This study evaluates alternative models of citizen satisfaction with urban services. More specifically, it compares and assesses three models of satisfaction at two points in time. The availability of cross-section survey data on city residents at two time points, supplemented with aggregate evidence, make possible a test of what Coleman (1964) refers to as the "equilibrium assumption." Only one of the three models, referred to as the "personal contact" model, was found to be supported by the evidence. Further, this model was supported at two points in time and was found to have nearly identical parameters of influence at the two time points.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ABERBACH, J. and J. WALKER (1973) Race in the City. Boston: Little, Brown.
2.
ANTUNES, G. and J. PLUMLEE (1977) "The distribution of an urban public service: Ethnicity, socioeconomic status and bureaucracy as determinants of the quality of neighborhood street."Urban Affairs Q.12 (March): 313-332.
3.
BOLOTIN, F. and D. CINGRANELLI (1983) "Equity and urban policy: The underclass hypothesis revisited."J. of Politics45, 1: 209-219.
4.
BOYD, L. and G. IVERSON (1979) Contextual Analysis: Concepts and Statistical Techniques. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
5.
BROWN, K. and P. COULTER (1983) "Subjective and objective measures of police service delivery."Public Administration Rev.43, 1: 50-58.
6.
CHRISTENSON, J. and G. TAYLOR (1983) "Socially constructed and situational contexts for assessing public services."Social Science Q.64, 2: 264-274.
7.
COLEMAN, J. (1964) Introduction to Mathematical Sociology. New York: Free Press.
8.
DURAND, R. (1976) "Some dynamics of urban service evaluations among blacks and whites."Social Sci. Q.56, 4: 698-706.
9.
JONES, B. , S. R. GREENBERG, C. KAUFMAN, and J. DREW (1977) "Bureaucratic response to citizen-initiated contacts: Environmental enforcement in Detroit."Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.71, 1: 148-165.
10.
LINEBERRY, R. (1977) Equality and Urban Policy: The Distribution of Municipal Public Services. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
11.
LIPSKY, M. (1980) Street-Level Bureaucracy. New York: Russell Sage.
12.
LOVRICH, N. and G. TAYLOR (1976) "Neighborhood evaluation of local government services: A citizen survey approach."Urban Affairs Q.12 (December): 197-222.
13.
MLADENKA, K. and K. HILL (1977) "The distribution of benefits in an urban environment: Parks and libraries in Houston."Urban Affairs Q.13 (September): 73-94.
14.
SCHUMAN, H. and B. GRUENBERG (1972) Dissatisfaction with city services: Is race an important factor?, pp. 369-392 in H. Hahn (ed.) People and Politics in Urban Society. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
15.
SHARP, E. (1982) "Citizen-initiated contacting of government officials and socioeconomic status: Determining the relationship and accounting for it."Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.76, 1: 109-115.
16.
THOMAS, J. (1982) "Citizen-initiated contacts with government agencies: A test of three theories."Amer. J. of Pol. Sci.26, 3: 505-522.
17.
VEDLITZ, A. , J. DYER, and R. DURAND (1980) "Citizen contacts with local governments: A comparative view."Amer. J. of Pol. Sci.24, 1: 50-67.
18.
WILLIAMS, O. (1971) Metropolitan Political Analysis: A Social Access Approach. New York: Free Press.
19.
U.S. Census of Population and Housing (1970, 1980) Block Statistics. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
