Abstract
In Western Europe the debate on (young) people’s engagement with conventional politics is on-going. The conditions under which some people become more involved with politics are a puzzle, since pioneer works on political culture detected differences among individuals in this respect. This paper aims to test several factors of socialization on civic engagement and political participation for 13 and 14 year old students. We focus on political socialization patterns that foster students’ political engagement, which could be seen as a starting point for political participation. To achieve this, the chapter explores political engagement of youngsters (13–14 years old) across Europe. This multilevel analysis uses data from the ICC study, which took place between 2007 and 2009. The analysis will focus on both within, and between country differences in explaining levels of political engagement and several of its agents. Furthermore, the analysis will show that parents play a vital role in the very narrow setting of an individual. On the other hand schools have the potential to reach a large proportion of young people, which could help to equilibrate the effect of missing first stage socialization and develop a positive impact on young people’s political engagement and further political participation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
It is unsurprising that the focus of the discussion has been associated with the various competencies citizens need in order to participate in an election.
- 2.
- 3.
The description of the data is based on documents regarding the ICC study. These documents will be published early 2011.
- 4.
More information on the research framework could be found here: http://iccs.acer.edu.au/uploads/ICCS%20Assessment%20Framework/ICCS%202008%20Full.pdf
- 5.
The general concept of political efficacy captures the feeling of an individual that political and social change is possible. It is normally differentiated into external and internal efficacy. Whereas external efficacy describes the individuals perception of the responsiveness of the political system, internal efficacy relates to the confidence of an individual to understand politics and to act in the political dimension (Converse, P. E. (1972). Change in the American electorate. In: A. Campbell & P. E. Converse (Eds.),The human meaning of social change (pp. 263–337). New York: Russell Sage Foundation),
- 6.
In lack of particular variables to model the school environment, we have to be vague here. But, the model parameter indicate, that schools across countries show some similarities, which are probably related to the fact that certain school characteristics are not only influential for political engagement, but probably show the same effects in different countries.
- 7.
Pupil from a two parents household of different kind.
References
Almond, G. A., & Verba, S. (1963). The civic culture: Political attitudes and democracy in five nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Almond, G. A., & Verba, S. (1989). The civic culture: Political attitudes and democracy in five nations. Newbury Park: SAGE.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Benzécri, J. P. (1992). Correspondence analysis handbook. New York: Marcel Dekker.
Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1967). Die Gesellschaftliche Konstruktion der Wirklichkeit. Eine Theorie der Wissenssoziologie. Frankfurt a. M.: Fischer Verlag.
Campbell, D. E. (2008). Voice in the classroom: How an open classroom climate fosters political engagement among adolescents. Political Behaviour, 30, 437–454.
Dalton, R. (2006). Citizen politics: Public opinion and political parties in advanced industrial democracies. Washington: Chatham House.
Dalton, R. (2008). Citizenship norms and the expansion of political participation. Political Studies, 56, 76–98.
Dawson, R. E., & Prewitt, K. (1969). Political socialization. Boston: Little Brown.
Delli Carpini, M. X., & Keeter, S. (1996). What Americans know about politics and why it matters. New Haven: Yale University Press.
EUYOUPART (2005). EUYOUPART deliverable 17: Final comparative report. Political participation of young people in Europe – Development of indicators for comparative research in the European Union (EUYOUPART), Forschungsprojekt im Rahmen des 5. Rahmenprogramms, Vertragsnummer HPSE-CT-2002-00123. Vienna, SORA.
Franklin, M. N. (2004). Voter turnout and the dynamics of electoral competition in established democracies since 1945. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Galston, W. A. (2003). Civic education and political participation. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(1), 29–33.
Greenacre, M. J. (1984). Theory and applications of correspondence analysis. London: Academic.
Greenacre, M. J. (2007). Correspondence analysis in practice. Boca Raton/London: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
Held, D. (1996). Models of democracy. Standford: Standford University Press.
Hooghe, M. (2004). Political socialization and the future of politics. Acta Politica. International Journal of Political Science, 39(4), 331–341.
Hyman, H. (1959). Political socialization. Glencoe: Free Press.
James, A., & James, A. L. (2004). Constructing childhood. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Jones, K. V., & Subramanian, S. (2012). Developing multilevel models for analysing contextuality, heterogeneity and change using MLwiN 2.2: Centre for Multilevel Modelling, University of Bristol.
Langton, K., & Jennings, K. M. (1968). Political socialization and the high school civics curriculum in the United States. American Political Science Review, 62, 862–867.
Markus, G. B. (1979). The political environment and the dynamics of public attitudes. A panel study. American Journal of Political Science, 42(2), 461–487.
McIntosh, H., & Youniss, J. (2010). Toward a political theory of political socialization of youth. In L. R. Sherrod, J. Torney-Purta, & C. A. Flanagan (Eds.), Handbook of research on civic engagement in youth. Hoboken: Wiley.
Meulman, J. J., van der Kooij, A., et al. (2004). Principal components analysis with nonlinear optimal scaling transformations for ordinal and nominal data. In D. Kaplan & S. P. inc. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of quantitative methodology for the social sciences (p. 511). Thousand Oaks: Sage: xiii.
Mondak, J. J., & Halperin, K. (2008). A framework for the study of personality and political behaviour. British Journal of Political Science, 38, 335–363.
Nie, N., Junn, J., et al. (1996). Education and democratic citizenship in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Niemi, R. G., & Junn, J. (1998). Civic education: What makes students learn? New Haven: Yale University Press.
Norris, P. (2000). A virtuous circle: Political communication in postindustrial societies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Panagiotakos, D. B., & Pitsavos, C. (2004). Interpretation of epidemiological data using multiple correspondence analysis and log-linear models. Journal of Data Science, 2, 75–86.
Rasbash, J., Browne, W., et al. (2000). A user's guide to MLwiN. London: Center for Multilevel Modelling - University of London Institute of Education.
Sapiro, V. (2004). Not your parents’ political socialization: Introduction for a new generation. Annual Reviews, 7, 24.
Scherr, A. (2008). Sozialisation, person, individuum. In B. Schäfers (Ed.), Einführung in Hauptbegriffe der Soziologie (pp. 45–68). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaft.
Schwarzer, S., & Zeglovits, E. (2012, forthcoming). “If you don’t come across it in your family or in school, where else?” – How 16-and 17-year old Austrian first time voters perceive the role of schools in preparing them for the election. In S. Abendschoen (Ed.), New directions of political socialization research: Old and new challenges. Colchester: ECPR Press.
Searing, D., Schwartz, J., et al. (1973). The structuring principle: Political socialisation and belief systems. American Political Science Review, 67(2), 415–432.
Tedin, K. L. (1980). Assessing peer and parental influences on political attitudes. American Journal of Political Science, 24, 13–54.
Torney-Purta, J. (2002a). The school’s role in developing civic engagement: A study of adolescents in twenty-eight countries. Applied Development Science, 6(4), 203–212.
Torney-Purta, J. (2002b). What adolescents know about citizenship and democracy. Educational Leadership, 59(4), 45–50.
Torney-Purta, J., Wilkenfeld, B., et al. (2008). How adolescents in twenty-seven countries understand, support, and practice human rights. Journal of Social Issues, 64, 857–880.
Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., et al. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wagner, M., Johann, D., et al. (2012, forthcoming). “Voting at 16: Turnout and the quality of vote choice.” Electoral Studies.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schwarzer, S., Connor, D. (2013). Political Engagement Among the Youth: Effects of Political Socialization Across Europe. In: Demetriou, K. (eds) Democracy in Transition. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30068-4_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30068-4_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-30067-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-30068-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)