Abstract
Keywords
Background and Study Justification
Comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) is a curriculum-based process of teaching and learning about the cognitive, emotional, physical, and social aspects of sexuality (Unesco et al., 2018). CSE aims “to equip children and young people with knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values to empower them to realise their health, well-being, and dignity, develop respectful social and sexual relationships, consider how their choices affect their own well-being and that of others, and understand and ensure the protection of their rights throughout their lives” (Unesco et al., 2018, p. 16). Because many programs only address parts of this comprehensive approach, they cannot be referred to as comprehensive, and oftentimes the term “sexuality education” (SE) is used.
Over the more than three decades since the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, there has been sustained commitment to SE at the highest political levels, with SE being embedded in the fundamental right to health and to education (UNGA, 2010). Scientific evidence has shown that SE can prevent harmful health outcomes and support young people in safe and positive sexual development. SE has been shown to increase knowledge and improve attitudes related to Sexual and Reproductive Health (SRH) and promote safe sex practices (including condom use, number of sexual partners and delaying initiation of first sex) (Michielsen & Ivanova, 2022). There is growing evidence on the positive effect of SE on gender equitable attitudes, respect for sexual diversity and gender-equitable relationships, as well as on reducing sexual and gender-based violence (Goldfarb & Lieberman, 2021).
Despite scientific evidence and political support, debates around SE have always existed. Main discussion points include the age at which SE should begin and which topics should be taught at what age (e.g., with claims that SE is not age-appropriate), who is responsible to provide SE (e.g., parents, teachers, schools…), and how to account for families’ socio-cultural and religious backgrounds and moral views (Enzlin, 2018; Robinson et al., 2017). However, in recent years these debates have grown more intense with the rise of ‘anti-gender movements’ in the social and political arena. “Gender” and “gender ideology” have been put forward as vague notions, as a “symbolic glue” that binds together various “grassroot” actors who might not share the same ideological stands across all issues they address, but are united in their protest against what they perceive as a new type of totalitarianism in form of freedom, tolerance, equality and diversity (Alonso & Lombardo, 2018; Kováts & Põim, 2015; Krizsan & Roggeband, 2018; Venegas, 2022). SE has become one of the main targets of the anti-gender movement because the school curriculum concretises issues related to feminist and LGBTQIA+ struggles for gender equality and identity allegedly under the veil of democratic and human rights (Venegas, 2022). This results in SE being “under fire all-over Europe” (Kováts & Põim, 2015), with less focus on the issue of how to deliver SE in school, and more on “the possibility of there being such a thing as [R]SE [relationship and sexuality education]” (Venegas, 2022).
Recent reports from 2018 (WHO European Region) (Ketting & Ivanova, 2018) and 2021 (European Union) (Michielsen & Ivanova, 2022) indicate that the opposition to SE is widespread in the European region. Only five countries, including Belgium, 1 were reported to be opposition-free. Recent events, however, show this has substantially changed. In September 2023, in the French speaking community in Belgium, a law mandating SE (Education à la Vie Relationelle Affective et Sexuelle - EVRAS) for 2 h in the final year of primary school and for 2 h in the fourth year of secondary school, led to several vocal protests and even arson at six primary schools (De Morgen, 2023b). More recently (March 2024), the Flemish Week of Spring Fever (an annual week to promote SE in schools) met with resistance for the first time in almost two decades, though still very limited compared to the French speaking community (De Morgen, 2023a).
In these recent opposition episodes in Belgium, two new phenomena emerged. Firstly, these opposition groups were joined by a subgroup of the population with anti-government sentiments and hostility towards elites (including vaccine hesitancy and conspiracy theorists), and particularly in the French speaking community, by conservative Muslims. It is unclear how these groups relate to Catholic and right-wing movements, but also in Belgium gender seems to be a tool of coalition building in the mutual fight against an outer enemy “gender ideology” and inner enemy “political correctness” or “wokism” (among right-wing populists), the perceived imposed neocolonial Western values of gender and sexual equality (among religious conservatives) (Paternotte & Kuhar, 2018), and perceived rejection of the traditional family as the key organising system in society (Kuhar & Zobec, 2017; McEwen, 2017). These protestors share the feeling that they are not heard by a too liberal cultural elite deciding about personal and intimate values regarding gender and sexuality. Secondly, while the anti-gender movement’s repertoire up until now mainly included demonstrations, petitions, electoral mobilizations etc. (Paternotte & Kuhar, 2018), now the focus has shifted towards the spread of fake news, conspiracy theories, and online hate campaigns. But even more worrying and unique to the Belgian case was the use of extreme violence (arson in schools) in combatting school-based SE.
