Generational characteristics of participation in social and political processes
The pertinence of the study of ideas about the peculiarities of participation in socio-political processes of representatives of different generations stems from the growing interest in modern society in strategies for involving citizens in social processes and building intergenerational communications. In the sociological and political studies currently being conducted, the problems of building a dialogue between representatives of different generations are presented rather fragmentarily. The analysis of the views of representatives of different generations on the socio-political processes that affect the involvement of citizens in public life is also carried out fragmentarily. The purpose of the publication: to study the influence of the intergenerational aspect on the participation of citizens in socio-political processes and to analyze the factors that determine the process of building intergenerational communications, as well as possible limitations. The methodology of the research is based on the functional, institutional, and comparative approaches to the analysis of the participation of representatives of different generations in socio-political processes. The comparative analysis was carried out based on the data of the author's empirical study “The influence of intergenerational communications on the involvement of residents in socio-political processes” (October-December 2020). The object of the study: the target groups (youth, middle-aged, elderly citizens). The sample size of the survey participants was 750 people (N = 750). The participants in the standardized interview (N = 30) – respondents of all the noted age categories. The novelty of the research consists in identifying trends and specifics in the formation of strategies for the participation in social and political processes of representatives of different generations. The results of the study will improve the strategies for involving residents in socio-political processes, and will also contribute to identifying the factors of sustainable formation of the communication environment, in which representatives of different generations are included.
Figures
Solosina, M. I. (2021), “Generational characteristics of participation in social and political processes”, Research Result. Sociology and management, 7 (3), 90-103, DOI:10.18413/2408-9338-2021-7-3-0-9.
While nobody left any comments to this publication.
You can be first.
Gurova, I. M. and Evdokimova, S. M. (2016), “The theory of generations as a tool for analysis, formation and development of labor potential”, MIR (Modernization. Innovation. Development), (7), 150-159. DOI https://doi.org/10.18184/2079-4665.2016.7.3.150.159. (in Russian)
Lepskij, V. E. (2010), “Controlled chaos technologies are a weapon of destruction of subjectivity of development”, Informatsionnye voiny, (4), 69-78. (in Russian)
Markvart, J. (2017), “Is Citizen Participation in Strategic Planning an Onerous Obligation or Untapped Potential?”, Vestnik ekspertnogo soveta, (2), 26-31. (in Russian)
Mochalin, A. V. (2016), “Transformation of Electoral Behavior as a Factor of Socialization of Youth in the Russian Province”, Nauchnye vedomosti BelGU, (24) [Online], available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/transformatsiya-elektoralnogo-povedeniya-kak-faktor-sotsializatsii-molodezhi-rossiyskoy-provintsii (Accessed 12 February 2021). (in Russian)
Nilova, K. V. (2015), “Intergenerational intrafamily communication: sociopsycholinguistic aspect”, Ph.D. Thesis, Ufa, [Online], available at: https://bashedu.ru/sites/default/files/dissovets_files/disrab/dissertaciya_nilova.pdf. (Accessed 3 March 2021). (in Russian)
Prjazhnikova, O. N. (2019), “Social innovation and social and solidarity economy practices”, Ekonomicheskie i sotsial'nye problemy Rossii, (1), 99-118. (in Russian)
Shvabaujer, N. (2020), “Mayor's cheat sheet”, Rossijskaya gazeta, (140) [Online], available at: https://rg.ru/2020/06/29/reg-urfo/minstroj-razrabotal-standart-vovlecheniia-gorozhan-v-proekty-razvitiia.html (Accessed 12 February 2021). (in Russian)
Barsukov, V. N. (2018), “Barriers to social integration of the older generation in the context of intergenerational communication issues”, Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast, 11 (5) [Online], available at: http://esc.vscc.ac.ru/article/2815?_lang=en (Accessed 12 February 2021).
Gallicano, T. D., Curtin, P. and Matthews, K. (2012), “I love what I do, but… A relationship management survey of millennial generation public relations agency employees”, Journal of Public Relations Research, 24 (3), 222-242.
Gidengil, E., Lahtinen, H., Wass, H. and Erola, J. (2020), “From Generation to Generation: The Role of Grandparents in the Intergenerational Transmission of (Non-) Voting”, Political Research Quarterly [Online], available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912920971715 (Accessed 12 February 2021).
Giles, H., Ryan, E. B. and Anas, A. P. (2008), “Perceptions of Intergenerational Communication by Young, Middle-Aged, and Older Canadians”, Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 40 (1), 21-30.
Haapala, A., Frydryczak, B. and Salwa, M. (2019), Moving from Landscapes to Cityscapes and Back: Theoretical and Applies Approaches to Human Environments, Series Landscapes, Przypis, Poland.
Law, J., Young, T., Almeida, J. and Ginja, S. (2019), “Intergenerational Communication – an interdisciplinary mapping review of research between 1996 and 2017”, Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 17 (3), 287-310 [Online], available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2018.1535349 (Accessed 12 February 2021).
Lehtinen, S. (2020), “An Intergenerational Approach to Urban Futures: Introducing the Concept of Aesthetic Sustainability”, Moving from Landscapes to Cityscapes and Back: Theoretical and Applied Approaches to Human Environments, 111-119.
Listvina, E. V. and Frolova, S. M. (2020), “Sociocultural Aspects of Intergenerational Communications in the Digital Age”, Izvestiya of Saratov University. New Series. Series: Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy, 20 (4), 369-373.
Sivricova, N. and Moiseeva, E. (2018), “Values of generations in the context of inter-generational communication”, SHS Web of Conferences. International Conference on Advanced Studies in Social Sciences and Humanities in the Post-Soviet Era [Online], available at: https://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/abs/2018/16/shsconf_icpse2018_02017/shsconf_icpse2018_02017.html (Accessed 12 February 2021).
Grimm, R., Fox, C., Baines, S., Albertson, K. (2013), “Social innovation, an answer to contemporary societal challenges”, Innovation the European Journal of Social Science Research, 26 (4), 436-455.
Strauss, W. and Howe, N. (1992), Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069 [Online], available at: https://archive.org/details/GenerationsTheHistoryOfAmericasFuture1584To2069ByWilliamStraussNeilHowe/mode/2up (Accessed 12 February 2021).
Strauss, W. and Howe, N. (2009), The Fourth Turning, Crown, USA.
Strom, R. D. and Strom, P. S. (2015), “Assessment of Intergenerational Communication and Relationships”, Educational Gerontology, 41 (1), 41-52.
Van der Brug, W. and Kritzinger, S. (2012) “Generational differences in electoral behaviour”, Electoral Studies, 31 (2), 245-249.
The study was carried out with the financial support of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research and the EISS within the framework of the scientific project No. 20-011-32279 opn_mol. The author expresses gratitude for the help in conducting the study, active participation in the discussion of its results and valuable comments to the members of the project group on intergenerational communications of RASO Andreyev Andrey Vladimirovich, Grebenikova Yulia Alexandrovna and Zavalin Vyacheslav Gennadievich.