Abstract
Although sweeping statements about the effect of television viewing on political participation could still be found in the literature in the 1990s, it is now commonly held that the effect of television should be studied as a multidimensional phenomenon. Not only the time spent watching television but also the kinds of programs being watched and even the preference for particular stations are assumed to have an effect. In this article, we report on a survey among 6,330 Belgian adolescents allowing for a comprehensive analysis of the relationship between various dimensions of television viewing and political participation. We focus on adolescents, because research suggests that the decline in participation levels clearly manifests itself in this age group. The results of the analysis confirm a negative impact of the amount of television viewing, which is partly counterbalanced by a positive impact of a preference for information and for public broadcasting. We discuss the implications of these findings among adolescents for adult participation behavior.
Notes
1Both in the Dutch-speaking and the French-speaking community of the country, the two public broadcasting corporations (VRT and RTBF, respectively) enjoy a solid market share, although this is larger in the Dutch community than in the French community.
Note. Principal component analysis, Promax rotation with Kaiser normalization. Bold represents factor loading greater than 0.40. Source: Belgian Youth Survey 2006 (Hooghe et al., Citation2006), n = 6,330.
2Torney-Purta et al. (2001) provided a strong case for including these social movement-oriented acts in a definition of political participation, as these clearly aim to change social conditions. As this issue is beyond the scope of this article, we simply note that we follow the approach taken by Torney-Purta et al. (Citation2001).
3Questions included, “Who is the president of the European Commission?” (José Manuel Barosso); “What parts does the Belgian federal parliament consist of?” (Chamber and Senate); “Who is the minister of Justice?” (Laurette Onkelinx); “To which party does Guy Verhofstadt belong?” (VLD). Scores of 0 = 40.9%, 1 = 29.2%, 2 = 16.2%, 3 = 9.6%, and 4 = 4.1%.
Note. Entries are column percentages. Self-reported time spent watching television. Source: Belgian Youth Survey 2006 (Hooghe et al., Citation2006), n = 6,330.
Note. Hierachical ordinary least squares regression. Entries are standardized coefficients and explained variance (for Steps 2 and 3: rise in explained variance). Source: Belgian Youth Survey 2006 (Hooghe et al., Citation2006).
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Note. Each respondent could indicate three types, so total % is larger than 100. The “other” program preferences do not load on one of the two dimensions. Source: Belgian Youth Survey 2006 (Hooghe et al., Citation2006).
4Various other operationalizations of the entertainment preference scale have been tested, but none led to significant results in this analysis (results are available from the author).
Note. Preference for television channels in Belgian Youth Survey 2006 (Hooghe et al., Citation2006). Entries are column percentages. Note that respondents could indicate three channels, so that the total percentage may be more than 100.
5One could argue that most adults also have a standardized daily routine, but this will mainly apply to those in full-time employment, which amounts to less than half of the adult population. Among late adolescents, on the other hand, about 98% participates in full-time schooling.