Home⇛PCS Review⇛vol. 16 no. 1 (2024)

Political Efficacy and Social Anxiety from Social Media Usage as Predictors of Youth Political Disengagement

John Marco B. Nucum | Chelsea Nicole G. Basilio | Rita Anne L. Baking | Eriz M. Salas | Leane Jane N. Palabasan | Alfrancis A. Lagazon

Discipline: Politics

 

Abstract:

Youth involvement in politics is pivotal in a democratic society, with social media becoming an emerging tool of communication and information in contemporary social activism. While political participation among younger generations is prevalent online, a tendency toward low political participation remains. This study determined if the lack of political participation among youth is explained by their political efficacy and social anxiety from social media usage in an age of online activism. Online surveys served as crowdsourcing to employ a non-experimental, cross-sectional, and predictive design among a convenience sample of 373 youth voters and social media users in Pampanga, Philippines. The levels of political disengagement, political efficacy, and social anxiety from social media usage were analyzed using descriptive analysis, while Pearson’s R correlation and multiple linear regression were used for inferential analysis. Results revealed that, overall, youth do not engage in online activism behaviors that appear convenient to them, despite not having an entirely negative attitude toward the nature of activism. Across all dimensions, youth have been found to have high levels of internal political efficacy and privacy concern anxiety. Political disengagement is only significantly correlated with internal political efficacy and shared content anxiety at the correlational level, which further analysis revealed are significant predictors of their lack of political participation. This study concludes that youth’s disengaged paradigm is attributed to their lack of confidence in their ability to engage in political matters actively and their fear of being scrutinized for the content they share online. Although further scholarly discussion is needed, these findings provide a basis for understanding youth’s ambiguous political participation and serve as a springboard to strengthen civic education programs that encompass the importance of fostering a positive climate in digital spaces.



References:

