open Secondary menu

Political EngagementGeneration Z: Portrait of a New Generation of Young Canadians and How They Compare to Older Canadians

After looking at Generation Z's orientations towards Canadian society and democracy compared with those of older generations, this section examines how the newest generation of Canadians engages with politics and takes part in society and public affairs.

First, we present the political resources and motivational factors that support and explain citizens' participation in politics. Then, we present youth's media consumption patterns and their trust in different media sources. Next, we examine the role of socialization agents–actors that may influence youth's political engagement and behaviours, including schools and teachers, parents, peers and, in a more modest way, political parties. We conclude this section with an overview of youth's attitudes towards the electoral process and the ways youth are civically and politically active in Canadian society.

1. Political resources

a. Political knowledge

One of the most important resources for citizens is knowledge of politics and public affairs (Delli Carpini and Keeter 1996). Those who know more about politics tend to be more active in politics.

To assess Canadians' knowledge about politics, we asked them 10 questions on three topics: political figures, political institutions, and political parties' campaign promises (in the context of the 2019 federal election)1.

On average, older Canadians have greater political knowledge than any other group. The bottom bar of Figure 14 shows that, on average, older Canadians correctly answered five of 10 knowledge questions about politics. This is two more correct answers than Canadians aged 23–34 (who, on average, correctly answered three of 10 questions), while the two youngest age groups have the least knowledge, answering only two of the questions correctly, on average. The differences in levels of knowledge are substantial and are all statistically significant. However, the findings are not surprising, as prior research shows that young citizens tend to know less about politics, which supports the life cycle explanation of political involvement: Young people are busier with other life events, such as acquiring diplomas and finding employment (Mahéo and Vissers 2016; Gidengil et al. 2003)

Figure 8: Average number of correct answers to 10 political knowledge questions, by age group (with 95% confidence intervals)

Figure 8:  Average number of correct answers to 10 political knowledge questions, by age group (with 95% confidence intervals)

Text version of "Figure 8: Average number of correct answers to 10 political knowledge questions, by age group (with 95% confidence intervals)"

This horizontal bar chart shows the average number of correct answers to political knowledge questions by age group. The scale ranges from 0 (no correct answer) to 10 (ten correct answers). The averages are as follows:

  • Aged 16–17: 2.2
  • Aged 18–22: 2.2
  • Aged 23–34: 3.1
  • Aged 35+: 4.9

Taking a closer look at the different types of knowledge, the gaps between the youngest and eldest Canadians vary by question. As shown by the first and third lines of Figure 8, the knowledge gap between the two youngest age groups and the oldest age group is the largest for the questions related to government responsibilities (with gaps of about 36 and 46 percentage points, respectively). This is not surprising, given that older Canadians have had more experience with the political system and public services.

There are also substantial differences in levels of knowledge about public figures and parties' campaign promises between Gen Zers and older Canadians, especially those aged 35 years and older (with gaps of about 20 to 30 percentage points for most questions).

Knowledge of the current political and electoral context–demonstrated by knowledge of campaign promises and public figures–can be seen as a measure of political attentiveness. So, in that sense, it is not surprising that the group of citizens aged 35 and over are the most politically knowledgeable or attentive. As older Canadians turn out at higher rates, they are more likely to follow political campaigns and the news. Attentiveness to the election matters most to those who participate in it. In paying more attention to the campaigns, they are also likely to become more aware of key political figures who are discussed regularly.

The turnout explanation for political attentiveness is further supported by our analysis of those aged 18–22. Respondents in that age group who voted in the 2019 election display significantly higher levels of knowledge about campaign promises (and political institutions) than those who did not vote. So among the youngest Canadians, it is also the case that those who vote pay more attention to politics.

It is worth noting that knowledge about the number of representatives in the House of Commons (see the ninth line or second from the bottom of Figure 9) is relatively low and that most differences between age groups are not statistically significant. Approximately one-third of all age groups answered correctly. This shows that youth who are mostly still in school know facts about political institutions as well as older Canadians do.

