Compulsory Voting as a Way to Increase Political Knowledge in the European Union: a Comparison Between Belgium and the Netherlands

Compulsory Voting as a Way to Increase Political Knowledge in the European Union: A Comparison Between Belgium and the Netherlands.

Pauline Vanhoutte 12138444

Master’s thesis

Graduate School of Communication Master’s programme Communication Science

University of Amsterdam Under the supervision of Judith Möller

Abstract

This master’s thesis examines the relationship between compulsory voting and

political knowledge in the European Union (EU). Using an online survey, the study compares the level of political knowledge about European politics in Belgium and in the Netherlands. These two countries being similar on several aspects, except on their voting systems. The most similar system design therefore applies. While some scholars argue that compulsory voting increases the level of political knowledge, others found opposing results. Based on the anticipatory elaboration theory by Eveland (2004), this study reveals a significant difference between Belgium and the Netherlands. The mean political knowledge score of Belgian

citizens is higher than Dutch citizens’. Moreover, this study investigates the role of media use, likelihood and willingness to vote in this relationship. While there was no significant effect of media use and likelihood to vote on people’s level of political knowledge, a significant effect of willingness to vote was found. In Belgium, the more a person is willing to vote (even if it was not mandatory), the higher his/her level of political knowledge about the European Union. In other words, compulsory voting might be considered as an asset to enhance democracy by increasing turnout and levels of political knowledge. However, citizens of compulsory voting system should be willing to vote. Motivating measures are therefore needed to take the most out of compulsory voting.

Compulsory Voting as a Way to Increase Political Knowledge in the European Union: A Comparison Between Belgium and the Netherlands.

In order to increase turnout during elections, some countries have decided to implement compulsory voting. (Birch, 2009b; Loewen, Milner, & Hicks, 2008) In these countries, turnout significantly increased by up to 20%. (Birch, 2009b; Lijphart, 1997;

Loewen et al., 2008) While some consider that compulsory voting is not democratic as it does not allow people to choose whether to vote or not, several scholars argue that a democracy needs a majority of the people to vote. (Birch, 2009b; de Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2006; Mackerras & McAllister, 1999; McNair, 2011) It, indeed, is the only way to ensure that the elected officials are representative of the entire population’s choice. Moreover, some of the researchers studying compulsory voting expressed the possibility that compulsory voting has a positive effect on people’s level of political knowledge. (Jakee & Sun, 2006; Lijphart, 1997; Loewen et al., 2008; Selb & Lachat, 2009; Sheppard, 2015) Indeed, Jakee and Sun (2006) believe that “forcing individuals to vote will increase their interest in the political process and therefore their willingness to inform themselves about related matters” (2006, p. 64). This would enforce the benefits of compulsory voting for a democratic society. Indeed, many scholars outlined the need, in a democratic system, for an informed public. (Boukes, 2019; Clark, 2014; de Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2006; Eveland, Jr., 2004; Eveland & Hutchens, 2011; McNair, 2011; Moeller & de Vreese, 2015; Nadeau, Nevitte, Gidengil, & Blais, 2008) However, the relationship between compulsory voting and political knowledge is not

supported by lots of empirical evidence. Some researches argue that compulsory voting does not increase the level of political knowledge of citizens who would not vote if it was not compulsory. (Loewen et al., 2008; Selb & Lachat, 2009) The willingness to vote or not might therefore influence the effect of compulsory voting on political knowledge.

When studying political knowledge, most scholars focus on the effect of media use. (Boukes, 2019; de Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2006; Dimitrova, Shehata, Strömbäck, & Nord, 2014; Eveland, Jr., 2004; Eveland & Hutchens, 2011; Eveland & Scheufele, 2000; Moeller & de Vreese, 2015; Newton, 1999; Pinkleton, Austin, & Fortman, 1998; Prior, 2005; Wei & Hindman, 2011) Accessing social media, reading newspaper or watching television; each of these has an effect on the level of political knowledge one has. Another aspect of media use, the frequency at which someone accesses media to get information, also influences the level of political knowledge. It would therefore be important to see whether one’s media use has an effect on the relationship between compulsory voting and political knowledge. Indeed, Jakee and Sun (2006) argue that people get more interested when forced to vote and therefore access more information to gain more knowledge. Media use could therefore be central to the relationship between compulsory voting and political knowledge. We could suppose that without the increased use of media, people would not gain, or gain less, political knowledge due to compulsory voting. Media use seems to be mediating this relationship.

While scholars agree on the need for an informed public, able to make a rational choice when asked to vote, the reality is often different. Many studies prove that people’s level of political knowledge is low in many countries. (Delli Carpini, 2000; Delli Carpini & Keeter, 1993; Elliott, 2017; Jakee & Sun, 2006; Newton, 1999) Moreover, several studies looked at supranational institutions such as the European Union. (Clark, 2014; Elenbaas, De Vreese, Boomgaarden, & Schuck, 2012) Clark’s study revealed that

“individuals know less about the EU than their national political system” (2014, p. 446). This finding is linked to the fact that the European Union suffers from a ‘democratic deficit’. (Flickinger & Studlar, 2007; Malkopoulou, 2009) Meaning that citizens do not have enough power in the decision-making process and that the European system is too complex to be understood and lack transparence. Moreover, it is also often said that European affairs are

under-represented in the media. (Boomgaarden et al., 2013; Clark, 2014; Elenbaas et al., 2012; Peter & de Vreese, 2004) Each of these might be an explanation of the low level of political knowledge people have about the European Union. In order to reduce the democratic deficit, the European Union has tried over the years to increase the power of the European Parliament, which is the only institution of the union directly elected by citizens. (Noury & Roland, 2002) However, turnout rates are dropping every five years. (European Parliament, 2014) By increasing people’s knowledge and therefore understanding of the European Union, the democratic deficit could potentially be reduced. This research will investigate one way to increase political knowledge: compulsory voting. This will be done by answering the

following research question: To what extent does compulsory voting affect the level of political knowledge about the European Union citizens have? And to what extent are media use and willingness to vote playing a role in this relationship?

In addition to the societal need for this study, the master’s thesis will also add to the literature. At first, because the researches that have been conducted on the effect of

compulsory voting on political knowledge have found different results. More research is therefore needed to be able to fully understand the relationship. Second, this study will

differentiate itself from what has already been done. Indeed, no research studying the effect of compulsory voting on political knowledge has compared two European countries, using the most similar system design. Third, this study will consider several factors that could influence the relationship between compulsory voting and political knowledge, such as media use and willingness to vote.

Theoretical Framework Compulsory Voting

Compulsory voting is “a legally binding voting rule, most commonly enshrined at a constitutional level” (Kużelewska, 2016, p. 37). It forces citizens “to attend the polls at

election time and perform whatever duties are required there of electors”(Birch, 2009a, p. 2). Compulsory voting is also often referred to as mandatory voting. However, several scholars argue that compulsory voting should be renamed compulsory turnout. (Elliott, 2017) Their argument being that there is no way to know whether citizens actually vote or not, as a vote should be secret. The only thing that can be assessed is whether people showed up or not, which therefore refers to turnout and not voting.

