Young citizens’ political participation can fundamentally affect the functioning of democracies. Therefore, this study examined patterns of political participation among the youth. Specifically, the focus was on authoritarianism, national identification, and their presumed bidirectional relations with youth participation. Structural equation modeling of data from the two-wave longitudinal questionnaire of Czech adolescents and young adults (age 15–25; N = 1346) was employed, differentiating between older adolescents and young adults. The model also included political alienation and internal political efficacy as additional predictors. Results showed that higher authoritarianism was associated with decreased participation and that this association became more apparent with age. National identification was only associated with lower prosocial participation. Political alienation and internal political efficacy were not associated with youth participation but were reciprocally affected by authoritarianism and youth participation. Furthermore, results suggested a possible beneficial effect of online participation, as it was associated with lower authoritarianism and political alienation and higher internal political efficacy.
AdachiPaulWilloughbyTeena. 2014. “Interpreting Effect Sizes when Controlling for Stability Effects in Longitudinal Autoregressive Models: Implications for Psychological Science.” European Journal of Developmental Psychology12 (1): 116–128. doi:10.1080/17405629.2014.963549.
2.
AltemeyerBob. 1981. Right-wing Authoritarianism. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press.
AlvaEdgarMaríaUrciaVivasVanina. 2023. “Civic Engagement of Future Citizens: An Insight from Peruvian Students’ Attitudes towards Relevant Societal Issues as Predictors of Expected Conventional Political Participation.” Child Indicators Research16 (5): 2187–2221. doi:10.1007/s12187-023-10049-7.
5.
AnyiwoNkemkaPalmerGordon J. M.GarrettJanay M.StarckJordan G.HopeElan C.. 2020. “„Racial and Political Resistance: An Examination of the Sociopolitical Action of Racially Marginalized Youth.” Current Opinion in Psychology35: 86–91. doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.03.005.
6.
ArtDavid. 2022. “The Myth of Global Populism.” Perspectives on Politics20 (3): 999–1011. doi:10.1017/S1537592720003552.
7.
BačovskýPavel. 2021. “Gaming Alone: Videogaming and Sociopolitical Attitudes.” New Media & Society23 (5): 1133–1156. doi:10.1177/1461444820910418.
8.
BačovskýPavel. 2024. “Level up! Priming Hobbyist Political Identity Using Survey Experiment.” Journal of Experimental Political Science1–17. doi:10.1017/XPS.2024.9
9.
BačovskýPavelFitzgeraldJennifer. 2023. “Raising a Politically Engaged Generation: When Parental Influence Matters Most.” Youth & Society55 (1): 44–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X211029976
10.
BañalesJosefinaMathewsChanningNooryaHayatNkemkaAnyiwoDiemerMatthew A. 2020. “Latinx and Black Young Adults’ Pathways to Civic/political Engagement.” Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology26 (2): 176–88. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000271
11.
BarrettMartyn D. 2007. Children’s Knowledge, Beliefs and Feelings about Nations and National Groups. Hove: Psychology Press.
12.
BarrettMartyn D.ZaniBruna. 2015. “Political and Civic Engagement: Theoretical Understandings, Evidence and Policies.” In Political and Civic Engagement: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Barrett MartynD.BrunaZani, 3–26. Routledge.
13.
BaugutPhilipNeumannKatharina. 2019. “How Right-Wing Extremists Use and Perceive News Media.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly96 (3): 696–720. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018803080
14.
BronfenbrennerUrie. 1979. The Ecology of Human Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
15.
BrowneMichael W.CudeckRobert. 1992. “Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit.” Sociological Methods & Research21 (2): 230–258.
CapraraGian V.VecchioneMichele. 2013. “Personality Approaches to Political Behavior.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, edited by LeonieHuddySearsDavid O.LevyJack S.. 2nd ed.23–58. Oxford University Press.
18.
CicognaniElviraZaniBruna. 2015. “Social and Psychological Factors Influencing Political and Civic Participation.” In Political and Civic Engagement: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Barrett MartynD.BrunaZani, 124–45. Routledge.
