Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 1
Fifteen years after: Shifts in Czech adolescents’ perceptions of family, school and society
Jan Šerek, Petr Macek, Stanislav Ježek & Lenka Lacinová
Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
serek@fss.muni.cz
Published in Journal of Adolescent Research:
Šerek, J., Macek, P., Ježek, S., & Lacinová, L. (2014). Twenty years after the Velvet Revolution:
Shifts in Czech adolescents' perceptions of family, school and society. Journal of Adolescent
Research, 29(6), 738-764. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0743558414538315
This version is an original submission to the journal with revisions after peer review accepted by
the editor.
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 2
Abstract
Families and schools are traditionally seen as substantial socialization agents forming
adolescents' social values and their views of society (Zukin et al., 2006). Special attention is paid
to the question whether the relative importance of these influences remains stable in times of
major social changes (Pinquart & Silbereisen, 2005). In this study, two different generations of
Czech middle adolescents are compared: (a) the “post-totalitarian“ generation that grew up in the
last decade of the communist regime and entered adolescence during the time of rapid political
and socioeconomic changes (data collected in 1995), and (b) the current generation without
personal experience with the communist regime, raised in a stable democratic society (data
collected in 2010). Both groups of participants (total n = 2,103, aged from 14 to 17) were
administered an identical questionnaire. First, we examined the changes in adolescents'
perceptions and evaluations of the society over the last 15 years. Today's adolescents perceive
society more as a community and their future orientations are more focused on materialistic and
less on environmental values. While the emotional relationship between the children and parents
remains the same, adolescents learn a somewhat different message in the family, emphasizing
self-reliance. School environment is perceived more as positive and engaging than 15 years ago.
Second, we predicted adolescents' social views and values from their assessment of family and
school environment. Our results show that the effect of parental values on adolescents' value
orientations is higher in the current generation. Positive school environment contributes to the
development of socially responsible orientations despite the changes in society.
Keywords: social change, value orientations, perceptions of society, Czech adolescents,
school engagement, family environment, normative beliefs
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 3
Fifteen years after: Shifts in Czech adolescents' perceptions of family, school and
society
The fall of communist regimes in Eastern and Central Europe at the end of the 1980s
brought political, economic and social changes that markedly influenced the everyday life
experience of people living in these countries. This radical social change can be considered a
natural experiment affecting all groups in the population (Tomasik & Silbereisen, 2009). When
analyzing its long-term consequences, it is important to bear in mind that social changes are
extremely complex phenomena, occurring on several different levels and in many specific
contexts (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Flanagan, 1995; Pinquart & Silbereisen, 2005). Thus, we can
study social changes from different points of view. Among them, the individual-level analysis,
demonstrating the direct influence of social change on the individuals, is one of the most
preferable ones. It provides us a valuable insight into how people interpret the changes and what
they expect from the future development. This paper takes the individual-level perspective and
asks how the opinions on the society and value orientations have changed over the last fifteen
years since the early post-transition period. Specifically, we focus on young people in middle and
late adolescence, in the process of acquiring their views on the society and developing their value
orientations.
After the Fall of the Totalitarian System: Cultural and Macro-social Influences
Although there is a substantial evidence that the post-communist transition affected
adolescents’ values, interpretation of relevant political issues and social order, perceptions and
evaluations of social welfare, family life, or activities (e.g. Bowes, Chalmers, & Flanagan, 1997;
Flanagan et al., 1999; 2003; Flanagan, Bowes, Jonsson, Csapo, & Sheblanova, 1998; Krappmann,
Uhlendorf, & Oswald, 1999; Macek et al., 1998; Noack, 1999;), it is necessary to distinguish
among several intertwined effects. On one hand, young people in the generation that personally
experienced the revolutionary events reported criticism in regard to the pre-revolutionary
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 4
situation, but also a lot of positive feelings regarding change, and, especially, the high level of
personal enthusiasm regarding their future (Macek & Kostroň, 1996; Macek et al., 1998). In this
respect, the change had an immediate short-term effect on young people's social perceptions and
future orientations. On the other hand, we need also consider the paradox of democratic
revolutions given by the prolonged influence of totalitarian experience. After the fall of
communist regimes in Eastern and Central Europe, changes at the socio-psychological levels were
much slower than those at the political-economic level (Marková, 2004; Macek & Marková,
2004). As empirical studies on transformation processes in post-communist countries show, past
experiences from the previous regime survive in the collective memory (namely that of families)
for at least one generation. Regarding these collective and personal experiences, the concept of
post-communist syndrome was introduced. It includes a lack of civic culture, division between
public and private morality, reverence for paternalism, high level of social security etc.
(Klicperová, Feierabend, & Hofstetter, 1997; Klicperová-Baker et al., 2007). Since these
experiences are maintained through social interactions and are a part of inter-connected systems of
communication, ideologies, songs, myths, collective memories and traditions, they are highly
resistant to change (Macek & Marková, 2004; Marková et al., 1998; Plichtová & Erös, 1997).
From this perspective, the social change has also its long-term effects that become apparent rather
in later generations.
Therefore, when studying the effects of social change on adolescents, we have to consider
both short-term and long-term effects. Two competing hypotheses can be drawn from these
considerations. Either we can assume that the effect of the social change on social perceptions and
values is stronger for the first post-revolutionary generation as a result of the direct revolutionary
(or early post-revolutionary) experience; or we can expect the shifts rather in the next generations
because the post-communist syndrome has to fade away before the effect of the change becomes
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 5
evident. Since such study cannot be based only on one-time evaluation, it is useful to conduct a
cohort comparison of samples gathered at different historical points (see Silbereisen, 2005).
Besides the effects of social change, the comparison of the generations has to reflect also
the macro-structural trends and changes relevant for everyday life experiences of adolescents in
whole Europe (Mortimer & Larson, 2002; Tomasik & Silbereisen, 2009). First, the most
immediate consequences stem from new informational technologies (mobiles, computers) and
communication virtual networks (Anderson, 2002; Šmahel, 2008). The second remarkable change
is related to new demographic trends, above all aging of industrial societies and migration
between societies (Fussel, 2003). Third, the contemporary industrial societies are characterized by
a high level of diversity, in terms of individualization and plurality of life courses (Elder, 1998),
value orientations (Stattin & Kerr, 2001; Tomasik & Silbereisen, 2009) and possibilities. This
diversity extends the individual developmental pathways for adolescents from the more
advantaged social environment, but it can bring restrictions for adolescents from disadvantaged
backgrounds (Mortimer & Larson, 2002).
Family and School Environment and Social Change
Social changes can influence not only adolescents' perceptions of the society and social
values but also the way how these perceptions and values are developed. They are developed
mainly from two environments – families and schools. Family experience can affect social
perceptions and values in several ways. First, family locates a young person into a certain social
position, determined mainly by parental education and socioeconomic status. This general life
experience forms offspring's social perceptions and values, independently of actual parental
orientations (Glass, Bengston, & Durnham, 1986; Vollebergh, Iedema, & Raaijmakers, 2001).
Next, parents influence their children in a more direct way. Through mutual communication and
observation of parental behavior, adolescents learn about parental stances on important social
issues and get examples of model civic behavior. Moreover, parents can actively try to persuade
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 6
their children to accept some social views or encourage them to take part in some civic activities
(Jennings, 2004; Zukin, Keeter, Andolina, Jenkins, & Delli Carpini, 2006; da Silva, Sanson,
Smart, & Toumbourou, 2004; Westholm, 1999). At the same time, some parental effects can be
rather implicit. For example, parenting styles can have an effect on young people's political
alienation (Gniewosz, Noack, & Buhl, 2009), or can serve as a channel through which parents
pass right-wing authoritarianism on their children (Peterson, Smirles, & Wentworth, 1997).