Nowadays, twenty-nine countries are using compulsory voting worldwide, including “six western European countries: Belgium, Greece, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Switzerland (Schaffhausen canton) and Cyprus” (Kużelewska, 2016, p. 38) However, these countries do not all apply compulsory voting the same way. While in some of them compulsory voting is written in the constitution but does not imply any sanction if not respected, others have stricter rules and punish citizens who fail to vote. (Birch, 2009b; Elliott, 2017; Kużelewska, 2016; Sheppard, 2015) In this research, Belgium will be the compulsory voting system and will be compared to the Netherlands. In Belgium, people who fail to turnout on election day receive a fine.

Lots of researches have already been conducted on compulsory voting. Most of them focused on evaluating the arguments that have been raised in favor and against the system. (Jakee & Sun, 2006; Malkopoulou, 2009; Selb & Lachat, 2009) Others conducted research to assess whether compulsory voting could benefit democracy. (Loewen et al., 2008; Sheppard, 2015) The most important benefit of compulsory voting that was found is that it reduces “unequal participation among social groups” (Selb & Lachat, 2009, p. 573). In most countries, voluntary voting leads to an over-representation of the wealthier and more educated, resulting in elected officials who are not representative of the entire population. (Elliott, 2017; Lijphart, 1997; Selb & Lachat, 2009) When voting is mandatory, this inequality disappears.

political parties as those who have strong opinions get out to vote more than people with moderate opinions. (Malkopoulou, 2009) Finally, another benefit of compulsory voting for democracy is its impact on political knowledge. (Jakee & Sun, 2006; Lijphart, 1997)

Political knowledge

Political knowledge is a well know concept in political science, it refers to “the

various bits of information about politics that citizens hold” (Delli Carpini & Keeter, 1993, p. 1179). This concept has been widely studied in the past due to its recognized importance for our society and democracy. (Boukes, 2019; Clark, 2014; de Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2006; Eveland, Jr., 2004; Eveland & Hutchens, 2011; McNair, 2011; Moeller & de Vreese, 2015; Nadeau et al., 2008) Most scholars studied the effect of media use on the level of political knowledge people have. Media use refers to the frequency at which an individual uses a medium or several media. While some focused on television (de Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2006; Prior, 2005; Wei & Hindman, 2011), others looked at newspapers (de Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2006), and more recently a large amount of studies on social media were published (Boukes, 2019; Dimitrova et al., 2014; Wei & Hindman, 2011). These researches stress the importance of the media in the development of political knowledge. Indeed,

“individuals’ first introduction to politics, and most of their contact with politics, comes from the media” (Eveland & Hutchens, 2011, p. 3). It can therefore be assumed that the use one makes of the media is influencing his/her level of political knowledge. However, some scholars argue that using media does not always mean that people are actually exposed to political information. Indeed, nowadays, with the increasing amount of media and programs available, it is easier for people to not be exposed to political information at all. (Bennett & Iyengar, 2008; Prior, 2007) Moreover, even if people are exposed to political information, it does not mean that they actually pay attention to it. (Eveland, Jr., 2004) Therefore, media use might not always imply an increase of political knowledge. However, a third factor might

influence people’s attention to the media and therefore increase the level of political

knowledge. According to Eveland (2004), the expectation of a discussion motivates people to look closer at the news, and therefore to use the media more, which might increase their level of political knowledge.

Even though political knowledge has been widely studied, it is a concept that is hard to evaluate. Indeed, it is hard to determine what level of knowledge is considered as good enough to be considered as an informed citizen. It is indeed unlikely that someone knows about every single political fact even if he/she pays a lot of attention to the news. An additional complexity of the concept is that there are several kinds of political knowledge. Scholars differentiate between factual, structural and civic political knowledge. (Eveland & Hutchens, 2011; Moeller & de Vreese, 2015) Factual knowledge refers to knowledge of facts about the political system and recent political events. For instance, knowing how many countries are part of the European Union. Structural knowledge refers to the understanding of the political facts. And civic knowledge “encompasses both factual knowledge of key

institutions of a political system as well as the ability to relate them to each other” (Moeller & de Vreese, 2015, p. 4). Most researches focus on factual knowledge as it is the easiest one to assess. Moreover, if people do not have a high level of factual knowledge it is unlikely that they will score higher on structural and civic knowledge. Factual knowledge is therefore providing us with a level of ‘basic’ political knowledge. This master’s thesis will focus on factual political knowledge about the European Union.

Hypotheses

As already mentioned, few researches have assessed the relationship between

compulsory voting and political knowledge. (Jakee & Sun, 2006; Lijphart, 1997; Loewen et al., 2008; Selb & Lachat, 2009; Sheppard, 2015) However, they did not all get the same results. Indeed, while some found evidences that compulsory voting increases the level of

political knowledge (Jakee & Sun, 2006; Lijphart, 1997), others did not find such a difference (Loewen et al., 2008; Selb & Lachat, 2009; Sheppard, 2015). These variations in findings might be due to the differences in methodology. At first, because while some of them conducted a survey (Selb & Lachat, 2009) (or used survey data available (Sheppard, 2015)), others conducted an experiment (Loewen et al., 2008). Moreover, the country in which the research was conducted might have a significant influence on the final results. While Selb and Lachat (2009) focused on Belgium, Loewen et al. (2008) conducted their experiment in Quebec, Canada. Sheppard (2015) used survey data of 47 countries over a period of 17 years. Additionally, some of these researches have compared countries on national knowledge questions (Sheppard, 2015). This makes the comparison harder as the questions were not the same for every country they compared. By using this method, the comparison is harder as the political system of the countries studied might be different. In the case of this research, the knowledge questions will be similar for both countries as they concern the European Union.

Jakee and Sun (2006) and Lijphart (1997) believe that voting makes people more attentive to politics and therefore increases their political knowledge. This implies that compulsory voting has a positive effect on the level of political knowledge of the population. On the other hand, Loewen et al. (2008) and Selb and Lachat (2009) argue that people who would not vote if it was not mandatory do not have any gain of knowledge when they are forced to vote. In other words, in these two studies, when people are not willing to vote and would not if it was not mandatory, their level of political knowledge does not increase. Finally, Sheppard (2015) did not find any significant results that compulsory voting increases political knowledge. However, she found out that in mandatory voting countries, people answered more often that they don’t know the answer. According to Sheppard, this could be a proof of knowledge. She believes that people in voluntary systems guessed the answer when they did not know and sometimes got it correct, which explains her insignificant results.