Figure 9: Proportions of correct answers to 10 political knowledge questions, by age group (with 95% confidence intervals)

Figure 9: Proportions of correct answers to 10 political knowledge questions, by age group (with 95% confidence intervals)

Text version of "Figure 9: Proportions of correct answers to 10 political knowledge questions, by age group (with 95% confidence intervals)"

This horizontal bar chart shows the proportion of respondents answering each political knowledge question correctly, by age group. The breakdown is as follows:

  • Responsibility over healthcare
    • Aged 16–17: 30%
    • Aged 18–22: 30%
    • Aged 23–34: 43%
    • Aged 35+: 66%
  • Public figure: Angela Merkel
    • Aged 16–17: 24%
    • Aged 18–22: 29%
    • Aged 23–34: 40%
    • Aged 35+: 64%
  • Responsibility over employment insurance
    • Aged 16–17: 17%
    • Aged 18–22: 18%
    • Aged 23–34: 35%
    • Aged 35+: 64%
  • Campaign promise: abolish carbon tax
    • Aged 16–17: 28%
    • Aged 18–22: 28%
    • Aged 23–34: 39%
    • Aged 35+: 59%
  • Public figure: Julie Payette
    • Aged 16–17: 29%
    • Aged 18–22: 21%
    • Aged 23–34: 28%
    • Aged 35+: 55%
  • Campaign promise: universal dental care
    • Aged 16–17: 19%
    • Aged 18–22: 21%
    • Aged 23–34: 32%
    • Aged 35+: 47%
  • Public figure: Chrystia Freeland
    • Aged 16–17: 11%
    • Aged 18–22: 12%
    • Aged 23–34: 22%
    • Aged 35+: 47%
  • Campaign promise: ban semi-automatic rifles
    • Aged 16–17: 22%
    • Aged 18–22: 22%
    • Aged 23–34: 32%
    • Aged 35+: 42%
  • Number of House of Commons representatives
    • Aged 16–17: 33%
    • Aged 18–22: 28%
    • Aged 23–34: 26%
    • Aged 35+: 34%
  • Campaign promise: abolish post-secondary tuition
    • Aged 16–17: 10%
    • Aged 18–22: 9%
    • Aged 23–34: 10%
    • Aged 35+: 9%

b. Feelings of political competency

Citizens' feelings of competency with regard to politics are an important factor in their engagement with politics and political or civic activism. Indeed, if people feel they cannot understand what is going on in politics and public affairs, they will be less likely to get involved.

We asked Canadians whether they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: "Politics and government seem so complicated that a person like me can't understand what's going on." As shown in Figure 10, there is a clear divide between the oldest Canadians (Gen Xers and Baby Boomers) and the three youngest age groups (Millennials and Gen Zers). While all age groups tend to agree somewhat with the statement (as they score above the mid-point of 0.5, on average), young Canadians aged 16 to 34 are more likely to say they agree that politics seems too complicated for them to understand it. The three youngest groups of Canadians present an average agreement score of 0.6, and there is no statistical difference between their scores. On the other hand, Canadians aged 35 and over are less likely to agree with this statement (with an average score of 0.53, which is significantly different from the younger people's score).

Looking closer at recently enfranchised Canadians–those aged 18 to 22 who voted in the 2019 federal election–we can compare the reported political competency of the first-time voters and those who chose not to vote. Those who voted reported competency scores that were, on average, 15 percentage points higher than those who did not vote. This highlights the importance of voter and democratic education programs in raising turnout through improving knowledge and competency.

Figure 10: Average agreement with statement about politics being too complicated, by age group (with 95% confidence intervals)

Figure 10: Average agreement with statement about politics being too complicated, by age group (with 95% confidence intervals)

Text version of "Figure 10: Average agreement with statement about politics being too complicated, by age group (with 95% confidence intervals)"

This horizontal bar graph shows the average level of agreement with the statement "Sometimes politics and government seem so complicated that a person like me can't really understand what's going on." The scale ranges from 0 (strongly disagree) to 1 (strongly agree). The averages are as follows:

  • Aged 16–17 years: 0.62
  • Aged 18–22 years: 0.60
  • Aged 23–34 years: 0.58
  • Aged 35+: 0.53

c. Political interest

Political interest is one of the most important indicators of citizens' engagement with politics and a central motivational factor explaining whether citizens take an active part in public affairs (Verba, Schlozman and Brady 1995). In general, Canadians tend to be relatively interested in public affairs and politics. In fact, one-quarter of respondents to the 2019 survey said they were very interested in politics, and half said they were somewhat interested.