19.
CitrinJackHerbertMccloskyShanksMerrill J.SnidermanPaul M.. 1975. “Personal and Political Sources of Political Alienation.” British Journal of Political Science5 (1): 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400008024
20.
DahlViktorStattinHåkan. 2016. “Beyond the Limits: Involvement in Illegal Political Activities.” European Political Science Review8 (1): 125–45. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773914000435
21.
de Oliveira SantosDéborade Oliveira de CastroHenrique C. 2023. “Rethinking the Political through the Psychological: a Theoretical Discussion about Personality and Political Behavior.” Trends in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43076-023-00320-9
22.
DeckmanMelissa. 2024. The Politics of Gen Z: How the Youngest Voters Will Shape Our Democracy. Columbia University Press.
23.
DuckittJohnSibley ChrisG. 2016. “Personality, ideological attitudes, and group identity as predictors of political behavior in majority and minority ethnic groups.” Political Psychology371: 109–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12222
FierroPedroPatricioArocaPatricioNavia. 2023. “Political Disaffection in the Digital Age: The Use of Social Media and the Gap in Internal and External Efficacy.” Social Science Computer Review41 (5): 1857–1876. https://doi.org/10.1177/08944393221087940
26.
FinifterAadaW. 1970. “Dimensions of Political Alienation.” American Political Science Review64 (2): 389–410. https://doi.org/10.2307/1953840
27.
FitzgeraldJenniferBačovskýPavel. 2022. “Young Citizens’ Party Support: The ‘When’ and ‘Who’ of Political Influence within Families.” Political Studies72 (2): 634–651. https://doi.org/10.1177/00323217221133643
28.
FitzgeraldJenniferSchauerKathrynO’NealRachel JanieBačovskýPavel. 2023. “To Belong: Feeling ‘At Home’ and Support for Democracy.” Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie75 (1): 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-023-00908-0
29.
FlanaganScott C.LeeAie-Rie. 2003. “The New Politics, Culture Wars, and the Authoritarian-Libertarian Value Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies.” Comparative Political Studies36 (3): 235–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414002250664
30.
FoxStuart. 2015. Apathy, Alienation and Young People: The Political Engagement of British Millennials. PhD thesis. University of Nottingham. https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/30532/
31.
FoxStuart. 2021. “Political Alienation and Referendums: How Political Alienation Was Related to Support for Brexit.” British Politics16 (1): 16–35. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41293-020-00134-8
32.
FunkeFriedrich. 2005. “The Dimensionality of Right-Wing Authoritarianism: Lessons from the Dilemma between Theory and Measurement.” Political Psychology26 (2): 195–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00415.x
33.
HamakerEllen L.KuiperRebecca M.Grasman RaoulP. P. P.. 2015. “A Critique of the Cross-Lagged Panel Model.” Psychological Methods20 (1): 102–116. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038889
34.
HinckAshley. 2019. Politics for the Love of Fandom: Fan-Based Citizenship in a Digital World. Baton Rouge: LSU Press.
HuddyLeonie.KhatibNadia. 2007. “American Patriotism, National Identity, and Political Involvement.” American Journal of Political Science51 (1): 63–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00237.x
37.
KanasAgnieszkaMartinovicBorja. 2017. “Political Action in Conflict and Nonconflict Regions in Indonesia: The Role of Religious and National Identifications.” Political Psychology38 (2): 209–225. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12345
KazharskiAliaksei. 2022. “Identity Politics of the Far Right in the Czech Republic: Freedom and Direct Democracy.” In The Many Faces of the Far Right in the Post-Communist Space: A Comparative Study of Far-Right Movements and Identity in the Region, edited by NinnaMörner, 83–90. Centre for Baltic and East European Studies.
40.
KearnsErin M.AsalVictorWalshJames I.FedericoChristopherLemieuxAnthony F. 2020. “Political Action as a Function of Grievances, Risk, and Social Identity: An Experimental Approach.” Studies in Conflict & Terrorism43 (11): 941–958. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610X.2018.1507790
KimSeongcheol. 2020. “Between illiberalism and hyper-neoliberalism: competing populist discourses in the Czech Republic.” European Politics and Society21 (5): 618–633. doi:10.1080/23745118.2020.1709368
KnoblochKatherine R.2015. “Alienation, Political.” In The International Encyclopedia of Political Communication, edited by MazzoleniG., 1–5. John Wiley.
