TikTok is known for its lighthearted dance and lip-synch videos, yet videos with the hashtag #politics have garnered nearly 14 billion views. Does young adults’ politically oriented expression on TikTok lead to increased civic engagement offline? TikTok helps incorporate young adults into political social networks that may encourage additional civic activity. In addition, the playful, humorous nature of TikTok-based political expression encourages young adults to develop participatory, political selves. Using data from a 2020 survey of Americans between 18 and 25 years old, we find that posting political videos on TikTok connects with higher offline civic engagement. The results suggest that playful political expression is an important feature for promoting young adult civic engagement.
AbadieA.ImbensG. W. (2011). Bias-corrected matching estimators for average treatment effects. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 29(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1198/jbes.2009.07333
3.
AbadieA.ImbensG. W. (2016). Matching on the estimated propensity score. Econometrica, 84(2), 781–807. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA11293
AchenC. H.BartelsL. M. (2016). Democracy for realists: Why elections do not produce responsive government. Princeton University Press.
6.
AdiA.GerodimosR.LillekerD. G. (2018). ‘Yes we vote’: Civic mobilisation and impulsive engagement on Instagram. Javnost-The Public: Journal of the European Institute for Communication & Culture, 25(3), 315–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/13183222.2018.1464706
AlbericiA. I.MilesiP. (2016). Online discussion, politicized identity, and collective action. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 19(1), 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430215581430
9.
AustinP. C. (2011). An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46(3), 399–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2011.568786
10.
BaumgartnerJ. C.LockerbieB. (2018). Maybe it is more than a joke: Satire, mobilization, and political participation. Social Science Quarterly, 99(3), 1060–1074. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12501
11.
BeckerA. B. (2011). Political humor as democratic relief? The effects of exposure to comedy and straight news on trust and efficacy. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 19(5), 235–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870.2011.622191
12.
BeckerA. B. (2014). Playing with politics: Online political parody, affinity for political humor, anxiety reduction, and implications for political efficacy. Mass Communication and Society, 17(3), 424–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2014.891134
13.
BlackfordJ. (2009). Propensity scores: A method for matching on multiple variables in down syndrome research. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 47(5), 348–357. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-47.5.348
14.
BoulianneS. (2015). Social media use and participation: A meta-analysis of current research. Information, Communication & Society, 18(5), 524–538. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1008542
15.
CaseyL. S.ChandlerJ.LevineA. S.ProctorA.StrolovitchD. Z. (2017). Intertemporal differences among mTurk workers: Time-based sample variations and implications for online data collection. Sage Open, 7(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244017712774
16.
ChanG. C.LimC.SunT.StjepanovicD.ConnorJ.HallW.LeungJ. (2022). Causal inference with observational data in addiction research. Addiction, 117(10), 2736–2744. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.15972
17.
ChanM. (2016). Social network sites and political engagement: Exploring the impact of Facebook connections and uses on political protest and participation. Mass Communication & Society, 19, 430–451. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2016.1161803
18.
ChoJ.AhmedS.KeumH.ChoiY. J.LeeJ. H. (2018). Influencing myself: Self-reinforcement through online political expression. Communication Research, 45(1), 83–111. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650216644020
19.
ChristakisN. A.FowlerJ. H. (2009). Connected: The surprising power of our social networks and how they shape our lives. Little, Brown, and Company.
20.
DiamondA.SekhonJ. J. (2013). Genetic matching for estimating causal effects: A general multivariate matching method for achieving balance in observational studies. Review of Economics and Statistics, 95(3), 932–945. https://doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00318
21.
EggersA. C.HainmuellerJ. (2009). MPs for sale? Returns to office in postwar British politics. American Political Science Review, 103(4), 513–533. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055409990190
22.
Gil de ZúñigaH.JungN.ValenzuelaS. (2012). Social media use for news and individuals’ social capital, civic engagement and political participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(3), 319–336. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01574.x
23.
GimpelJ. G.LeeF. E.KaminskiJ. (2006). The political geography of campaign contributions in American politics. Journal of Politics, 68(3), 626–639. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00450.x
24.
GreeneW. H. (2018). Econometric analysis (8th Ed.). Pearson Education.
25.
GuineaudeauB.VottaF.MungerK. (2020). Fifteen seconds of fame: TikTok and the democratization of mobile video on social media. https://osf.io/f7ehq/download
26.
HallT. E.SinclairB. (2019). A connected America: Politics in the era of social media. Oxford University Press.
27.
HeadM. L.HolmanL.LanfearR.KahnA. T.JennionsM. D. (2015). The extent and consequences of P-hacking in science. Plos Biology, 13(3), e1002106. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002106
28.
HoD. E.ImaiK.KingG.StuartE. A. (2007). Matching as nonparametric preprocessing for reducing model dependence in parametric causal inference. Political Analysis, 15(3), 199–236. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpl013
29.
ImbensG. W.RubinD. B. (2015). Causal inference for statistics, social, & biomedical sciences: An introduction. Cambridge University Press.
KahneJ.BowyerB. (2018). The political significance of social media activity and social networks. Political Communication, 35(3), 470–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2018.1426662
32.
KennedyM. (2020). If the rise of the TikTok dance and e-girl aesthetic has taught us anything, it’s that teenage girls rule the internet right now:’ TikTok celebrity, girls and the Coronavirus crisis. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 23(6), 1068–1076. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549420945341
33.