Another specific source of social experiences and values are school environments. For
children they represent the first public formal institution where their participation is obligatory
(Flanagan et al., 1998). School communities and classrooms serve as small “laboratories” where
students learn how the society works. They are institutions of civic society where young people
exercise their social competencies, some level of autonomy, and decision making.
Educational reforms bringing democratic teaching and relationships to schools and
classrooms have become an important task for the new democracies. It was necessary to change
not only some formal characteristics and a content of education but also the general philosophy of
teaching. The passive perception of knowledge and information overload should be replaced by
students' active, independent and creative performance, which, hopefully, would later lead to a
self-responsible and mature civic and career behavior (Rabušicová, 1991).
The relevant research reflecting the role of school experiences on the development of
adolescents’ value orientation and civic attitudes does not still offer a perfectly consistent answer
as to which specific aspects of the classroom climate are responsible for social perceptions and
values formation. However, it seems that students' perceptions of teaching practices, classroom
democracy or participative school culture may play an important role here (Flanagan, Cumsille,
Gill, & Gallay, 2007; Gniewosz, & Noack, 2008; Ichilov, 1991; Torney-Purta, Lehmann, Oswald,
& Schulz, 2001; Torney-Purta, 2002).
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 7
Although family and school environments influence adolescents' social perceptions and
value orientations, these effects are not unambiguously stable across different social conditions. In
times of social or political change, the influences from outside the family can have a strong impact
(Beck, & Jennings, 1991). Similarly, the strength of association between school experience and
attitudes towards societal institutions is not the same for societies with different sociopolitical
characteristics (Torney-Purta, Barber, & Richardson, 2004).
Transformational Period and Czech Adolescents
There are some typical features of the Czech society and important political, economic,
and social events of the transitional period that frame the everyday life experiences of the postrevolutionary
cohorts. In the early 1990s, former Czechoslovakia (and since 1993 the Czech
Republic) was still a post-totalitarian society, which in many respects resembled, metaphorically,
the period of adolescence. There was a “social moratorium” which offered a great opportunity for
experimentation as the legal environment was extremely vague, and the tolerance for breaking
social norms was high. Both the young and the older had to undergo the process of resocialization,
experiencing and managing more personal freedom and self-responsibility in the
new democracy and liberal society. Many people had to rearrange their personal values and to
choose new life goals and perspectives (Macek, 2011).
Among the post-communist countries, various research studies conducted in
Czechoslovakia and later in the Czech Republic have systematically shown a high level of
confidence and optimism during the first years of transformation (Macek & Marková, 2004).
Also, adolescents saw new social and life conditions in a very positive way, providing them with
wonderful personal opportunities and challenges (Macek & Kostroň, 1996; Macek et al., 1998).
However, society’s perceptions and the public mood changed drastically during the
second half of the 1990s. The economic crisis had a profoundly negative effect on the State
budget and a lack of legal framework of privatization led to the restriction of rights of small
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 8
shareholders. General dissatisfaction with the political representation grew rapidly. Many Czechs
became disappointed and less optimistic about the future than during the previous era (Macek &
Marková, 2004; Linek, 2009).
Compared to the 1990s, the first decade of the new millennium can be metaphorically seen
as emerging adulthood of the Czech society. The period of social moratorium was terminated, the
Czech Republic joined “adults” in May 2004 when it became a full-fledged member of the
European Union (Macek, Bejček, & Vaníčková, 2007). The unrealistic optimism and naive trust
from the early 1990s was replaced by a more realistic view of the society. As empirical data show,
a large part of the population presents considerable criticism of political elites and of the ways in
which democracy works (Linek, 2009).
Generally speaking, the current generation of Czech adolescents grew up in a changing
society when a lot of people (including their parents) experienced both: many new opportunities,
positive expectations, individual freedom and challenges, improving standard of life and also a
high level of social uncertainty, growing distrust toward politics and political institutions, a higher
pressure on self-responsible behavior (Macek & Polášková, 2006). Whereas the post-totalitarian
generation of Czech adolescents at the beginning of the 1990s perceived social changes in an very
positive way, since those changes represented personal opportunities and challenges (getting a
good education, the possibility to travel and live abroad, and political and ideological freedom),
the current generations of adolescents are more apt to view the same conditions as ordinary
attributes of everyday life.
Recent data also reveal that Czech adolescents at the turn of the twenty-first century are
more similar to their Western European peers than they are to the former post-totalitarian Czech
generation (Macek, 2011). They experience personal freedom, but at the same time must take
more responsibility for themselves. The value of education, success, social prestige, emancipation,
free time, and entertainment has grown considerably (Macek & Polášková, 2006). Similar trends
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 9
were found regarding materialistic and hedonistic value orientations (Sak & Saková, 2004). Most
of young Czechs declare very liberal and tolerant beliefs and values (regarding drugs, abortion,
and sexual freedom) and a large majority of them reports no religious beliefs at all. According to
data from 2008, only about 18% of them consider themselves religious (Rabušic & Hamanová,
2009).
The Study on Adolescents’ “Social Contract”
The development of social perceptions and values has been studied mainly under the label
of “social contract”. It is a metaphor used by C. Flanagan as a framework for examination of
factors related to development of adolescents’ civic commitment to the society where they live
(Flanagan et al, 1998, 1999; Flanagan & Tucker, 1999). Based on the idea of varying social
contract in different socio-political contexts, the project “Adolescents’ interpretation of the Social
contract” considered normative beliefs about society, actual perceptions and evaluations of
society, public interest and activity, and preferred values among adolescents in four developing
(Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Russia) and three stable democracies (Australia,
Sweden, and the United States). Data were collected via survey in large urban areas of each
country in 1995. Considering the process of transformation of post-communist countries to new
democracies, it was the time when the first effects of political, economical, and social changes
could be evident in young people’s everyday life (Macek et al., 1998; Flanagan et al., 2003).
However, when we wanted to generalize the results from the three post-communist
countries (Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, and Hungary), empirical findings did not offer a clear
general picture of adolescents’ attitudes toward market changes. In regard to the assessment of
social changes, only one predictor had a significant effect in all the countries: young people who
endorsed a strong social welfare role from the state were more likely to feel that social disparities
were increasing. Furthermore, only liberal values are the other predictor that had a significant
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 10
impact in each of the three countries: as expected, adolescents preferring liberal values also felt
that initiative would be rewarded (Macek et al., 1998).
The ambiguous results of this study strengthen the argument for a more specific and
detailed analysis of each transitional democracy. Moreover, it became evident that family
background (SES) and value orientations cannot themselves satisfactorily explain the perceptions
of social changes or social order. In this respect, additional developmental sources need to be
considered, for example parenting, family relationships, or school experience. Further, the
comparison of the countries shortly after the democratic transition with the stable democracies can
bring only approximate results concerning short- and long-term effects of the social change. A
repeated measure of the same country at different time points can provide much convincing
results here.
The Present Study
Considering the transformational period in Czech society after “velvet revolution” in the
November 1989, this study aims to find whether there are any changes in the adolescents’
perceptions of society, their normative beliefs about society and relevant value orientations over
this time period. As the next step, we look at the predictors of these perceptions from the domain
of family and school environment.