Based on these arguments, it can be expected that in countries enforcing mandatory voting, citizens will demonstrate a higher degree of political knowledge about the European Union. Indeed, if people have to vote, it is supposed that they ‘force themselves’ to get informed and understand the political system. (Jakee & Sun, 2006; Lijphart, 1997) This relates to the theory of anticipatory elaboration by Eveland (2004) which states that people are getting informed and therefore have a higher level of knowledge when they expect a discussion about the topic. In this case, the discussion being the elections and the need to make a choice. Additionally, we might suppose that in countries with compulsory voting, people discuss politics more often with their friends and family which increases the attention they pay to politics and therefore their political knowledge.

Hypothesis 1: Citizens living in a country which enforces mandatory voting have a greater level of political knowledge about the European Union than citizens living in a country with voluntary voting.

According to the various arguments in favor of hypothesis 1, media use is influencing the relationship between compulsory voting and political knowledge. Most scholars consider that if people know more, it is because they pay more attention to the news, which means that they use the media more. (Eveland, Jr., 2004; Jakee & Sun, 2006; Lijphart, 1997) Media use is therefore a third and essential component in the relationship between compulsory voting and political knowledge. Based on this theory, it can be assumed that without the increase in media use, people would not gain more political knowledge due to compulsory voting.

Hypothesis 2: The relationship between compulsory voting and political knowledge about the European Union is mediated by the frequency at which people use the media. Therefore, the more people access the media, the stronger the relationship between compulsory voting and political knowledge will be.

The researches that did not find significant differences between political knowledge in compulsory and voluntary voting system argue that it is due to the people who would not vote if they were not required to. (Loewen et al., 2008; Selb & Lachat, 2009) Based on this theory, it can be assumed that the willingness to vote is moderating the relationship between

compulsory voting and political knowledge. Therefore, it can be supposed that in both voting systems, the more people are willing to vote, the higher their level of political knowledge will be. To measure the willingness to vote, the likelihood to vote for the next elections will be assessed. Moreover, in compulsory voting systems, citizens who do not express a willingness to vote have a lower level of political knowledge than those who do.

Hypothesis 3: The effect of compulsory voting on political knowledge about the European Union is moderated by the likelihood to vote for the next elections. Therefore, the more people are likely to vote, the weaker the relationship between compulsory voting and political knowledge will be.

Hypothesis 4: In compulsory voting systems, people who are not willing to vote, and who would not vote if it was not compulsory, will show a lower level of political knowledge than those who are willing to vote.

To visualize the four hypotheses summarized in a conceptual model, see Appendix A.

Methods

In order to test the hypotheses and answer the research question, a cross-sectional survey has been conducted. This method has been chosen for its ability to capture people’s opinion and behavior. In the case of this master’s thesis, people’s political behavior, political knowledge and media use are assessed.

This study used the most similar system design, comparing Belgium and the

Netherlands. This comparison method uses two countries which are similar on most aspects except one, in this case the voting system (Belgium has implemented mandatory voting in

1893, while the Netherlands abolished it in 1967). “The reason for choosing systems that are similar is the ambition to keep constant as many extraneous variables as possible.” (Anckar, 2008, p. 389) Belgium and the Netherlands are both kingdoms, with a multiparty system, and are founding members of the European Union.

The data was collected between April 13th and 23rd 2019. (See Appendix B) Respondents were contacted through social media and online blogs, resulting in a

convenience sample. In addition, to personal messages, the survey was shared on Facebook and Reddit groups1. The survey was available in English, French and Dutch to ensure the full comprehension of the questions by the respondents. The questionnaire was translated using the double-translation method. (See appendix C, D and E)

Sample

To be able to complete the survey, respondents needed to be Belgian or Dutch citizens of 18 years old or older. People younger than 18 were excluded from the study as they are not eligible to vote. In total, 236 people finished the survey, 26 of these had to be removed from the analysis because they had a different nationality than Belgian or Dutch and two had to be removed because they were younger than 18. Out of the 208 respondents used for the

analyses, 103 were Dutch and 105 were Belgian. Unfortunately, as it can be seen in table 1, the sample does not reflect the actual composition of the Dutch and/or Belgian population.

1

Groups the survey has been shared on – On Facebook: Disseratation survey exchange; survey exchange: find participants & respondents. Reciprocity ensured; Survey sharing 2019; The research survey exchange group; Survey sharing 2019 (English, active only); Dutch students abroad; Dutch students in Madrid. – On Reddit: /r/ducth; /r/surveysample; /r/mediastudies; /r/Amsterdam.

Belgium Netherlands

Population data Sample Population data Sample Gender Male 49.2% 31.4% 49.6% 46.6% Female 50.8% 68.6% 50.4% 53.4% Age group Aged 28 or younger 34.9% 28.6% 32.6% 74.8% Aged 55 or older 31.8% 18.1% 27.2% 1.9%

Table 1. Comparison of demographics between the sample and official population data. (CBS, 2019; Statbel, 2019)

Measures

The survey consisted of 26 questions. After giving informed consent, respondents were asked four different kinds of questions: demographics, political behavior, media use and political knowledge. (See Appendix C, D and E)

In order to measure the independent variable, being part of a mandatory voting system or not, respondents were asked about their citizenship. Additionally, respondents who do not vote in their country were excluded from the analysis, as the compulsion to vote does not apply to expatriates. As it can be seen in table 2, the two groups were comparable in size but different in terms of gender, age and education status.

Belgium Netherlands Number of respondents 105 103 Gender Male 31.4% 46.6% Female 68.6% 53.4% Age M 40.87 26.73 SD 15.04 9.59 Education

Enrolled in higher education 23.8% 68%

Not enrolled in higher education 76.2% 32%

Table 2. Comparison of Belgian and Dutch citizens in the sample on gender, age and education.

Political behavior. Respondents’ political behavior was measured using three

questions to avoid overreporting: Did you vote during the last elections in your country?; Did you vote during the last European elections?; How likely is it that you will vote for the next European elections? For the two questions regarding the past elections, respondents were given several possible answers: Yes; No, I was not able to; No, I was not allowed to; No, I decided not to; I don’t remember; I prefer not to say. For the analysis, these were recoded into two categories: respondents that voted (1), and those that did not (0). (For national elections: M = .78, SD = .41; For European elections: M = .58, SD = .49)

Likelihood to vote. To answer the third hypothesis regarding the likelihood to

used. Respondents were asked to evaluate the likelihood they would turn out on a scale ranging from 0 (not likely at all) to 10 (extremely likely).

Willingness to vote. To answer the fourth hypothesis, Belgian citizens who

said they voted for the last European elections were asked an additional question: If voting was not compulsory, would you have voted? 65.9% of the respondents said they would have voted anyways, while only 7.3% said they would not have voted. The remaining 26.8% said they don’t know if they would have voted.

Media use. Media use was measured with questions regarding the frequency at which

respondents access news and political information. Additionally, questions related to the use of specific kinds of media were asked: Which of these media do you use at least once a week? Respondents could then choose between newspaper, television, radio, social media and online news sites. The same question was asked regarding the media they use daily. These questions showed that 47.6% of the respondents accessed news and political information daily, while 14.4% have access less than once a week or never. Social media (67.3%) and online news sites (62%) are the media that are the most used daily, while newspaper (14.4%) is the least used daily. Respondents were also asked about their perception of these media and at which frequency they discuss politics.