KingG.LucasC.NielsenR. A. (2017). The balance-sample size frontier in matching methods for causal inference. American Journal of Political Science, 61(2), 473–489. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12272
34.
KingG.NielsenR. (2019). Why propensity scores should not be used for matching. Political Analysis, 27(4), 435–454. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2019.11
35.
KrampenG. (2000). Transition of adolescent political action orientations to voting behavior in early adulthood in view of a social-cognitive action theory model of personality. Political Psychology, 21(2), 277–297. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00188
36.
LaneD. S.LeeS. S.LiangF.KimD. H.ShenL.WeeksB. E.KwakN. (2019). Social media expression and the political self. Journal of Communication, 69(1), 49–72. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqy064
37.
LarsonJ. M.NaglerJ.RonenJ.TuckerJ. A. (2019). Social networks and protest participation: Evidence from 130 million twitter users. American Journal of Political Science, 63(3), 690–705. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12436
38.
LoaderB. D.VromenA.XenosM. A. (2014). The networked young citizen: Social media, political participation and civic engagement. Information, Communication and Society, 17(2), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.871571
39.
LuptonD. L. (2019). The external validity of college student student subject pools in experimental research: A cross-sample comparison of treatment effect heterogeneity. Political Analysis, 27(1), 90–97. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2018.42
MoffettK. W.RiceL. L. (2016). Web 2.0 and the political mobilization of college students. Lexington Books.
42.
MoffettK. W.RiceL. L. (2018). College students and online political expression in the 2016 election. Social Science Computer Review, 36(4), 422–439. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439317721186
OhmeJ. (2019). When digital natives enter the electorate: Political social media use among first-time voters and its effects on campaign participation. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 16(2), 119–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2019.1613279
45.
OrtizD. G.OstertagS. F. (2014). Katrina bloggers and the development of collective civic action: The web as a virtual mobilizing structure. Sociological Perspectives, 57(1), 52–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731121413517558
46.
OstmanJ. (2012). Information, expression, participation: How involvement in user-generated content relates to democratic engagement among young people. New Media & Society, 14(6), 1004–1021. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812438212
PingreeR. J. (2007). How messages affect their senders: A more general model of message effects and implications for deliberation. Communication Theory, 17(4), 439–461. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00306.x
50.
PollockP. H.III. (1983). The participatory consequences of internal and external political efficacy: A research note. Western Political Quarterly, 36(3), 400–409. https://doi.org/10.1177/106591298303600306
51.
RiceL. L.MoffettK. W. (2019). Snapchat and civic engagement among college students. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 16(2), 87–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2019.1574249
52.
RiceL. L.MoffettK. W. (2022). The political voices of generation Z. Routledge.
53.
RiceL. L.MoffettK. W.MadupalliM. (2013). Campaign-related social networking and the political participation of college students. Social Science Computer Review, 31(3), 257–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439312455474
54.
RosenstoneS. J.HansenJ. M. (2002). Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America. Pearson-Longman.
55.
SekhonJ. S. (2011). Multivariate and propensity score matching software with automated balance optimization: The matching package for R. Journal of Statistical Software, 42(7), 1–52.
56.
SerranoJ. C. M.PapakyriakopoulosO.HegelichS. (2020). Dancing to the partisan beat: A first analysis of political communication on TikTok. In Southampton ’20: 12th ACM conference on web science, Southampton, UK, July 07–10, 2020. New York, NY, USA: ACM, (p.10). https://doi.org/10.1145/1122445.1122456
57.
SinclairB. (2012). The social citizen: Peer networks and political behavior. University of Chicago Press.
58.
StuartE. A. (2010). Matching methods for causal inference: A Review and a look forward. Statistical Science, 25(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1214/09-STS313
59.
ThorsonK. (2012). What does it mean to Be a good citizen? Citizenship vocabularies as resources for action. The Annals of the American Academy of Political & Social Science, 644(1), 70–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716212453264
TownerT. L.DulioD. A. (2011). The web 2.0 election: Does the online medium matter?Journal of Political Marketing, 10(1–2), 165–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377857.2011.540220
VaccariC.ValerianiA.BarberaP.BonneauR.JostJ. T.NaglerJ.TuckerJ. A. (2015). Political expression and action on social media: Exploring the relationship between lower-and higher-threshold political activities among twitter users in Italy. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(2), 221–239. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12108
66.
VijayD.GekkerA. (2021). Playing politics: How sabarimala played out on TikTok. American Behavioral Scientist, 65(5), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764221989769
YamamotoM.KushinM. J.DalisayF. (2015). Social media and mobiles as political mobilization forces for young adults: Examining the moderating role of online political expression in political participation. New Media & Society, 17(6), 880–898. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813518390
71.
YangH. C.DeHartJ. L. (2016). Social media use and online political participation among college students during the US election 2012. Social Media + Society, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115623802
72.
ZallerJ. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge University Press.
73.
ZhangZ.KimH. J.LonjonG.ZhuY. (2019). Balance diagnostics after propensity score matching. Annals of Translational Medicine, 7(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2018.12.10
74.
ZhaoS.GrasmuckS.MartinJ. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1816–1836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.012
75.
ZukinC.KeeterS.AndolinaM.JenkinsK.Delli CarpiniM. X. (2006). A new engagement? Political participation, civic life, and the changing American citizen. Oxford University Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