This growing opposition contributes to increased polarisation regarding SE in schools and in the wider society. Polarisation involves the amplification of differences and opposition between individuals or groups, often leading to increased hostility, conflict, and a breakdown of consensus. Firstly, through deliberately spreading misinformation about SE (e.g., that children are shown pornographic content) and by identifying the family as part of the “cultural war”, a moral panic is created. Subsequently, parts of the general population (“the movable middle”) can start to doubt the necessity of SE (Alonso & Lombardo, 2018; Venegas, 2022). Secondly, schools have become a “prominent site of struggle” (Paternotte & Kuhar, 2018), where teachers become afraid of parental concerns around SE, have doubts themselves, and are confronted with polarised views within their classrooms. Finally, pro-SE organisations are pushed in the defensive and SE even turns out to be a divisive issue in some organisations. There have been anecdotal stories of division with e.g. the LGBTQIA+ community that want to “Drop the T” (Advocate, 2015) or “Get the L out” (Get The L Out (n.d.)), to distance themselves from the discussions on gender.
This research project aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the sources, complexities and nuances of polarisation regarding SE in Flanders. With this project, we respond to calls from key researchers and stakeholders in the field for “good empirics” (Verloo & Paternotte, 2018) and nuanced, context-specific approaches that underscore the complexity of opposition against and support for (aspects of) SE (Paternotte & Kuhar, 2018). The project consists of five sub-studies that address related research objectives identified through a literature review and exploratory discussions with various stakeholder organisations working on SE in Belgium. In Study 1, we aim to examine how the SE field in Flanders is organised and to identify the motivations and repertoires of stakeholders that are critical towards and those in support of (aspects of) SE. In Study 2, we explore the attitudes of the general population towards SE and how these are socially and structurally embedded, as well as examine the (potential) behavioral outcomes of those attitudes. Next, in Study 3, we focus on teachers and schools to assess their attitudes towards SE and their experiences and needs regarding conflicts over SE in schools. Study 4 examines the age-appropriateness and acceptability of SE. Finally, based on the knowledge and insights gained from studies 1 to 4, we aim to analyse polarisation regarding SE as a complex system (Study 5). This approach allows the research to create a system map that highlights the complexities and context-specific strategies related divergent views on (aspects of) SE. The project is guided by a national and an international guidance committee made up of policy makers, non-governmental organisations, international organisations and academics.
Methodological Approach
This research is methodologically structured as a mixed-methods study that unfolds through five distinct studies that are interwoven and build on each other. Moreover, this project benefits from an interdisciplinary approach as it is a collaboration between the Sociology and Sexology departments at KU Leuven.
Study 1: In-Depth Study of Stakeholder Views on SE in the Flemish Community
A vast number of stakeholders are actively engaged in promoting or opposing SE in the Flemish community. Mapping and understanding these stakeholders—their goals, strategies, and influence—is essential for gaining deeper insight into the landscape. Therefore, Research Objective 1 (RO1) is to analyse the depth of the opposition against and support for SE: what are the narratives and societal visions underlying (the different sub-groups of) the opposition against and support for SE? What linguistic and visual elements characterise the narratives? Who are the people that protest with the goal of changing the current SE, why do they manifest, and how are they mobilised?
Study 1.1: Stakeholder Mapping
Throughout the project, we will undertake activities to continuously identify and map relevant stakeholders. These activities include a stakeholder mapping exercise with the project’s national guidance committee, literature reviews, internet searches, document analysis, social media monitoring, snowball sampling, exploring connections between known and emerging stakeholders, and screening stakeholder presence at SE-related events in the Flemish community—such as informational sessions or protests.
Study 1.2: (Social) Media Analysis and Stakeholder Interviews
From the stakeholder mapping exercise, we will select at least two stakeholders aligned more closely with the pro-SE spectrum and two representing the more critical side. These stakeholders will be the focus of an in-depth analysis of their narratives and societal visions, using a social constructivist lens. For each selected actor, we will collect the following data: (1) the two most used (social) media communication channels to extract text, images, audio and video; (2) in-depth interviews with key figures linked to these stakeholders.