Based on the previous considerations, we decided to focus on the comparison of two
different generations (cohorts) of adolescents in one country. The first generation can be called
“post-totalitarian“ and represents young people who grew up in the last decade of the communist
regime and entered adolescence during the time of rapid political and socioeconomic changes.
The second cohort represents the current generation with no personal experience with the
communist regime. Data representing the first generation come from the “Adolescents’
interpretation of the Social contract” project, mentioned above. Specifically, our new reanalysis of
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 11
the Czech subsample is used. We compare this data with the new data representing the current
generation of adolescents, collected for the purposes of this study.
The purpose of the comparison is mainly exploratory. The sheer amount of changes at all
levels of a person’s environment makes it difficult if not impossible to propose explicit
hypotheses. Generally we expected that the inertia of socialist values and morals would slowly
dissipate and thus today’s adolescents would be more conservative or right-wing than their peers
in 1995. With the Czech society becoming a normal society as opposed to transformational we
expected the role of the family to stabilize and the influence of parents to increase (Beck &
Jennings, 1991). We also expected that current generation would report higher levels of
materialistic or hedonistic value orientations (Macek & Polášková, 2006; Rabušic & Hamanová,
2009; Sak & Saková, 2004). We controlled for the effect of gender because differences between
males and females have tended to blur after social change in the Czech Republic. Similarly,
adolescents’ studying lower and higher secondary schools were differentiated due to possible age
differences (Amadeo, Torney-Purta, Lehmann, Husfeldt, & Nikolova, 2002; Macek, Lacinová, &
Polášková, 2011).
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 12
Method
Participants and Procedures
Our data comprise two samples from the region of South Moravia; one collected in 1995
(N=1127, 52% male) and the other from 2010 (N=976, 47% male). Both samples comprise two
age cohorts – grade 8 (lower secondary school; mean age 14.6; 50% in 1995, 55% in 2010) and
grade 10 (higher secondary school; mean age 17.1). The proportion of males does not
significantly differ between grades both in 1995 and 2010, 2
(1) = 1.56 and 0.39 respectively.
Respondents were administered a multi-page paper questionnaire comprising many items tapping
their perceptions of the economy, local community, school, and their personal beliefs. In 2010,
only a part of the 1995 questionnaire was administered.
Cluster sampling of school classes within South Moravian region was used in 1995, the
questionnaires being administered in schools. Due to changes in the legislature and the everincreasing
amount of social research taking place in schools, it was not feasible to replicate the
cluster sampling procedure of 1995 in 2010. Instead, a quota sampling (replicating age and
educational structure of the 1995 sample) with individual administration at home was used. Data
gathering was performed by the academic institution in 1995 and the professional research
company in 2010. Overall, South Moravian region is constantly close to the national average in
terms of basic socio-economic indicators such as gross domestic product or unemployment rate
(Czech Statistical Office, 2012; 2013).
Measures
Parents’ highest achieved education was measured on a three-category scale – lower
secondary education (up to grade 9; compulsory in the Czech Republic), higher secondary
education (high school, vocational school) and university education (bachelor degree or higher).
Fathers’ and mothers’ education were summed into an indicator of parents’ education. In only
1.4% families in 1995 (1.7% in 2010) both parents had no higher education than lower secondary.
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 13
Most families were with one or both parents with higher secondary education (50.8% resp.
72.0%). Parents’ employment was measured by two summed dichotomous questions “Does your
mother/father have a job?” Both parents had a job in 81% families in 1995 and in 77% in 2010.
There were 1.9% and 1.4% families respectively with both jobless parents.
Perceptions of current society: The equal opportunities scale measured a belief that the
liberal ideal of equal opportunities has been accomplished in the society (two items; e. g. If a
person is willing to work hard, they can make a good living. r = .42) with respondents expressing
their agreement on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 – certainly disagree to 5 – certainly agree
(unless otherwise stated this response scale is used in all the subsequent items). The items were
combined into a summation scale by means of averaging them. The three-item caring community
scale tapped whether the society was perceived as resembling to the communitarian ideal of
helping and caring community (e.g. If there is someone in our community with a problem he/she
may count on the help of other people.; Cronbach’s α = .70).
Normative beliefs about society: The economic equality scale measured a belief that the
society should be more egalitarian and that the welfare state should be promoted (ten items, e.g. It
is not right that there are poor and rich in the society. There should be more of equality.
Cronbach’s α = .73). The two-item social welfare skepticism scale tapped the worry that people
tend to “slack” when the government provides for them (e.g. If the state offers services for free
people tend to get lazy/cheat. r = .51). The state non-responsibility scale measured the belief that
it is not the government, but the NGOs who should take care of the homeless (two items, e.g.
Homeless people should be taken care of by a church and charity organizations, not the state. r =
.54).
Perceptions of society structure. Respondents were shown five ordered diagrams
representing the structures of different societies – welfare pyramids (Figure 1), and they were
instructed: “These five diagrams represent different types of societies. Please look at the diagrams
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 14
and read the descriptions. Then answer the following questions regarding the Czech Republic.” In
one extreme the diagram represented an elitist society with most people at the bottom of the
society, almost none in the middle and some at the very top. In the other extreme there was a
pyramid with very few people at the bottom, most people just below the top and still many people
at the very top. Respondents marked, which diagram represents today’s Czech society, Czech
society in 30 years, and an ideal for the Czech society (Macek & Kostroň, 1996).
-----------------------------------------
Insert Figure 1 about here
------------------------------------------
Value orientations: This section of the questionnaire measured how much some values or
value orientations appear to be important for their future life. All value-orientation items were
evaluated on a five-point scale from 1 – certainly unimportant to 5 – certainly important. Social
responsibility value orientation of adolescents was measured on a five-item scale (e.g. to do
something useful for the society; Cronbach’s α = .77). Materialistic value-orientation scale
included five items (e.g. to make a lot of money; Cronbach’s α = .76). Five-item scale measured
environmental value orientation of adolescents (e.g. to do something to stop pollution; Cronbach’s
α = .81). The scale of self-development/education value orientation was based on three items (e.g.
to develop your talents; Cronbach’s α = .68). Two items measured the value of power or influence
for the respondent (e.g. to influence the other people; r = .44).
Family functioning: Four items were combined into a scale of how much the
respondent’s parents brought him/her up to help others, perceive their needs and sympathize with
them – socially responsible parenting (e.g. Parents taught me to pay attention to the needs of
others, not only to my own.. Cronbach’s α = .73). A measure of how much respondents were
brought up by their parents to rely on themselves was computed as a mean of another four items –
self-reliance parenting (e.g. Parents told me, that I should be independent a take care of myself in
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 15
life. Cronbach’s α = .59). Positive relationship with parents and the rest of the primary family was
measured by four items (e.g. Our family always made many things together. Cronbach’s α = .54).
Two items asked about how much parents respect respondents’ opinions – mutual respect (e.g. If I
give a good reason parents are willing to change their principles once in a while. r = .41). The
final two-item summation scale here is a measure of perceived economic anxiety experienced by
the family (e.g. My parents frequently worry how to pay bills. r = .22).
School environment: School engagement was measured by an eight-item scale (e.g.
Students are proud of their school. Cronbach’s α = .81). One item, originally intended to be part
of the school engagement scale, appeared to be more independent, so we decided to use it as an
individual scale. It measured the belief in teachers’ believing that every student can learn when he
or she really tries – equal treatment.
