Girls in politics: can you picture it? A study on the impact of frames and imagined experiences on perceived political efficacy among Belgian youth

Women participate, on average, less intensely to politics which is frequently attributed to women’s lower levels of perceived political self-efficacy. Research suggest that the period of adolescence is pivotal in creating a gender gap in perceived political efficacy: the degree of girls’ political self-efficacy tends on average to stagnate during adolescence, while that of boys tends to increase. There seems to be a form of gender-specific political socialisation taking place in which cognitive processes play a different role according to gender. This paper seeks to explore the mediating effects of cognitive processes on perceived political efficacy for boys and girls. Bandura (1997) defines self-efficacy in terms of an individuals beliefs in her capacity to influence the political system. Self-efficacy determines how people feel, think and act. In conjunction with actual success experiences, self-efficacy is also shaped by imagined experiences, i.e. imagining oneself as being effective in hypothetical situations. Lakoff’s (2008) work on neurolinguistic conceptualization suggests that narratives and frames can influence people’s imagined experiences. When people talk about politics in certain ways, frames (a network of linguistic relations) get activated in the brain. The strength (and also dangers) of neurolinguistic patterns is that when activated, both cognitive and affective elements are evoked. Frames are thus not just words, but also engender emotion. Such frames can also become simulacra of experiences. As such, these frames enable (or hamper) the presence of success in imagined experiences (in hypothetical situations). Two frames seem relevant to gender differences in politics, specifically how the ideal woman or man views (or deals with) politics (frame on appropriate behavior), as well as how each individual imagines her own future self (in relation to politics) (Markus & Nurius, 1986; Ryan & Irie, 2013). Using qualitative data from focus groups with boys and girls in the second year of secondary schools in Belgium (grade 8), the current paper aims to explain (1) how frames and narratives shape boys’ and girls’ imagined experiences of (un)successfully influencing politics and (2) to which extent differences in these experiences may explain gender differences in levels of perceived political efficacy. A thematic analysis of the frames/mental images activated through boys’ and girls’ conversations on politics, reveal that different frames and narratives are used when young people discuss politics. The preliminary analysis of the qualitative data seems to indicate a different value attributed by boys and girls to different narratives. The most frequent narratives seem to revolve either around the position of power and influence in politics, or around politics as conflict. Boys and girls both seem to recognise these narratives but make an antithetical emotional association with them. Moreover, we noticed that these frames were endorsed by informal sanctioning mechanisms (ignoring, ridiculing, …). This seems to indicate that frames about politics contribute to gender-stereotypical narratives.