Study 1.3: Protest Survey
Protest surveys (i.e., surveys during a protest, demonstration or social movement event) will be conducted, consisting of both ‘on the spot’ interviews and a drop-off online survey. The occurrence of organised protest activities will be closely monitored by the researchers, aided by the project’s national guidance committee and the researchers’ networks. In case of a protest, a team of researchers will visit the protest scene and conduct a short face-to-face survey with a random sample of protesters on their motivations for participating and how they were mobilised. In addition, protesters are invited to (after the protest) fill out an online questionnaire on their attitudes towards different aspects of sexuality education. This survey resembles the survey in Study 2.1 so that the opinions of protesters can be compared to those of the Belgian population.
Study 2: In-Width Study of Attitudes on SE in the Belgian Population
In the second study, we aim to map attitudes of the general population towards SE in Belgium: are there specific subgroups within the population that are more likely to oppose/support (aspects of) SE and which narratives on SE resonate within those subgroups? (RO2).
Study 2.1: Probability-Based Survey
We will conduct a probability-based survey to map profiles of varying degrees of support and opposition in the general population, their prevalence, socio-demographic and ideological embedding and potential (behavioral) consequences. Data will be collected via the advanced data collection infrastructure The Social Study (TSS) (https://thesocialstudy.be) which comprises a probability sample of Belgian citizens aged 16 and above and is managed by an inter-university consortium. We will conduct a 20-min survey among a sample of 5,000 respondents and ask questions – amongst others – about attitudes towards (different aspects of) SE; attitudes regarding sexual orientation, gender identity and sexuality; school-based SE curricula; age-appropriateness of SE; acceptance of, support for and/or engagement in protest activities in favor of or opposing SE.
Study 2.2: Serial Focus Group Discussions
Next, we will organise serial focus groups to gain deeper understanding in the roots and common grounds of attitudes towards SE and to explore which SE-related narratives resonate with the stakeholder perspectives identified in Study 1. We aim to work with max. 4 sub-groups, consisting of 7 to 10 people for 3 consecutive group discussions. Working multiple times with the same homogenous groups allows us to create a safe space to have in-depth discussions and support collaborative sense-making (Baden et al., 2022). We will ask participants to reflect on the different narratives and statements used by the opposition against and support for SE in the Flemish community.
Study 3: Study on Polarisation regarding and Opposition Against SE in the School Context in the Flemish Community
In the third study, we aim to explore the attitudes of school teachers and directors regarding SE in schools (RO3.1), the extent to which schools have faced opposition from organisations, parents, and students; the degree of polarization experiencedin classrooms concerning SE; and whether these experiences differ according to school and student characteristics (RO3.2). Moreover, we aim to map the needs of schools and teachers regarding dealing with opposition against and polarisation regarding SE and examine whether these needs differ according to school and student characteristics (RO3.3).
Study 3.1: Scoping Review
A scoping review will be conducted to provide an overview of the current original research on SE mentioning the theme polarisation, opposition, resistance or pushback. The objectives are to map and characterise the different forms, to identify the actors and triggers involved, and to explore the impact and institutional responses. Providing this overview will help not only to consolidate this fragmented research field, but will also offer insights into the different tactics and arguments.
Study 3.2: Q-Methodology Study
To identify different profiles of support for and critique to SE, we will do a Q-methodology study with a sample of teachers. This methodology combines quantitative (Q sort) and qualitative (interviews) techniques to study which different subjective opinions on sensitive topics exist (Coogan & Herrington, 2011), in this case on SE in schools. A Q-set of items will be developed based on the ongoing narratives around school-based SE as well as on existing literature. Participants will be asked to rank the items onto a grid in a prearranged distribution ranging from ’fully disagree’ to ’fully agree’, followed by a short interview to gain more insights in their ranking.
Study 3.3: Focus Group Discussion and Interviews
To further understand school teachers’ experiences with conflicts towards school-based SE, we will engage them in focus group discussions. Data will be collected on (1) experiences with resistance from children, parents and other societal actors, (2) experience with conflicts in the classroom, (3) coping strategies and school policies, and (4) needs of teachers. In addition, we will conduct interviews with the principals of each of the selected schools to discuss their experiences and policy regarding SE.
Study 3.4: Opt-in Panel Survey
Every project year, around the same period (i.e., the Week of Spring Fever, an annual SE campaign in the Flemish community) we will assess teachers’ own attitudes on SE and experiences with opposition in their school, through an opt-in panel survey via Teacher Tapp. Teacher Tapp is a smartphone application for teachers in the Flemish community from all levels (kindergarten, primary school, secondary school, higher education) managed by the Artevelde College. Every day, three questions are presented to the participants. Teacher Tapp has over 7,400 registered users in the Flemish community, with an average of 1,100 responses to its daily questions. This generates insights in the attitudes of the general teaching corps and the evolution of these attitudes over time. Moreover, we will explore associations between teachers’ attitudes and their age, sex, years of teaching experience and postal code.
