Institutional Trust as a Mediator between Political Efficacy and Voter Participation

Robby Effendi; Suaidah Lubis; Anggi Mutia Dewi; Tania Salsabila Hasibuan; Dwi Putri; Fransisca Mularia Butar Butar

doi:10.55537/j-ibm.v6i1.1771

Authors

Robby Effendi Universitas Medan Area
Suaidah Lubis Universitas Medan Area
Anggi Mutia Dewi Universitas Medan Area
Tania Salsabila Hasibuan Universitas Medan Area
Dwi Putri Universitas Medan Area
Fransisca Mularia Butar Butar Universitas Medan Area

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55537/j-ibm.v6i1.1771

Keywords:

Institutional Trust, Local Elections, Political Efficacy, Political Participation, Voter Behavior

Abstract

This study examines institutional trust as a mediator between political efficacy and voter participation after the 2024 local election in Medan, Indonesia. A quantitative cross-sectional correlational design was used with 275 voters selected through convenience sampling. Data were collected through an online survey measuring political efficacy, institutional trust in the General Elections Commission (KPU), and voter participation. Pearson correlations and mediation analysis with 5,000 bootstrap resamples were applied. The results showed positive associations among all variables. Institutional trust significantly mediated the association between political efficacy and voter participation (B = 0.11, SE = 0.03, 95% CI [0.06, 0.17]) and accounted for 20.5% of the total association, while the direct association remained significant (B = 0.42, 95% CI [0.31, 0.53]). These findings indicate partial mediation: citizens’ confidence in their political competence is associated with participation both directly and through their evaluation of electoral institutional credibility. The study highlights institutional trust as an evaluative mechanism in local democratic participation and recommends strengthening political literacy, transparent election administration, and accessible public communication.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Acar, Y. G., & Uluğ, Ö. M. (2022). When and why does political trust predict well-being in authoritarian contexts? Examining the role of political efficacy and collective action among opposition voters. British Journal of Social Psychology, 61(3), 861–881. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12505

American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000165-000

Ardèvol-Abreu, A., Diehl, T., & de Zúñiga, H. G. (2019). Antecedents of internal political efficacy: Incidental news exposure online and the mediating role of political discussion. Politics, 39(1), 82–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263395717693251

Arrazak, M. A., & Adnan, M. (2025). The influence of social media usage and political trust on young voters political participation in Padang City. Jurnal ISO: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, Politik dan Humaniora, 5(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.53697/iso.v5i1.2160

Bakar, D. M., Hidayat, E. R., & Malik, I. (2022). Implications of political trust, kinship politics, and political participation: Makassar City election in 2020. Politik Indonesia: Indonesian Political Science Review, 7(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.15294/ipsr.v7i1.38486

Bienstman, S., Hense, S., & Gangl, M. (2024). Explaining the “democratic malaise” in unequal societies: Inequality, external efficacy and political trust. European Journal of Political Research, 63(1), 172–191. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12611

Boulianne, S. (2019). Building faith in democracy: Deliberative events, political trust and efficacy. Political Studies, 67(1), 4–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321718761466

Chang, W.-C. (2023). Direct democracy and party membership: Testing the role of political efficacy. Political Studies Review, 21(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/14789299211034278

Chen, C., Bai, Y., & Wang, R. (2019). Online political efficacy and political participation: A mediation analysis based on the evidence from Taiwan. New Media & Society, 21(8), 1667–1696. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819828718

Denemark, D., & Niemi, R. G. (2012). Political trust, efficacy and engagement in challenging times: An introduction. Australian Journal of Political Science, 47(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2011.643164

Devine, D. (2024). Does political trust matter? A meta-analysis on the consequences of trust. Political Behavior, 46(4), 2241–2262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-024-09916-y

Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11

Easton, D. (1975). A re-assessment of the concept of political support. British Journal of Political Science, 5(4), 435–457. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400008309

Fitz, E. B., & Saunders, K. L. (2024). Distrusting the process: Electoral trust, operational ideology, and nonvoting political participation in the 2020 American electorate. Public Opinion Quarterly, 88(SI), 843–857. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfae025

