Political party popularity and Buddhist policy advocacy: An analysis of university students' political preferences in Bangkok
คำสำคัญ:
Buddhist policy orientation, political communication, political identity, political party popularity, political perceptionบทคัดย่อ
This study investigates the factors that affect the popularity of political parties among university students in Bangkok, Thailand. This demographic represents educated urban youth. The research focuses on five key variables: political identity, political party policy, political communication, political perception, and political party popularity. Political party popularity is defined as the degree of support, positive attitudes, and emotional attachment toward a party that influences electoral behavior. In this study, the term “Buddhist-oriented policy” refers to policy positions that emphasize the institutional protection of Buddhism, promote moral governance based on religious principles, and advocate for identity-based narratives that connect national and religious values. Using a cross-sectional survey involving 300 students and employing Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), the findings indicate that political identity and political communication are the only significant predictors of popularity of political parties. Political communication significantly influences political perception, while political identity does not. Additionally, political perception does not have a significant impact on party popularity, and there are no statistically significant indirect (mediated) effects. Moreover, political party policies, especially those oriented toward Buddhism, show no significant direct or indirect effects on either perception or popularity. These findings suggest that for educated urban youth, alignment with political identity and communication processes may hold greater influence than policy content and religious values. This indicates a potential generational divergence in political behavior, rather than a definitive shift within the broader Thai electorate.
เอกสารอ้างอิง
Alvídrez, S. (2017). Interactivity in Twitter: Effects of party identity on the evaluation of political candidates and on their vote intentions. Comunicación y Sociedad, 29, 103-122. https://doi.org/10.32870/CYS.V0I29.6416.
Bankert, A., Huddy, L., & Rosema, M. (2017). Measuring partisanship as a social identity in multi-party systems. Political Behavior, 39, 103–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-016-9349-5.
Bougher, L. D. (2017). The correlates of discord: Identity, issue alignment, and political hostility in polarized America. Political Behavior, 39, 731–762. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-016-9377-1.
Cain, B. (2020). I'm the one: Social media, social identity, and elections. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 10(4), e202023. https://doi.org/10.30935/OJCMT/9142.
Castle, J. J., & Stepp, K. K. (2021). Partisanship, religion, and issue polarization in the United States: A reassessment. Political Behavior, 43, 1311-1335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-020-09668-5.
Claassen, R. L., Djupe, P. A., Lewis, A. R., & Neiheisel, J. R. (2021). Which party represents my group?The group foundations of partisan choice and polarization. Political Behavior, 43, 615-636. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-019-09565-6.
Dalton, R. J. (2016). Party identification and its implications. In Erin Hannah (ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.72.
Huddy, L., & Bankert, A. (2017). Political partisanship as a social identity. In Erin Hannah (ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.250.
Huddy, L., Mason, L., & Aarøe, L. (2015). Expressive partisanship: Campaign involvement, political emotion, and partisan identity. American Political Science Review, 109(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055414000604.
Kristensen, N. N., & Solhaug, T. (2017). Students as first-time voters: The role of voter advice applications in self-reflection on party choice and political identity. Journal of Social Science Education, 16(1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.4119/UNIBI/JSSE-V16-I1-1503.
Miller, P. R., & Conover, P. J. (2015). Red and blue states of mind: Partisan hostility and voting in the United States. Political Research Quarterly, 68(2), 225–239. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912915577208.
Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation. (2026). Student statistics. Retrieved January 12, 2026, from https://info.mhesi.go.th/homestat_std.php.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 123–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2.
Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Pick, M., Liengaard, B. D., Radomir, L., & Ringle, C. M. (2022). Progress in partial least squares structural equation modeling use in marketing research in the last decade. Psychology & Marketing, 39(5), 1035–1064. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21640.
Stenger, S., True, J., Buranajaroenkij, D., & Satasut, P. (2026). The gendered politics of state-sanctioned extremism: Evidence from a study of Buddhist protectionism. Politics & Gender, 22(1), 139–170. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1743923x25100135.
Twenge, J. M., Honeycutt, N., Prislin, R., & Sherman, R. A. (2016). More polarized but more independent: Political party identification and ideological self-categorization among U.S. adults, college students, and late adolescents, 1970–2015. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(10), 1364–1383. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216660058.
Westwood, S. J., Iyengar, S., Walgrave, S., Leonisio, R., Miller, L., & Strijbis, O. (2018). The tie that divides: Cross-national evidence of the primacy of partyism. European Journal of Political Research, 57(2), 333–354. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12228.
Zabinski, A. M., & Bolsen, T. (2017). Party identity and the evaluation of political candidates. Discover, 4, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.31922/DISC4.1.
