Spiral of Rebellion: Conflict Seeking of Democratic Adolescents in Republican Counties

A study of adolescents living in red and blue counties during the 2006 midterm elections shows a striking pattern of Democratic youth thriving in political expression and debate when exposed to Republican ideological climates. Democratic adolescents were more likely to talk with parents and friends about politics, disagree openly, test opinions, and listen to opponents if they lived in Republican counties compared with Democratic youth living in liberal or balanced counties. Compared to Republican youth residing in the same communities, Democratic youth in Republican counties were also more likely to engage in political discussion, to pay attention to news media, and to express confidence in their ability to comprehend campaign issues. The frequency of disagreeing in conversations predicted support for liberal activism. Disagreeing was a particularly strong predictor of supporting liberal activism for youth living in red counties. These findings support the theory—proposed by McDevitt and colleagues in other studies—that young people sometimes express political identities through conflict and disagreement, not because they come to share the views of parents, teachers, or majorities in their communities. The same pattern was not found for Republican youth in Democratic counties during the 2006 elections; they were not more politically expressive when exposed to hostile ideological climates. However, Republican identity (like Democratic identity) correlated with knowledge of the political parties. The results suggest that Democratic identity is frequently expressed in deliberative and conflict-seeking activities, while Republican identity is often grounded in knowledge. Overall, the study suggests the value of peer-centered, critical discussion as a strategy for youth political mobilization. CIRCLE Working Paper 68 www.civicyouth.org ________________________________________________________________________ 2 | P a g e McDevitt An implicit theme of conflict avoidance undergirds theories of how children develop proto-ideological identities. In the family transmission model, the child’s exposure to and dependence on parents facilitate the internalization of deferential orientations such as respect for order, submission to authority, and acceptance of discipline (Barker & Tinnick, 2006; Niemi & Jennings, 1991). The formation of political identity is wrapped up with the family’s need for social cohesion, the parent’s desire to retain leadership as the child enters adolescence, and the child’s need for parent approval (Peterson, 1995). By co-orienting their opinions with those of parents, children learn how to express views without disrupting family expectations for hierarchy in interpersonal exchanges (McLeod & Chaffee, 1972; Olson, 1995; Saphir & Chaffee, 2002). Identity crystallization during adolescence, to a great extent, is a function of surveillance, as youth achieve increased perceptual accuracy in monitoring and taking cues from the ideological climates of families (Jennings, Stoker, & Bowers, 1999; Westholm, 1999) and other developmental contexts (Sears & Valentino, 1996; Youniss, McLellan, Su, & Yates, 1999). Many teenagers are quite capable of rebellion, of course, when identity dispositions previously internalized are subject to critical awareness and possible rejection (Erikson, 1968; Haste & Hogan, 2006). Even so, identity formation as observation and absorption of ideological influences resonates with the many conceptions of adult political behavior grounded in conflict avoidance (McDevitt & Ostrowski, 2009). In political psychology theory, individuals retain cognitive consistency and elude dissonance by opting for participatory modes—such as marking ballots inside voting booths—that do not require public declarations of allegiance (Ulbig & Funk, 1999). In media scholarship, concepts such as selective exposure, attention, and recall emphasize preference for content that reinforces existing beliefs and partisan commitments (Chaffee, Saphir, Graf, Sandvig, & Hahn, 2001; Iyengar & Simon, 2000). In political sociology, “accountability pressure” inherent in social networks implies harmonious identities in ideological expression (Mutz, 2002; Nir, 2008). Scholars of interpersonal communication report that many adults find political conversation in face-to-face settings to be unpleasant, risky, and unrewarding (e.g., Conover, Searing, & Crewe, 2002). In the “spiral of silence,” humans possess a social skin acutely sensitive to opinion climates, and, due to fear of isolation, express contentious views only when they perceive majority support (Hayes, 2007; Noelle-Neumann, 1974, 1979). Normative theories of human development in deliberative democracy, however, require that youth obtain overtly expressive dispositions, including a willingness to speak out in hostile climates (Hess & Ganzler, 2007; McDevitt & Caton-Rosser, 2009; Murphy, 2004). Still, it seems naïve to assert that youth—with political efficacy and identity crystallization not yet realized—might somehow overcome the conflict-avoidant limitations that taint adult identity expression. Here we present a counter-intuitive hypothesis against this pessimistic backdrop of deliberative theory applied to youth development. We propose that adolescents who self identify as Democrats will flourish in expressive and confrontational interaction when they reside in Republican-dominated counties during an election season. We test the rebellion hypothesis with a panel study of high school seniors interviewed before and after midterm elections of 2006. Respondents were exposed to competitive campaigns in 10 states. We matched individual-level panel