Results
Our findings are presented in two sections. First, there is the description of changes from
1995 to 2010 on the various scales. Second, there is a comparison of the generations through
hierarchical regressions predicting perceptions of society, normative beliefs, and value
orientations. Considering the type-I error inflation due to the number of statistical tests performed
and the large sample size, the .01 level was chosen as the base for rejecting null hypotheses.
Changes in Adolescents’ Assessments Between 1995 and 2010
For both cohorts separate descriptives for individual scales are presented in Table 1. Along
with the descriptives inductive tests of the differences between cohorts, sexes and grades are
provided (univariate ANOVAs). In most items and scales, the 2010 cohort showed a little higher
variance in their responses, which may reflect the difference in the mode of administration. All
computed scales have a full range from 1 to 5.
-----------------------------------------
Insert Table 1 about here
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 16
------------------------------------------
Perceptions of current society. There appears to be a small increase in perceptions of the
local society as a caring community over the 15 years with a small effect of grade with younger
respondents being slightly more optimistic about the “communityness” of their local society. The
equal opportunity scale shows no effect of generation, only a small effect of grade with younger
respondents being slightly more optimistic (Table 1). The difference between younger and older
respondents was much larger in 1995 (.3 pooled SD) than in 2010 (.01 pooled SD)
Normative beliefs about society. The support for economic equality has slightly
decreased over the 15 years. There is also a small grade effect – the younger respondents hold
these values more than the older ones – and a very small gender effect – girls hold social values
more than boys. The distribution of this variable has one of the lowest SDs and is thus very
narrow (kurtosis = 1.20). None of the variables in the model had significant effect on the social
welfare scale. The state non-responsibility scale showed a small increase over the 15 years stable
across the various subgroups (Table 1).
Welfare pyramids. In all three items asking about the respondents’ perception of the
welfare composition of our society, there were substantial differences. Current generation
describes our current society most often a pyramid with triangular shape with wide base and a
pointy top (2nd
most elitist, 35.7%) whereas 15 years ago the most frequent description was a
symmetrical shape with most people in the middle and same amounts of people above and below
this middle (2nd
least elitist, 39.6%). Considering this item an ordinal scale of elitism of a society
the shift towards elitism perceptions is large (Md1995 = 3.0, Md2010=2.0 , Mann-Whitney U =
386307, z = 11.8, p < .001). Similar shift can be found in predictions of the society in 30 years in
the future; again there is a large shift towards elitist perceptions (Md1995 = 4.0, Md2010=3.0, MannWhitney
U = 375424, z = 12.0, p < .001). In both generations, the item asking about the ideal
shape has its mode in the least elitist option with most people one step below the top (59.7% in
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 17
1995, 46.9% in 2010). However, in the medians there is the same shift towards seeing the ideal
less often as the least elitist option (Md1995 = 5.0, Md2010=4.0, Mann-Whitney U = 451389, z = 7.4,
p < .001).
Values. On the scale of social responsibility, there were only slight gender and grade
differences with girls and younger adolescents adhering more to this set of values. Materialisticvalue
orientation scale showed a substantial increase over the 15 years stable across the various
subgroups. There was a similarly stable decrease, although smaller in magnitude, on the scale of
environmental value orientation. Both in 1995 and in 2010 younger respondents adhere score
higher on this scale. This difference seems to get smaller over time but the interaction is nonsignificant.
There appears to be a very small decrease over the time on the scale of selfdevelopment/education
values. This value orientation is the most generally adhered to (means
over 4 on a scale from 1 to 5) with girls reporting slightly higher scores. The scale of power as a
value is stable over time, not affected by any of the factors (Table 1).
Family functioning. On the scale of social responsible parenting there appears to be no
change over time with only a slight gender effect of girls being more led by their parent to social
values. There is a small significant increase the scale of self-reliance parenting over the 15 years
attributable mainly to the interaction with gender – while boys remained the same, girls selfreliance
parenting increased by almost 1/3 pooled standard deviation. Again, there is no
significant difference between 1995 and 2010 in the positive relationship with parents. There is a
medium effect of grade with the younger feeling closer and more positive relationships with their
family (age does not seem to contribute to this effect any more beyond its relationship with
grade). Next, there is a small decrease over the 15 years on scale of mutual respect, stable across
the various subgroups. A small increase in the level of economic anxiety perceived by the family
is attributable mainly to the increase in the younger group of almost .3 pooled standard deviation;
the older respondents remained without change on this scale (Table 1).
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 18
School engagement. School engagement appears to have substantially increased over the
15 years (Cohen d = .63). The increase was significantly higher for the older respondents than for
the younger ones (Cohen d = .93 in the higher grade). On the other hand, there were no significant
inter-generational differences on the scale of equal treatment (Table 1).
Predictions of Perceptions of the Society, Normative Beliefs, and Value Orientations
We expected that the effects of family and school on adolescents’ social perceptions,
normative beliefs, and value orientations would change over the 15 years. To assess these
changes, we conducted several hierarchical multiple linear regression models predicting
perceptions of economic equality, equal opportunities, caring community, social responsibility
values, and materialistic values. Four blocks of predictors were entered into the models. We
started with gender and grade as control variables. Next, we added socioeconomic characteristics
of the family represented by the mean level of parental education and number of employed family
members. Then, we entered adolescents’ reports on family experience, namely close relationship
with parents, self-reliance parenting, and socially responsible parenting. Finally, perceptions of
school engagement and equal treatment by teachers were added. Since we aimed to capture
changing effects of these predictors, two identical models for 1995 and 2010 generations were
computed. Statistical significance of the difference between regression coefficients was tested by
the procedure given by Sheskin (2004).
Equal opportunities. For both generations, family and school significantly predicted the
perceptions of equal opportunities, even though the effects were small. The most obvious change
was the increase in the family influence (increase from 2 to 7 % explained variance). While the
effect of family was rather dubious in 1995, there was an apparent positive effect of close
relationship and self-reliance parenting in 2010. The effect of school retained the same size but it
was rather subtle for both generations (2 % explained variance). Last noticeable change regards
the effect of parental education. Whereas the level of parental education had no effect in 1995, 15
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 19
year later adolescents with more educated parents perceived the society as more just in terms of
equal opportunities.
Caring community. The patterns found for caring community perceptions were similar to
those found for equal opportunities. Family influence was a significant but rather weak predictor
in 1995, and its effect became stronger in 2010 (increase from 2 to 6 % in explained variance). In
both generations, socially responsible parenting fostered the perception that the society was a
caring community. School was a stable predictor for both generations (4 and 6 % in explained
variance) with school engagement as the only significant predictor. On the contrary, there was a
change in the effect of parental education. In 1995 sample, adolescents with lower educated
parents tended to perceive the society more as a caring community, while this predictor had no
effect in 2010.
Economic equality. Adolescents’ support for economic equality was predicted mainly by
family influences in both generations. Similar to previous social perceptions, the effect of family
considerably increased between 1995 and 2010 (from 4 to 14 % in explained variance). The most
powerful family predictor was socially responsible parenting but also a small positive effect of
self-reliance parenting appeared in 2010. The effect of school was rather negligible in both
generations (1 % of explained variance), except for a small effect of school engagement in 2010.
Both in 1995 and 2010, higher parental education was associated with adolescents’ lower support
for economic equality.