However, as shown in Figure 11, levels of political interest vary with respondents' age. First, both those aged 16–17 and 18–22 report they are not interested at all (in dark red) or somewhat uninterested (in light red) more frequently than those aged 23–34 and 35 and over. It follows, therefore, that among the two older age groups, there is a relatively higher proportion of individuals who report being very interested (in dark green) and somewhat interested in politics (in light green).

Figure 11: Levels of political interest, by age group

Figure 11: Levels of political interest, by age group

Text version of "Figure 11 Levels of political interest, by age group"

These four pie charts show the levels of political interest for each age group. The breakdown is as follows:

  • Respondents aged 16–17:
    • Very interested: 11%
    • Somewhat interested: 45%
    • Somewhat disinterested: 35%
    • Not interested: 9%
  • Respondents aged 18–22:
    • Very interested: 12%
    • Somewhat interested: 45%
    • Somewhat disinterested: 31%
    • Not interested: 12%
  • Respondents aged 23–34:
    • Very interested: 18%
    • Somewhat interested: 52%
    • Somewhat disinterested: 22%
    • Not interested: 8%
  • Respondents aged 35+:
    • Very interested: 28%
    • Somewhat interested: 49%
    • Somewhat disinterested: 18%
    • Not interested: 6%

The differences in the average levels of interest are statistically significant between the age groups (but not between those aged 16–17 and 18–22), which shows that the two youngest age groups of Generation Z (who have equal levels of interest in politics) are the least politically interested of all Canadians.

The age differential in levels of political interest and the lower levels of interest found among the new generation of Canadian voters raises some questions for the future. Indeed, some researchers have argued that levels of political interest are relatively set by the age of 16 and that, by that age, "you either got it or you don't" (Prior 2018). Thus, it is possible that as Generation Z replaces older generations, the overall level of political interest in the Canadian population will decline due to lower interest in politics among Gen Z. Alternatively, it may be the case that with age, and after going through different stages of life, Generation Z may become more interested in a topic that will have more importance in their lives.

Looking to the future raises the question of what can be done in the present to increase political interest among the youngest generation. Using regression analyses, we examine the relationship between individual characteristics, psychological engagement, civic activities, and social resources and political interest. We focus on explaining Generation Z's political interest, and further examine differences between those aged 16 to 17 and those aged 18 to 22 with the use of interaction terms. Figure 18 shows the statistically significant associations between several factors and political interest. These figures are based on the results of the regression analyses, which can be found in the Appendix (Table 2).

Figure 12a shows the predicted probability of being politically interested, based on the level of knowledge of those aged 16 to 22. We see that higher levels of knowledge about political institutions are associated with higher levels of interest. Figure 12b displays the predicted probability of being politically interested, based on the frequency of political discussions within three types of social networks. We find that more frequent discussions with teachers, parents and peers are all associated with significantly higher levels of political interest, and that this positive association is especially strong for discussions with parents and peers.

While we cannot speak about the causal relationship between these factors with the data at hand (i.e. whether more knowledge and more discussions cause, or produce, more political interest or if, alternatively, political interest leads to more knowledge and discussions), based on theoretical models and past empirical evidence, we expect that increasing knowledge of politics and stimulating discussions with younger individuals would produce some increase in political interest.

Figure 12: Predicted levels of political interest (with 95% confidence intervals)

a) Predicted levels of political interest (with 95% confidence intervals)

Figure 12a: Predicted levels of political interest (with 95% confidence intervals)

Text version of "Predicted levels of political interest (with 95% confidence intervals)"

Panel a: Predicted levels of political interest of those aged 16–22, based on their levels of knowledge about political institutions

Panel a is a line graph of predicted political interest for respondents aged 16–22 years depending on the number of correctly answered questions about political institutions. The horizontal axis ranges from zero to three questions answered correctly. The vertical axis ranges from 0.67 to 0.76, with 0 meaning no political interest and 1 meaning very interested. 0.67 corresponds to being somewhat interested. All other variables are held at their mean.

  • If a respondent answered zero questions correctly, their predicted level of political interest is 69%.
  • If a respondent answered one question correctly, their predicted level of political interest is 70%.
  • If a respondent answered two questions correctly, their predicted level of political interest is 71%.
  • If a respondent answered three questions correctly, their predicted level of political interest is 73%.

b) Predicted levels of political interest of those aged 16-22, based on their levels of political discussions with friends, parents and teachers

Figure 12b: Predicted levels of political interest of those aged 16-22, based on their levels of political discussions with friends, parents and teachers

Text version of "Predicted levels of political interest of those aged 16-22, based on their levels of political discussions with friends, parents and teachers"

Panel b: Predicted levels of political interest of those aged 16–22, based on their levels of political discussions with friends, parents and teachers

Panel b is a line graph of predicted political interest based on the frequency of political discussions with three different socializing actors. Each line corresponds to a different actor: friends, parents, or teachers. The horizontal axis includes the five ordered response categories for discussion frequency: never, rarely, sometimes, often, very often. The vertical axis ranges from 0.64 to 0.76, with 0 meaning no political interest and 1 meaning very interested. 0.67 corresponds to being somewhat interested. All other variables are held at their mean.

  • Socializing agent: friends
    • Given no political discussion, the predicted level of political interest is 66%.
    • Given rare political discussion, the predicted level of political interest is 68%.
    • Given political discussion sometimes, the predicted level of political interest is 70%.
    • Given political discussion often, the predicted level of political interest is 73%.
    • Given political discussion very often, the predicted level of political interest is 74%.
  • Socializing agent: teachers
    • Given no political discussion, the predicted level of political interest is 68%.
    • Given rare political discussion, the predicted level of political interest is 69%.
    • Given political discussion sometimes, the predicted level of political interest is 70%.
    • Given political discussion often, the predicted level of political interest is 71%.
    • Given political discussion very often, the predicted level of political interest is 72%.
  • Socializing agent: parents
    • Given no political discussion, the predicted level of political interest is 66%.
    • Given rare political discussion, the predicted level of political interest is 68%.
    • Given political discussion sometimes, the predicted level of political interest is 70%.
    • Given political discussion often, the predicted level of political interest is 72%.
    • Given political discussion very often, the predicted level of political interest is 74%.

2. Media consumption

a. Frequency of news consumption

Another dimension of Canadians' interest in politics and current affairs is their news consumption: Those who are more interested in public affairs tend to follow the news more often. Generally, Canadians tend to pay attention to current affairs. In fact, 40% of Canadians report following the news on a daily basis, while only 17% say they never check the news. Here, too, there is a gap between the three generational groups: Generation Z follows the news much less frequently than Millennials, and even less than Gen Xers and Baby Boomers. For example, roughly 25% of Canadians aged 16 to 22 report that they never check the news, and close to half of them only do so once or twice a week.

b. News sources

The different generational groups that we refer to in this report have experienced very different media environments and technological contexts during their formative years. While Baby Boomers grew up in a media environment mostly populated by radio and print media, Gen Xers faced the growing importance of the television, Millennials were the first to use the Internet on a regular basis, and Generation Z is the first generation to grow up with mobile devices (Dimock 2019). The context in which Canadians have evolved most likely affects the types of news sources they favour to keep themselves informed about public affairs and politics.

In the analysis of the survey conducted with Canadians in 2019, we do find differences in preferred news sources between the age groups. The most distinctive group, in terms of its use of various news sources, is the group of Canadians aged 35 or older. Alternatively, the groups in the 16–34 age range are relatively similar in the way they consume news. The only distinction among these three age groups–who have all grown up with the Internet–is that the youngest of the Gen Zers (aged 16 to 17) are much less likely to use print media in their media diet (the difference is statistically significant with all other age groups).

To illustrate the difference between Gen Xers and Baby Boomers and the youngest generations, Figure 13 shows the relative importance of different news sources in the media diet of those aged 16 to 17 (on the left) and of those over 35 (on the right). It is clear that for older Canadians, television is the number one source of information, followed relatively equally by print media, radio, web apps on mobile devices, and information found on social networks. Alternatively, the most-used media outlet by younger Canadians is social networking applications, followed by television and web apps on mobile devices.

