000			01567pab a2200169 454500
008			180718b1998 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aHindera, John J.
245			_aRepresentative bureaucracy: the theoretical implications of statistical interaction
260			_c1998
300			_ap.655-71
362			_aSep
520			_aThe research extends our knowledge of the relationship between passive representative bureaucracy and active representative bureaucracy (Mosher 1968). We utilize data from the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to posit and test a theory of situational thresholds. Our theory is premised on the argument that Meier's (1993b) construct, critical mass, constitutes a particular example of a more general concept, situational threshold (Campbell 1963). We present evidence that three situational thresholds exist in the EEOC bureaucratic environment which determine the nature of the relationship between passive representativeness and active representation: when a critical mass is reached; when a group constitutes a plurality; and when a group constitutes a majority. In toto, these three situational thresholds delineate four distinct social environments in which active representation transpires. Our findings strongly suggest that the relationship between passive representation and active representation is fundamentally different for each type of bureaucratic environment. - Reproduced
650			_aBureaucracy
700			_aYoung, Cheryl D.
773			_aPolitical Research Quarterly
909			_a38892
999			_c38892 _d38892