Who Feels They Can Understand and Have an Impact on Political Processes? Socio-demographic Correlates of Political Efficacy in 46 Countries, 1996–2016

IF 1.9 3区 社会学 Q2 COMMUNICATION International Journal of Public Opinion Research Pub Date : 2023-05-09 DOI:10.1093/ijpor/edad013
Jennifer Oser, Fernando Feitosa, Ruth Dassonneville
{"title":"Who Feels They Can Understand and Have an Impact on Political Processes? Socio-demographic Correlates of Political Efficacy in 46 Countries, 1996–2016","authors":"Jennifer Oser, Fernando Feitosa, Ruth Dassonneville","doi":"10.1093/ijpor/edad013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n While recent research has produced robust objective evidence of unequal representation in democracies, there is little evidence about whether this inequality is consistent with individuals’ subjective perceptions of their own political efficacy. To answer this question, we use all available data on political efficacy from the International Social Survey Programme modules for 46 countries (1996–2016) to investigate trends and correlates of external and internal political efficacy. We focus on socio-demographic characteristics that are central to recent literature on unequal representation: gender, education, and income. Our individual-level findings show that education and income are positively associated with both external and internal efficacy while being female is associated with lower levels of internal efficacy but unrelated to external efficacy. We complement these individual-level analyses with a contextual investigation of how descriptive representation contributes to efficacy gaps. Focusing on gender, we show that women feel that they have more of a say in governmental decisions in contexts with a higher level of female representation among elected representatives. We conclude by noting how future research can leverage cross-national data to identify contextual mechanisms that may have an impact upon persistent social gaps in political efficacy across contexts and over time.","PeriodicalId":51480,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Public Opinion Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Public Opinion Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edad013","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

While recent research has produced robust objective evidence of unequal representation in democracies, there is little evidence about whether this inequality is consistent with individuals’ subjective perceptions of their own political efficacy. To answer this question, we use all available data on political efficacy from the International Social Survey Programme modules for 46 countries (1996–2016) to investigate trends and correlates of external and internal political efficacy. We focus on socio-demographic characteristics that are central to recent literature on unequal representation: gender, education, and income. Our individual-level findings show that education and income are positively associated with both external and internal efficacy while being female is associated with lower levels of internal efficacy but unrelated to external efficacy. We complement these individual-level analyses with a contextual investigation of how descriptive representation contributes to efficacy gaps. Focusing on gender, we show that women feel that they have more of a say in governmental decisions in contexts with a higher level of female representation among elected representatives. We conclude by noting how future research can leverage cross-national data to identify contextual mechanisms that may have an impact upon persistent social gaps in political efficacy across contexts and over time.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
谁觉得他们能理解政治进程并对其产生影响?1996-2016年46个国家政治效能的社会人口学相关性
虽然最近的研究提供了民主国家代表权不平等的有力客观证据,但几乎没有证据表明这种不平等是否与个人对自己政治效能的主观看法相一致。为了回答这个问题,我们使用了46个国家(1996年至2016年)国际社会调查计划模块中关于政治效率的所有可用数据来调查外部和内部政治效率的趋势和相关性。我们关注的是社会人口特征,这些特征是最近关于不平等代表性的文献的核心:性别、教育和收入。我们在个人层面的研究结果表明,教育和收入与外部和内部效能均呈正相关,而女性与较低水平的内部效能相关,但与外部效能无关。我们对这些个人水平的分析进行了补充,并对描述性表征如何导致疗效差距进行了背景调查。以性别为重点,我们表明,在民选代表中女性代表比例较高的情况下,女性觉得她们在政府决策中有更多的发言权。最后,我们注意到未来的研究如何利用跨国数据来确定可能对跨背景和随时间持续存在的政治效能社会差距产生影响的背景机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Public Opinion Research welcomes manuscripts that describe: - studies of public opinion that contribute to theory development and testing about political, social and current issues, particularly those that involve comparative analysis; - the role of public opinion polls in political decision making, the development of public policies, electoral behavior, and mass communications; - evaluations of and improvements in the methodology of public opinion surveys.
期刊最新文献
Political Turmoil and Attitude Change Among the Diaspora. The Impact of the 2016 Attempted Military Coup on Homeland Orientation Among Recent Turkish Immigrants in the Netherlands Hasty Generalization as a Source of Misleading Survey Responses The More Sophisticated, the More Biased? Testing a New Measure of Political Sophistication on Biased Information Processing Calling on the Third-party Privacy Control into Algorithmic Governance Framework: Linking Users’ Presumed Influence with Control Agency Theory Misperceptions, Intergroup Prejudice, and the Varied Encounters Between European Citizens and Non-EU Foreigners
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1