CHAPTER FOUR

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF STUDY FINDINGS

4.1 Respondents’ Socio-Demographic Characteristics

4.1.1 Response Rate

The total response rate was 96% of 400 sampled respondents, amounting to 384 respondents.

4.1.2 Gender of Respondents

Table 4.1.2 Gender by Respondent Distribution

Gender Frequency Percentage

Male 198 51.6%
Female 186 48.4%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025

Table 4.1.2 depicts the gender distribution of the respondents, with males accounting for

51.6% (198) of the respondents and females comprising 48.4% (186).

1
 Gender Distribution of Respondents

200
180
160
140
120
198
100 186

80
60
40
20
Male Female

Figure 1: Gender distribution of respondents

4.1.3 Age Distribution

Respondents’ ages are distributed as follows:

Table 4.1.3 Age Distribution of Respondents

Age Group Frequency Percent

18-25 years 130 33.9%
26-35 years 125 32.6%
36-45 years 75 19.5%
46-55 years 43 11.2%
56 years and above 11 2.8%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025

Table 4.1.3 depicts the distribution of respondents across different age groups. The data

shows that the largest proportion of respondents falls within the 18-25 years age bracket, with

a total number of 130 individuals, representing 33.9% of the total sample. Closely following

2
is the 26-35 years group, with 125 respondents accounting for 32.6%. Together, these two age

groups constitute approximately 66.5% of the entire sample, indicating that the majority of

respondents are young adults in their early and late twenties.

The 36-45 years group accounts for 75 respondents, representing 19.5%, making it the third

most represented age category. This suggests that nearly one-fifth of the respondents are

middle-aged adults, potentially reflecting a segment with some level of professional or life

experience relevant to the study.

The 46-55 years age group has a frequency of 43 respondents, corresponding to 11.2%,

indicating that a smaller portion of the sample consists of older adults who are likely

approaching or at the later stages of their careers. Notably, this group represents roughly one-

tenth of the total respondents.

The least represented category is the 56 years and above group, with only 11 respondents,

which is 2.8% of the sample. This small percentage suggests that the study primarily captures

the perspectives of younger and middle-aged adults, with limited input from senior

respondents.

The data indicates a predominantly youthful demographic, with over 66% of respondents

below 36 years of age. This distribution might influence the study's findings, especially if

age-related perspectives or experiences are pertinent to the research objectives.

3
 Age Distribution of Respondents

140

120

100

80
130 125
60
75
40
43
20
18-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56+

Figure 2: Age distribution of respondents

4.1.4 Level of Education

Table 4.1.4 Education Level Distribution
Educational Level Frequency Percentage
No formal education 12 3.%
Primary education 58 15%
Secondary 182 47.%
education
Tertiary education 126 33%
Others 6 2%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025

Table 4.1.4 depicts the distribution of respondents based on their level of education. The data

shows that the largest portion of respondents, comprising 182 individuals, has attained

secondary education, which accounts for 47% of the total sample. This indicates that nearly

4
half of the respondents completed the secondary school level, representing a significant

segment of the population.

Following this, 126 respondents possess tertiary education, representing 33% of the total.

This suggests that approximately one-third of the respondents have attained higher education

qualifications, which could imply a relatively educated sample with potentially greater access

to information and resources.

The group with no formal education consists of 12 respondents, making up 3% of the sample.

While this is a relatively small percentage, it highlights that a minority of respondents lack

formal educational backgrounds. This demographic may present unique perspectives or

challenges within the context of the study.

Respondents with only primary education total 58 individuals, representing 15%. The

primary education group is the second-largest educational category after secondary education,

indicating a sizable portion of the sample with basic foundational education.

Lastly, a small fraction of respondents, 6 individuals or 2%, fall into the "Others" category,

which could include informal, vocational, or unconventional educational backgrounds not

captured by the main categories.

The data reveals a predominantly educated sample, with most respondents having completed

secondary or tertiary education, totaling approximately 80% of the population. This

distribution suggests that the study mainly reflects the views of respondents with at least

secondary educational background, potentially influencing the insights gained regarding

knowledge levels, awareness, or perspectives related to the research topic. It also indicates a

relatively literate sample, which may impact the generalizability of the findings to

populations with lower literacy levels.