Political knowledge. Political knowledge was measured by five factual knowledge

questions. For each question, correct answers were coded ‘1’, while the wrong and the ‘don’t know’ options were coded ‘0’. The following questions were asked: When are the next European elections? (M = .73, SD = .44); Which country of the European Union is in the process of leaving the union? (M = .98, SD = .12); Who is the current president of the European Parliament? (M = .16, SD = .37); Which one of these countries is not part of the European Union? (M = .45, SD = .50); Which one of these is false? The members of the

European Parliaments are … (M = .10, SD = .30). The order of the knowledge questions was randomized to avoid any order effect.

The five questions were computed to create a new variable ranging from 0 to 5. Respondents who scored ‘0’ did not answer any questions correctly (n = 2), while those who scored ‘5’ answered all questions correctly (n = 6). (M = 2.43, SD = 1.01)

Before computing the five knowledge questions into one variable, a factor analysis has been carried out to test unidimensionality. The factor analysis reveals that only one factor has an eigenvalue above 1 (1.637), which explains 32.74% of the variance. This means that the five factors assess the same variable.

Additionally, a reliability test was conducted and resulted in a Cronbach’s alpha of .474. This is not very high, but it can easily be explained by the fact that some questions were easier than others. It is common when assessing political knowledge. (Mondak, 2001)

Results

Belgian and Dutch citizens have a significantly different voting behavior. It can clearly be seen in Figure 1 and 2 that Belgian citizens (88%) generally tend to vote more than Dutch citizens (68%). Moreover, Dutch citizens vote less for European elections (37%) than for national elections (68%). Additionally, there is a difference of likelihood to vote for the next European elections between Belgian and Dutch citizens. While the sample is mainly composed of citizens that are willing to vote (in both countries), Belgian citizens are more likely than Dutch citizens to turnout.

Figure 1. Voting behavior during the last election in their country. Did you vote during the last elections in your country?

Figure 2. Voting behavior during the last European elections. Did you vote during the last European elections?

The first hypothesis supposed that citizens of a mandatory voting system (Belgian citizens) would score significantly higher on political knowledge about the European Union compared to citizens of a voluntary voting system (Dutch citizens). In order to test this hypothesis, an independent samples t-test was conducted. The t-test outlined a significant difference in political knowledge about the European Union between Belgian (M = 2.57, SD = .83) and Dutch (M = 2.29, SD = 1.16) citizens, t (206) = -2.01, p = .046.

Based on the results, additional analysis was conducted to test whether the first hypothesis would still find significant results if citizens who do not vote are taken out of the equation. After filtering out all the respondents who ranked their likelihood to vote for the next European elections below 5 on a 10-point scale, the t-test analysis testing hypothesis 1 was re-tested. The analysis yielded that there is no significant difference between Belgian (M = 2.57, SD = .83) and Dutch (M = 2.34, SD = 1.17) citizens anymore, t (189)= -1.63, p=.104.

The second hypothesis supposed that due to a mediation effect, citizens who access the media more are more likely to have an increase in the level of political knowledge about the

0 20 40 60 80 100 Belgium Netherlands P er ce n tag e o f resp o n d en ts Voted Did not vote

Did not answer or does not remember

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Belgium Netherlands P er ce n tag e o f resp o n d en ts Voted Did not vote

European Union when they live in a compulsory voting system. This hypothesis was tested using a mediated regression analysis with PROCESS by Andrew Hayes. As summarized in Figure 3, there is no significant indirect effect of media use on the relationship between compulsory voting and political knowledge about the European Union.

Figure 3. Mediation model, hypothesis 2. There is no mediation effect of media use on the relationship between voting system and political knowledge about the European Union.

The third hypothesis suggested that the relationship between the national voting system and the level of political knowledge about the European Union would be moderated by people’s willingness to vote in the upcoming elections. In other words, the more people are willing to vote for the next elections, the less their level of political knowledge is influenced by the voting system they live in. This hypothesis was tested using a moderated regression analysis with PROCESS by Andrew Hayes. The analysis did not yield any significant results, t = -.11, p = .061, 95% CI -0.22, 0.01.

The fourth hypothesis suggested that citizens of a mandatory voting system would have a lower level of political knowledge about the European Union if they would not have voted if it was not mandatory. To test this hypothesis, a linear regression analysis has been conducted. The regression model provides significant results, F (1, 80) = 11.29, p = .001.

Voting system

(enforced compulsory or voluntary)

Political knowledge about the European Union

Media use b = -.091, p = .66

Direct effect, b = .261, p = .051

Indirect effect, b = .019, 95% BCa CI  -.068, .119

Moreover, according to the results, 12.4% of the variance in political knowledge can be explained by the willingness to vote. (R2 = .124) The willingness to vote has a moderately strong effect on political knowledge, b* = .35, t = 3.36, p = .001, 95% CI 0.18, 0.70. Respondents’ level of political knowledge about the European Union increased by .44 on a scale of 5 for each increase of 1 on the willingness to vote scale of 3 (respondents scoring 1 would not have voted if it was not mandatory, those scoring 2 are uncertain about their willingness to vote and those scoring 3 are willing to vote). In other words, the more people are unwilling to vote, the less political knowledge they have about the European Union in a mandatory voting system.

Discussion

This paper aimed at answering the following research question: To what extent does compulsory voting affect the level of political knowledge about the European Union citizens have? And to what extent are media use and willingness to vote playing a role in this

relationship? Based on the answers provided by the respondents, clear differences between Belgian and Dutch citizens were observed. At first, a difference of voting behavior. It has been clearly demonstrated by the results that Dutch citizens vote less than Belgian citizens, both in national and European elections. Additionally, Dutch citizens vote more for national than for European elections. Second, a difference of political knowledge about the European Union. Belgian citizens had a significantly higher mean score than Dutch citizens. On the five questions that were asked about European politics, one question showed a significant

difference between the two countries: the question regarding the month in which the next elections would be held. It is important to note that the survey was distributed a month before the elections. Third, a difference in willingness and likelihood to vote. While asked how likely it was that they would vote for the 2019 European elections, Dutch citizens showed less likelihood than Belgian citizens. However, this difference does not moderate the relationship

between voting system and political knowledge. Additionally, the willingness to vote of Belgian citizens if voting was not mandatory is a significant predictor of political knowledge about the European Union. The more they are willing to vote, the more they know about European politics. However, no mediation effect of media use was observed on the

relationship between voting system and political knowledge. Additionally, both Belgian and Dutch citizens have a comparable use of the media in terms of frequency. To summarize these findings, it can be said that only the first and fourth hypotheses were sustained, while the second and third had to be rejected.