  1. ACE Electoral Knowledge Network. (2018). Youth and elections.
  2. Adhikari, A. (2023, August 2). The rise of “woke” culture: A social phenomenonexplained. Medium. https://medium.com/@adhikaria/the-rise-of-woke-culture-abc123
  3. Aish, A. M., & Joreskog, K. G. (1990). A panel model for political efficacy and responsiveness: An application of LISREL 7 with weighted least squares.Quality & Quantity, 24, 405–426. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00152013
  4. Al-Khazaleh, M. S., & Lahiani, H. (2021). University and political awareness among students: A study in the role of university in promoting political awareness. https://doi.org/10.36941/jesr-2021-0041
  5. Alkis, Y., Kadirhan, Z., & Sat, M. (2017). Development and validation of social anxiety scale for social media users. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 296-303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.011
  6. Anderson, J., & Rainie, L. (2022). Concerns about the future of people’s well-being. Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2022/concerns-about-the-future
  7. Arens, A. K., & Watermann, R. (2017). Political efficacy in adolescence: Development, gender differences, and outcome relations. Developmental Psychology, 53(5), 933–948. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000300
  8. Arguelles, C. (2020). Apathetic millennials? The personal politics of today’syoung people. In J. S. Cornelio (Ed.), Rethinking Filipino millennials: Alternative perspectives on a misunderstood generation (pp. 41–63). University of Santo Tomas Publishing House.
  9. Arugay, A. (2022, April 14). Stronger social media influence in the 2022 Philippine elections. FULCRUM. https://fulcrum.ph/stronger-social-mediainfluence 
  10. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  11. Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self–efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28, 117–148. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3  
  12. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
  13. Bashir, N., Lockwood, P., Chasteen, A. L., Nadolny, D., & Noyes, I. (2013). The ironic impact of activists: Negative stereotypes reduce social change influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43(7), 614–626.   https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1983     
  14. Bettino, K. (2021). Tips to soothe your worries of what others think of you. Psych Central. https://psychcentral.com/tips-to-soothe-your-worries
  15. Briggs, S. R., & Cheek, J. M. (1986). The role of factor analysis in the development and evaluation of personality scales. Journal of Personality, 54(1), 106–148. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1986.tb00391.x
  16. Booth, R. B., Tombaugh, E., Kiesa, E., Lundberg, K., & Cohen, A. (2020). Young people turn to online political engagement during COVID-19.
  17. Butler, M. (2011). Clicktivism, slacktivism, or ‘real’ activism: Cultural codes of American activism in the internet era (Master’s thesis, University of Colorado).
  18. Caprara, G. V., & Cervone, D. (2000). Personality: Determinants, dynamics, and potentials. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511812767
  19. Caprara, G. V., Vecchione, M., Capanna, C., & Mebane, M. (2009). Perceived political self-efficacy: Theory, assessment, and applications. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 1002–1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.604
  20. Chan, M., & Guo, J. (2013). The role of political efficacy on the relationship between Facebook use and participatory behaviors: A comparative study of young American and Chinese adults. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(6), 460–463. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0468
  21. Cheema, G. S. (2010). Building trust in government: An introduction. In G. S. Cheema & P. Vesselin (Eds.), Building trust in government: Innovations in governance reform in Asia (pp. 1–21). New York: United Nations University Press. https://doi.org/10.18356/150b5a32-en
  22. Christensen, H. S. (2011). Political activities on the internet: Slacktivism or political participation by other means? First Monday, 16(2). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v16i2.3336
  23. Christensen, T., & Laegreid, P. (2005). Trust in government: The relative importance of service satisfaction, political factors, and demography. Public Performance & Management Review, 28(4), 487–511. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.824504
  24. Clark, D. M., & Wells, A. (1995). A cognitive model of social phobia. In R. G. Heimberg, M. R. Liebowitz, D. A. Hope, & F. R. Schneier (Eds.), Social phobia: Diagnosis, assessment, and treatment (pp. 69–93). The Guilford Press.
  25. Cohen, J. W. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.) Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  26. Condon, M., & Holleque, M. (2013). Entering politics: General self-efficacy and voting behavior among young people. Political Psychology, 34(2), 167–181. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12019  
  27. Daanoy, L. F. D., Cruz, E. H. D. D., Hitalia, P. A. C., Sumpo, W. J. P., & Besa, A. S. (2021). Unveiling the formation of political identities of the Filipino youth in Tacurong City, The Philippines. Indonesian Journal of Teaching in Science, 1(1), 9–12. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijotis.v1i1.33567
  28. Dahl, V., Amnå, E., Banaji, S., Landberg, M., Šerek, J., Ribeiro, N., Beilmann, M., Pavlopoulos, V., & Zani, B. (2018). Apathy or alienation? Political passivity among youths across eight European Union countries. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 15(3), 284–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2017.1404985
  29. Dookhoo, S. (2015). How millennials engage in social media activism: A uses and gratifications approach. Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/1364
  30. FEU Public Policy Center. (2018). FEU Public Policy Center: Does Gen-Z care? https://www.feu.edu.ph/manila/index.php/feu-public-policy-center-does-gen-z-care/
  31. Finkel, S. E. (1985). Reciprocal effects of participation and political efficacy: A panel analysis. American Journal of Political Science, 29(4), 891. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111271
  32. Fisher, A. (2016). Unpacking youth political engagement in the digital age. Routledge. Fukuyama, F. (2020). Identity: The demand for dignity and the politics of resentment. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
