Factors Contributing to Internet Users' Participation in Digital Petitions
Society Volume 11 Issue 2#2023
PDF (English)
PDF (Bahasa Indonesia)

Keywords

Digital Petition;
E-Participation;
Indonesia;
Political Participation;
World Values Survey

View Counter


  • Abstract viewed - 181 times
  • PDF (English) downloaded - 55 times
  • PDF (Bahasa Indonesia) downloaded - 32 times

Search in:

| |

How to Cite

Ekonugraheni, D., Mahriani, R., & Yusnaini, Y. (2023). Factors Contributing to Internet Users’ Participation in Digital Petitions. Society, 11(2), 359-376. https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v11i2.387

Funding data

Abstract

This study tries to answer why citizens of the Republic of Indonesia continue to participate in digital petitions even though the government has not legalized this mechanism. To answer this question, the researchers used raw data from the World Value Survey (WVS) VII, which involved 3,000 respondents from Indonesia who were eighteen years old and randomly selected. The logistic regression technique examined the effect of fourteen independent variables on the dependent variable (internet user participation in digital petitions/Y). The final logistic regression model contains seven independent variables that can explain Y as much as 4.52% significantly, X2 (7) = 169.60, p < 0.01. The final model produces the characteristics of respondents who could participate in digital petitions: young people, not religious, having liberalism ideology, male, educated more than or equivalent to high school, distrust of government organizations, and unmarried. This study recommends that the government and parties related to digital petitions increase citizens’ religiosity, increase the quantity, access, and quality of education levels of ideological education, and maintain citizens’ trust in government organizations. Researchers also encourage the legislative institutions at the central and local levels to formally adopt the digital petition mechanism as an official channel for citizens to articulate their political aspirations.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v11i2.387
PDF (English)
PDF (Bahasa Indonesia)

References

Anduiza, E., Gallego, A., & Cantijoch, M. (2010). Online political participation in Spain: The impact of traditional and internet resources. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 7(4), 356–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681003791891

Anonymous, A. (2021a). Petition. Oxford Learners Dictionaries.

Anonymous, A. (2021b). Petitions. Www.Parliament.Uk.

Badan Pusat Statistik. (2021). Statistik Indonesia 2021. BPS Statistic Indonesia.

Best, S. J., & Krueger, B. S. (2005). Analyzing the representativeness of internet political participation. Political Behavior, 27(2), 183–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-005-3242-y

Bochel, C., & Bochel, H. (2017). ‘Reaching in’? The potential for e-petitions in local government in the United Kingdom. Information Communication and Society, 20(5), 683–699. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1203455

Bonham, J. (1952). Two Studies in the Middle Class Vote: I--The Middle Class Elector. The British Journal of Sociology, 3(3), 222. https://doi.org/10.2307/586809

Carreras, M., Castañeda-Angarita, N., & America, L. (2014). Who Votes in Latin America? A Test of Three Theoretical Perspectives. Comparative Political Studies, 47(478), 1079–1104. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414013488558

Chan, R. C. H., Mak, W. W. S., Chan, W.-Y., & Lin, W.-Y. (2020). Effects of Social Movement Participation on Political Efficacy and Well-Being: A Longitudinal Study of Civically Engaged Youth. Journal of Happiness Studies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-020-00303-y

Clark, S. D., & Lomax, N. (2020). Linguistic and semantic factors in government e-petitions: A comparison between the United Kingdom and the United States of America. Government Information Quarterly, 37(4), 101523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101523

Clark, S. D., Morris, M. A., & Lomax, N. (2018). Estimating the outcome of UKs referendum on EU membership using e-petition data and machine learning algorithms. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 15(4), 344–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2018.1491926

Dai, X., & Norton, P. (2007). Parliamentary democracy online: Lessons from Europe. Journal of Legislative Studies, 13(3), 477–482. https://doi.org/10.1080/13572330701500946

de Vreese, C. H., & Boomgaarden, H. (2006). News, political knowledge and participation: The differential effects of news media exposure on political knowledge and participation. Acta Politica, 41(4), 317–341. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ap.5500164

de Zúñiga, H. G., Barnidge, M., & Scherman, A. (2017). Social Media Social Capital, Offline Social Capital, and Citizenship: Exploring Asymmetrical Social Capital Effects. Political Communication, 34(1), 44–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2016.1227000

Dimitrova, D. V., Shehata, A., Strömbäck, J., & Nord, L. W. (2014). The Effects of Digital Media on Political Knowledge and Participation in Election Campaigns: Evidence From Panel Data. Communication Research, 41(1), 95–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211426004