Social responsibility values. Both in 1995 and 2010, the strongest predictor of socially
responsible value orientation was family experience. Although parents had substantial influence
on adolescents’ social responsibility already in 1995, this effect was much stronger 15 years later
(increase from 16 to 34 % in explained variance). The only influential factor among family
influences was socially responsible parenting. Another significant predictor of social
responsibility values was school. However, the effect of school was weaker compared to family,
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 20
and there was a decline in its strength for the 2010 generation (decrease from 8 to 4 % in
explained variance). While the effect of school engagement remained relatively stable, equal
treatment by teachers positively predicted social responsibility values only in 1995.
Materialistic values. The findings concerning materialistic value orientations did not
substantially differ from socially responsible orientations. The strongest effect on materialism had
family, namely self-reliance parenting. While the effect was rather modest in 1995, there was an
evident increase in 2010 (increase from 3 to 13 % in explained variance). The effect of school was
barely significant and weak, except for a negative effect of school engagement in 1995.
In sum, we found that the effect of family experience on young people’s social
perceptions, normative beliefs and value orientations became stronger during last 15 years. The
shift was apparent for all outcome variables, but it was especially strong for value orientations and
normative beliefs. Socially responsible parenting had positive effects on adolescents’ socially
responsible orientations, support for economic equality, and perceptions that the society was a
caring community. Besides, self-reliance parenting positively predicted particularly materialistic
value orientations. Both types of parenting have stronger impact in 2010 than 1995.
In contrast to family, the effect of school remained more stable across the generations. For
both generations, school experience moderately enhanced the perceptions that the society offers
equal opportunities and that it is a caring community. The effect of school on the development of
socially responsible orientations declined during last 15 years. Support for economic equality and
materialistic value orientations seemed to be influenced only very weakly by school in both
generations. The effect of school was mostly transmitted through perceived school engagement.
Parental education had no effect on young people's value orientations. However, children
of more educated parents perceived the society less as a caring community in 1995, perceived
more equal opportunities in 2010, and supported less economic equality both in 1995 and 2010.
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 21
For both generations, there was no effect of parental employment on social perceptions, normative
beliefs, or value orientations.
Discussion
Our findings suggest no growing disillusionment about democracy among young people.
When we look at how both generations perceive the fulfillment of the democratic ideals in the
society in terms of equal opportunities and caring community, there is no significant decrease.
Nowadays, current adolescents perceive the society little more as a caring community than their
counterparts from fifteen years ago. At the first sight, this can seem surprising as especially the
late 1990s were characteristic of “democratic disenchantment” (Linek, 2009). Moreover, also
other data show that the young Czechs’ interest in politics has been declining continuously in the
last eighteen years (Rabušic & Hamanová, 2009). Yet it is necessary to point out here that it is an
all-European trend and it matters predominantly how the interest in politics, or in other words,
political participation, is defined (Fahmy, 2006).
On the other hand, the other empirical results reveal that in the last decade, the view of
democracy and its values has been more or less stabilized in the Czech society (Linek, 2009).
Even though the overall highly positive assessment of the democratic political system has been
slightly undermined in the recent twenty years, it does not mean, in any case, a shift towards the
opposite polarity of assessment. According to a number of indicators from other studies, it is more
likely a more realistic view of the society (Houška, 2006; Rabušic & Hamanová, 2009).
While the perceptions of democracy have not shifted towards pessimism, the perceptions
of the economic equality in the society offer a different picture. The current young people see the
society as more elitist and unequal than the previous generation. It corresponds with the real
process of economic and social stratification of the Czech society during the transformational
period.
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 22
Since the communist regime was very egalitarian and based on the power of state, we
could expect a strong endorsement of egalitarian and statist normative beliefs in 1995 and a
subsequent decrease in the following fifteen years. Although we found such a shift in terms of
lower support for economic equality and state responsibility for social services, the observed
difference was rather small. One explanation might be that this general belief can be expected to
have a substantial inertia and we might expect it to change only slowly (Klicperová et al., 1997;
Macek & Marková, 2004). Alternatively, we can also assume that the expected shift took place
and was consequently suppressed by other influences. The major public discourse in the first half
of the 1990s might have reinforced the belief that the egalitarism is not necessary because “the
able can finally achieve”. Moreover, it should be also mentioned that individual freedom and the
possibility of free self-advancement were perceived at that time as one of the greatest gains and
one of the most important values brought to young Czechs by the revolution and democratic
changes (Nash, 2005; Arnett, 2006). Fifteen years later, the disappointment of the second half of
the 1990s (Linek, 2009) could have reversed the change in the direction of higher endorsement of
social welfare principles. As a consequence of these two influences, no obvious change in
adolescents' beliefs could be observed.
Regarding egalitarism and statism, we suggested two competing hypotheses describing the
direction of change. The first one reflected weakening of deeply rooted egalitarism, the second
one expected that people had turned excessively to the opposite immediately after the transition
because of their extreme distrust in the former political regime, and they have slowly returned to
moderate beliefs during the following years. As described in the previous paragraph, we found a
shift from egalitarianism and statism towards lower trust in state-based welfare. Thus, the first
hypothesis seems to be plausible, though the difference is rather small.
Although we argue that the generations are quite similar, there are some noticeable
differences. One of them concerns value orientations. The current generation is definitely more
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 23
materialistic, which corresponds with other researches as well (Sak & Saková, 2004; Rabušic &
Hamanová, 2009). There are probably only a few factors that would lead young people away from
material values. On the other hand, there are a higher availability of consumables and higher
acceptation of the admittance or expression of material aspirations. The higher materialism of the
current generation is accompanied by a minor adherence to environmental values. This may
reflect at least two trends. A more proximal explanation is that by the end of the totalitarian
regime the local environment was very visibly polluted and youth ecological organizations were
very popular with young people providing an alternative to state youth organizations. This
popularity remained even after the revolution. A more distal explanation of this trend, yet related
to the first one, is that environmental politics has joined the mainstream politics, the
“establishment” so to say making its values less attractive to adolescents. Ecological issues and
behavior have become a part of everyday life while their being informed and involved is relatively
high (Štursová & Bocan, 2006).
Adolescents’ evaluations of family functioning have not undergone any large changes in
the last fifteen years according to our results. It is good to note that although there is a small
increase in self-reliance parenting, the assessment of positive relationships with parents does not
appear to be changed, which suggests that these aspects of family functioning do not exclude each
other. Further, we found a relatively strong association between parenting and adolescents’ social
perceptions, normative beliefs and values (Vollebergh, Iedema, & Raaijmakers, 2001; ter Bogt,
Meeus, Raaijmakers, & Vollebergh, 2001; Westholm, 1999). The most striking finding here is an
obvious increase in the parental ability to influence adolescents' perceptions and values. This
makes us deliberate whether the parental role in the process of their children’s civic and political
socialization has become considerably stronger. A plausible explanation is that the intergenerational
transmission of the social orientation can be weakened in the times of rapid social
changes (Beck & Jennings, 1991). Therefore, the influence of family is more evident for the
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 24
current generation. Considering the socioeconomic status of family, there was an effect of parental
education on perceived opportunities only in the current generation. Once again, it can be justified
by the post-revolution euphoria and the fact that in the early 1990s, society was not still so much
economically stratified.