Figure 13: Visualization of preferred news media sources for respondents aged 16–17 (left panel) and those aged 35 and older (right panel)

Figure 13: Visualization of preferred news media sources for respondents aged 16–17 (left panel) and those aged 35 and older (right panel)

Text version of "Figure 13: Visualization of preferred news media sources for respondents aged 16–17 (left panel) and those aged 35 and older (right panel)"

These bubble plots show the percentage of preferred news sources for two age groups: respondents aged 16–17 and those aged 35 and over. Respondents were asked to select their main news sources from a list of nine possible sources.

The preferred news sources for respondents aged 16–17 are, in descending order:

  • social networking sites: 52%
  • television: 45%
  • web applications: 40%
  • social news: 19%
  • radio: 18%
  • independent: 9%
  • print: 7%
  • other: 5%

The preferred news sources for respondents aged 35 and over are, in descending order:

  • television: 69%
  • print: 28%
  • radio: 28%
  • web applications: 28%
  • social networking sites: 25%
  • independent: 13%
  • social news: 5%
  • other: 5%

The sources of information that individuals use have important implications for the type of information they consume and how they consume it. According to research (Kononova 2013; Paasonen 2016), consuming news on web applications and social networks implies that individuals usually multi-task and are more often distracted by other visual stimuli (like advertisements). Therefore, they pay less attention to the informational content. Also, studies have found that misinformation travels more quickly on the web, compared with other types of media, augmenting the viewer's risk of being exposed to false information and fake news (Vosoughi, Roy, and Aral 2018). So members of the new generation who tend to consume news on social networks and web apps might be less attentive to political news and more likely to be exposed to misinformation, which may have important consequences for their political engagement.

c. Trust in news sources

When comparing Canadians' confidence in different news sources and, more specifically, between news published by traditional journalism outlets and news posted on social media, we find that, in general, trust in professional journalism is much higher than trust in social media (i.e. there is a substantial and statistically significant 20 percentage-point gap). But looking at the levels of trust in these two news sources across age groups reveals different patterns.

Those aged 35 and over are the most trusting of professional journalism and the least trusting of social media. It is no surprise that they stand out compared with Millennials (aged 23–34) and Generation Z (aged 16–22), who have both grown up with the Internet. However, there are still some differences between these younger groups. While Millennials, who are considered to be the first "digital natives," are still more trusting of professional journalism than social media, Gen Zers–the first generation to have grown up with smartphones–display relatively equal levels of trust in traditional journalism and news posted on social media (contrary to the two older age groups).

This result has important implications for democracy. Given that young Canadians follow the news on social networks and web apps much more than older Canadians do, and that they have as much trust in social media as in professional journalism, in terms of the news they produce, Generation Z are the most at risk of consuming and believing fake news and unverified information, which is more prevalent on the web than in print media.

3. Social resources

In this section, we focus on Generation Z. We consider the different socialization agents impacting the political engagement of Canadian youth aged 16 to 22 and examine whether youth who can or cannot yet vote experience similar or distinct socialization influences. Many studies on political socialization have highlighted the influence that parents and families, schools and teachers, and friends can have on the political development of children and youth (Beck and Jennings 1982; Mahéo 2018; Marquart, Ohme, and Möller 2020; Napoli 2014). These agents of socialization may help shape youth's political orientations and behaviours in various ways, most notably through discussions about politics and by inviting youth to take part in political or civic activities (Dalton 1982). Further, we examine more contemporary influences, such as the capacity of political parties to contact and mobilize youth during a federal election campaign.

a. Social networks: Political discussions

Agents of socialization help shape the political orientations and behaviours of youth in various ways, most notably through discussions about politics (Dalton 1982). Through such discussions, agents of socialization convey messages about the importance of politics or of being involved in society; however, they may also offer information about politics and opportunities to become engaged. These political discussions may help to build engagement with politics–as we have seen in the section on political interest–and to increase the likelihood that individuals will become politically active (Zuckerman 2005; McClurg 2003).

