“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
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

References (49) · 22 in this index

  1. About IC2
  2. Research
  3. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  4. Technical Communication Quarterly
  5. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Show all 49 →
  1. Technical Communication Quarterly
  2. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  3. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  4. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  5. 10.1145/3328020.3353927
  6. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  7. Community Action and Organizational Change
  8. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  9. Computers and Composition
  10. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  11. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  12. Technical Communication Quarterly
  13. Legitimizing situated knowledge in rural communities through storytelling around gas pipe…
    Tech. Commun.
  14. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  15. Participation and Power
  16. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  17. Technical Communication Quarterly
  18. 10.1109/ProComm53155.2022.00080
  19. The methodology of participatory design
    Tech. Commun.
  20. 10.1111/ruso.12196
  21. 10.29173/cjs19891
  22. 10.1111/ruso.12100
  23. 10.18061/1811/51125
  24. 10.4324/9781003082002
  25. 2020 Census: Tracking self-response rates map
  26. Victim Advocacy in the Courtroom: Persuasive practices in Domestic Violence and Child Pro…
  27. Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook
  28. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  29. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory
  30. Technical Communication Quarterly
  31. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  32. 10.4135/9781849209496
  33. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  34. 10.2307/j.ctt46nzds.10
  35. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  36. Narrative and Professional Communication
  37. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  38. 10.1007/s10804-020-09363-z
  39. 10.1177/1532673x14536923
  40. 10.1080/00380237.1991.10570594
  41. 10.23943/princeton/9780691157207.001.0001
  42. County business patterns (CBP)
  43. County typology codes
  44. 10.1108/IJSSP-07-2020-0276