What do adolescents think about political ideologies? - The investigation of socialization effects Nóra Miklós, Dóra Hamrák, Balázs Fehér, Ágnes Szabó.

What do adolescents think about political ideologies?

- The investigation of socialization effects

Nóra Miklós, Dóra Hamrák, Balázs Fehér, Ágnes Szabó

Research of the Political Ideology Lab

Interdisciplinary approach of ideologies in Central and Eastern Europe

Methodological and thematical variety: from as many angles as possible (Psychology, Sociology and Political Science)

Adolescents and PoliticsWhy them? adolescents’ concept of ideologies – how stable are they and what kind of factors contribute in changing them?

Gustaffson (1987): parents, peers, school-mates, teachers, mass media and other different communities are all socializational mediators

1. Institutional influences (schools)

Theoretical introduction

Theoretical introduction

2. Peer influences

Sample

• 228 adolescents (17-18-year-old)• 3 types of high schools from Budapest

Method

• Timing: Spring, 2011• Questionnaire:

•Five Words Association Method

•Content analysis (Züll, Scholz & Schmitt, 2010)

•9 main categories

Results – General findings

• 1604 classifiable associations– 816 related to the Right– 753 related to the Left

• Most frequent: – Forms and methods of political activity (22,3%)– Political actors (14,5%)– Affective contents (10,75%)

• Substantial differences between Left and Right

Results – General findings II.

BUT they are not absolute counterpoints!

Results – The structure of the representation

Conclusions #1 – The structure

• Symbolic, limited core• Diverse, extended peripheral ring

BUT

Adolescents DO have social representation about political ideologies!

Results – Differences between schools

vocational schools

high schools

Conclusions #2 – School types

• Vocational schools – unstable, diverse representation at both wings

• Right-wing: more remarkable differences elite (+ordinary high schools): more stable + greater

consensus• Similarity between the 2 high schools: Jaccard-index

R: J=21% (N=70) L: J=21% (N=56)

Sharp cleavage between vocational and high schools!

Discussion

Different socializational atmospheres teacherspeerssocio-economic status of the familyattitude and vision of the school

The representation of the Left- and Right-wing starts to develop in different ways!

A fruitful prospective direction: Network-analysis of the classes

The vocational school

• Density: .703 (168 connections); N=16

The common high school

• Density: .563 (453 connections); N=29

The elite high school

• Density: .570 (564 connections); N=32

Are friends similar in political orientation?

Left-Right semantic differential scale with open-ended question

People often speak about Left-Wing and Right-Wing in politics. Where do you place yourself on this scale?

Left-wing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Right-wing

Please, explain your choice in a few words!

Some interesting cliques„not interested”; „neutral”

Vocational school classN=21

„FIDESZ”; „Right-wing”; „belonged to the Right”; „need for order”

Some interesting cliques„FIDESZ”; „Christianity”; „Viktor Orbán”; „sympathy”

Common high school classN=71

„do not talk about it”; „lack of interest”; „no answer”

Some interesting cliques„neutral”; „no answer”; „change, against conservatism and Right-wing”

Elite high school classN=105

„liberalism, Left is better, because of parents”; „neutral”; „do not know, hate politics”

Limitations and future plans

• Expansion of the sample• The problem of the frequency and rank• More complex network analysis• Involving parents• Focus groups

[email protected]

Thank you for your attention!

THE REPRESENTATION OF ELITE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS ABOUT THE RIGHT

High Frequency Low Rank

Low Rank

Political actors (25%. 2.1)References to political activity

(38%. 2.9)

Ideological contents (5%. 2.7)Societal groups (3%. 2.8)

High Rank

Societal values (9%. 3.2)Symbolic contents (6%. 3)Time and Space (2%. 3)

Affective contents (10%. 3.4)

THE REPRESENTATION OF COMMON HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS ABOUT THE RIGHT

High Frequency Low Rank

Low Rank Political actors (25%. 2.3)

Ideological contents (4%. 2)Societal values (11%. 2.8)Time and Space (11%. 2.8)

Affective contents (11%. 2.9)

High Rank

References to political activity (36%. 3)

Symbolic contents (9%. 3.2)Societal groups (3%. 3.4)

THE REPRESENTATION OF VOCATIONAL SCHOOL STUDENTS ABOUT THE RIGHT

High Frequency Low Rank

Low rank

Ideological contents (5%. 2.7)Symbolic contents (14%. 2.9)

Time and Space (3%. 2.5)Societal groups (4%. 2.8)Political actors (18%. 2.8)

Affective contents (17%. 2.8)

High rank References to political activity (31%. 3.1)

Societal values (11%. 3.2)

THE REPRESENTATION OF ELITE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS ABOUT THE LEFT

High Frequency Low Rank

Low Rank

Ideological contents (16%. 2.3)Symbolic contents (9%. 2.7)Time and Space (13%. 2.7)Political actors (19%. 2.1)

High Rank

References to political activity (30%. 3)

Societal values(5%. 3.7)Societal groups (17%. 3.3)Affective contents (15%. 3)

THE REPRESENTATION OF COMMON HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS ABOUT THE LEFT

High Frequency Low Rank

Low RankIdeological contents (25%. 2.1)

Political actors (20%. 2.4)Societal values (2%. 2.4)

Affective contents (15%. 2.9)

High Rank

Political actors (36%. 3)References to political activity

(29%. 3.1)

Societal groups (5%. 3)Time and Space (7%. 3.1)

HE REPRESENTATION OF VOCATIONAL SCHOOL STUDENTS ABOUT THE LEFT

High Frequency Low Rank

Low Rank Affective contents (29%. 2.8)Ideological contents (6%. 2.9)

Time and Space (3%. 2.5)Political actors (18%. 2.4)

High RankReferences to political activity

(26%. 3.1)

Societal values (3%. 3.7)Symbolic contents (12%. 3.3)

Societal groups (2%. 3.8)