These mixed results can partially be explained by some limitations of the study. First, as mentioned earlier, the sample is not representative of the Dutch and Belgian population in terms of demographics but also in terms of voting behavior. Indeed, according to the turnout rates of the last Dutch elections that were held in March 2019, only 56.2% of the population voted. (Kies Raad, 2019) While in the sample used for this study, 68.9% declared that they voted during these elections. The generalizability of the results to the Dutch population can therefore be questioned. A second limitation of this study is that it was administered online. While respondents were asked to answer five factual questions about the European Union, they potentially could have used a search engine to find the correct answer and positively affect their knowledge score. Because the survey was online, there is no way to check for this phenomenon. However, in an effort to prevent such behavior, a short introduction to the knowledge questions mentioned that many people do not know the answers to these questions and that it is therefore perfectly fine to not know it either. A third limitation of this study concerns the fact that in Belgium, federal, regional and European elections are held simultaneously, which is not the case in the Netherlands. This could imply two different scenarios. At first, it could be supposed that because it is a triple election the media will address the topic more than they would in the Netherlands. A second hypothesis could be that

citizens would focus more on the two other elections compared to European elections. In both cases, it could have an influence on the level of political knowledge of Belgian citizens. Unfortunately, this study did not consider this factor.

Despite the limitations that were mentioned, this study contributes to filling a gap in the literature. As mentioned earlier, several scholars disagree on whether compulsory voting could have an effect on political knowledge or not. (Jakee & Sun, 2006; Lijphart, 1997; Loewen et al., 2008; Selb & Lachat, 2009; Sheppard, 2015) This study has proved that the level of political knowledge is significantly higher in a mandatory voting system when compared to a voluntary voting country. These results confirm those found by Jakee and Sun (2006) and Lijphart (1997). However, some could argue that Belgian citizens have a higher level of political knowledge about the European Union because they host most of the

European institutions. Indeed, all European summits happen in Brussels and even though the official seat of the European Parliament is in Strasbourg, most of the work is done in Brussels. This imply that most lobbying firms are also based in Brussels. (Schendelen, van, 2008) Boomgaarden et al. (2013) explain that often the EU is addressed in the news when a key event is taking place. It could therefore be hypothesized that the happening of all these events in the capital of Belgium has a positive effect on the level of political knowledge Belgian citizens have.

The literature also argued that compulsory voting increases turnout rates. (Birch, 2009b; Lijphart, 1997; Loewen et al., 2008) This could be seen in this study as well.

Moreover, results showed that Dutch citizens, who have the choice not to vote, decided more often to vote for national elections compared with European elections. We could therefore suppose that their level of knowledge about national politics is higher than their level of knowledge about European politics. This hypothesis is addressed by Clark (2014). He argues that people tend to know more about national politics than EU politics.

The second hypothesis, which was testing the effect of media use in the relationship between voting system and political knowledge, was in line with results of several scholars. (Eveland, Jr., 2004; Jakee & Sun, 2006; Lijphart, 1997) They argued that the increase in knowledge was due to the increased attention to the media which resulted in the need to make a choice in compulsory voting systems. This study did not find any results confirming this hypothesis. It resulted from the analyses that there was no significant difference of media use between the two countries. A few arguments from the literature can explain this unexpected finding. First, accessing the media does not necessarily mean accessing political information. It is nowadays, easier than ever for people to select what they want to watch. (Bennett & Iyengar, 2008; Prior, 2007). Indeed, “many Europeans may choose to simply avoid the subject of EU politics” (Clark, 2014, p. 448). Second, even if people are exposed to political information about the European Union, it does not necessarily mean that they pay attention to it. (Eveland, Jr., 2004) And finally, even if people choose to watch political news and pay attention to it, they do not all watch the same news. The literature is therefore divided on the question. While some believe that people gain knowledge due to their use of the media (Eveland, Jr., 2004; Jakee & Sun, 2006; Lijphart, 1997), others argue that using the media does not necessarily mean that you gain knowledge (Bennett & Iyengar, 2008; Eveland, Jr., 2004). It might be that Dutch citizens access the media as much as Belgian citizens but that they reach more entertainment than news for instance. Another explanation could be related to the quality of the news in the two countries. It might be that the quality of news in Belgium is not comparable to the one in the Netherlands. This could therefore have an impact on the level of political knowledge citizens have about the European Union. Similarly, it could be that the coverage of the European elections started later in the Netherlands and was therefore not optimal at the time the survey was launched (about a month before the elections).

The third hypothesis supposed that the likelihood that citizens would vote for the 2019 elections would be a moderator of the relationship between voting system and political

knowledge. Even though this hypothesis was backed up by several scholars (Loewen et al., 2008; Selb & Lachat, 2009), the results of this study rejected it. The likelihood to vote for the next elections does not significantly moderate the relationship between the voting system and the level of political knowledge. This might be explained by the fact that Belgian citizens might have expressed a high likelihood to vote for the 2019 elections even if they do not necessarily want to vote. Indeed, they know they will vote as it is compulsory, whether they want it or not. Additionally, we could suppose that some people are planning to vote but did not pay a lot of attention to the news yet. Similarly, as explained by Boomgaarden et al. “EP elections are characterized as a second-order national elections” (2013, p. 611), which means that national issues are considered when making a choice. (Elenbaas et al., 2012) This

phenomenon could result in low level of political knowledge about the European Union, but higher level of knowledge about national politics. (Clark, 2014)

The fourth hypothesis suggested that in Belgium, the willingness to vote would be a predictor of the level of political knowledge. (Loewen et al., 2008; Selb & Lachat, 2009) The hypothesis was supported by the analyses. The more Belgian citizens are willing to vote (even if it was not mandatory), the higher their level of political knowledge is. This means that while introducing compulsory voting has a positive effect on people’s level of political knowledge, when people feel forced to vote and would not if they did not have to, their level of knowledge is weaker.

By answering the research question this paper has helped filling a gap in the literature. Indeed, no study ever looked at political knowledge of the European Union and the effect compulsory voting could have on it. However, further researches are still needed. It would for instance be interesting to conduct this research with different European countries and at

different points in time. This way, we could assess whether Belgium is a unique case due to the fact that it hosts the European institutions. Moreover, testing the level of political

knowledge at different points in time, for instance closer to the elections or right after, would allow for a comparison. This comparison would help understand what influences the level of political knowledge and whether compulsory voting systems always show a higher mean score. Additionally, a content analysis of the media would bring a new perspective to the study. It would help understand why while no difference in frequency of media use can be observed, there still is a difference of political knowledge between the two countries. The content analysis would evaluate the frequency of European coverage and its quality. This study also proved that when people are not willing to vote but do so to avoid a sanction, their level of political knowledge is weaker. Researching what motivates people to vote and what motivates some not to vote even when they know they will be sanctioned for it seems needed. It could help develop motivating measures, which could increase the level of political

knowledge.

