Political efficacy and interest as mediators of expected political participation among Belgian adolescents

Abstract

Citizenship education intends to prepare students to become politically active citizens. However, studies investigating the relationship between citizenship education and political participation have largely neglected the mediating role of political attitudes. This study examines whether political efficacy and political interest are mediators of expected political participation, using the data of the Belgian (Flemish) sample of the ICCS 2016 study. The results indicate that three educational strategies (i.e., classroom discussions, civic learning opportunities, and student participation at school) are positively associated with expected political participation (i.e., institutionalized and noninstitutionalized participation) in a distinct way. A substantial part of this relationship is mediated by political interest and political efficacy. Future research should take this underlying mechanism into account when studying the development of civic engagement amongst adolescents in a school context. The findings of this study call for a broad approach to citizenship education for the development of political attitudes, as well as behavior.

Notes

1 The Belgian (Flemish) sample of the ICCS 2016 dataset was collected by the Centre for Political Research of the University of Leuven. The author is a member of the team responsible for the collection of the data.

2 The Flemish school system is tracked with a cascade system, but only formally from the ninth grade onward (De Groof et al., 2009). Therefore, no tracking variable is included in the analyses.

3 Electoral participation will be disregarded, as the Belgian election system is characterized by compulsory voting and therefore students might not consider this as a voluntary action but rather as an obligation.

4 Contacting an elected official is often listed as more traditional, institutionalized participation. However, although it is directed toward the political sphere, contacting an official is an individual undertaking, usually on a specific issue and characterized by an ad hoc action. Therefore, I do consider it as a form of noninstitutionalized participation in the analyses. The factor analyses conducted by the IEA indicated that two separate scales for political participation should be made from the list of the aforementioned items, labeled “political participation” (i.e., institutionalized participation) and “participation in legal activities” (i.e., noninstitutionalized participation), with contacting an official subdivided among the latter (Schulz et al., 2018b).

5 A comparison between the scale scores of 2016 and 2009 is not included here as the items changed compared to 2009.

6 Both studies use a national sample of the ICCS 2009 data set.

7 The final model was replicated using a two-level structure, accounting for the variance of political participation on the second level, leading to very similar results.

8 In the political efficacy model, this effect is not present. However, the mediation through political efficacy is significant, as well as the total effect size of participation at school on institutionalized participation; see results in Table 6.

9 The indirect paths of classroom discussions on institutionalized participation are not taken into account here, as the direct path and the total relationship is not significant; see Table 4.

10 Model I is just identified; therefore, no fit indices are reported.

11 Also here, the indirect path of classroom discussions on institutionalized participation is not taken into account, as the direct relationship and the total relationship are not significant; see Table 6.

12 The results of these analyses are available on request.