5
 Education Distribution of Respondents
2%3%

15%

33%

47%

No formal education Primary Education SSCE

Tertiary education Others
Figure 3: Education level distribution of respondents

4.1.5 Occupation
Table 4.1.5 Occupation Distribution of Respondents
Occupation Frequency Percentage
Student 112 29%
Civil Servant 102 27%
Businessperson 86 22%
Self-employed 52 14%
Others 32 8%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025

Table 4.1.5 depicts the distribution of respondents across different occupations. The data

reveals that the largest group consists of students, with 112 respondents, accounting for 29%

of the total sample. This indicates that nearly a third of the respondents are actively engaged

in academic pursuits or are recent graduates, which could influence their perspectives,

particularly regarding issues related to education, youth, or future orientation. The second-

6
largest occupational category is civil servants, comprising 102 respondents or 27%. This

sizable segment suggests a significant portion of the sample is involved in government or

public administration, potentially bringing insights based on their professional experience

within the public sector. Their participation might also reflect an interest or engagement in

civic matters, policy-making, or governance issues. Businesspersons make up 86 respondents,

representing 22% of the total. This group’s presence highlights entrepreneurial or commercial

interests within the sample. Their perspectives could be influenced by economic

considerations, market dynamics, and business-related challenges or opportunities, making

their views valuable for understanding economic or enterprise-focused issues. Farmers

account for 52 respondents, constituting 14%. While representing a smaller proportion, this

group’s views are critical for understanding rural or agricultural concerns, especially in

contexts where farming is a primary livelihood or where agricultural development is a policy

focus. The "Others" category includes 32 respondents or 8%, covering occupations that do

not fit neatly into the main categories, such as artisans, entrepreneurs, or employed in other

sectors.

7
 Occupation Distribution of Respondents

8%

14% 29%

22%

27%

Student Civil Servant Businessperson

Self-employed Others
Figure 4: Occupation distribution of respondents

4.1.6 Marital Status

Table 4.1.6 Registered Voters Distribution of Respondents

Response Frequency Percentage

Yes 207 54%
No 177 46%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025

Over half of the respondents 207 (54%) have participated in political activities, indicating a

relatively high level of civic engagement in the sample.

8
 Distribution of Respondents on Participation in
Political Activity
300

260

220

180

140
207
100 177

60

20
Yes No

Figure 5: Respondents distribution on registered voter’s

4.2 Use of Social Media by Political Candidates and Parties

Table 4.2.1: Distribution of respondent’s social media use by politicians during the 2023
general elections

Response Frequency Percentage

Yes 223 58%
No 161 42%
Total 384 100%

9
 Source: Primary data computed, 2025

A total of 223 respondents (58%) reported that politicians used social media during the 2023

general elections, indicating that social media engagement by politicians was a prevalent

phenomenon during this period. Conversely, 161 respondents (42%) stated that politicians did

not use social media, reflecting a significant minority who either believed social media was

not a primary platform for political engagement or possibly lacked awareness of its use.

This distribution suggests that more than half of the surveyed population perceives social

media as a key tool utilized by politicians in the electoral process, potentially influencing

voter behavior, campaign dynamics, and political communication strategies. The 58% figure

underscores the growing importance of social media as a political communication channel,

aligning with global trends of digital engagement in elections.

On the other hand, the 42% who responded "No" highlight that a substantial proportion of the

populace might either have limited exposure to social media platforms or perceive traditional

media as more significant for political activities. This divergence in perceptions could reflect

demographic variations such as age, education level, or technological access, which merit

further investigation.

Table 4.2.2: Distribution of Popular Platforms Used, Identifying the Most Favored
Social Media channels.

Response Frequency Percentage

Facebook 73 19%
Twitter 73 19%
Instagram 93 24%
WhatsApp 90 23%
Others 55 14%
Total 384 100%

10
 Source: Primary data computed, 2025

A total of 93 respondents (24%) identified Instagram as the most favored social media

platform used during the 2023 general elections, making it the most preferred channel among

the respondents. WhatsApp was close behind, with 90 respondents (23%) indicating its

popularity, highlighting its significant role in political communication and information

dissemination.

Facebook and Twitter were equally popular, each with 73 respondents (19%), suggesting that

these platforms are also key channels for political engagement, though slightly less favored

compared to Instagram and WhatsApp. The "Others" category, with 55 respondents (14%),

indicates that a variety of additional platforms were used, reflecting diverse choices and

possibly emerging or niche social media channels that are gaining traction in political

contexts.

This distribution demonstrates that visual and instant messaging platforms like Instagram and

WhatsApp played a prominent role in the digital political landscape during the election

period, likely due to their popularity, accessibility, and ease of sharing content quickly. The

relatively balanced use of Facebook and Twitter further underscores their ongoing importance

in shaping political discourse and mobilization.

The data reveals a clear preference for visually engaging and conversational platforms, with

Instagram and WhatsApp leading the pack. This trend suggests that politicians and campaign

strategists should prioritize these channels to effectively reach and engage voters, recognizing

the evolving nature of social media preferences in contemporary electoral politics.