While some could argue that this study is not generalizable as it only focused on two cases, several scholars argue that it should not be an issue. (Ruddin, 2006; Steinberg, 2015) Indeed, according to them, even case studies can be generalized if well conducted. This study used several precautions such as using the most similar system design. It can therefore be assumed that compulsory voting has a positive effect on political knowledge in countries that enforce it.

If there was one thing to remember from this study, it would be that compulsory voting might be an incredible asset to help democracy. At first, it increases turnout rates, which favors an optimal representation of the entire population. Secondly, it increases the level of political knowledge citizens have. However, to be as efficient as possible, compulsory voting should be accompanied with quality news and motivating measures. People should be

motivated and not feel forced to vote in order to take the most out of compulsory voting and enhance democracy.

References

Anckar, C. (2008). On the Applicability of the Most Similar Systems Design and the Most Different Systems Design in Comparative Research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(5), 389–401. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570701401552 Bennett, W. L., & Iyengar, S. (2008). A New Era of Minimal Effects? The Changing

Foundations of Political Communication. Journal of Communication, 58(4), 707–731. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00410.x

Birch, S. (2009a). Full participation: a comparative study of compulsory voting. Tokyo, Japan ; New York: United Nations University Press.

Birch, S. (2009b). The case for compulsory voting. Public Policy Research, 16(1), 21–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-540X.2009.00550.x

Boomgaarden, H. G., De Vreese, C. H., Schuck, A. R. T., Azrout, R., Elenbaas, M., Van Spanje, J. H. P., & Vliegenthart, R. (2013). Across time and space: Explaining variation in news coverage of the European Union: Across time and space. European Journal of Political Research, 52(5), 608–629.

https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12009

Boukes, M. (2019). Social network sites and acquiring current affairs knowledge: The impact of Twitter and Facebook usage on learning about the news. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2019.1572568

CBS. (2019). Population Pyramid. Age composition in the Netherlands 2019. Retrieved from https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/visualisaties/population-pyramid

Clark, N. (2014). The EU’s Information Deficit: Comparing Political Knowledge across Levels of Governance. Perspectives on European Politics and Society, 15(4), 445– 463. https://doi.org/10.1080/15705854.2014.896158

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

Delli Carpini, M. X. (2000). In search of the informed citizen: What Americans know about politics and why it matters. The Communication Review, 4(1), 129–164.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10714420009359466

Delli Carpini, M. X., & Keeter, S. (1993). Measuring Political Knowledge: Putting First Things First. American Journal of Political Science, 37(4), 1179.

https://doi.org/10.2307/2111549

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

Elenbaas, M., De Vreese, C. H., Boomgaarden, H. G., & Schuck, A. R. T. (2012). The impact of information acquisition on EU performance judgements: the impact of information acquisition. European Journal of Political Research, 51(6), 728–755.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2012.02055.x

Elliott, K. J. (2017). Aid for Our Purposes: Mandatory Voting as Precommitment and Nudge. The Journal of Politics, 79(2), 656–669. https://doi.org/10.1086/690711

European Parliament. (2014). Results of the 2014 European elections. Turnout. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/elections2014-results/en/turnout.html

Eveland, Jr., W. P. (2004). The Effect of Political Discussion in Producing Informed Citizens: The Roles of Information, Motivation, and Elaboration. Political Communication, 21(2), 177–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600490443877

Eveland, W. P., & Hutchens, M. J. (2011). Political Knowledge. In W. Donsbach (Ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Communication.

https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405186407.wbiecp060.pub2

Eveland, W. P., & Scheufele, D. A. (2000). Connecting News Media Use with Gaps in Knowledge and Participation. Political Communication, 17(3), 215–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/105846000414250

Flickinger, R. S., & Studlar, D. T. (2007). One Europe, Many Electorates?: Models of

Turnout in European Parliament Elections After 2004. Comparative Political Studies, 40(4), 383–404. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414006288970

Jakee, K., & Sun, G.-Z. (2006). Is compulsory voting more democratic? Public Choice, 129(1–2), 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-005-9008-6

Kies Raad. (2019). Provinciale Staten 20 maart 2019. Retrieved from

https://www.verkiezingsuitslagen.nl/verkiezingen/detail/PS20190320

Kużelewska, E. (2016). Compulsory Voting in Belgium. A Few Remarks on Mandatory Voting. Białostockie Studia Prawnicze, 20/A en, 37–51.

https://doi.org/10.15290/bsp.2016.20A.en.03

Lijphart, A. (1997). Unequal Participation: Democracy’s Unresolved Dilemma Presidential Address, American Political Science Association, 1996. American Political Science Review, 91(01), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.2307/2952255

Loewen, P. J., Milner, H., & Hicks, B. M. (2008). Does Compulsory Voting Lead to More Informed and Engaged Citizens? An Experimental Test. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 41(03), 655. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000842390808075X

Mackerras, M., & McAllister, I. (1999). Compulsory voting, party stability and electoral advantage in Australia. Electoral Studies, 18(2), 217–233.

Malkopoulou, A. (2009). Lost voters: Participation in EU elections and the case for compulsory voting. Center for European Policy Studies.

McNair, B. (2011). An Introduction to Political Communication (5th ed.). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203828694

Moeller, J., & de Vreese, C. (2015). Spiral of Political Learning: The Reciprocal Relationship of News Media Use and Political Knowledge Among Adolescents. Communication Research, 009365021560514. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650215605148

Mondak, J. J. (2001). Developing Valid Knowledge Scales. American Journal of Political Science, 45(1), 224. https://doi.org/10.2307/2669369

Nadeau, R., Nevitte, N., Gidengil, E., & Blais, A. (2008). Election Campaigns as Information Campaigns: Who Learns What and Does it Matter? Political Communication, 25(3), 229–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600802197269

Newton, K. (1999). Mass Media Effects: Mobilization or Media Malaise? British Journal of Political Science, 29(4), 577–599. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123499000289 Noury, A. G., & Roland, G. (2002). More power to the European Parliament? Economic

Policy, 17(35), 279–319. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0327.t01-1-00090

Peter, J., & de Vreese, C. H. (2004). In Search of Europe: A Cross-National Comparative Study of the European Union in National Television News. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 9(4), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1081180X04270597 Pinkleton, B. E., Austin, E. W., & Fortman, K. K. J. (1998). Relationships of media use and

political disaffection to political efficacy and voting behavior. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 42(1), 34–49.

Prior, M. (2005). News vs. Entertainment: How Increasing Media Choice Widens Gaps in Political Knowledge and Turnout. American Journal of Political Science, 49(3), 577. https://doi.org/10.2307/3647733

Prior, M. (2007). Post-Broadcast Democracy: How Media Choice Increases Inequality in Political Involvement and Polarizes Elections.