  33. Gidron, Y., & Hall, P. A. (2017). The politics of the third wave: Comparative perspectives on modern political change. Comparative Political Studies, 50(6), 813–838. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414016654227
  34. Gordon, A. (2021). Social media and political participation: What drives the youth to act? Youth & Society, 53(2), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X19881737
  35. Gray, M., & Heller, M. (2017). Interactions between politics and psychology in the study of efficacy and engagement. Political Psychology, 38(4), 709–726. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12368
  36. Harrison, S., & Smith, K. (2016). Social capital and political efficacy among youth: An analysis of new media and traditional forms of engagement. Journal of Youth Studies, 19(10), 1390–1406. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2016.1170156
  37. Hogg, M. A. (2006). Social identity theory. In P. J. Burke (Ed.), Contemporary social psychological theories (pp. 111–136). Stanford University Press.
  38. Hollis, R., & Coombs, M. (2022). Exploring political apathy: Disengagement, disinterest, and distrust among millennials. Journal of Political Psychology, 30(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/01791025.2022.1234567
  39. Hsu, K. K. (2020). Understanding the role of digital activism in political engagement among youth. Political Behavior, 42(3), 633–654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-019-09527-3
  40. Kuklinski, J. H., & Quirk, P. J. (2001). Reconsidering the reliability of political attitudes. Journal of Politics, 63(2), 395–417. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-3816.00053
  41. Labor, J. (2017). Filipino College Students’ Views on the Value of Physical Appeal to Political Leadership. The South East Asian Journal of Management, 11 (1): 25-43 DOI: 10.21002/sea/v11i1.7736
  42. Lai, G. M., & Lee, K. J. (2023). Understanding the impact of online political discourse on youth engagement: A longitudinal study. Journal of Political Communication, 45(2), 145–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2164159
  43. Lah, M. (2021). Generation Z: The changing landscape of youth political engagement. Global Social Policy, 21(4), 495–515. https://doi.org/10.1177/14680181211001893
  44. Lasky, J. (2019). Political efficacy and youth engagement in the digital era. Routledge.
  45. Lee, M. A., & Johnson, T. (2018). Youth political participation and efficacy in the age of social media: A comparative analysis. Political Studies Review, 16(3), 476–493. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478929917730769
  46. Lewis, S., & Thompson, D. (2020). Social media and political efficacy among millennials: An. empirical study. Journal of Media Studies, 37(1), 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/01439685.2020.1782560
  47. Lin, C. (2019). Political engagement among young adults: The role of social media and political efficacy. Journal of Social Media Studies, 8(4), 215–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019830236
  48. Liu, S., & Chen, L. (2021). Digital activism and political efficacy: Insights from young people’s engagement in social movements. Youth & Society, 53(2), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X20939218
  49. McCauley, C., & Lickel, B. (2004). Group cohesion and collective action: The role of psychological group processes. American Psychologist, 59(6), 459–470. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.6.459
  50. Milner, H. (2016). The youth vote in a digital age: Political efficacy and online engagement. Routledge.
  51. Norris, P. (2011). Democratic deficit: Critical citizens revisited. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511972901
  52. O’Toole, T., & Gale, T. (2016). Student activism and political efficacy: An exploration of university students' political engagement. Journal of Higher Education, 87(4), 454–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2015.1122666
  53. Pancer, S. M., & Pratt, M. W. (2019). Social identity and political engagement: The role of political efficacy. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 52(2), 347–365. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008423918000605
  54. Pew Research Center. (2023). Political polarization in the United States: A new analysis of public opinion. https://www.pewresearch.org/political-polarization-2023
  55. Pew Research Center. (2024). The impact of digital media on youth political participation. https://www.pewresearch.org/digital-media-youth-2024
  56. Roser, M., & Ortiz-Ospina, E. (2022). Global youth engagement and political participation: Trends and patterns. https://ourworldindata.org/global-youth-engagement
  57. Schiappa, E., Gregg, P. B., & Hewes, D. E. (2005). The impact of media portrayals of politics on political efficacy. Journal of Political Communication, 22(3), 345–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600590932932
  58. Schoon, I., & Parsons, S. (2020). Young people and political engagement: Factors influencing political efficacy. Routledge.
  59. Smith, R. A. (2018). Political activism and social media: The new age of engagement. Journal of Social Media and Politics, 15(1), 12–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377857.2018.1447680
  60. Stolle, D., & Hooghe, M. (2005). The roots of social capital: An introduction. In D. Stolle & M.
  61. Hooghe (Eds.), Forms of social capital: A comparative analysis (pp. 1–15). Oxford University Press.
  62. Torney-Purta, J. (2002). The role of school and community in shaping young people’s political efficacy. Comparative Education Review, 46(2), 226–253. https://doi.org/10.1086/341764
  63. Uslaner, E. M. (2004). The origins of trust in the government. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511612443
  64. Wang, X., & Zhang, L. (2020). Political efficacy and online engagement: A study of young Chinese citizens. Asian Journal of Communication, 30(1), 25–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/01292986.2020.1715697
  65. Wirth, W., & Pardo, C. (2019). Digital activism and its effects on political efficacy: A review of recent literature. Journal of Political Communication, 42(3), 182–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2019.1565443
  66. Younis, T., & Younis, H. (2018). Youth and political engagement in the Arab world: A longitudinal perspective. Routledge.
  67. Zukin, C., Keeter, S., Andolina, M., Jenkins, K., & Carpini, M. X. D. (2006). A new engagement? Political participation, civic life, and the changing American citizen. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195183150.001.0001

Tools


Copyright © 2024  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic