Understanding Psychological Motives towards Politics: Developing Psychological Orientation Scale towards Politics (POSP-S) for Indonesia



For over 18 years, Indonesia has undergone democracy in every aspect of government decision making. After new order (orde baru) regime fell, Indonesia has changed several regulations to implement democratic principle, such as direct elections for Presidential; Gubernatorial and also local leaders. However, there still few challenges faced by Indonesia. One of those challenges is related to human behavior, which is political participation. In democratic country, one of the primary requirements is voluntarily active participation. Voluntarily means an action without any pressure. Without voluntarily act on participation, a country cannot be listed as democratic country. As an attempt to predict voluntarily participation on politics, psychology has came up with the concept of psychological orientation on politics which represented by three dimensions, political efficacy; political interest and political knowledge. However, different political situation and system among countries are the reason why there is no universal measurement of psychological orientation towards politics. This study aims to construct an instrument as an attempt to measure psychological orientation towards politics in Indonesian context. As an attempt to produce the best items and theoretical model, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) is applied to examine the contribution of each item towards dimensions. CFA analysis finally generates 21 final items for Psychological Orientation towards Politics Scale that can be applied in Indonesian context.


Political efficacy, political interest, political knowledge, psychology, politics

Full Text:



Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.

Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117-148.

Beerbohm, E. (2015). Is democratic leadership possible? American Political Science Review, 109(4), 639-652.

Burns, N., Schlozman, K. L., & Verba, S. (2001). The Private Roots of Public Action: Gender, Equality and Political Participation. Harvard University Press.

Carpini, M. X. D., & Keeter, S. (1993). Measuring political knowledge: Putting first things first. American Journal of Political Science, 37(4), 1179-1206.

Coffe, H. (2013). Women stay local, men go national and global? Gender differences in political interest. Sex Roles, 69, 323-338.

Cozby, P. C., & Bates, S. C. (2012). Methods in Behavioral Research 11th ed. McGraw-Hill.

Craig, S. C., & Maggiotto, M. A. (1982). Measuring political efficacy. Political Methodology, 8(3), 85-109.

Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to Classical and Modern Test Theory. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.

Ekman, P. (1992). An argument for basic emotion. Cognition and Emotion, 6(3/4), 169-200.

Field, A., Miles, J., & Field, Z. (2012). Discovering Statistics Using R. Sage Publication.

Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2008). Social Cognition: From Brains to Culture. NY: McGraw-Hill.

Flavin, P., & Keane , M. J. (2012). Life satisfaction and political participation: Evidence from the United States. Journal of Happiness Studies, 13, 63-78.

Fossati, D. (2016). The State of Local Politics in Indonesia: Survey Evidence from Three Cities. ISEAS: Yusof Ishak Institute.

Galston, W. A. (2001). Political knowledge, political engagement, and civic education. Annual Review of Political Science, 4, 217-234.

Glenn, N. D., & Grimes, M. (1968). Aging, voting and political interest. American Sociological Review, 33(4), 563-575.

Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53-60.

Hunt, D. P. (2003). The concept of knowledge and how to measure it. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(1), 100-113.

Johann, D. (2012). Specific political knowledge and citizen’s participation: Evidence from Germany. Acta Politica, 47(1), 42-66.

Karp, J. A., & Banducci, S. A. (2008). Political efficacy and participation in twenty-seven democracies: How electoral systems shape political behavior. British journal of political science, 38, 311-334.

Kensi, K ., & Stroud, N. J. (2006). Connections between internet use and political efficacy, knowledge, and participation. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 50(2), 173-192.

Kholid, A., Husein, R., & Mutiarin, D. (2015). The influence of social media towards student political participation during the 2014 indonesian presidential election. Journal of Government and Politics, 6(2), 246-264.

Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. The Guilford Press.

Lasorsa, D. L. (2009). Political interest, political knowledge, and evaluations of political news sources: Their interplay in producing context effects. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 86(3), 533-544.

Leung, D. Y. P., Wong, E. M. L., Chan, S. S. C., & Lam, T. H. (2013). Psychometric properties of the big five inventory in a chinese sample of smokers receiving cessation treatment: A validation study. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 3(6), 1-10.

Miller, Warren E., Arthur H. Miller, and Edward J. Schneider. 1980 American National Election Studies Data Source-? book: 1952-1978. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Mondak, J. J., & Anderson, M. R. (2004). The knowledge gap: A reexamination of gender-based differences in political knowledge. The Journal of Politics, 66(2), 492-512.

Prior, M. (2010). You’ve either got it or you don’t? The stability of political interest over the life cycle. The Journal of Politics, 72(3), 747-766.

Russell, J. A. (2003). Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychological Review, 110(1), 145-172.

Russo, S., & Stattin, H. (2017). Stability and change in youth’s political interest. Social Indicators Research, 132, 643-658.

Schwartz, S. H. (2006). A theory of cultural values orientations: Explication and applications. Comparative Sociology, 5 (2-3), p.137-182.

Schwartz, S. H. (2012). An overview of the Schwartz Theory of Basic Values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), pp.1-20.

Silvia, P. J. (2008). Interest –the curious emotion. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(1), 57-60.

Swerdlik, M. E., & Cohen, R. J. (2009). Psychological Testing and Assessment: An Introduction to Tests and Measurement 7th.ed. McGraw-Hill.

Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53-55.

Sulitzeanu-Kenan, R., & Halperin, E. (2012). Making a Difference: Political Efficacy and Policy preference construction. British Journal of Political Science, 43, 295-322.

Weber, E. T. (2010). Democratic Political Leadership. In R. Couto (Eds.), Political and Civic Leadership: A reference Handbook (pp. 105-110). Washington D.C: Sage Press.

Osborne, D., Yogeeswaran, K., & Sibley, C. G. (2015). Hidden consequences of political efficacy: Testing an efficacy–apathy model of political mobilization. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 21(4), 533-540. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000029

Zaheer, L. (2016). Effects of watching political talk shows on political efficacy and political participation. Journal of Political Studies, 23(2), 357-372.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 82-91.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

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

Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta
Jln. Lingkar Selatan, Tamantirto, Kasihan, Bantul Yogyakarta
Telp: ( 0274) 387656 ext 249
Phone: 62274287656
Fax: 62274387646
Email: jgp@umy.ac.id

Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan is licenced under a Creative Common Attribution 4.0 International Licence