Are small cities online? Content, ranking, and variation of U.S. municipal websites

Government Information Quarterly

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 62-74

  Feeney, Mary K ^a   Brown, Adrian ^b  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

E government; Government websites; Information and communication technologies; Local government

Indexed keywords

EID: 85006414887     PISSN: 0740624X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2016.10.005     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Ahn, M.J., Adoption of e-communication applications in U.S. municipalities: The role of political environment, bureaucratic structure, and the nature of applications. The American Review of Public Administration 41:4 (2011), 428–452.
2. Bearfield, D.A., Bowman, A.O.'.M., Can you find it on the web? An assessment of municipal e-government transparency. The American Review of Public Administration 25:1 (2016), 1–17, 10.1177/0275074015627694.
3. Bertot, J.C., Jaeger, P.T., Grimes, J.M., Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Government Information Quarterly 27 (2010), 264–271.
4. Bertot, J.C., Jaeger, P.T., Grimes, J.M., Promoting transparency and accountability through ICTs, social media, and collaborative e-government. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy 6:1 (2012), 78–91.
5. Brudney, J.L., Selden, S.C., The adoption of innovation by smaller local government. The case of computer technology. The American Review of Public Administration 25:1 (1995), 71–86.
6. Coursey, D., Norris, D.F., Models of e-government: Are they correct? An empirical assessment. Public Administration Review 68 (2008), 523–536.
7. Cumbie, B.A., Kar, B., A study of local government website inclusiveness: The gap between E-government concept and practice. Information Technology for Development, 2014, 1–20.
8. Dawes, S.S., Interagency information sharing: Expected benefits, manageable risks. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 15:3 (1996), 377–394.
9. DiMaggio, P.J., Powell, W.W., The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review 48:2 (1983), 147–160.
10. DiMicco, J., Millen, D.R., Geyer, W., Dugan, C., Brownholtz, B., Muller, M., Motivations for social networking at work. Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, 2008, Association for Computing Machinery, 711–720.
11. Dolson, J., Young, R., Explaining variation in the e-government features of municipal websites: An analysis of e-content, e-participation, and social media features in Canadian municipal websites. Canadian Journal of Urban Research 21:2 (2012), 1–24.
12. Duggan, M., Smith, A., Cell Internet use 2013. 2013, Pew Research Center (Sept 16. Retrieved from, June 15, 2015, from) http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/09/16/cell-internet-use-2013/.
13. Farrell, S., Utility navigation: What is it and how to design it. 2015, Nielson Norman Group (Retrieved from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/utility-navigation/on September 1, 2016).
14. Feeney, M.K., Welch, E.W., Technology-task coupling: Exploring social media use and managerial perceptions of e-government. American Review of Public Administration, 2014, 1–18, 10.1177/0275074014547413 (August 20 2014).
15. Fountain, J.E., The virtual state: Transforming American government?. National Civic Review 90:3 (2001), 241–252.
16. Galvez, R.A., Youngblood, N.E., E-government in Rhode Island: what effects do templates have on usability, accessibility, and mobile readiness?. Universal Access in the Information Society, 15(281), 2016.
17. Gant, J.P., Gant, D.B., Web portal functionality and State government E-service. System sciences, 2002. HICSS. Proceedings of the 35th annual Hawaii international conference on (pp. 1627–1636), 2002, IEEE.
18. Grimmelikhuijsen, S.G., Meijer, A.J., Does twitter increase perceived police legitimacy?. Public Administration Review 75:4 (2015), 598–607.
19. Grimmelikhuijsen, S., Porumbescu, G., Hong, B., Im, T., The effect of transparency on trust in government: A cross-national comparative experiment. Public Administration Review 73 (2013), 575–586.
20. Guillamón, M.D., Ríos, A.M., Gesuele, B., Metallo, C., Factors influencing social media use in local governments: The case of Italy and Spain. Government Information Quarterly 33:3 (2016), 460–471.
21. Habermas, J., The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. (Translated by Thomas burger. Reprint edition), 1991, The MIT Press, Boston.
22. Ho, A.T.K., Reinventing local governments and the e-government initiative. Public Administration Review 62:4 (2002), 434–444.
23. Holzer, M., Manoharan, A., Shick, R., Towers, G., US municipalities e-governance report. 2008, National center for public performance, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ.
24. Holzer, M., Zheng, Y., Manoharan, A., Shark, A., Digital governance in municipalities worldwide (2013–14). E-governance institute, 2014, National Center for Public Performance, Rutgers University, Newark.
25. Huang, Z., Benyoucef, M., Usability and credibility of e-government websites. Government Information Quarterly 31:4 (2014), 584–595.
26. Jimenez, B.S., Mossberger, K., Wu, Y., Municipal government and the interactive web: Trends and issues for civic engagement. Manoharan, A., (eds.) E-governance and civic engagement: Factors and determinants of e-democracy: Factors and determinants of e-democracy, 2012, IGI Global, 251 (Chapter 17 in).
27. Jun, K.N., Weare, C., Institutional motivations in the adoption of innovations: The case of e-government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21:3 (2011), 495–519.
28. Layne, K., Lee, J., Developing fully functional e-government: A four-stage model. Government Information Quarterly 18:2 (2001), 122–136.
29. Levy, A., Trauth, E., Bagby, J.W., Moving toward web 2.0-enhanced e-government in small-town Pennsylvania. Boughzala, I., Janssen, M., Assar, S., (eds.) Case studies in e-government 2.0, 2015, Springer International Publishing, New York, NY, 29–45.
30. Li, M.H., Feeney, M.K., Adoption of electronic technologies in local U.S. governments: Distinguishing between e-services and communication technologies. The American Review of Public Administration 44:1 (2012), 75–91.
31. Manoharan, A., A study of the determinants of county e-government in the United States. The American Review of Public Administration 43:2 (2013), 159–178.
32. Mergel, I., Social media adoption and resulting tactics in the US federal government. Government Information Quarterly 30:2 (2013), 123–130.
33. Mickoleit, A., Social media use by governments: A policy primer to discuss trends, identify policy opportunities and guide decision makers. OECD working papers on public governance (26), 2014, OECD Publishing.
34. Moon, J.M., The evolution of e-government among municipalities: Rhetoric or reality?. Public Administration Review 62:4 (2002), 424–433.
35. Moon, J.M., Bretschneider, S., Does the perception of red tape constrain IT innovativeness in organizations? Unexpected results from a simultaneous equation model and implications. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 12:2 (2002), 273–292.
36. Mossberger, K., Tolbert, C.J., Stansbury, M., Virtual inequality: Beyond the digital divide. 2003, Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC.
37. Mossberger, K., Wu, Y., Civic engagement and local e-government: Social networking comes of age. 2012, University of Illinois at Chicago.
38. Mossberger, K., Wu, Y., Crawford, J., Connecting citizens and local governments? Social media and interactivity in major US cities. Government Information Quarterly 30:4 (2013), 351–358.
39. Mossberger, K., Tolbert, C.J., McNeal, R.S., Digital citizenship: The internet, society and participation. 2008, MIT Press.
40. Moynihan, D., Normative and instrumental perspectives on public participation citizen summits in Washington, D.C. The American Review of Public Administration 33:2 (2003), 164–188.
41. Musso, J.A., Weare, C., Hale, M.C., Designing web technologies for local governance reform: Good management or good democracy?. Political Communication 17:1 (2000), 1–19.
42. National League of Cities, Forms of municipal government. (Accessed Oct 16, 2015 at) http://www.nlc.org/build-skills-and-networks/resources/cities-101/city-structures/forms-of-municipal-government, 2015.
43. Newcombe, T., Roanoke, Va., has incorporated social media into everything. 2015, GovTech Social (September 9, 2015. Accessed Oct 2, 2015 at) http://www.govtech.com/social/Roanoke-Va-Has-Incorporated-Social-Media-Into-Everything.html.
44. Nicolaou, A.I., Social control in information systems development. Information Technology & People 12:2 (1999), 130–147.
45. Norris, D.F., Kraemer, K.L., Mainframe and PC computing in American cities: Myths and realities. Public Administration Review, 1996, 568–576.
46. Norris, D.F., Reddick, C.G., Local e-government in the United States: Transformation or incremental change?. Public Administration Review 73:1 (2013), 165–175.
47. Norris, D.F., Moon, F.J., Advancing e-government at the grassroots: Tortoise or hare?. Public Administration Review 65 (2005), 64–75.
48. Nyczepir, D., Rethinking the municipal website. 2015, CityLab. The Atlantic (Accessed Oct 15, 2015 at) http://www.citylab.com/cityfixer/2015/10/rethinking-the-municipal-website-boston/408952/?utm_source=SFTwitter.
49. O'Reilly, T., What is web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Communications and Strategies(1), 2007, 17 (First Quarter 2007).
50. Oliveira, G.H.M., Welch, E.W., Social media use in local government: Linkage of technology, task, and organizational context. Government Information Quarterly 30:4 (2013), 397–405.
51. Panagiotopoulos, P., Bigdeli, A.Z., Sams, S., Citizen–government collaboration on social media: The case of Twitter in the 2011 riots in England. Government Information Quarterly 31:3 (2014), 349–357.
52. Pandey, S.K., Bretshneider, S., The impact of red tape's administrative delay on public organizations interest in new information technologies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 7:1 (1997), 113–130.
53. Reddick, C.G., The growth of e-procurement in American state governments: a model and empirical evidence. Journal of Public Procurement 4:2 (2004), 151–186.
54. Reddick, C.G., Norris, D.F., Social media adoption at the American grass roots: Web 2.0 or 1.5?. Government Information Quarterly 30:4 (2013), 498–507.
55. Schwester, R., Examining the barriers to e-government adoption. Electronic Journal of E-government 7:1 (2009), 113–122.
56. Scott, J.K., “E” the people: Do US municipal government web sites support public involvement?. Public Administration Review 66:3 (2006), 341–353.
57. Steinfield, C., Ellison, N.B., Lampe, C., Social capital, self-esteem, and use of online social network sites: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 29 (2008), 434–445.
58. Thomas, J.C., Streib, G., The new face of government: Citizen-initiated contacts in the era of e-government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 13:1 (2003), 83–102.
59. Tolbert, C.J., Mossberger, K., The effects of e-government on trust and confidence in government. Public Administration Review 66:3 (2006), 354–369.
60. Wang, S., Feeney, M.K., Determinants of information and communication technology use in municipalities. American Review of Public Administration, 2014, 10.1177/0275074014553462.
61. Welch, E.W., The relationship between transparent and participative government: A study of local governments in the United States. International Review of Administrative Sciences 78:1 (2012), 93–115.
62. Welch, E.W., Hinnant, C.C., Moon, M.J., Linking citizen satisfaction with e-government and trust in government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15:3 (2005), 371–391.
63. West, D.M., E-government and the transformation of service delivery and citizen attitudes. Public Administration Review 64:1 (2004), 15–27.
64. West, D.M., State and federal electronic government in the United States, 2008. 2008, The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC (Retrieved July 15, 2015, from) http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/reports/2008/8/26-egovernment-west/0826_egovernment_west.pdf.
65. World Wide Web Consortium, Web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. (Retrieved on October 27, 2015, from) http://www.w3.org/standards/techs/wcag#w3c_all, 2008.
66. Wong, W., Welch, E.W., Does e-government promote accountability? A comparative analysis of website openness and government accountability. Governance 17:2 (2004), 275–297.
67. Wukich, C., Mergel, I., Closing the citizen-government communication gap: Content, audience, and network analysis of government tweets. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 12:3 (2015), 707–735.
68. Youngblood, N.E., Mackiewicz, J., The usability analysis of municipal government website home pages in Alabama. Government Information Quarterly 29:4 (2012), 582–588.
69. Zheng, Y., Schachter, H.L., Holzer, M., The impact of government form on e-participation: A study of New Jersey municipalities. Government Information Quarterly 31:4 (2014), 653–659.