Dolata, U., & Schrape, J. F. (2016). Masses, Crowds, Communities, Movements: Collective Action in the Internet Age. Social Movement Studies, 15(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2015.1055722

Elnoshokaty, A. S., Deng, S., & Kwak, D.-H. (2016). Success Factors of Online Petitions: Evidence from Change.org. 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), 1979–1985. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2016.249

Emmenegger, P., & Manow, P. (2014). Religion and the Gender Vote Gap: Women’s Changed Political Preferences from the 1970s to 2010. Politics and Society, 42(2), 166–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329213519419

Flanagan, C. (2003). Developmental Roots of Political Engagement. Political Science and Politics, 36(02), 257–261. https://doi.org/10.1017/S104909650300218X

Fukuyama, F. (1997). Social Capital. Brasenose College.

George, J. J., & Leidner, D. E. (2019). From clicktivism to hacktivism: Understanding digital activism. Information and Organization, 29(3), 100249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2019.04.001

Gibson, R. K., & McAllister, I. (2013). Online Social Ties and Political Engagement. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 10(1), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2012.712461

Graham, G. (2004). Eight theories of ethics. Routledge.

Greenberg, A. (2008). Race, Religiosity, and the Women’s Vote Race. Women & Politics, 22(3), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1300/J014v22n03

Haerpfer, C., Inglehart, R., Moreno, A., Welzel, C., Kizilova, K., Diez-Medrano, J., Lagos, M., Norris, P., Ponarin, E., & Puranen, B. (n.d.). World Values Survey Wave 7 (2017-2020) Cross-National Dataset. https://doi.org/10.14281/18241.13

Hagen, L. (2018). Content analysis of e-petitions with topic modeling: How to train and evaluate LDA models? Information Processing and Management, 54(6), 1292–1307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2018.05.006

Hagen, L., Harrison, T. M., Uzuner, Ö., May, W., Fake, T., & Katragadda, S. (2016). E-petition popularity: Do linguistic and semantic factors matter? Government Information Quarterly, 33(4), 783–795. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.07.006

Halupka, M. (2014). Clicktivism: A systematic heuristic. Policy and Internet, 6(2), 115–132. https://doi.org/10.1002/1944-2866.POI355

Harrison, T. M., Dumas, C., DePaula, N., Fake, T., May, W., Atrey, A., Lee, J., Rishi, L., & Ravi, S. S. (2021). Exploring E-petitioning and media: The case of #BringBackOurGirls. Government Information Quarterly, 101569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101569

Heath, O., Verniers, G., & Kumar, S. (2015). Do Muslim voters prefer Muslim candidates? Co-religiosity and voting behaviour in India. Electoral Studies, 38, 10–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2015.01.005

Hosmer, D. W., Lemeshow, S., & Sturdivant, R. X. (2013). Applied Logistic Regression. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Hough, R. (2012). Do Legislative Petitions Systems Enhance the Relationship between Parliament and Citizen? Journal of Legislative Studies, 18(3–4), 479–495. https://doi.org/10.1080/13572334.2012.706057

Inkeles, A. (2000). Measuring social capital and its consequences. Policy Sciences, 33(3/4), 245–268.

International IDEA. (n.d.). Regional Entity View. Retrieved February 18, 2021, from https://www.idea.int/data-tools/regional-entity-view/ASEAN/40

Isaksson, A. S. (2014). Political participation in Africa: The role of individual resources. Electoral Studies, 34, 244–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2013.09.008

Kaufhold, K., Valenzuela, S., & De Zúñiga, H. G. (2010). Citizen journalism and democracy: How user-generated news use relates to political knowledge and participation. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 87(3–4), 515–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769901008700305

Koenig, H. G., Al Zaben, F., Khalifa, D. A., & Al Shohaib, S. (2015). Measures of Religiosity. In Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Constructs (pp. 530–561). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-386915-9.00019-X

Lee, C., Chen, D., & Huang, T. (2014). The Interplay Between Digital and Political Divides. Social Science Computer Review, 32(1), 37–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439313497470

Levi, M. (2015). Trust, Sociology of. In J. D. B. T.-I. E. of the S. & B. S. (Second E. Wright (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences: Second Edition (pp. 664–667). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.32162-6

Lewis-Beck, M. S., Jacoby, W. G., Norpoth, H., & Weisberg, H. F. (2008). The American Voter Revisited. Michigan University Press.