11
Table 4.2.3: Distribution of the Frequency and Nature of Political Messages in the 2023

General Elections

Response Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 12 3%
Disagree 21 6%
Neutral 58 15%
Agree 101 26%
Strongly Agree 192 50%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025

A total of 192 respondents (50%) strongly agreed that political messages during the 2023

general elections were frequently and actively communicated, indicating a widespread

perception that political messaging was a prominent and consistent feature of the electoral

period. Additionally, 101 respondents (26%) agreed with this statement, further supporting

the view that a significant majority perceived the presence of robust political messages.

In contrast, a smaller portion of respondents expressed neutrality 58 respondents, (15%),

suggesting that some individuals were either unsure or perceived the frequency and nature of

political messages as neither particularly dominant nor absent. A minor percentage,

comprising 21 respondents (6%), disagreed, and only 12 respondents (3%) strongly

disagreed, implying that a very small segment believed political messages were infrequent or

less impactful.

This distribution clearly highlights that the majority of respondents 76% when combining

those who agreed and strongly agreed perceived the communication of political messages as

a major aspect of the 2023 elections. The high level of agreement underscores the importance

of strategic messaging in electoral campaigns, reflecting the role of political communication

in influencing voter perceptions and engagement.

12
The data suggests that political messaging was a pervasive and significant element during the

election, with most respondents recognizing its frequency and potential influence on the

electoral process. Campaign strategists and political actors should thus consider the

substantial impact and importance of messaging campaigns in shaping election outcomes.

Table 4.2.4: Perception of ease of interaction via social media, assessing positive impacts

on communication.

Response Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 19 5%
Disagree 40 10%
Neutral 58 15%
Agree 125 33%
Strongly Agree 142 37%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025

A total of 267 respondents (70%) expressed positive perceptions regarding the ease of

interaction via social media during the 2023 general elections, with 125 respondents (33%)

agreeing and 142 respondents (37%) strongly agreeing that social media facilitated effective

communication. This high level of agreement indicates that a significant majority viewed

social media as an accessible and beneficial platform for engaging with political actors and

information.

Conversely, 59 respondents (15%) remained neutral on this issue, suggesting some

uncertainty or mixed perceptions about the ease of interaction through these channels. A

smaller proportion, comprising 40 respondents (10%), disagreed, and 19 respondents (5%)

strongly disagreed, implying that a minority perceived social media as less conducive to

interaction or communication.

13
This distribution underscores that a substantial majority of respondents perceived social

media as having a positive impact on political communication during the election period. The

perception of ease in engaging with political content and actors via social media channels

highlights its role in enhancing political accessibility and participation.

The data emphasizes that most respondents recognize social media as a valuable tool for

facilitating communication, which could have contributed to increased political engagement

and voter awareness. For campaign strategists and political communicators, leveraging social

media’s interactive potential appears crucial in modern electoral contexts.

Table 4.2.5: Usage for campaign promises and manifestos to evaluate transparency and

campaign strategies

Response Frequency Percentage

Yes 298 78%
No 86 22%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025

A total of 298 respondents (78%) indicated that social media was used for disseminating

campaign promises and manifestos, highlighting its prominent role in promoting transparency

and informing voters about political agendas during the 2023 general elections. This majority

suggests that most political actors leveraged social media platforms to communicate their

commitments openly, potentially fostering trust and accountability in the electoral process.

86 respondents (22%) stated that social media was not used for such purposes, reflecting a

smaller segment of the population that may perceive limited transparency or engagement

through digital platforms, or perhaps rely on traditional communication channels instead.

This distribution demonstrates a clear trend towards utilizing social media as a key tool for

campaign transparency and strategic messaging. The high percentage of usage indicates that
14
social media played a significant role in conveying campaign promises, which could

influence voters' perceptions of candidates’ sincerity and commitment.

4.3 Impact of Social Media on Voter Behavior and Public Opinion.

Table 4.3.1: Distribution of respondents on influence of social media on voting decision

Response Frequency Percentage

Yes 176 46%
No 208 54%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025

A total of 176 respondents (46%) believed that social media influenced their voting decisions

during the 2023 general elections, indicating that nearly half of the surveyed population

perceived social media as having a role in shaping their electoral choices. This suggests that

social media platforms may have contributed to influencing voter perceptions, preferences,

and decision-making processes for a considerable segment of the electorate.

208 respondents (54%) stated that social media did not influence their voting decisions,

implying that for more than half of the respondents, voting choices were unaffected by social

media content or engagement. This highlights a divergence in perception regarding the

impact of social media on electoral behavior.