The evaluations of school engagement appear to be improving. This is consistent with the
findings of Mareš (2007), who reported very similar results, as well as other study according to
which adolescents’ active participation at school has increased during the last decade (Houška,
2006). This may be due to the many changes introduced in the educational system, most of which
are in the direction from unified centrally prescribed curriculum towards community managed
schools with higher curricular variability both among schools and within schools (Ministry of
Education, Youth and Sport, 2001). Even though both lower secondary and higher secondary
schools appear to profit from this trend as judged by students’ evaluations of their environment
the improvement in the evaluations is greater in higher secondary schools. It may be because older
students appreciate this individuation more but also because higher secondary schools have
undergone more changes. What is interesting in this context is that the belief that all students can
learn regardless of their ability is now not more attributed to teachers than it was fifteen years ago.
This suggests that the increased pleasantness of the learning environment is not necessarily related
to learning.
However, there are also several limitations to this study. The first one is related to
difficulties in detecting the direct influences of social change. Our approach, based on a
comparison of two different cohorts at two different historical points cannot exclude or control all
social factors which influence young people immediately and only temporarily. If the social
euphoria from the early 1990s can be regarded as a characteristic attribute of the Czech society of
that period, the current generation’s opinions can be currently affected by certain pessimism and
insecurity brought upon by the ongoing world-wide economic crisis.
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 25
Next, some characteristics varied considerably within both generations. Therefore, we
cannot consider the studied generations to be fully homogenous groups, sharing unanimous
opinions. Instead, some opinions on the society in both cohorts might be quite heterogeneous.
This means that the major part of inter-individual variability in the measured attitudes, beliefs, or
perceptions is due to more proximal (developmental) factors, and the social change plays a more
moderate role here.
Finally, when interpreting the results, we must also consider that the adolescents of 1995
had much less experience with the various social phenomena the questions asked about than
today’s adolescents. We have mentioned new informational technologies as a new source of
information about society and life. However, in regard to the early nineties, also some more
concrete items of our research interest were “new” in that time. For example, the issue of
homelessness and the role of NGOs in this issue were just emerging. In spite of, or maybe due to,
the fact that social welfare was omnipresent and automatic in the socialist society, visible welfare
payments were a new thing. Thus, caution is warranted in the interpretation of various shifts. They
may not be shifts in attitude or belief, but at least partially shifts in how well the belief is formed.
It is possible that in 1995 at least a part of respondents expressed newly formed opinions formed
ad hoc at the time of responding.
Generally, our results revealed smaller differences between the post-totalitarian and
current generation than one might expect. Nevertheless, our finding is substantiated by some
trends appearing in other studies (Macek, 2011; Macek & Polášková, 2006; Sak & Saková, 2004).
Current adolescents are, in comparison with the post-revolution generation from the early 1990s,
more individualistically and achieve oriented; they prefer material values to a higher degree.
Moreover, they perceive society as more elitist, their view of the world and social environment is
more differentiated, and their perception of society and value orientation is more evidently
affected by the family in which they grow up. Current young people seem to accept that
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 26
democracy is accompanied by increased social inequalities since they do not have stronger
feelings that the government should step in. However, these findings do not imply that Czech
adolescents can be regarded as exceptional or even extreme in this respect. From a more general
perspective, social beliefs and values of young Czechs fit into trends that are common among
young people from countries with longer democratic traditions (Amadeo et al., 2002; Flanagan et
al., 1998; 1999; Macek et al., 1998).
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 27
References
Amadeo, J.-A., Torney-Purta, J., Lehmann, R. H., Husfeldt, V., & Nikolova, R. (2002). Civic
knowledge and engagement among upper secondary students. Citizenship and education in
sixteen countries. Amsterdam: IEA.
Anderson, R. E. (2002). Youth and information technology. In J. Mortimor & R. Larson (Eds.),
The future of adolescent experience: Societal trends and the transition to adulthood (pp.175-
207). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Arnett, J. J. (2006). Emerging adulthood in Europe: A response to Bynner. Journal of Youth
Studies, 9, 111–123.
Beck, P. A., & Jennings, M. K. (1991). Family traditions, political periods, and the development of
partisan orientations. The Journal of Politics, 53, 742-763.
Bowes, J. M., Chalmers, D., & Flanagan, C. (1997). Children’s involvement in household work:
Views of adolescents in six countries. Family Matters: Australian Journal of Family Studies,
46, 26-30.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Experiments by nature and
design. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Czech Statistical Office (2012). Historical yearbook of national accounts 1990-2010. Retrieved
from http://www.czso.cz/csu/2012edicniplan.nsf/engkapitola/5014-12-eng_n_2012-12
Czech Statistical Office (2013). Labour market in the Czech Republic 1993-2012. Retrieved from
http://www.czso.cz/csu/2013edicniplan.nsf/engp/3104-13
da Silva, L., Sanson, A., Smart, D., & Toumbourou (2004). Civic responsibility among australian
adolescents: Testing two competing models. Journal of Community Psychology, 32, 229-255.
Elder, G. H. (1998). The life course as developmental theory. Child Development, 69, 1-12.
Fahmy, E. (2006). Young citizens: Young people’s involvement in politics and decision making.
Aldershot: Ashgate.
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 28
Flanagan, C. A. (1995). Commentary: Reflections on human development in a reunited Germany.
In J. Youniss (Ed.), New directions for child development, 70: After the wall: Family
adaptations in East and West Germany (pp. 85-89). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Flanagan, C. A., & Tucker, C. J. (1999). Adolescents’ explanations for political issues:
Concordance with their views of self and society. Developmental Psychology, 35, 1198-1209.
Flanagan, C. A., Cumsille, P., Gill, S., & Gallay, L. S. (2007). School and community climates
and civic commitments: Patterns for ethnic minority and majority students. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 99, 421- 431.
Flanagan, C. A., Jonsson, B., Botcheva, L., Csapo, B., Bowes, J., Macek, P., Averina, I., &
Sheblanova, E. (1999). Adolescents and the 'Social Contract': Developmental roots of
citizenship in seven countries. In M. Yates & J. Youniss (Eds.), Community service and civic
engagement in youth: International perspectives (pp. 135 - 155). New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Flanagan, C., Bowes, J., Jonsson, B., Csapo, B., & Sheblanova, E. (1998). Ties that bind:
Correlates of adolescents’ civic commitments in seven countries. Journal of Social Issues, 54,
457-475.
Flanagan, C.A., Campbell, B., L. Botcheva, J. Bowes, B. Csapo, P. Macek, & E. Sheblanova
(2003). Social class and adolescents' beliefs about justice in different social orders. Journal of
Social Issues, 59, 711-732.
Fussel, E. (2003). Youth in aging societies. In J. Mortimer & R. Larson (Eds.), The future of
adolescent experience: Societal trends and the transition to adulthood (pp.18-54). New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Glass, J., Bengtson, V. L., & Dunham, C. C. (1986). Attitude similarity in three-generation
families: Socialization, status inheritance, or reciprocal influence? American Sociological
Review, 51, 685-698.
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 29
Gniewosz, B., & Noack, P. (2008). Classroom climate indicators and attitudes towards foreigners.
Journal of Adolescence, 31, 609-624.
Gniewosz, B., Noack, P., & Buhl, M. (2009). Political alienation in adolescence: Associations
with parental role models, parenting styles, and classroom climate. International Journal of
Behavioral Development, 33, 337-346.
Houška, T. (2006). Účast mladých lidí na politickém a společenském životě – 2006 [Young
people participation on political and societal life - 2006]. Research report. Prague: National
children and youth institute, Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport. Retrieved from:
http://www.vyzkum-mladez.cz/zpravy/1221126172.pdf
Ichilov, O. (1991). Political socialization and schooling effects among Israeli adolescents.