Study 4: Study on the Age-Appropriateness and Acceptability of SE Content
Through the fourth study, we aim to study the age-appropriateness and acceptability of SE content, taking into account scientific evidence on the biological and cognitive sexual and gender development of children and young people, as well as stakeholder perceptions of age-appropriate SE content (RO4).
Study 4.1: Desk Study
First, a desk study will be conducted to establish what is known, from empirical studies, about sexual development of children and young people, by reviewing leading journals on the literature on theories and frameworks on sexual development of people aged 0–18. This literature review will be complemented by online interviews with international experts on the sexual development of children and young people.
Study 4.2: Conjoint Experiment
Second, to look into what the Belgian population perceives as age-appropriate and acceptable SE, we will conduct a conjoint experiment integrated in the population-based study (Study 2.1). People’s opinions on the acceptability of SE at school are likely based on several dimensions (or attributes) of SE: (1) the perceived age-appropriateness of SE, (2) the SE topicand (3) the SE provider (parent, teacher or other). Respondents will be presented with vignettes that describe real-life situations in which each dimension is experimentally alternated. This allows us to estimate the causal effect of each dimension separately on people’s opinions and assess perceptions of age-appropriateness of SE in combination with topics and SE providers. The findings on age-appropriateness from the conjoint experiment will be triangulated with findings on this topics from the serial focus group discussions (Study 2.2).
Study 4.3: Modified Delphi Study
Third, to explore pathways towards mutual understanding and the acceptability of differing viewpoints on age-appropriate and acceptable SE content, a modified Delphi study will be conducted. Delphi is a methodology that uses expert opinions to come to a consensus on a topic. In this study, we consider young people to be the experts on their lives and needs. A diverse group of Flemish young people (in terms of sexual and gender orientation and social, cultural and economic background) will be recruited, as well as a number of experts. The panel will discuss the results of Studies 4.1 and 4.2. Through a series of synchronous sessions, and intermediate asynchronous input, we will discuss age-appropriate SE while also reflecting on societal acceptability.
Study 5: Complex System Mapping of Polarisation Regarding (Aspects of) SE in Flanders
Finally, we will study polarisation regarding SE in the Flemish community as a complex system. Complex systems offer a lens through which to understand the intricate and evolving nature of polarisation regarding SE. It investigates how relationships between a system’s parts give rise to its collective behaviors and how the system interacts and forms relationships with its environment. Using the data from Studies 1–4, we will draft a causal loop diagram (CLD) on polarisation regarding SE in the Flemish community. A CLD is a complex systems tool that provides language to describe the complexity of problems beyond isolated cause-and-effect relationships and allows to make our understanding of the interrelationships within a system’s structure more explicit (de Pinho, 2015). CLDs show how different variables in a system affect each other through positive and negative feedback loops, often resulting in unanticipated events.
Study Populations and Recruitment Approaches
As each sub-study serves a different purpose and uses various methods, we will implement specific recruitment strategies for each phase of the study.
Recruitment Stakeholder Mapping (Study 1.2)
Given the sensitivity of the topic and the likely reluctance of organisations opposing (aspects of) SE to participate, we will adopt a direct, transparent, and respectful recruitment approach. An experienced post-doctoral researcher with expertise in qualitative methods and stakeholder engagement will lead the process, ensuring careful navigation of complex dynamics and the development of trust with participants.
Recruitment Protest Survey (Study 1.3)
We follow the standardised sampling procedure for protest surveys developed by Walgrave & Verhulst (2011). This approach guarantees an equal likelihood for each protester to be selected. For this standardised procedure, a clear role division is essential for the researchers involved: ‘pointers’ select the protesters on the one hand and ‘interviewers’ approach the protesters on the other hand. It is important that interviewers do not self-select protesters to approach, as this may lead to selection bias. Depending on the type of demonstration (moving or static demonstration, on an avenue or square) different methods will be developed for selecting every n-th protester on every n-th row or shell.