These figures suggest a somewhat balanced perspective, with almost equal proportions of

respondents perceiving social media as either influential or non-influential in their voting

process. While social media clearly played a significant role for many, there remains a

substantial segment for whom traditional or other factors may wield greater influence.

This distribution emphasizes the mixed perception of social media’s role in voter behavior,

underscoring the need for political actors to understand and strategically harness digital

15
platforms to sway and mobilize voters effectively. It also points to the importance of further

exploring underlying factors such as demographics or media literacy that affect perceptions

of influence.

Table 4.3.2: Learning about political parties and candidates through social media

Response Frequency Percentage

Strongly Agree 135 35%
Agree 102 26%
Neutral 65 17%
Disagree 40 10%
Strongly Disagree 42 11%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025

A total of 237 respondents (61%) expressed positive perceptions regarding learning about

political parties and candidates through social media, with 135 respondents (35%) strongly

agreeing and 102 respondents (26%) simply agreeing that social media is an effective

platform for obtaining political information. This indicates that a significant majority of the

respondents found social media to be a useful tool for gaining insights into political actors

and their platforms during the 2023 general elections.

Meanwhile, 65 respondents (17%) remained neutral, suggesting that they neither strongly felt

nor dismissed the role of social media in political learning. A smaller segment, comprising 40

respondents (10%), disagreed, and 42 respondents (11%) strongly disagreed, indicating that

some individuals perceived social media as less effective or relevant for learning about

political parties and candidates.

Table 4.3.3: Influence of political discussions on opinions

Response Frequency Percentage

Strongly Agree 97 25%
16
 Agree 90 24%
Neutral 93 24%
Disagree 73 19%
Strongly Disagree 30 8%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025

A total of 187 respondents (49%) expressed positive perceptions regarding the influence of

political discussions on their opinions, with 97 respondents (25%) strongly agreeing and 90

respondents (24%) simply agreeing that engaging in political discussions shapes their

viewpoints. This indicates that nearly half of the surveyed population believes that

participating in or observing political debates and discussions can significantly influence their

perspectives and opinions.

93 respondents (24%) remained neutral, suggesting they are either unaffected by such

discussions or undecided about their impact. A smaller proportion, comprising 73 respondents

(19%), disagreed, and 30 respondents (8%) strongly disagreed, reflecting a segment of the

population that perceives little to no influence of political discussions on their opinions.

Table 4.3.4: Exposure to misinformation or fake news on social media

Response Frequency Percentage

17
 Strongly Agree 192 50%
Agree 101 26%
Neutral 58 15%
Disagree 21 6%
Strongly Disagree 12 3%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025

A total of 293 respondents (76%) expressed concern about exposure to misinformation or

fake news on social media, with 192 respondents (50%) strongly agreeing and 101

respondents (26%) agreeing that they encountered false or misleading information during the

2023 general elections. This high percentage highlights the widespread recognition of

misinformation’s prevalence and the associated risks of misinformation spreading through

social media platforms.

Meanwhile, 58 respondents (15%) remained neutral, indicating that some individuals are

uncertain or unaffected by exposure to fake news. A smaller group, comprising 21

respondents (6%), disagreed, and only 12 respondents (3%) strongly disagreed, suggesting

that a minority perceive little to no exposure to misinformation.

Table 4.3.5: Social media contributed to political awareness in Nigeria during the 2023

general elections

Response Frequency Percentage

Strongly Agree 192 50%
Agree 101 26%
Neutral 58 15%
Disagree 21 6%
Strongly Disagree 12 3%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025

18
A total of 293 respondents (76%) recognized that social media contributed significantly to

political awareness in Nigeria during the 2023 general elections. Specifically, 192

respondents (50%) strongly agreed, and 101 respondents (26%) agreed that social media

played a pivotal role in informing and educating the public about political issues, candidates,

and electoral processes.

58 respondents (15%) remained neutral, indicating some uncertainty or ambivalence about

social media’s impact on political awareness. A smaller proportion, comprising 21

respondents (6%), disagreed, and 12 respondents (3%) strongly disagreed, suggesting that a

minority did not perceive social media as a notable contributor to political awareness.

4.4 Challenges in Using Social Media for Political Communication

Table 4.4.1: Prevalence of misleading or false information

Response Frequency Percentage

Yes 246 64%
No 138 36%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025
According to the data, a significant portion of respondents 64% acknowledge the widespread

presence of misleading or false information on social media during the 2023 elections.

Specifically, 246 individuals indicated that they encountered or perceived the prevalence of

misinformation, highlighting a considerable challenge faced by users in verifying the

authenticity of the content they come across.