45.
LaiMark H. C.RenMaggie Y. W.Wu AniseM. S.Hung EvaP. W.. 2013. “Motivation as Mediator between National Identity and Intention to Volunteer.” Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology23 (2): 128–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.2108
46.
LemieuxAnthony F.KearnsEric M.AsalVictorWalshJames I.. 2017. “Support for Political Mobilization and Protest in Egypt and Morocco: an Online Experimental Study.” Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict10 (2-3): 124–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2017.1346815
47.
LernerRichard M.WangJunWarrenDaniel J. A.EricksonKarlChampineRobey B.2014. “Development of Civic Engagement: Theoretical and Methodological Issues.” International Journal of Developmental Science8 (3): 69–79. https://doi.org/10.3233/DEV-14130
48.
LernerRichard M.Lerner JacquelineV.Bowers EedmondP.GeldhofJohn G.. 2015. “Positive Youth Development and Relational-Developmental-Systems.” In Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science: Theory and Method, edited by Overton WilliesF.MolenaarPeter C. M.LernerRichard M.. 7th ed.607–651. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118963418.childpsy116
49.
LernerRichard M.TirrellJonathan M.DowlingElizabeth M.GeldhofGeldhof J.GestsdóttirSteinunnLernerJacqueline V.KingPamela E.WilliamsKateIrahetaGuillermoSimAistair T. R.. 2019. “The End of the Beginning: Evidence and Absences Studying Positive Youth Development in a Global Context.” Adolescent Research Review4 (1): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-018-0093-4
50.
MacháčkováHanaŠerekJan. 2017. “Does ‘clicking’ Matter? the Role of Online Participation in Adolescents’ Civic Development.” Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace11 (4): 1802–7962. https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2017-4-5
51.
MaurissenLies. 2020. “Political Efficacy and Interest as Mediators of Expected Political Participation Among Belgian Adolescents.” Applied Developmental Science24 (4): 339–353.
52.
MiddaughEllenBenjaminBowyerJosephKahne. 2017. “U Suk! Participatory Media and Youth Experiences with Political Discourse.” Youth & Society49 (7): 902–922. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X16655246
53.
NoackP.MacekP.CicognaniE.AmnåE.Motti-StefanidiF.MenezesI.BanajiS.KalmusV. (2018). CATCH-EyoU: Processes in Youth's Construction of active EU Citizenship: Cross-national Longitudinal (Wave 1 and 2) Questionnaires [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/Zenodo.1313646
54.
OrthUlrichMeierLaurenz L.BühlerJanina L.DappLlaura C.KraussSamanthaMesserliDeniseRobinsRichard W. 2022. “Effect Size Guidelines for Cross-Lagged Effects.” In Psychological Methods. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000499
55.
ParkChang S.2019. “The Mediating Role of Political Talk and Political Efficacy in the Effects of News Use on Expressive and Collective Participation.” Communication and the Public4 (1): 35–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/2057047319829580
RanadeWendyNorrisPippa. 1984. “Democratic Consensus and the Young: a Cross National Comparison of Britain and America.” Journal of Adolescence7: 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-1971(84)90047-2
59.
RubleDiane N.JeannetteAlvarezMeredithBachmanCameronJessica. 2004. “The Development of a Sense of “We”: The Emergence and Implications of Children’s Collective Identity.” In The Development of the Social Self, edited by MarkBennettFabioSani, 29–76. Psychology Press.
60.
RuparMirjabaMaciejSekerdejKatarzynaJamróz-Dolińska. 2021. “The Role of National Identification in Explaining Political and Social Civic Engagement.” Group Processes & Intergroup Relations24 (8): 1515–1537. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220967975
61.
