We investigate attitudes toward the EU of a sample of students enrolled in a German university by using a mixed-methods data design. We conducted an online survey among students at the University of Göttingen (N=730) and asked them closed questions on the EU enlargement, the allocation of authority at the EU level, the way democracy works at the EU level, and an open question on their wish for the future of the EU. We then ran a latent class analysis of the recoded answer categories from the open question and of our set of closed questions. Our three-class solution highlights variation in support for the EU among students. Indeed, while the vast majority of the respondents take highly supportive attitudes towards the EU, we can distinguish between ‘Integrationists’ (in favour of pursuing the EU integration project; 68% of the sample), ‘Critical Europeanists’ (supportive of the EU but dissatisfied with the way democracy works at the EU level; 20.50% of the sample) and ‘Pessimist Europeanists’ (supportive of the EU but afraid of the implosion of the EU; 11% of the sample). Our study highlights the importance of the use of non-standardised measures and mixed-methods data collection for understanding citizens’ attitudes towards the EU in a more nuanced way.
We investigate the mindsets on the EU of students enrolled in a German university. We conducted an online survey among students of a German university (N=730) and asked them closed questions on the EU enlargement, the allocation of authority at the EU level, the way democracy works at the EU level and an open question on their wish for the future of the EU. We then ran a latent class analysis of the recoded answer categories from the open question and of our set of closed questions. Our three-class solution highlights variation in support of the EU among students. Indeed, while the vast majority of the respondents show highly supportive attitudes toward the EU, we can distinguish between “Integrationists” (in favour of pursuing the EU integration project; 68% of the sample), “Critical Europeanists” (supportive of the EU but dissatisfied with the way democracy works at the EU level; 20,50% of the sample) and “Pessimist Europeanists” (supportive of the EU but afraid of the implosion of the EU; 11% of the sample). A further analysis of the narratives provided by members of each class to the open question enables us to shed light on variation within each latent class. In particular, we find variation (1) in the dimensions and policies the EU should further integrate according to the Europeanists, (2) in the types of EU institutions to be further democratised and strategies to improve the democratisation of the EU regime according to the Critical Europeanists and (3) in strategies the EU should follow to avoid its implosion according to the Pessimist Europeanists. Our study highlights the importance of the use of non-standardised measures and mixed-methods data collection for grasping citizens´ mindset on the EU in its multidimensionality and complexity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.