Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Introduction Political efficacy is a key determinant of democratic participation; however, it remains unevenly distributed, particularly among rural women in India. Existing research has largely emphasized sociodemographic predictors, with limited attention to the combined associations of sociocultural, relational, digital, and institutional factors on political efficacy. This study addresses this gap by adopting a multidimensional framework to examine the determinants of political efficacy among rural women in India. Methods A quantitative cross-sectional design was employed using data from 394 rural women in Kerala. Data were obtained through a structured questionnaire administered online (Google Forms) and in person (face-to-face). Political efficacy, gender norms, household decision-making power, social capital, digital engagement, and institutional exposure were also assessed. The incremental contribution of the predictors was measured using hierarchical multiple regression analysis. Results Sociodemographic variables were significant in the baseline model but no longer significant in the fully adjusted model. In contrast, gender norms and the power to make household decisions were strong and reliable predictors of political efficacy in this study. Social capital and digital engagement contributed additional explanatory power, whereas institutional exposure had a significant independent effect in the final model. The full model accounted for 42% of the variance in political efficacy. Discussion The findings indicate that political efficacy is more strongly associated with sociocultural, relational, digital, and institutional factors than with the sociodemographic characteristics included in the analysis. The findings further suggest that gender norms, household agency, social capital, digital engagement, and institutional exposure should be considered together when developing policies and programs to support women’s political efficacy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kariveliparambil et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: