Interpersonal connections are known to have strong positive effects on health and well–being and may be pathways to civic and political participation. Evidence of interpersonal connections with peers, family, and friends includes the frequencies with which people communicate with friends and family by e–mail or on the Internet, eat dinner with any member of their household, talk with their neighbors, and exchange favors with neighbors.

The results are mixed. Illinois ranks 46th in the rate of people 18 and older who exchange favors with their neighbors at least a few times a week, at a rate of 14.5%, compared with 16.2% of Americans nationwide. Favors includes acts of kindness, such as watching each other's children, helping with shopping, house sitting, lending garden or house tools, and others. Illinois ranks 46th in the rate of people 18 and older who say they eat dinner with their family at least a few times a week, at a rate of 86.9%, compared with 89.1% nationally.

With respect to attending meetings where a public issue is discussed or working with a neighbor to solve a problem in the community, Illinois ranked slightly higher than the national average (10.0% vs. 9.9% and 9.0% vs. 8.8%, respectively). Illinois ranked 28th in 2009 in the rate of people ages 16 and older who work with neighbors to improve the community.

Illinoisans are quite similar to the national average in the way they relate to others and do favors for their neighbors. Almost 14% are well–connected and do favors for their neighbors, while about 8% are less connected. Unlike most other states, there is no gap between urban and rural areas in Illinois in the portion of people who do favors for their neighbors. This is because rural Illinois residents are far less likely to exchange a favor with neighbors (14.0%) than their nationwide peers (19.5%). Nationally, the elderly are most likely to be connected and exchange favors, but in Illinois, Generation Xers, born 1965–1980, are slightly more likely to do so (17.5%) than either the elderly, born prior to 1946 (15.2%) or Baby Boomers, born 1946–1964, (13.5%).

In Illinois, being connected closely with others and exchanging favors with neighbors are each related to higher rates of volunteerism; those who do both, volunteer at a high rate (41.9%). Similarly, those who have close ties to others and do favors for their neighbors are more likely to report working with others to x a problem (17.5%) compared with those who lack such community connections (9.8%).

There is a striking gap in participation rates between formal and informal activities. The difference in the rate of volunteering with religious, educational, youth service, social, or community service entities, acts of formal participation, as opposed to the rate of individuals coming together to address a community–based issue or attending a meeting where public issues are discussed, which are informal acts of participation, is signicant (28.3% vs. 10% in Illinois).

There are many factors that contribute to these statistics. It is undeniable that the lack of knowledge with respect to how government operates and how to use the medley of civic tools to impact government decision–making is partially responsible for the low level of participation once again highlighting the detriment caused by the lack of hands–on civic education. The lack of healthy civic habits, which include the failure of the general public to know what their First Amendment rights are and how to use them effectively, also impact this gure. For example, the above ndings indicate that even if individuals identify an issue of concern, such as opposing a community development or particular allocation of tax dollars, virtually no action is being taken. These statistics might be vastly different if civic education of youth was a priority in our society, where at an early age young people not only learn the three branches of government, but gain practical knowledge, skills, and confidence as to what happens within local, state, and federal government entities and how to have their voices heard on issues important to them. Perhaps then attending a meeting where a public issue is discussed would have meaning and value to citizens who have increasing demands on their time.