Background: the SES model
Verba and Nie (1972) established the socioeconomic status (SES) model, in which people with more education and income participate more in politics. The model captured a powerful empirical regularity but did not fully explain why status leads to participation. The civic voluntarism model sought to unpack this link into specific resources, motivations and networks.
Three factors
Brady et al. (1995) identified time, money and civic skills as resources needed for participation. Civic skills, the abilities to organize meetings, write letters and speak up, are developed at work, in voluntary associations and in religious institutions, so people with lower incomes can acquire them through church activity. The second factor is psychological engagement such as political interest, political efficacy and party identification; the third is recruitment networks through which someone asks people to take part. Rosenstone and Hansen (1993) showed that mobilization by parties and groups strongly shapes participation, and Schlozman et al. (1994) reported that the gender gap in participation is largely explained by resource differences.
Assessment and debates
Leighley (1995) compared the model with other approaches and noted the need to consider opportunity and incentive structures alongside resources. Kam and Palmer (2008) argued that education effects may reflect prior factors such as family background rather than education itself. Gallego (2010) showed that education gaps in turnout vary greatly with national institutions. The model, together with concern that unequal participation produces unequal political voice, serves as a standard framework for participation research.
FAQ
- What is the civic voluntarism model in simple terms?
- To participate in politics, people need resources like time, money and skills, interest and motivation, and someone asking them to join.
- Why "voluntarism"?
- Because it covers the many voluntary activities in which citizens invest their own time and effort, not just voting.
Sources reviewed: 2026-10-26
References
- Verba, S., & Nie, N. H. (1972). Participation in America: Political democracy and social equality. Harper & Row. Classic SES model of participation.
- Rosenstone, S. J., & Hansen, J. M. (1993). Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America. Macmillan. Mobilization account of participation.
- Schlozman, K. L., Burns, N., & Verba, S. (1994). Gender and the pathways to participation: The role of resources. The Journal of Politics, 56(4), 963–990. Resources and the gender gap.
- Brady, H. E., Verba, S., & Schlozman, K. L. (1995). Beyond SES: A resource model of political participation. American Political Science Review, 89(2), 271–294. The resource model paper.
- Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Harvard University Press. The book presenting the full model.
- Leighley, J. E. (1995). Attitudes, opportunities and incentives: A field essay on political participation. Political Research Quarterly, 48(1), 181–209. Field essay comparing participation models.
- Kam, C. D., & Palmer, C. L. (2008). Reconsidering the effects of education on political participation. The Journal of Politics, 70(3), 612–631. Questions whether education causes participation.
- Gallego, A. (2010). Understanding unequal turnout: Education and voting in comparative perspective. Electoral Studies, 29(2), 239–248. Comparative education gaps in turnout.