We asked young Canadians how frequently they talked about politics with friends, teachers and parents. Overall, youth aged 16 to 22 tend to discuss politics slightly more with parents, followed by teachers and then friends. But differences in the frequency of discussions among these types of social networks are not large. The only significant difference in discussions between the two youth groups is about discussions with teachers: Those aged 16–17 discuss politics more frequently with their teachers than those aged 18–22. This is not surprising, since many 16- and 17-year-olds are still in high school and have frequent interactions with the same teachers, compared with older youth, who are more likely to be at university.

b. School: Civics courses and mock elections

Families play an important part in youth's socialization to politics, but schools represent another important socialization agent in children's and adolescents' lives. Almost all children attend school at least until they turn 16, and most continue their formal education in a variety of contexts for some years afterward. While the efficacy of civic education courses and programs has been debated in the literature, more recent studies have found that programs offered in schools boost children's political knowledge and engagement (Mahéo 2018, 2019).

We asked the young respondents about their experience with civics programs in school. As Figure 14 reveals, those aged 16–17 were significantly more likely to report having participated in a mock election at school (52%), compared with those aged 18–22 (43%). Those aged 16–17 were also significantly more likely to report having taken civics courses in high school (81%), compared with those aged 18–22 (71%). The differences in civics program experiences between youth aged 16–17 and those aged 18–22 may be due to increased access to such programs for the younger group in recent years. But we also need to consider the possibility that these differences might be due at least in part to the fact that the older youth group might not recall their high school experiences as precisely as those who are 16 and 17, given that they may have left high school some time ago.

Overall, close to half of Gen Zers in Canada have taken part in a voting activity at school, and roughly three-quarters of them have had civics courses. While there is still room for improvement in terms of exposing young Canadians to the act of voting before they turn 18, it seems that a large proportion of young Canadians now receive some kind of classroom training about democracy and politics. A review of the civics programs and curricula used in schools across Canada in past years could help assess whether there has, in fact, been an increase in the offering of civic education programs.

Figure 14: Percentage of respondents aged 16 to 22 who reported taking civics courses and participating in mock elections, by age group (with 95% confidence intervals)

Figure 14: Percentage of respondents aged 16 to 22 who reported taking civics courses and participating in mock elections, by age group (with 95% confidence intervals)

Text version of "Figure 14: Percentage of respondents aged 16 to 22 who reported taking civics courses and participating in mock elections, by age group (with 95% confidence intervals)"

This horizontal bar graph shows the percentage of respondents aged 16–22 who took courses where they learned about government and politics and who participated in mock election programs in primary or high school:

  • When you were in high school, did you take any courses where you learned about government and politics?
    • Aged 16–17: 81%
    • Aged 18–22: 71%
  • In the past, did you participate in a mock election program in primary school or in high school? (For example: Student Vote)
    • Aged 16–17: 52%
    • Aged 18–22: 43%

c. Political parties

As we know, being asked to participate is an important factor in political participation (Verba, Schlozman and Brady 1995). Respondents were surveyed about being contacted by a political party or a candidate during the 2019 federal election campaign.

Figure 15 displays a substantial and significant gap in the mobilization of Canadians. Fewer than 30% of young Canadians under the age of 35 reported having been in touch with political parties or candidates during the 2019 campaign, while about 40% of Canadians aged over 35 said they had been in touch with a party or a candidate2. This finding corroborates prior research and reports showing that young Canadians are much less likely to be contacted and mobilized by political parties before an election (Mahéo and Vissers 2016), which may be one of many factors explaining why youth turnout rates are much lower than those for older Canadians.

Figure 15: Percentage of respondents who reported being contacted by a political party, by age group (with 95% confidence intervals)

Figure 15: Percentage of respondents who reported being contacted by a political party, by age group (with 95% confidence intervals)

Text version of "Figure 15: Percentage of respondents who reported being contacted by a political party, by age group (with 95% confidence intervals)"

This horizontal bar chart shows the proportion of respondents in each age group who reported being contacted by a political party. The proportions are as follows:

  • Aged 16–17: 22%
  • Aged 18–22: 26%
  • Aged 23–34: 29%
  • Aged 35+: 39%

Footnotes

1 All questions can be found in the Appendix.

2 The low proportion of contact with pre-electors (i.e. 22% for youth aged 16–17) might be explained by the fact that political parties do not have an incentive to contact Canadians who are not yet of voting age.