Granados, C., & Sánchez, F. (2026). Should I stay or should I go? The behavioural consequences of political trust in contexts of inequality: The case of Latin America. Journal of Politics in Latin America, 18(1), 3–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/1866802X251384315

Guan, Y. (2026). Multidimensional political trust and its effects on political activism in nondemocracies: Findings from a concept-driven clustering method. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 28(1), 306–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/13691481251343628

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N. P., & Ray, S. (2021). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using R: A workbook. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7

Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

Ida, R., Mashud, M., Saud, M., Yousaf, F. N., & Ashfaq, A. (2025). Politics in Indonesia: Democracy, social networks and youth political participation. Cogent Social Sciences, 11(1), Article 2432071. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2024.2432071

Kestilä-Kekkonen, E., Koivula, A., & Tiihonen, A. (2022). When trust is not enough: A longitudinal analysis of political trust and political competence during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Finland. European Political Science Review, 14(3), 424–440. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773922000224

Mashud, M., Ida, R., & Saud, M. (2023). Political discussions lead to political efficacy among students in Indonesia. Asian Journal of Comparative Politics, 8(1), 184–200. https://doi.org/10.1177/20578911221143674

McDonnell, J. (2020). Municipality size, political efficacy and political participation: A systematic review. Local Government Studies, 46(3), 331–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930.2019.1600510

Miura, A., & Kobayashi, T. (2021). Characteristics of participants and satisficing tendency in online surveys using a sample provider. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/zqd5p

Mulyawan, W., Rifai, R., & Hidayat, R. (2024). Factors influencing first-time voters’ turnout in the 2024 legislative elections: Political efficacy, campaign strategies, and financial incentives. The International Journal of Politics and Sociology Research, 12(2), 157–168. https://doi.org/10.35335/ijopsor.v12i2.266

Niemi, R. G., Craig, S. C., & Mattei, F. (1991). Measuring internal political efficacy in the 1988 National Election Study. American Political Science Review, 85(4), 1407–1413. https://doi.org/10.2307/1963953

Ouattara, E., & Steenvoorden, E. (2024). The elusive effect of political trust on participation: Participatory resource or (dis)incentive? Political Studies, 72(4), 1269–1287. https://doi.org/10.1177/00323217231194820

Prahara, S. A., & Rachma, N. M. (2023). Political efficacy and political participation in Islamic association cadres. Psikis: Jurnal Psikologi Islami, 9(1), 170–178. https://doi.org/10.19109/psikis.v9i1.16514

Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879

Reichert, F. (2016). How internal political efficacy translates political knowledge into political participation: Evidence from Germany. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 12(2), 221–241. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v12i2.1095

Stals, L., Stiers, D., & Kern, A. (2025). Political trust and electoral behavior among 16- and 17-year-old first-time voters in Belgium. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 37(3), Article edaf026. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edaf026

Suryahadi, A., Al Izzati, R., Suryadarma, D., & Dartanto, T. (2023). How inequality affects trust in institutions: Evidence from Indonesia. Asian Economic Policy Review, 18(1), 73–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/aepr.12401

Suryanagara, M. I. S., Rahmatunnisa, M., Bainus, A., & Umam, A. K. (2025). Voting behavior in Asian democracies: A comprehensive synthesis of contemporary research. Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, 38(2), 139–155. https://doi.org/10.20473/mkp.V38I22025.139-155

Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2

van Alebeek, C. R. A., van der Meer, T., & Hakhverdian, A. (2026). Stable or variable distrust? Disentangling the relationship between political trust and electoral behavior. European Political Science Review, 18(1), 87–103. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773925100210

Wang, C., & Zhang, X. (2024). Governance capacity, social justice, social security, and institutionalized political participation in China: A moderated mediation model. Chinese Public Administration Review, 15(3), 194–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/15396754241252978

Wang, C. H. (2016). Political trust, civic duty and voter turnout: The mediation argument. The Social Science Journal, 53(3), 291–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2016.04.008