Recruitment Probability-Based Survey (Study 2.1)
The recruitment for the probability-based survey will happen through The Social Study. The panel, which has already been recruited at the start of our project, is based on a probability sample drawn from The Belgian National Register of Natural Persons (The Social Study, 2024). To obtain the random sample, a stratified, two-stage cluster design was applied, where (sub-)municipalities (NIS6) were the primary sampling units and residents the secondary sampling units.
Recruitment Serial Focus Groups (Study 2.2)
We aim to organise focus group discussions with respondents matching attitudinal profiles identified via the population-based survey (Study 2.1). To support this, we will collaborate with organisations aligned with the study to identify trusted gatekeepers within diverse communities. These gatekeepers will help tailor recruitment strategies so that they are sensitive to the specific needs and identities within each group, with careful attention to intersectionality, and develop safe spaces in which participants feel free to speak their minds.
Recruitment Q-Methodology Study (Study 3.2)
For the Q-study, we will recruit between 20 and 50 teachers through the networks of partners in the national guidance committee, as well as other stakeholders identified during the stakeholder mapping phase (Study 1). While primarily focusing on teachers who hold strong views — both in favour of and against (aspects of) SE — we will also aim to recruit a diverse group of SE teachers (levels of experience, primary and secondary school, urban and rural setting, diverse gender and ethnic background).
Recruitment Focus Group Discussions (FDGs) With Teachers and Interviews With School Directors (Study 3.3)
For FGDs with teachers and interviews with school directors, we aim to recruit between 8–10 schools across Flanders and Brussels that have experienced some sort of resistance against or conflict related to SE in the recent past. Selection will ensure a diversity in terms of school level (primary and secondary), geographic location (urban vs. rural), school network (official vs. free education), and socio-economic context, as measured by the OKI (Education Opportunity Deprivation Indicator). Within each school, we will recruit 5–8 teachers responsible for achieving educational and developmental goals related to relationships and sexuality. The recruitment of schools will primarily go through Flemish educational umbrella organizations 2 and the Department of Education and Training of the Flemish Government, as well as through the established network of teachers who have been recruited for the Q Study.
Recruitment Opt-In Panel Survey of Teachers (Study 3.4)
Teacher Tapp users receive daily, optional surveys via the app, which they can complete at their convenience. As participation is voluntary and self-selected, the sample represents an opt-in, non-probability group of teachers. Based on current usage, we expect around 1,100 respondents per question, diverse in age, teaching experience, and gender.
Recruitment Modified Delphi Study (Study 4.3)
To recruit the panel of young people for the Delphi study, we will collaborate with the youth organisationd and with organisations working with specific groups of young people to ensure a diverse composition of the panel (in terms of sexual and gender orientation and social, cultural and economic background). We aim to recruit 8–10 young people. The panel will be complemented with experts on sexual development, child development and health promotion.
Data Analysis
Each part of the study employs distinct data analysis methods, yet the overall approach remains integrative. Insights from earlier and concurrent research stages inform and enrich subsequent phases, creating a cumulative understanding (see Figure 1). The project concludes with a complex systems mapping, bringing together all components in a final synthesis. Overview of Methodological Approach
Content and Discourse Analysis (Study 1.1 and 1.2)
Content retrieved from stakeholders’ most-used (social) media channels and interviews will be analysed using inductive-relational content analysis and a thematic analysis in NVivo to code textual and visual data. By means of critical discourse analysis we will further examine emotional tone and underlying mental models in each actor’s narrative.
Quantitative Data-Analysis of Survey Data (Study 1.3, 2.1, 3.4 and 4.2)
The data collected through The Social Study and the protest survey will be analysed using structural equation modeling to map determinants and consequences of support and opposition against SE. Latent profile analysis will be applied to detect attitudinal profiles within the population—ranging from support to opposition, as well as mixed or ambivalent views. The conjoint experiment data will be analysed by calculating the Average Marginal Component Effect (AMCE), indicating how much the acceptability of SE would change on average if one of the SE dimensions (learner age, learner gender, SE topic, provider gender and provider role) were replaced with a different level of the same dimension.
To analyse the Teacher Tapp data, longitudinal statistical analyses will be conducted to examine how attitudes and experiences of teachers concerning SE evolve over time. Moreover, we will explore how teachers’ attitudes vary according to educational context, school level, teacher characteristics, and geographic location.
Content and Thematic Analysis (Study 2.2 and 3.3)
Focus group discussions will be audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using NVivo through inductive-relational content analysis. Thematic analysis will also be applied to identify key patterns and insights across the data.