SamDavid L.WanjohiRacheal N.AkotiaCharity S.. 2019. “Civic Engagement and Participation Among Ghanaian and Kenyan Students and Their Correlates.” Journal of Civil Society15 (1): 42–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/17448689.2018.1560557
62.
SchnelleCarolineDirkBaierAandreasHadjarKlausBoehnke. 2021. “Authoritarianism beyond Disposition: A Literature Review of Research on Contextual Antecedents.” Frontiers in Psychology12: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.676093
63.
SchroederRalph. 2018. “Digital Media and the Rise of Right-Wing Populism.” In Social Theory after the Internet: Media, Technology, and Globalization, edited by RalphSchroeder, 60–81. UCL Press.
64.
SchubachElisabethZimmermannJuliaPeterNoackNeyerFranz J. 2017. “Short Forms of the Utrecht-Management of Identity Commitments Scale (U-MICS) with the Domains of Job, Romantic Relationship, and Region.” Journal of Adolescence54: 104–09. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.11.012
65.
SchulzWolfram. 2005. “Political Efficacy and Expected Political Participation Among Lower and Upper Secondary Students: A Comparative Analysis with Data from the IEA Civic Education Study.” In Paper Presented at the ECPR General Conference Budapest, September 8-10, Budapest, Hungary. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED499264.pdf
66.
SchwemmerCarsten. 2021. “The Limited Influence of Right-Wing Movements on Social Media User Engagement.” Social Media + Society7 (3): 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211041650
67.
SearsDavid O.BrownChristia. 2013. “Childhood and Adult Political Development.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, edited by LeonieHuddySearsDavid O.LevyJack S.. 2nd ed.59–95. Oxford University Press.
68.
SullivanJohn L.TransueJohn E.. 1999. “The Psychological Underpinnings of Democracy: A Selective Review of Research on Political Tolerance, Interpersonal Trust, and Social Capital.” Annual Review of Psychology50: 625–650. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.625
69.
van DethJan W.2014.“A Conceptual Map of Political Participation.” Acta Politica49(3): 349–367.
70.
VaswaniMamtaEssesVictoria M.Newby-ClarkIan R.GiguèreBenjamin.. 2022. “Cultural Differences in Fear of Negative Evaluation after Social Norm Transgressions and the Impact on Mental Health.” Frontiers in Psychology13: 1–11.
71.
VernerMarijaBačovskýPavelWilson SokheySarah. 2024. “Triggering Populist Support in Europe: How Internal Political Efficacy Shapes the Effect of Economic Vulnerability on Party Preferences.” European Political Science23 (3): 398–419. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-023-00462-5
72.
VolleberghWilma. 1996. “The Development of Authoritarianism in Adolescence. Longitudinal Change in Authoritarianism and the Impact of Age, Gender and Educational Level.” In Social Problems and Social Contexts in Adolescence: Perspectives across Boundaries, edited by KlausHurrelmanHamiltonStephen F, 247–264. Aldine de Gruyter.
73.
WangChing-HsingWengDennis L. C.TsaiChia-hung. 2020. “Personality Traits and Political Participation in Taiwan: a Mediation Approach.” Political Science71 (3): 175–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/00323187.2020.1767506
74.
WeinerElliotFedericoChristopher M. 2017. “Authoritarianism, Institutional Confidence, and Willingness to Engage in Collective Action: A Multinational Analysis.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin43 (3): 392–406. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216686561
75.
WeissJulia. 2020. “What Is Youth Political Participation? Literature Review on Youth Political Participation and Political Attitudes.” Frontiers in Political Science2 (1): 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2020.00001
76.
YuLuGuMingyueChanKo L. 2023. “Hong Kong Adolescents’ Participation in Political Activities: Correlates of Violent Political Participation.” Applied Research Quality Life18 (3): 1365–1405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-023-10143-6
ZhaoKunFaulknerNicholasPerryRyan. 2020. “Social Dominance Orientation, Right-Wing Authoritarianism, and Willingness to Carry Out Three Domains of Socially Inclusive Behaviors in a Public Campaign.” Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy20 (1): 264–286. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12200
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.
