Relational Pathways to Sociopolitical Control: A Mixed-Methods Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescence is a critical period for sociopolitical development, yet research has primarily focused on youth with explicit civic engagement, overlooking the role of community involvement in broader contexts. This mixed-methods study examines how adolescent community involvement—ranging from volunteering and advocacy to participation in sports, religious, and cultural activities—shapes sociopolitical control (SPC) in young adulthood. Using longitudinal quantitative survey data from 352 Canadian families, alongside qualitative interviews with 32 adult participants, we analyze how relationships with parents and peers mediate the link between community involvement and SPC. Regression analyses demonstrate that community involvement in high school predicts SPC at age 25, with parental support and positive peer relationships serving as significant mediators. Mediation analysis further reveals that relationships with mothers exert the strongest indirect effect on SPC, followed by relationships with fathers and peers. Qualitative findings highlight the mechanisms through which relational contexts foster or hinder SPC, illustrating that family values, peer norms, and early exposure to social issues shape long-term civic identity. These results underscore the importance of fostering relationally supportive environments that encourage diverse forms of adolescent community participation, contributing to both individual empowerment and broader democratic engagement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".