Q-Analysis (Study 3.2)
Q-sort rankings from teachers will be imported into KADE, a specialised Q-methodology software. Using Principal Component Analysis with varimax rotation, the software will extract shared patterns in viewpoints. These quantitative results will be interpreted alongside qualitative interview data to identify and describe meaningful clusters of perspectives.
Complex System Mapping (Study 5)
In order to study polarization around SE as a complex system, we will develop a causal loop diagram (CLD). This will be done through analyses of data collected in studies 1 to 4. The combined data of these studies (including scientific literature, quantitative datasets, interview transcripts, data from social media), will be coded and cause-and-effect statements will be extracted, following the manual of de Pinho (2015). These will form the basis for an initial CLD. We will explore the use of automation in this process. The process of revising, finetuning and validating the CLD will be done in a workshop with the guidance committees.
Ethics
As we acknowledge the sensitive nature of this study on SE, comprehensive measures will be implemented to address both formal and relational ethical dimensions. Firstly, ethical clearance from KU Leuven’s Social and Societal Ethics Committee will be obtained for each sub-study. Secondly, respondents will be approached in an ethical and transparent manner. They will be informed about the study’s research aims and planned analyses to explicitly confirm their voluntary willingness to participate. Once participants informally agree to take part, they will receive detailed information sheets and consent forms for the FGDs, interviews, and Q-study. Audio recordings of FGDs and in-depth interviews will only occur after participants have signed the consent forms. Furthermore, respondents will be clearly informed that their participation is voluntary and that they can withdraw at any point. Thirdly, data protection measures will be implemented to ensure both the safety of the data and the privacy of respondents, in compliance with all relevant GDPR regulations. Qualitative data gathered from interviews and FGDs will be pseudonymised. Audio recordings from the qualitative data collection will be deleted after transcription. Quantitative survey data will not include any identifiable information. For all datasets, we will create a README file containing metadata that provides background information about the dataset. After 4 years, qualitative datasets will be stored in KU Leuven’s institutional research data repository (RDR). The probability-based survey data will be stored in the SODHA archive in accordance with TSS guidelines. All research data retrieved through this project will be stored in password-protected Teams-folders, accessible only by the research team. In line with KU Leuven guidelines, we will retain the data for a period of minimum 10 years. Fourthly, as SE is a sensitive topic and the target of well-organised opposition movements, this can have consequences on the online and physical safety of researchers. We will therefore adhere strictly to KU Leuven’s safety protocols and, if necessary, develop additional measures to ensure researcher safety throughout the project.
Rigor
The rigor of this study has been optimised through multiple methodological approaches, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the polarisation regarding SE in Belgium. The research design incorporates both an in-depth and in-width investigation, employing a diverse range of data collection methods and analytical techniques. First, the study capitalises on the complementary strengths of qualitative and quantitative research methods, enhancing its ability to capture the phenomenon in its entirety and develop a complete understanding. Second, each successive phase of the study is refined by leveraging accumulated knowledge from previous and concurrent research phases, allowing for continuous improvement and adaptation. Third, the project is a team effort involving researchers from various disciplines. All sub-studies are co-organised, and analyses are conducted by multiple researchers and presented to the national and international guidance committee, mitigating potential biases in the research process. The involvement of multiple analysts is structured in a collaborative and reflexive manner. This approach aims to achieve a richer interpretation of meanings rather than striving for consensus, enhancing the depth and nuance of the findings. Additionally, the researchers are explicit about their positionality. Continuous reflexivity will be embedded throughout the study to ensure transparency and mitigate bias. A living positionality statement will be developed and updated at key stages of the research process. Reflexive research journals will be used to document emotional responses, ethical dilemmas, and decisions.
This multi-faceted approach to research design and execution ensures a high level of rigor, enhancing the validity and reliability of the study’s findings while providing a nuanced understanding of the complex phenomenon under investigation. The culmination of these methodological approaches is the creation of a complex system mapping, providing a comprehensive visual representation of the polarisation process in SE.
Conclusion
The project will make substantial empirical contributions to the field, which has largely been dominated by political and historical analyses of the anti-gender movement. The combination of empirical data at population level with extensive qualitative research allows to study polarisation dynamics at societal and school levels. Furthermore, the complex systems lens studies the issue of polarisation as a whole with attention to interconnectedness and feedback loops leading to a comprehensive and fundamental understanding of the issue.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
We thank the Advisory Board of the project for their valuable input in designing the study.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research is funded by an internal KU Leuven Grant (C2M/24/067) and a Research Foundation Flanders grant (G062225N).
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.