Open Access

Lighting the participatory spark? The role of social media influencers in initiating political participation

, ,  and   
Mar 29, 2025

Cite
Download Cover

Figure 1

Moderated mediation modelComments: The diagram shows a conceptual model of the relationship between exposure to political influencer content and manifest participation, mediated by latent participation and moderated by general political interest and engagement with influencer.
Moderated mediation modelComments: The diagram shows a conceptual model of the relationship between exposure to political influencer content and manifest participation, mediated by latent participation and moderated by general political interest and engagement with influencer.

Figure 2

Respondents who reported encountering political content created by influencers during the past year at least once, by topic (per cent)Comments: n = 680
Respondents who reported encountering political content created by influencers during the past year at least once, by topic (per cent)Comments: n = 680

Figure 3

Findings for the moderated mediation model with exposure to political influencer content (IV) and manifest participation (DV)Comments: The moderators are mean-centred. Multicollinearity diagnostics are all good (tolerances range between .84 and .93 and VIF scores from 1.074 to 1.185).
Findings for the moderated mediation model with exposure to political influencer content (IV) and manifest participation (DV)Comments: The moderators are mean-centred. Multicollinearity diagnostics are all good (tolerances range between .84 and .93 and VIF scores from 1.074 to 1.185).

Respondents who reported encountering or not encountering political influencer content, by age group (per cent)

Answer Age group
15–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–65
Yes 81 74 68 55 57
No 19 26 32 45 43

Regression analyses for Figure 3 with covariates

Mediator (0–1) DV (0–1)
B SE B SE
Exposure to politics (0–1) ***.16 .04
EXP*Engagement (0–1) −.16 .18
EXP*Interest (0–1) −.08 .17
Gender ***.08 .02
Age group ***−.03 .00
Education level −.00 .01
Constant ***.35
N 602
R2 .20

Exposure to politics (0–1) **.07 .03
Mediator (0–1) ***.70 .03
Gender .01 .01
Age group −.01 .01
Education level −.00 .00
Constant **.09 .03
N 602
R2 .60

Respondents who reported their attitudes towards political influencer content, by age group (per cent)

Attitude Age group
15–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–65
Very positive 14 9 6 4 6
Somewhat positive 32 27 21 16 12
Neither negative nor positive 37 36 41 34 39
Somewhat negative 8 15 21 24 22
Very negative 2 4 3 12 12
Can’t say 7 9 9 11 9

Regression analyses for Figure 3

Mediator (0–1) DV (0–1)
B SE B SE
Exposure to politics (0–1) ***.16 .01
EXP*Engagement (0–1) –.14 .18
EXP*Interest (0–1) –.12 .17
Constant ***.38 .01
N 602
R2 .17

Exposure to politics (0–1) *.06 .02
Mediator (0–1) ***.70 .03
Constant ***.04 .01
N 602
R2 .59

Respondents and their background information

Variable Number of respondents in full sample (N = 1,025) % of N Number of respondents in subsample (n = 680) % of n % in the population (15–65)
Gender Male 519 51 337 50 51
Female 506 49 343 50 49

Age 15–24 183 18 148 22 17
25–34 205 20 152 22 20
35–44 199 19 135 20 20
45–54 204 20 112 17 19
55–65 234 23 133 20 23

Region Western Finland 243 24 167 25 24
Helsinki – Uusimaa 340 33 228 34 33
Southern Finland 220 21 144 21 21
Northern and Eastern Finland 222 22 140 21 22

Respondents’ engagement with political topics, by age group (per cent)

Variable Age group
15–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–65
Engagement with influencer content related to lifestyle politics Liking 42 20 21 16 14
Commenting 5 4 6 3 8
Sharing 5 2 2 5 1
Disliking 3 3 1 4 4
No engagement 45 71 71 73 74

Engagement with influencer content related to formal politics Liking 29 14 13 13 11
Commenting 5 4 3 3 8
Sharing 5 5 4 5 3
Disliking 1 2 2 2 4
No engagement 60 76 78 78 74
Language:
English
Publication timeframe:
2 times per year
Journal Subjects:
Social Sciences, Communication Science, Public and Political Communication, Mass Communication