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139878425

Ruddin, L. P. (2006). You Can Generalize Stupid! Social Scientists, Bent Flyvbjerg, and Case Study Methodology. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(4), 797–812.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800406288622

Schendelen, van, M. P. C. M. (2008). Machiavelli in Brussels : The Art of Lobbying the EU. https://doi.org/10.5117/9789053567661

Selb, P., & Lachat, R. (2009). The more, the better? Counterfactual evidence on the effect of compulsory voting on the consistency of party choice. European Journal of Political Research, 48(5), 573–597. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2009.01834.x

Sheppard, J. (2015). Compulsory voting and political knowledge: Testing a ‘compelled engagement’ hypothesis. Electoral Studies, 40, 300–307.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2015.10.005

Statbel. (2019). Structure of the Population. Population by gender and age group - Belgium, last year. Retrieved from https://statbel.fgov.be/en/themes/population/structure-population#panel-13

Steinberg, P. F. (2015). Can We Generalize from Case Studies? Global Environmental Politics, 15(3), 152–175. https://doi.org/10.1162/GLEP_a_00316

Wei, L., & Hindman, D. B. (2011). Does the Digital Divide Matter More? Comparing the Effects of New Media and Old Media Use on the Education-Based Knowledge Gap.

Mass Communication and Society, 14(2), 216–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205431003642707

Appendix A

Conceptual Model Summarizing the Four Hypotheses

Figure 1. Conceptual model summarizing the four hypotheses. Voting system

(enforced compulsory or voluntary)

Political knowledge about the European Union

Media use H2

Likelihood to vote for the next elections

H1 H3

Willingness to vote if it was not compulsory

Appendix B

Information on How to Access the Data

To access the data that was used for this study, feel free to send an email to Pauline Vanhoutte at the following email address: pauline.vanhoutte@student.uva.nl.

Appendix C

Survey Questionnaire in English

Thank you for taking the time to answer this survey, in which we will be asking about the European Union, and your media use. Respondents of this survey should be 18 or

older and citizens of Belgium or the Netherlands. Before we start, it is important that we inform you about your rights as a participant, and about the measures taken to safeguard your rights. By clicking next, you acknowledge the following:

- All information you provide us, will only be used for research purposes - Your participation is voluntary

- You can stop your participation at any point during the research - Your answers will be processed anonymously

- The results will only be reported in an aggregated fashion, and individual data will never be reported.

If you have any question about the research, please contact pauline.vanhoutte@student.uva.nl What is your gender?

( ) Male ( ) Female ( ) Other

How old are you? ______________

Are you currently enrolled in a higher education institution? ( ) Yes

Which degree are you currently enrolled in? ( ) Bachelor's degree

( ) Master's degree ( ) Doctorate

What is the highest degree you have obtained? ( ) High school

( ) Higher non-university education ( ) Bachelor's degree

( ) Master's degree ( ) Doctorate ( ) None of these

What is your citizenship? (If you have two citizenships, select the country you vote in) ( ) Belgian

( ) Dutch ( ) Other

In which country are you voting? ( ) Belgium

( ) The Netherlands ( ) Other

Did you vote during the last elections in your country? ( ) Yes

( ) No, I was not allowed to (e.g., too young) ( ) No, I was not able to (e.g., sickness, travel, ...) ( ) I don't remember

( ) I prefer not to say

Did you vote during the last European elections? ( ) Yes

( ) No, I decided not to

( ) No, I was not allowed to (e.g., too young) ( ) No, I was not able to (e.g., sickness, travel, ...) ( ) I don't remember

( ) I prefer not to say

If voting was not compulsory, would you have voted? ( ) I would have voted anyways

( ) I don't know if I would have voted ( ) I would not have voted

How likely is it that you will vote for the next European elections? ( ) 0 ( ) 1 ( ) 2 ( ) 3 ( ) 4 ( ) 5 ( ) 6 ( ) 7 ( ) 8 ( ) 9 ( ) 10

How often do you access news and political information? (e.g., watch the evening news, read newspaper, read an article online)

( ) Daily

( ) 4-6 times a week ( ) 2-3 times a week

( ) Once a week

( ) Less than once a week ( ) Never

Which of these media do you use at least once a week? (pick as many as applicable)

 Television

 Radio

 Newspaper

 Social media

 Online news sites

 None of these

Which of these media do you use at least once a day? (pick as many as applicable)

 Television

 Radio

 Newspaper

 Social media

 Online news sites

 None of these

According to you, how credible are the following sources of information? Not credible at all Somewhat not credible Neutral Somewhat credible Very credible

Television

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

According to you, how accessible are the following sources of information? Hardly accessible Somewhat hard to access Neutral Somewhat easy to access Easily accessible Television

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

Which one of these do you use to access political information? (pick as many as applicable)

 Television

 Radio

 Newspaper

 Social media

 Online news sites

 None of these

How often do you discuss politics?

Daily At least once a week At least once a month At least once a year Less than once a year Never

With your family

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

How often do you discuss European politics?

Daily At least once a week At least once a month At least once a year Less than once a year Never With your family

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

The following part will be composed of factual questions about the European Union. Many people don't know the answer to these questions, so no worries if you don't either. If you do not know the answer simply select the 'Don't know' option and proceed to the next question. When are the next European elections?

( ) In April 2019 ( ) In May 2019 ( ) In June 2019

( ) In September 2019 ( ) Don't know

Which country of the European Union is currently in the process of leaving the union? ( ) The United Kingdom

( ) Greece ( ) Italy ( ) Bulgaria ( ) Denmark ( ) Don't know

Who is the current president of the European Parliament? ( ) Donald Tusk ( ) Michel Barnier ( ) Jean-Claude Juncker ( ) Antonio Tajani ( ) Martin Schulz ( ) Don't know

Which one of these countries is not part of the European Union? ( ) Slovakia

( ) Lithuania ( ) Macedonia ( ) Slovenia

( ) None, they are all part of the EU ( ) Don't know

Which one of these is false? The members of the European Parliaments are ... ( ) Directly elected by the European citizens

( ) Drafting law proposals

( ) Responsible for the budget of the European Union ( ) Representing the interest of the European citizens ( ) None, they are all correct

Appendix D

Survey Questionnaire in French

Merci de prendre le temps de répondre à cette enquête, dans laquelle il vous sera demandé de répondre à des questions concernant l'Union européenne et votre utilisation des médias. Les répondants de cette enquête doivent avoir 18 ans ou plus et être citoyen belge ou néerlandais. Avant de commencer, c'est important de vous informer de vos droits en tant que participant et les mesures qui sont prises pour les garantir.

En continuant, vous prenez connaissance des points suivants:

- Toute information fournie sera uniquement utilisée pour la recherche - Votre participation est volontaire

- Vous pouvez arrêter votre participation à tout moment - Vos réponses seront enregistrées de manière anonyme

- Les résultats de cette enquête seront rapportés de manière groupée et aucune donnée individuelle ne sera rapportée.