data with voter turnout records at the county level. This allows us to explore whether relationships between partisan identity (PID) and deliberative dispositions are moderated by proximate ideological climates. In some respects, we anticipate the opposite of the spiral of silence—i.e., a spiral of rebellion. We expect that Democratic adolescents in Republican counties will not only be more politically expressive than Republican youth in the same regions; they will participate more vigorously in deliberative activities compared with Democratic youth in Democratic counties. If our theorizing is valid, conflict seeking in interpersonal political communication should engender motivation for confrontational activism, with this sequence most apparent among blue teenagers in red counties. CIRCLE Working Paper 68 www.civicyouth.org ________________________________________________________________________ 3 | P a g e McDevitt Developmental Provocation We adopt the framework of developmental provocation, whereby political maturation during adolescence is marked by healthy doses of agonism in interpersonal communication and identification with activism. Activities such as initiating conversations on controversial topics, disagreeing with teachers, and confronting parents elicit feedback that allows youth to contemplate options for ideological allegiance. In an initial test of the model, we interviewed adolescents at a middle school in Lubbock, Texas, before and after the 2000 presidential election (McDevitt, 2006). Active reflection on news content predicted frequency of initiating conversations about the campaign. Many parents took offense in this mostly low-income, AngloHispanic community. They warned children that they should be careful when voicing controversial opinions. Children persisted nonetheless—they had been armed with cognitive resources obtained from media. This provocation prompted both admonitions and encouragement from parents. Either way, teenagers benefitted from the feedback, as they were able to compare their opinions with those of parents. A subsequent study on developmental provocation traced influences of civic curricula on conflict seeking among high school juniors and seniors in Florida, Colorado, and Arizona (McDevitt & Ostrowski, 2009). Student-parent dyads were interviewed following the 2002 election season and after the next election cycle, in 2004. Classroom discussions and debates prompted students to discuss politics with parents and friends, but also to openly disagree during the 2002 campaigns. Conflict seeking in interpersonal communication, in turn, predicted support for liberal confrontational activism. Conflict seeking endured as a latent disposition, and became activated during the subsequent election season (2004), when the age range for panel respondents was 19-20. Participation in classroom discussions and debates in 2002 again predicted frequency of voicing disagreement and support for aggressive activism. The empirical bridging of the disposition to disagree with activism support suggests the value of conflict seeking in identity development and identity assertion, at least for liberally inclined youth. The current study includes measures that allow us to look for the same sequence among Republican youth. However, the ideational structure of liberal ideology is perhaps more conducive to conflict seeking during adolescence (McDevitt & Ostrowski, 2009). Post materialism, distrust of authority, and suspicion of institutions, tradition, and power might predispose liberal-minded adolescents to more likely identify with confrontational activism (Stolle, Hooghe, & Micheletti, 2005). Here we seek to replicate findings from the 2002-2004 study, whereby political identity during adolescence is expressed in conflict-seeking communication, and then manifest in support for confrontational activism. Unlike in the previous study, we can observe conflictseeking dynamics against the backdrop of supportive and hostile climates. At issue, theoretically, is the interplay of PID and proximate ideological climate. In contemplating the range of possible outcomes, we think it is useful to consider a typology of contagion/affirmation, integration, and rebellion/differentiation. Contagion/affirmation as an explanation for how adolescents experience PID is suggested by conflict-avoidance themes in prior studies of political behavior and family socialization. In an affirmation scenario, influences from adult role models and adolescent peers constitute ideological contagion. Youth seek affirmation—and avoid conflict/dissonance—by adopting prevailing ideological sentiments. Certainly this dynamic must be at work for many youth, as evident in generation-by-generation reproduction of geopolitical culture in red/blue CIRCLE Working Paper 68 www.civicyouth.org ________________________________________________________________________ 4 | P a g e McDevitt America (Bishop, 2008). Applied to the current study, contagion/affirmation would become manifest in Republican adolescents more likely to express themselves politically when residing in red counties. We would observe Democratic youth as particularly expressive in blue counties. Integration implies socialization advantages for children and adolescents growing up in ideologically diverse communities. Youth are exposed to a pluralism of partisan perspectives; they hear divergent views from teachers, parents, preachers, and peers. An invigorating environment of ideological diversity becomes manifest, as a developmental construct, in youth more likely to be politically engaged in these communities compared to cohorts in red and blue regions. Contagion/affirmation and integration are probably valid conceptions for how PID is