Youth Political Consumerism: Expression, Discussion & Social Media Antecedents

• In Event: Political Communication Virtual Poster Session
  In Virtual Poster Session: Political Communication Virtual Poster Session II

Abstract

Previous empirical research on political consumerism primarily focused on its conceptualization (Copeland, 2014; Stolle et al., 2005), and the influence of structural and psychological predictors (e.g., income, education, or political trust and efficacy. For a review see Copeland & Boulianne, 2020). Less explored remains the link between communicative antecedents and political consumerism behavior among younger generations.
Theory of lifestyle politics demonstrates younger people shape their meaning system around the immediate social networks, personal beliefs and values, which facilitates detachment with conventional institutional politics. Social Media and ICTs introduce new ways for people to interact with each other and to shape novel civic engagement practices (Ito, 2008), which can channel one’s personal expression into large-scale political actions (Bennett, 2003). According to the O-S-O-R model proposed by the political communication scholars (Cho et al., 2009; Jung et al., 2011), media exposure variables exert their influence on people’s civic participation via the communication process, such as political expression and political discussion (Gil de Zuniga et al., 2014)
Against this backdrop, it’s important to theorize the link between communicative digital media use and political consumerism, where only a handful of studies have investigated some of the potential influences of general digital media use on political consumerism (e.g. Becker & Copeland,2016; Kelm & Dohle2014).
Building on this line of research, the contribution of the current study is twofold: (1) This is the first study focusing on political consumerism behavior among the young citizens aged between 18-36 years old in U.S.; (2) We specifically examine the role of online and social media political expression and political discussion in predicting political consumerism modeling a causal theoretical structure relying on a US representative two-wave survey panel data.
We assume direct effects of social media expression and online political discussion on political consumerism, and indirect influences of online, social media and WhatsApp news use on political consumerism via social media political expression and online political discussion. Findings suggest that this O-S-O-R theoretical causal model explains well the paths and antecedents for young people to engage in political consumerism behavior (Cross-sectional: χ2 = 7.76; df = 3; p = .051; RMSEA = 0.060, CFI = 0.994, TLI = 0.976, SRMR = .016; Lagged: χ2 = 3.43; df = 3; p = .33; RMSEA = 0.041, CFI = 0.997, TLI = 0.989, SRMR = .021; Autoregressive: χ2 = 6.25; df = 3; p = .10; RMSEA = 0.112, CFI = 0.979, TLI = 0.917, SRMR = .0031). Second, social media expression (Lagged: β = .320, p = .033) and online political discussion (Cross-sectional: β = .275, p < .001; Lagged: β = .432, p < .01; Autoregressive: β = .343, p < .05) are positively associated with political consumerism. Third, political discussion mediates the influence of WhatsApp news use on political consumerism (Cross-sectional: β = .04, p < .05; Lagged: β = .11, p < .05).
Generally, the results are aligned with the O-S-O-R model that communication activities as discussion online will mediate the influence of media consumption on political participation (Cho, 2009). Young people get news information about public affairs, political institutions, government, etc, which in turn fuel further political expression and discussion and trigger political participatory behaviors (McLeod et al., Scheufele, 1999; Skoric et al., 2016). The interpersonal communication process provide opportunity for the young people to gain more political knowledge and understanding about political issues issue. Furthermore, these communicative antecedents mobilize younger citizens to take political actions (Eveland, 2004; Scheufele, 2002; Robinson & Levy, 1986).
The study also discusses several limitations ranging from model fitting differences, to sampling retention issues between waves (37%), and other theoretical issues such as key differences between buycotting and boycotting in which boycotting political participation resembles traditional high-resource, high-engagement activity than buycotting (e.g. Copeland, 2014; Ward & de Vreese, 2011). The study also reflects on some potential lines for scholarship to move forward. For instance, future studies should examine the antecedents to explain nuances in political consumerism behavior such buycotters, boycotters and dualcotters (Copeland, 2014); likewise, scholars should discern the effects of different political communication attributes such as political discussion with homogeneous versus heterogeneous networks (Valenzuela et al., 2012). All in all, given the historic and consistent deficit found in youth political activities’ engagement in the US, this study represents a modest but important step in clarifying communicative antecedents that lead young Americans to engage in political consumerism.

Authors

• Zicheng Cheng, Pennsylvania State University

• Bingbing Zhang, Pennsylvania State University

• Homero Gil de Zúñiga, University of Salamanca / Pennsylvania State University