MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413398350 · doi:10.1080/01402382.2025.2543204

Pathways to politics: a sequence analysis of political apathy and involvement

2025· article· en· W4413398350 on OpenAlexaff
Sebastian Jungkunz, Paul Marx

Bibliographic record

VenueWest European Politics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsInnovation Cluster (Canada)
FundersRheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität BonnDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsPoliticsApathySequence (biology)Political sciencePolitical economySociologyPsychologyLawCognitionBiologyNeuroscienceGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding inequality in political involvement is a core goal of political science. Previous research has examined specific life-course influences, but there is limited knowledge about the diverse trajectories young citizens follow to become politically engaged or apathetic. This study employs sequence analysis to identify prevailing trajectories of political involvement from adolescence to young adulthood in Germany and the United Kingdom. For a surprisingly large share, their political future of either apathy or involvement is already determined by age 17, or even as early as age 11. Only about 19% develop involvement between age 17 and 25 and only 24% between age 11 and 15. Studying predictors of individual trajectories points to strong parental influences, while personal experiences can foster later involvement for a sizeable sub-group. These results show an under-appreciated diversity of political socialisation trajectories and point to an urgent need to study the interaction of parental and personal factors shaping them.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWest European PoliticsSame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207