are seen as more likely to dominate. A follow-up survey of members of the public helps to compare these policymaker perceptions to actual citizen reports of use. Altogether, the findings address elected officials’ underlying assumptions in engaging with citizens and have important implications for government responsiveness to increasingly widely-used digital communication methods.

Author

• Kaylyn Jackson Schiff, Yale University