“The City Residents Do Not Get Involved”: Understanding Barriers to Community Participation in a Small Texas Boomtown

Clay Spinuzzi The University of Texas at Austin ; Andrew Booth The University of Texas at Austin ; Maclain Scott Rocky Mountain College ; Drake Gossi The University of Texas at Austin ; Tristin Brynn Hooker The University of Texas at Austin ; Nigel O'Hearn

Abstract

<bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Background:</b> Professional communication researchers have engaged communities through community research and interventions, such as town halls, charettes, and participatory design work. Such interventions rely on community members who are willing to get involved, voicing their perspectives, and engaging in productive dialogue. Yet, some communities do not have these precursor conditions for intervention: they face significant social barriers that make such interventions unlikely to succeed. In an interview- and document-based study, we examine the social barriers described by interviewees in “Permia,” a small town in the Texas Permian Basin region. In contrast to the five other communities we studied, Permia participants demonstrate little readiness to engage in community dialogue. We explore how Permia interviewees made sense of unwillingness to participate in its public life, how their understandings contrasted with the other communities we investigated, and how this research might guide professional communicators as they plan future community-based interventions. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Literature review:</b> We review the professional communication research on community interventions as well as relevant sociological literature on boomtowns. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Research questions:</b> 1. How do community leaders understand their community heritage as constraining or enabling development? 2. Where do community leaders and members see potential for change and growth in community development? Where do they see barriers, threats, and hard choices? 3. How do community leaders describe the relations among community development stakeholders? How do they describe expectations and trust among them on interpersonal, intergroup, and interorganizational levels? <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Research methodology:</b> We collected documents and statistics about six small Texas towns, then interviewed community leaders about the towns’ advantages and challenges. Based on those interviews, we collected further documents. We analyzed the data using deductive and inductive coding, as well as narrative analysis. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Results/discussion:</b> Through coding, we determined that interviewees saw Permia's residents as unwilling to engage in deliberations in traditional forums such as city council meetings, and that their explanations for this unwillingness fell into three categories of barriers: distrust of institutions, dwindling personal ties, and lack of moral expectations for residents to engage in community dialogue. These three categories contrast with the other communities we studied. Through narrative analysis, we identify stories that were told by the interviewees to explain how these barriers developed in Permia. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Conclusion:</b> We conclude by discussing how professional communicators might survey barriers to community dialogue. Such surveys can help professional communicators choose a pathway for intervention in their community projects.

Journal
IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Published
2025-03-01
DOI
10.1109/tpc.2025.3530783
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (22)

  1. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  2. Technical Communication Quarterly
  3. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  4. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  5. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Show all 22 →
  1. Technical Communication Quarterly
  2. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  3. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  4. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  5. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  6. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  7. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  8. Technical Communication Quarterly
  9. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  10. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  11. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  12. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  13. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  14. Technical Communication Quarterly
  15. Technical Communication Quarterly
  16. Computers and Composition
  17. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Also cites 15 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1145/3328020.3353927
  2. 10.1109/ProComm53155.2022.00080
  3. 10.1111/ruso.12196
  4. 10.29173/cjs19891
  5. 10.1111/ruso.12100
  6. 10.18061/1811/51125
  7. 10.4324/9781003082002
  8. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory
  9. 10.4135/9781849209496
  10. 10.2307/j.ctt46nzds.10
  11. 10.1007/s10804-020-09363-z
  12. 10.1177/1532673x14536923
  13. 10.1080/00380237.1991.10570594
  14. 10.23943/princeton/9780691157207.001.0001
  15. 10.1108/IJSSP-07-2020-0276