How Children Understand Civic Actions

Abstract

The development of civically engaged citizens is vital for democratic societies. Although several studies have explored children and adolescents' conceptualizations of civic engagement, less is known about youths' understanding of the individual skills and attributes best suited for civic action. The current study utilized a Q-sort methodology to explore the types of character strengths children and adolescents (n = 87; M age = 13, 9-19, 52% female) assigned to people who engage in different types of civic activities. Participants sorted 12 character strengths (amazed, creative, forgiving, futureminded, generous, grateful, humble, joyful, leader, purposeful, responsible, and thrifty) into five categories ranging from "most like" to "least like" based on their perceptions of individuals engaged in four distinct civic activities: volunteering, voting, protesting, and engaging in environmental or conservation behaviors. Youth not only differentially applied certain character strengths to individuals engaged in distinct civic activities but also identified a set of character strengths (future-minded, leader, purposeful, and responsible) as core to multiple forms of civic engagement. Results provide new insights into youths' budding conceptualization of the individual characteristics, attributes,

Social values and civic behaviour among youth in Ireland: The influence of social contexts

“…In particular, research suggests that parent, school, peer and community contexts exert paramount effects on youth's civic development due to their close relationship with the young person (Rossi et al., 2016; Wilkenfeld et al., 2010; Zaff et al., 2011). However, understanding about the nature of the relationship that exists between individual aspects of these social contexts and youth's civic values and behaviours is still limited (Metzger et al., 2015; Wray-Lake et al., 2016).…”

“…In sum, given its relevance for both social well-being and individual development, greater policy and research interest in promoting youth civic engagement has been called for, with researchers emphasising the importance of generating a greater understanding of the factors that facilitate, or hinder, youth civic engagement in the first instance (Hope and Jagers, 2014; Metzger et al., 2015; Sam et al., 2019). However, in comparison to the adult literature base, a dearth of research has focused on assessing the development of social responsibility and civic participation among adolescents (Lenzi et al., 2014; Luengo-Kanacri et al., 2016).…”

Adolescents' Civic Engagement: Concordant and Longitudinal Associations Among Civic Beliefs and Civic Involvement

“…First, previous research combined youth standard and social movement political behavior into a single measure rather than separating these disparate types of youth political involvement. Adolescents distinguish between social movement activities such as protesting from more mainstream, standard forms of political involvement in both their civic judgments (Metzger & Ferris, 2013) and their views of civic actors engaged in standard or social movement involvement (Metzger, Syvertsen, Oosterhoof, Babskie, & Wray-Lake, 2016). Similarly, these two forms of political engagement have been distinguished in multiple other studies of youth civic involvement (e.g., Diemer & Rapa, 2016;Torney-Purta, Lehmann, Oswald, & Schulz, 2001).…”

Examining Character Structure and Function Across Childhood and Adolescence

“…Given theory and some empirical work on each of these strengths at various ages, the strengths included in the current study are believed to be qualities youth are capable of understanding and displaying (e.g., Park & Peterson, ; Weber et al., ). Leadership, teamwork, gratitude, perseverance, future orientation, and optimism have been reliably assessed in youth as young as 10 (Park & Peterson, ; Weber et al., ), and Q‐sort methodology has suggested that youth are capable of understanding these strengths (Metzger et al., ). Although there are fewer established measures or empirical studies of respect, thrift, and responsibility, these strengths are commonly included in character education programs designed for elementary through high school ages (e.g., Boy Scouts of America, ).…”

“…These intrapersonal strengths are positively associated with indicators of positive youth development including academic performance (Park et al., ), self‐efficacy (Ruch, Weber, Park, & Peterson, ), and self‐regulation (Schmid, Phelps, & Lerner, ). Intrapersonal strengths may also enable youth to positively contribute to their contexts, as these strengths allow youth to understand and strategically plan civic actions that benefit society (Metzger, Syvertsen, Oosterhoff, Babskie, & Wray‐Lake, ).…”