experienced by many adolescents in various ideological climates across the United States. However, our prior research on developmental provocation leads us to predict a rebellion dynamic for Democratic youth in Republican counties. A conflict-seeking disposition is implied in how progressives describe the “good citizen,” and how they imagine moral-political growth during adolescence (Watts & Flanagan, 2007). Commitments to social justice, human rights, and institutional reform become meaningful through critical reflection, but also through confrontation. In similar fashion, the perspective of developmental provocation anticipates that PID is expressed through conflict seeking in primary groups. Perhaps more so than with conservative identity, liberal PID is forged in interpersonal communication, in exchanges animated by some degree of ideological tension (McDevitt & Ostrowksi, 2009). While families, classrooms, churches, and peer networks offer opportunities for ideological exchanges, the broader layer of geopolitical climate—when conservative—should enhance the agonistic dispositions of young Democrats. We expect Democratic identity to thrive as an expressive orientation in hostile climates. Manifestations of Conflict Seeking Our modeling of conflict seeking in the context of ideological climate incorporates variables from three areas of electoral engagement: deliberative dispositions, media use/cognition, and partisan/activist identity. Deliberative dispositions. Multiple indicators embody an implicit continuum, from relatively passive, to assertive, to confrontational expression. The continuum reflects the premise that mere exposure to political conversation—while potentially beneficial—requires less effort and ideological conviction than adversarial exchanges. Frequency of conversing about politics with parents and talking about politics with friends constitute our indicators of exposure. Finding oneself caught up in a political conversation is not necessarily a conflict-ridden experience. On the other hand, self-selection to such exchanges—even when conversations are initiated by others—implies some desire to experience ideological tension when the willing discussants are Democratic youth in red counties, or Republican youth in blue counties. We also asked respondents to identity the “greatest influence” on their political beliefs; options were parents, teachers, friends, religion, political parties, and news media. Compared to Republican youth, we expect that Democratic respondents will more likely name friends given our conception of liberal identity as an expressive orientation. Friendship networks would be highly valued for liberal youth curious about viewpoints beyond their immediate families. Moving beyond exposure, initiating conversations represents an assertive orientation. Bringing up politics suggests a desire for conflict when youth live in hostile climates. Other indicators of active engagement include the testing of personal opinions in conversation and a willingness to listen to partisan opponents. Efforts to refine opinions, and to hear out opponents, CIRCLE Working Paper 68 www.civicyouth.org ________________________________________________________________________ 5 | P a g e McDevitt reflect normative ideals of youth development in deliberative democracy (McDevitt & Kiousis, 2006). They also embody the Eriksonian conception of moral-political maturation proceeding through value clarification. Still another indicator of assertive communication is active participation in classroom discussions when teachers invite this type of interaction. Further along the continuum, conflict seeking is directly evident in activities such as a willingness to openly disagree in conversations, and confronting parents about their ideological commitments. Media use/cognition. Assertive and confrontational expression implies a need for some kind of armory for political cognition. We deploy indicators for news media attention and knowledge of political parties. A third variable—comprehension efficacy—represents the perceived capacity to understand the significance of political events and issues covered by media. Scholarship on adult information processing shows that active reflection on media content is a stronger predictor of knowledge and other media effects compared with mere exposure (Fleming, Thorson, & Zhang, 2006). The same is true in studies of child news processing during campaigns (McDevitt & Chaffee, 2000). Efficacy in comprehension should also boost confidence for youth who want to lock horns with parents, siblings, and friends. In the Lubbock study, perceived ability to comprehend campaign news predicted the frequency of initiating conversations (McDevitt, 2006). Partisan/activist identity. Indicators include partisan allegiance (Republican, Democratic, Libertarian, Green, other), strength of PID, and support for liberal confrontational activism. Identification with activism represents conflict seeking as behavioral intent. We asked respondents to gauge their support for actions such as “creating a web site to embarrass a corporation” and “trespassing on private land to protest the cutting down of ancient forests.” Preliminary analysis revealed that conservative versions of these items—such as “joining a protest against illegal immigration” and “boycotting a Hollywood movie that mocks religion”—did not hold together as reliable indices at preand post-election. The conservative predisposition to support social order might work against the crystallization of a confrontational stance in youth activism. In comparison to the liberal battery, the conservative items were also less likely to correlate significantly with indicators of conflict seeking in deliberative expression.