Political participation is not only shaped by laws and institutions but also by psychology. Political efficacy helps explain why some eligible citizens vote reliably while others disengage, even when voting is easy and legal.

Core idea: efficacy connects beliefs to behaviour

Political efficacy links a person’s attitudes to a decision to participate (especially voting). When people think their voice matters and government is responsive, they are more likely to invest time, attention, and effort into politics.

Key definition

Efficacy is not the same as partisanship, ideology, or knowledge, but it often interacts with all three: feeling capable and heard makes learning about politics and turning out to vote more likely.

Types of political efficacy

Political efficacy is commonly discussed in two parts, which can move independently.

Internal efficacy (confidence in oneself)

Internal efficacy is the belief that you personally understand politics well enough to participate effectively.

• Higher internal efficacy is associated with:

  • greater political interest and attention

  • feeling qualified to discuss issues or evaluate candidates

  • higher likelihood of voting, especially in lower-salience elections

• Lower internal efficacy can lead to:

  • “politics is too complicated” attitudes

  • avoiding registration, campaigns, or ballot measures

  • reliance on simple cues (party label) or nonparticipation

External efficacy (trust in responsiveness)

External efficacy is the belief that government and officials will listen and respond to ordinary people.

• Higher external efficacy is associated with:

  • willingness to vote because outcomes seem meaningful

  • contacting representatives or participating in community politics

• Lower external efficacy is associated with:

  • cynicism (“they don’t care what people like me think”)

  • apathy or protest-oriented participation rather than voting

  • disengagement after negative experiences with institutions

How efficacy shapes participation decisions

Voter participation is a choice under limited time, imperfect information, and competing responsibilities. Efficacy influences how people answer three practical questions.

A decision-model diagram showing how beliefs about costs/benefits feed into whether an action seems worthwhile, while self-efficacy (confidence in one’s ability) helps translate intention into behavior. Although the example is from health behavior, the structure maps well onto voting: efficacy functions like an internal “can I do this?” mechanism within a broader participation choice. Source

1) “Is it worth it?”

High efficacy increases the perceived benefit of voting: if participation can make a difference, voting seems worthwhile.

• People with low efficacy may see voting as symbolic rather than impactful.

• High efficacy can sustain participation even when elections feel predictable.

2) “Can I do it competently?”

Internal efficacy affects whether individuals feel able to pick candidates, understand issues, and navigate the ballot.

• Confusing ballots, unfamiliar offices, or complex policy debates can depress turnout more among low-internal-efficacy voters.

• Campaigns that provide clear explanations and accessible information can indirectly raise participation by boosting internal efficacy.

3) “Will anyone listen?”

External efficacy affects whether people believe institutions translate votes into policy.

• If government seems unresponsive, citizens may decide that the costs of participation outweigh the benefits.

• Perceptions of corruption, unequal influence, or broken promises can reduce external efficacy and therefore turnout.

What increases or decreases political efficacy

Political efficacy is shaped over time through socialisation and lived experience. It is not fixed.

Factors that can raise efficacy

• Civic education and political knowledge: understanding processes and rights increases internal efficacy.

• Positive contact with government: seeing an issue addressed or receiving a helpful response can raise external efficacy.

• Social support and mobilisation: encouragement from family, peers, or organisations can increase confidence and reduce uncertainty about participation.

• Community engagement: local problem-solving and volunteering can build skills that transfer into political participation.

Factors that can lower efficacy

• Distrust and alienation: repeated disappointment, polarisation, or perceived “insider” politics can lower external efficacy.

• Information overload or misinformation: confusion can lower internal efficacy and produce withdrawal.

• Feeling socially marginalised: believing that leaders ignore one’s group can reduce external efficacy, especially if reinforced by personal experience.

Efficacy and turnout patterns

Efficacy helps explain turnout differences across individuals and across election contexts.

A set of bar/line charts showing voter turnout rates by age group in U.S. presidential elections (e.g., younger voters participating at lower rates than older voters). This kind of descriptive turnout pattern helps ground efficacy arguments in observable participation gaps that political behavior theories aim to explain. Source

• In high-salience elections, some low-efficacy citizens may still vote due to social pressure, strong emotions, or high media attention.

• In low-salience elections, efficacy matters more because fewer outside cues push people to the polls.

• Efficacy can also shape whether people become “habitual voters”: repeated participation can build confidence and reinforce beliefs that participation matters.