Comparative Education Review, 35, 430-446.
Jenning, M. K. (2004). American political participation viewed through the lens of the political
socialization project. In M. Hermann (Ed.), Advances in political psychology, Vol. 1 (pp. 1-18).
Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
Klicperová, M. Feierabend, I. K., & Hofstetter, C.R. (1997). In the search for a post-communist
syndrome. A theoretical framework and empirical assessment. Journal of Community and
Applied Social Psychology, 7, 39-52.
Klicperová-Baker, M., Feierabend, I. K.; Kovacheva, S., Titarenko, L., Košťál, J., Hofstetter, C. R.
(2007). Demokratická kultura v České republice. Občanská kultura, étos a vlastenectví ze
srovnávacího pohledu [Democratic culture in the Czech Republic. Civic culture, ethos and
patriotism from a comparative perspective]. Prague: Academia.
Krappmann, L., Uhlendorf, H., & Oswald, H. (1999). Qualities of children's friendships in middle
childhood in East- and West Berlin. In R.K. Silbereisen & A. von Eye (Eds.), Growing up in
times of social change (pp. 91-106). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Linek, L. (2009). Zrazení snu? Struktura a dynamika postojů k politickému režimu a jeho
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 30
institucím a jejich důsledky [Dream betrayed? Structure and dynamics of attitudes toward the
political regime and its institutions and their consequences]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Faculty of Social Sciences UK, Prague.
Macek, P., Lacinová, L., & Polášková, E. (2011). Czech Republic. In J. J. Arnett (Ed.), Adolescent
psychology around the world (pp. 243-256). New York and London: Psychology Press.
Macek, P., & Marková, I. (2004). Trust and distrust in old and new democracies. In I. Marková
(Ed.), Trust and democratic transition in post-communist Europe (pp. 173-194). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Macek, P., & Polášková, E. (2006). Czech Republic. In J. J. Arnett (Ed.), International
encyclopedia of adolescence (pp. 206- 219). New York and London: Routledge
Macek, P. (2011). Self-definition in social change: Comparison across two generations of Czech
adolescents. In D. Chadee & A. Kostic (Eds.), Social psychological Dynamics (pp. 51-73).
Jamaica: University of the West Indies Press.
Macek, P., & Kostroň, L. (1996, July). Students opinion about society: The Case of Czech
Republic. Paper presented at XIVth Biennial ISSBD Meetings, Québec City.
Macek, P., Bejček, J., & Vaníčková, J. (2007). Contemporary Czech emerging adults: Generation
growing up in the period of social changes. Journal of Adolescent Research, 22, 444-475.
Macek, P., Flanagan, C., Gallay, L., Kostroň, L., Botcheva, L., & Csapo, B. (1998). Postcommunist
societies in times of transition: Perceptions of change among adolescents in Central
and Eastern Europe. Journal of Social Issues, 54, 547 – 560.
Mareš, J. (2007). Sociální klima školy jako teoretický a výzkumný problém [School climate as a
theoretical and empirical problem]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Faculty of social studies
MU, Brno.
Marková, I. (2004) (Ed.). Trust and democratic transition in post-communist Europe. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 31
Marková, I., Moodie, E., Farr, R., Drozda-Senkowska, E., Erös. F., Plichtová, J., Gervais, MarieClaude.,
Hoffmannová, J., & Mullerová, O. (1998). Social representations of the individual: A
post-communist perspective. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 797-829.
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport, (2001). National programme for the development of
education in Czech Republic: White paper. Prague: Institute for Information on Education.
Retrieved from: http://aplikace.msmt.cz/pdf/whitepaper.pdf
Mortimer, J. & Larson, R. (Eds.). (2002). The changing adolescent experience: Societal trends
and the transition to adulthood. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Nash, R. (2005). The economy of birthrates in the Czech Republic. In C. B. Douglass (Ed.),
Barren states: The population ‘implosion’ in Europe (pp. 93-113). New York: Berg.
Noack, P. (1999). Adolescent peer relations in times of social change. In R. K. Silbereisen & A.
von Eye (Eds.), Growing up in times of social change (pp. 51-73). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Peterson, B. E., Smirles, K. A., & Wentworth, P. A. (1997). Generativity and authoritarianism:
Implications for personality, political involvement, and parenting. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 72, 1202-1216.
Pinquart, M. & Silbereisen, R.K. (2005). Influences of parents and siblings on the development of
of children and adolescents. In V. Bengtson, A. Acock, K. Allen, P. Dilworth-Anderson & D.
Klein (Eds.), Sourcebook of family theories and methods: An interactive approach (pp. 367-
391). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Plichtová, J., & Erös, F. (1997). The economic and political terms in relation to identities of two
Slovak and Hungarian generations. Sociológia - Slovak Sociological Review, 29, 723-737.
Rabušic, L. & Hamanová, J. (2009). Hodnoty a postoje v ČR 1991-2008 (pramenná publikace
European Values Study) [Values and Attitudes in the CR 1991-2008 (Source Book of European
Values Study)]. Brno: Masaryk University.
Rabušicová, M. (1991). K sociologii výchovy vzdělání a školy [On sociology of education and
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 32
school]. Brno: Masaryk University.
Sak, P. & Saková, K. (2004). Mládež na křižovatce [Youth at the crossroads]. Prague: Svoboda
Servis.
Sheskin, D. J. (2004). Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures. Boca
Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
Silbereisen, R. K. (2005). Social change and human development: Experiences from German
unification. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29, 2-13.
Šmahel, D. (2008). Attending Online Communities: Culture of Youth? In Cultural attitudes
towards technology and communication 2008. (pp. 446-451). Australia: School of Information
Technology, Murdoch University.
Stattin, H., & Kerr, M. (2001). Adolescents’ values matter. In J-E. Nurmi (Ed.), Navigating
through adolescence: European perspectives. The Michigan State University Series On
Families and Child Development. (pp. 21-58). New York: Routledge Farmer.
Štursová, T., & Bocan, M. (2006). Aktuální problémy mladé generace ČR [Current problems of
young generation in CR]. Research report. National children and youth institute, Ministry of
Education, Youth and Sport. Retrieved from: http://www.vyzkum-
mladez.cz/zpravy/1174039212.pdf
ter Bogt, T. F. M., Meeus, W. H. J., Raaijmakers, Q. A. W., & Vollebergh, W. A. M. (2001).
Youth centrism and the formation of political orientations in adolescence and young
adulthood. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 229-240.
Tomasik, M. J. & Silbereisen, R. K. (2009). Demands of social change as a function of the
political context, institutional filters, and psychosocial resources. Social Indicators Research,
94, 13-28.
Torney-Purta, J. (2002). The school's role in developing civic engagement: A study of adolescents
in twenty-eight countries. Applied Developmental Science, 6, 203-212.
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 33
Torney-Purta, J., Barber, C. H., & Richardson, W. K. (2004). Trust in government-related
institutions and political engagement among adolescents in six countries. Acta Politica, 39,
380-406.
Torney-Purta, J., Lehmann, R., Oswald, R., & Schulz, W. (2001). Citizenship and education in
twenty-eight countries. Amsterdam: IEA.
Vollebergh, W. A. M., Iedema, J., & Raaijmakers, Q. A. W. (2001). Intergenerational
transmission and the formation of cultural orientations in adolescence and young adulthood.
Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 1185-1198.
Westholm, A. (1999). The perceptual pathway: Tracing the mechanisms of political value transfer
across generations. Political Psychology, 20, 525-551.
Zukin, C., Keeter, S., Andolina, M., Jenkins, K., & Delli Carpini, M. X. (2006). A new
engagement? Political participation, civic life, and the changing American citizen. Oxford,
New York: Oxford University Press.
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 1
Figures
Figure 1. Diagrams representing the structure of society – welfare pyramids
Note. The diagrams were accompanied by these descriptions: “Type A. Small elite at the top, only
few people in the middle, many people at the bottom.” “Type B. Pyramid-shaped society, small
elite at the top, more people in the middle, most people at the bottom.” “Type C. Pyramid-shaped
society with only few people at the very bottom.” “Type D. Society with most people in the
middle.” “Type E. Many people close to the top, only few at the bottom.”
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 Peak
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 3
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 5
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 1
Tables
Table 1. Generation, gender and grade effects on perceptions of society, normative beliefs, value orientations, perceived family functioning, and
school environment.
Mean (Standard deviation) Partial eta2
Generation Gender Grade Gen*
Gnd
Gen*
Gra1995 2010 male female 8th 10th Gen Gnd Gra
Perceptions of society
Equal opportunities 3.64 (0.83) 3.59 (0.87) 3.62 (0.86) 3.62 (0.83) 3.69 (0.85) 3.54 (0.84) .001 .000 .007** .000 .005*
Caring community 2.77 (0.69) 2.93 (0.80) 2.84 (0.76) 2.84 (0.74) 2.92 (0.74) 2.75 (0.75) .011** .000 .010** .000 .003
Normative beliefs
Economic equality 3.74 (0.44) 3.66 (0.55) 3.67 (0.51) 3.73 (0.48) 3.74 (0.50) 3.65 (0.49) .008** .005* .009** .001 .000
Social welfare skepticism 3.60 (0.85) 3.65 (0.92) 3.58 (0.90) 3.66 (0.86) 3.62 (0.93) 3.62 (0.83) .001 .002 .000 .000 .000
State non-responsibility 2.83 (0.98) 3.07 (0.92) 2.96 (0.98) 2.92 (0.95) 2.97 (0.92) 2.9 (1.00) .016** .001 .001 .000 .000
Value orientations
Social responsibility values 3.56 (0.56) 3.51 (0.61) 3.50 (0.63) 3.58 (0.54) 3.57 (0.61) 3.50 (0.56) .002 .005* .004* .000 .001
Materialistic values 3.68 (0.59) 3.96 (0.65) 3.83 (0.64) 3.79 (0.62) 3.80 (0.63) 3.81 (0.63) .049** .001 .000 .002 .000
Environmental values 3.88 (0.59) 3.71 (0.66) 3.77 (0.67) 3.83 (0.59) 3.86 (0.66) 3.74 (0.59) .019** .003* .010** .001 .001
Educational, selfdevelopmental
values
4.25 (0.51) 4.18 (0.63) 4.17 (0.61) 4.27 (0.52) 4.21 (0.60) 4.24 (0.54) .004* .009** .001 .000 .000
Power as a value orientation 3.33 (0.72) 3.38 (0.81) 3.39 (0.77) 3.31 (0.75) 3.33 (0.77) 3.38 (0.76) .001 .003 .001 .000 .001
Family functioning
Social responsible parenting 3.54 (0.59) 3.49 (0.66) 3.48 (0.63) 3.56 (0.61) 3.53 (0.62) 3.51 (0.62) .002 .004* .000 .000 .001
Self-reliance parenting 3.65 (0.56) 3.75 (0.62) 3.72 (0.6) 3.66 (0.58) 3.72 (0.59) 3.66 (0.59) .008** .002 .002 .004* .000
Positive relationship 3.33 (0.62) 3.38 (0.62) 3.34 (0.62) 3.37 (0.62) 3.45 (0.61) 3.25 (0.61) .001 .001 .024** .002 .003
Mutual respect parenting 3.61 (0.70) 3.43 (0.80) 3.52 (0.75) 3.54 (0.75) 3.51 (0.76) 3.55 (0.75) .014** .000 .000 .000 .000
Economic anxiety 2.89 (0.82) 3.13 (0.91) 3.02 (0.87) 2.97 (0.88) 3.02 (0.89) 2.97 (0.85) .017** .001 .001 .000 .006**
School environment
School engagement 2.66 (0.57) 3.04 (0.63) 2.79 (0.64) 2.87 (0.61) 2.86 (0.63) 2.80 (0.62) .094** .003 .001 .000 .015**
Equal treatment 3.88 (0.71) 3.79 (0.88) 3.84 (0.83) 3.84 (0.76) 3.84 (0.84) 3.84 (0.75) .003 .000 .000 .000 .003
Note. Univariate ANOVAs with two interactions. Effective sample sizes ranged from 2,012 to 2,062. Gen = generation. Gnd = gender. Gra =
grade. *p < .01, **p < .001.
Running head: FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER: SHIFTS IN CZECH ADOLESCENTS 2
Table 2.
Hierarchical multiple regressions predicting perceptions of the society, normative beliefs, and value orientations in 1995 and 2010.
Equal opportunities Caring community Economic equality
Social responsibility
values Materialistic values
1995 2010 Diff. 1995 2010 Diff. 1995 2010 Diff. 1995 2010 Diff. 1995 2010 Diff.
Step 1
Gender (female) .00 -.03 -.03 -.02 -.05 -.03 .09* .01 -.08 .03 .03 .00 -.06 .00 .06
Grade (10th) -.15** -.02 .13* -.13** -.07 -.07 -.10* -.06 .04 -.05 -.02 .03 .01 -.02 -.03
ΔR2
.03** .00 .03** .00 .02** .01 .01** .01 .01 .00
Step 2
Parents' education -.02 .09* .11* -.19** .04 .22** -.17** -.15** .01 -.04 -.03 .01 -.06 .00 .06
Parents' employment -.07 -.02 -.09 .01 .03 .04 -.02 .05 .07 .02 .04 .03 .03 -.01 -.04
ΔR2
.01 .02* .03** .00 .02** .02** .00 .00 .01 .00
Step 3
Close relationship .01 .16** .14* .03 -.04 -.08 .04 -.05 -.10 .07 .05 -.02 .03 .09 .06
Self-reliance parenting .08 .13** .05 -.02 -.08 -.05 .01 .13** .12* .01 .00 -.01 .17** .34** .17*
Socially resp. parenting .04 -.02 -.06 .09* .20** .11 .17** .32** .15** .30** .48** .18** -.10* -.01 .09
ΔR2
.02** .07** .02** .06** .04** .14** .16** .34** .03** .13**
Step 4
School engagement .09* .14** .05 .18** .28** .10 .04 -.09 -.13* .21** .19** -.02 -.11** -.09 .02
Equal treatment .08* .01 -.07 .05 -.08 -.13* .07 .12** .05 .18** .06 -.12* .01 .08 .07
ΔR2
.02** .02** .04** .06** .01 .01** .08** .04** .01* .01
Total R2
.07** .10** .11** .12** .10** .18** .26** .39** .05** .15**
n 1059 854 1050 831 1060 856 1060 855 1058 849
Note. Diff = difference between the effect in 1995 and 2010. *p < .01. **p < .001.