Who crosses the norms? Predictors of the readiness for non‐normative political participation among adolescents

Abstract

This study investigated whether adolescents' readiness for non-normative political participation (i.e., readiness to confront social rules for political reasons) was predicted by their interpersonal problems (with parents, teachers, and classmates), low optimism, and political beliefs (political self-efficacy and distrust in public institutions). A structural equation model using two-wave longitudinal data from Czech high school students (N = 768; 54% females; age range at T1 = 14-17, M = 15.97; T2 data collected 1.5 years later) showed that the changes in adolescents' readiness for non-normative participation were predicted by their lower institutional trust. Interpersonal relationships or optimism had no cross-sectional or longitudinal effect on the readiness for non-normative participation. These results suggest that the main source of adolescents' readiness for non-normative political actions lies in their political beliefs, while the effect of adolescents' interpersonal problems is less clear.Adolescence is characterized by the development of political orientation, including attitudes toward political participation (Eckstein, Noack, & Gniewosz, 2012). Political participation can encompass many forms (e.g., Ekman & Amnå, 2012). One line of prior research focused on two specific forms of political participation, normative and non-normative. While normative participation refers to legitimate, socially accepted forms of political expression (e.g., voting), non-normative participation encompasses more radical activities, which include confronting the system, violating social rules, and being potentially violent, such as participating in illegal protests or demonstrations (

Meaning-in-Life Profiles among Chinese Late Adolescents: Associations with Readiness for Political Participation

“…Participants’ readiness for participating in political actions was measured by 11 items derived from the studies of Šerek, Machackova, and Macek [ 42 ], as well as Dahl and van Zalk [ 32 ]. Participants reported on their likelihood of taking seven normative political actions (e.g., “sign a petition”) and four non-normative political actions (e.g., “together with others, forcibly occupy some administrative or governmental building”) when they think something bad is happening in society using a 6-point scale (1 = definitely will not; 6 = definitely will).…”

“…These behaviors are usually regarded as socially acceptable and developmentally appropriate for youth [ 41 ]. In contrast, non-normative political participation includes illegal and probably radical actions, such as violent protest and forcibly occupying a government institute [ 42 ]. These political actions are socially controversial.…”

“…These political actions are socially controversial. They likely present risks to young people’s personal safety and psychological well-being [ 43 ] and probably indicate a problematic developmental experience [ 42 ]. Therefore, late adolescents with meaning achievement may opt for normative political participation, while those with meaning moratorium may opt for non-normative political participation more than those with other statuses.…”

The relationship between the type of adolescents’ individual personality orientation and characteristics of their social engagement

“…Было установлено, что межличностные отношения или оптимизм не оказывают прямого влияния на готовность к участию в социальных событиях. Основным источником готовности подростков к политическим действиям являются их личные политические убеждения [29].…”

Risky Politics? Associations Between Adolescent Risk Preference and Political Engagement

“…One way that adolescents may experience risk while expressing positive contributions to society and contributing to personal growth is through political activities (Ekman & Amnå, 2012;Santos & Van Daalen, 2018;Šerek, Machackova, & Macek, 2018;Watts & Flanagan, 2007).…”