Si vous avez des question sur la recherche, merci de contacter pauline.vanhoutte@student.uva.nl

Quel est votre genre? ( ) Masculin

( ) Féminin ( ) Autre

Quel âge avez-vous? _________________ Êtes-vous inscrit dans une université? ( ) Oui

( ) Non

( ) Bachelier ( ) Master ( ) Doctorat

Quel est le diplôme le plus élevé que vous ayez obtenu? ( ) Etudes secondaires

( ) Supérieur non-universitaire ( ) Bachelier

( ) Master ( ) Doctorat

( ) Aucune des réponses proposées

Quelle est votre nationalité? (si vous avez deux nationalités, choisissez le pays dans lequel vous votez)

( ) Belge ( ) Néerlandais.e ( ) Autre

Dans quel pays votez-vous? ( ) Belgique

( ) Pays-Bas ( ) Autre

Avez-vous voté lors des dernières élections dans votre pays? ( ) Oui

( ) Non, j'ai décidé de ne pas voter

( ) Non, je n'en avais pas l'autorisation (ex. trop jeune) ( ) Non, je n'en ai pas été capable (ex. maladie, voyage) ( ) Je ne sais plus

( ) Je préfère ne pas le dire

Avez-vous voté lors des dernières élections européennes? ( ) Oui

( ) Non, j'ai décidé de ne pas voter

( ) Non, je n'en avais pas l'autorisation (ex. trop jeune) ( ) Non, je n'en ai pas été capable (ex. maladie, voyage) ( ) Je ne sais plus

( ) Je préfère ne pas le dire

Si le vote n'était pas obligatoire, auriez-vous quand même voté? ( ) J'aurais quand même voté

( ) Je ne sais pas si j'aurais voté ( ) Je n'aurais pas voté

Quelle est la probabilité que vous votiez pour les prochaines élections européennes? ( ) 0 ( ) 1 ( ) 2 ( ) 3 ( ) 4 ( ) 5 ( ) 6 ( ) 7 ( ) 8 ( ) 9 ( ) 10

A quelle fréquence accédez-vous aux nouvelles et à de l'information politique? (ex. regarder le JT, lire le journal, lire un article en ligne)

( ) Tous les jours

( ) 4 à 6 fois par semaine ( ) 2 à 3 fois par semaine ( ) Une fois par semaine

( ) Moins d'une fois par semaine ( ) Jamais

Lequel de ces médias utilisez-vous au moins une fois par semaine? (sélectionnez-en autant que nécessaire)

 Radio

 Journal papier

 Réseaux sociaux

 Sites d'information en ligne

 Aucune des propositions

Lequel de ces médias utilisez-vous au moins une fois par jour? (sélectionnez-en autant que nécessaire)

 Télévision

 Radio

 Journal papier

 Réseaux sociaux

 Sites d'information en ligne

 Aucune des propositions

D'après vous, à quel point les sources d'information suivantes sont-elles crédibles? Pas crédible

du tout

Peu crédible Neutre Crédible Très crédible

Télévision

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

Sites d'information

D'après vous, à quel point les sources d'information suivantes sont-elles accessibles? Difficile d'accès Quelque peu difficile d'accès Neutre Quelque peu accessible Facilement accessible Télévision

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

Lequel de ces médias utilisez-vous pour accéder à de l'information politique?

 Télévision

 Radio

 Journal papier

 Réseaux sociaux

 Sites d'information en ligne

 Aucune des propositions

A quelle fréquence discutez-vous de politique?

jours une fois par semaine une fois par mois une fois par an d'une fois par an Avec votre famille

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

A quelle fréquence discutez-vous de la politique européenne?

Tous les jours

Au moins une fois par

semaine Au moins une fois par mois Au moins une fois par an Moins d'une fois par an Jamais Avec votre famille

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

La partie suivante sera composée de questions factuelles sur l'Union européenne. Beaucoup de monde ne connait pas la réponses à ces questions, il n'y a donc pas de raison de s'inquiéter si vous ne les connaissez pas non plus.

Si vous ne connaissez pas la réponse, choisissez simplement l'opinion 'Je ne sais pas' et passez à la question suivante.

Quand seront organisées les prochaines élections européennes? ( ) En avril 2019

( ) En mai 2019 ( ) En juin 2019 ( ) En septembre 2019 ( ) Je ne sais pas

Quel pays de l'Union européenne est en train de quitter l'Union? ( ) Le Royaume Uni ( ) La Grèce ( ) L'Italie ( ) La Bulgarie ( ) Le Danemark ( ) Je ne sais pas

Qui est l'actuel président du parlement européen ? ( ) Donald Tusk ( ) Michel Barnier ( ) Jean-Claude Juncker ( ) Antonio Tajani ( ) Martin Schulz ( ) Je ne sais pas

Lequel de ces pays n'est pas membre de l'Union Européenne? ( ) La Slovaquie

( ) La Macédoine ( ) La Slovénie

( ) Aucun, ils sont tous membres de l'UE ( ) Je ne sais pas

Laquelle de ces propositions est fausse? Les membres du parlement européen ... ( ) Sont directement élus par les citoyens européens

( ) Rédigent des propositions de loi

( ) Sont en charge du budget de l'Union Européenne

( ) Représentent les intérêts des citoyens de l'Union Européenne ( ) Aucune, elles sont toutes correctes

Appendix E

Survey Questionnaire in Dutch

Bedankt voor je deelname aan dit onderzoek. We zullen een aantal vragen stellen over de Europese Unie en je mediagebruik. Om deel te nemen aan dit onderzoek moet je 18 jaar of ouder zijn en de Belgische of Nederlandse nationaliteit hebben.

Voor je begint is het belangrijk dat je geïnformeerd bent over je rechten als deelnemer en over de maatregelen die we nemen om je rechten te waarborgen.

Als je op 'volgende' klikt, erken je de volgende punten:

- Alle informatie die je aan ons verstrekt wordt alleen gebruikt voor onderzoeksdoeleinden - Je deelname is vrijwillig

- Je kan op ieder moment van dit onderzoek besluiten dat je toch niet wil deelnemen - Je antwoorden zijn anoniem

- De resultaten zullen alleen in geaggregeerde vorm worden weergegeven. We zullen nooit verslag doen van individuele data.

Als je vragen hebt over dit onderzoek, stuur een email naar pauline.vanhoutte@student.uva.nl Wat is je geslacht? ( ) Man ( ) Vrouw ( ) Overig Wat is je leeftijd? ___________

Sta je op dit moment ingeschreven bij een universiteit? ( ) Ja

Wat voor soort studie doe je op dit moment? ( ) Bachelor

( ) Master ( ) Doctoraat

Wat is het hoogste diploma dat je hebt behaald? ( ) Middelbare school

( ) Beroepsonderwijs of HBO ( ) Bachelor

( ) Master ( ) Doctoraat

( ) Geen van de bovenstaande

Wat is je nationaliteit? (Als je meerdere nationaliteiten hebt, selecteer dan het land waar je stemt)

( ) Belgisch ( ) Nederlands ( ) Anders

In welk land stem je? ( ) België

( ) Nederlands ( ) Anders

Heb je in de meest recente verkiezingen in je land gestemd? ( ) Ja