Mujani, S., & Liddle, R. W. (2010). Personalities, Parties, and Voters. Journal of Democracy, 21(2), 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.0.0160

Naranjo-Zolotov, M., Oliveira, T., Cruz-Jesus, F., Martins, J., Gonçalves, R., Branco, F., & Xavier, N. (2019). Examining social capital and individual motivators to explain the adoption of online citizen participation. Future Generation Computer Systems, 92, 302–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2018.09.044

Nekmat, E., Gower, K. K., Gonzenbach, W. J., & Flanagin, A. J. (2015). Source effects in the micro-mobilization of collective action via social media. Information Communication and Society, 18(9), 1076–1091. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1018301

Oni, A. A., Oni, S., Mbarika, V., & Ayo, C. K. (2017). Empirical study of user acceptance of online political participation: Integrating Civic Voluntarism Model and Theory of Reasoned Action. Government Information Quarterly, 34(2), 317–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.02.003

Panagiotopoulos, P., Sams, S., Elliman, T., & Fitzgerald, G. (2011). Do social networking groups support online petitions? Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 5(1), 20–31. https://doi.org/10.1108/17506161111114626

Pepinsky, T. (2017). Southeast Asia: Voting against disorder. Journal of Democracy, 28(2), 120–131. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2017.0029

Prihatini, E. S. (2018). Indonesian young voters: Political knowledge and electing women into parliament. Women’s Studies International Forum, 70(June 2018), 46–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2018.07.015

Putnam, R. D. (2002). Democracies in Flux: The Evolution of Social Capital in Contemporary Society. Oxford University Press.

Putra, H. (2017). Determinants of Vote Buying in Local Head Election in Indonesia. Jurnal Bina Praja, 9(2), 205–218. https://doi.org/10.21787/jbp.09.2017.205-218

Ranchordás, S. (2017). Digital agoras: Democratic legitimacy, online participation and the case of Uber-petitions. Theory and Practice of Legislation, 5(1), 31–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/20508840.2017.1279431

Šerek, J., & Machackova, H. (2014). Online only: Which Czech young adults prefer online civic participation? Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2014-3-6

Shadiqi, M. A., Muluk, H., & Milla, M. N. (2020). Support for Palestinian among Indonesian Muslim: Religious identity and solidarity as reasons for e-petition signing. Psychological Research on Urban Society, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.7454/proust.v3i1.83

Sheppard, J. (2015). Online petitions in Australia: Information, opportunity and gender. Australian Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 480–495. https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2015.1049512

Stockemer, D. (2014). What drives unconventional political participation? A two level study. The Social Science Journal, 51(2), 201–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2013.10.012

Suh, J. H., Park, C. H., & Jeon, S. H. (2010). Applying text and data mining techniques to forecasting the trend of petitions filed to e-People. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(10), 7255–7268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.04.002

Susha, I., & Grönlund, Å. (2014). Context clues for the stall of the Citizens’ Initiative: Lessons for opening up e-participation development practice. Government Information Quarterly, 31(3), 454–465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2014.02.005

Ulo, K. L. M., Hidayanto, A. N., Sandhyaduhita, P. I., Fitriani, W. R., Meyliana, M., & Abidin, Z. (2019). Factors influencing internet users’ intention to sign e-petitions. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 13(3/4), 257–275. https://doi.org/10.1108/TG-01-2019-0006

United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustaianable Development. United Nations.

Verba, S., Burns, N., & Schlozman, K. L. (1997). Knowing and Caring about Politics: Gender and Political Engagement. The Journal of Politics, 59(4), 1051–1072. https://doi.org/10.2307/2998592

Wang, Z., & Zhong, Y. (2020). What were residents’ petitions in Beijing- based on text mining. Journal of Urban Management, 9(2), 228–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jum.2019.11.006

Ward, G. (2020). Happiness and Voting: Evidence from Four Decades of Elections in Europe. American Journal of Political Science, 64(3), 504–518. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12492

Wright, S. (2012). Assessing (e-)Democratic Innovations: “Democratic Goods” and Downing Street E-Petitions. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 9(4), 453–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2012.712820

Wright, S. (2015). Populism and Downing Street E-petitions: Connective Action, Hybridity, and the Changing Nature of Organizing. Political Communication, 32(3), 414–433. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2014.958256

Wright, S. (2016). ‘Success’ and online political participation: The case of Downing Street E-petitions. Information Communication and Society, 19(6), 843–857. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1080285

Yates, S., & Lockley, E. (2018). Social Media and Social Class. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(9), 1291–1316. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218773821

Copyright (c) 2023 Owned by the Author(s), published by Society

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.