138 respondents (36%) reported not experiencing or noticing a high level of misinformation

on social media platforms. This suggests that while misinformation is a prominent issue for

many, there remains a segment of the population that perceives social media as relatively free

of falsehoods or perhaps less affected by such challenges.

19
Table 4.4.2: Incidence of hate speech
Response Frequency Percentage
Yes 260 68%
No 124 32%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025
The data reveals that a substantial majority of respondents 68%, or 260 individuals reported

the occurrence of hate speech on social media during the 2023 elections. This high incidence

underscores the prevalence of hostile and divisive language in online political discussions,

which can escalate tensions and hinder constructive dialogue.

On the other hand, 124 respondents (32%) indicated that they did not experience or observe

hate speech on social media platforms, suggesting that for a notable portion of users, social

media remained relatively free of such negative discourse during the electoral period.

Table 4.4.3: Use of social media for manipulation

Response Frequency Percentage
Yes 202 53%
No 182 47%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025
The findings indicate that over half of the respondents 53%, or 202 individuals believe that

social media was used as a tool for manipulation during the 2023 elections. This suggests a

significant concern about the potential for social media platforms to influence voter opinions,

spread propaganda, or sway electoral outcomes through manipulative tactics.

Conversely, 182 respondents (47%) felt that social media was not primarily used for such

purposes, implying that nearly an equal proportion of users did not perceive manipulation to

be a prominent issue during the electoral period.

20
The relatively high percentage of respondents who view social media as a medium for

manipulation points to underlying challenges in maintaining the integrity of online political

communication. It emphasizes the need for stricter regulation, enhanced media literacy, and

verification mechanisms to curb malicious activities and ensure that voters can access

genuine, unbiased information. Addressing these concerns is crucial to preserving the

credibility of social media as a democratic tool.

Table 4.4.4: Impact of lack of regulation

Response Frequency Percentage
Yes 259 67%
No 125 33%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025

The data shows that a significant majority of respondents 67%, or 259 individuals believe

that the absence of effective regulation on social media negatively impacted the electoral

process during the 2023 elections. This perception highlights concerns that insufficient

oversight may have allowed the proliferation of misinformation, hate speech, and

manipulation, thereby undermining the credibility and fairness of the electoral process.

125 respondents (33%) did not see the lack of regulation as a major issue, suggesting that a

considerable portion of users either perceive the current regulatory environment as adequate

or are less affected by regulatory gaps.

4.4.5: Influence of technical issues like internet access

Response Frequency Percentage
Yes 267 70%
No 117 30%
Total 384 100%
Source: Primary data computed, 2025

21
The data indicates that a significant majority of respondents 70%, or 267 individuals believe

that technical challenges such as poor internet access had an impact on their engagement

during the 2023 elections. This highlights that connectivity problems were a notable obstacle,

potentially affecting voters' ability to access information, participate in online discussions, or

cast their votes effectively.

On the other hand, 117 respondents (30%) did not perceive internet access issues as

significantly affecting their electoral experience. This suggests that while technical

difficulties were a widespread concern, a portion of the population was less affected or able

to circumvent such challenges.

The high percentage of respondents citing technical issues emphasizes the importance of

improving internet infrastructure and digital accessibility to ensure inclusive and seamless

participation in future elections. Addressing these technical barriers can help enhance the

reach and effectiveness of social media and online platforms in supporting democratic

processes.

4.5 Discussion of Findings

This chapter provides an in-depth analysis of the study's findings, the results reveal notable

trends in respondents’ socio-demographic characteristics, social media use, perception of

political messages, and challenges faced during the electoral process. Each theme is discussed

considering its implications for electoral integrity and democratic participation.

The study sampled 384 respondents with a response rate of 96%. The gender distribution was

fairly balanced, with males constituting 51.6% and females 48.4%. The age distribution

shows a predominantly youthful demographic, with 33.9% aged 18-25 years and 32.6% aged

26-35 years, together representing roughly two-thirds of the sample. This youthful

composition suggests that young adults form the core of social media users and political

22
discourse participants in this context, potentially influencing the dynamics of political

engagement and information dissemination.

Regarding education, a significant majority (80%) held at least a secondary or tertiary

qualification, indicating a highly educated sample with likely greater access to information

and digital platforms. The occupational profile shows students (29%) and civil servants

(27%) as the most common responses, representing active participants in societal and

economic spheres, with implications for their political awareness and engagement strategies.

The data reveals widespread engagement with social media during the 2023 elections,

reflecting its emerging prominence in political communication within the country. A

significant majority, 58%, of respondents reported that politicians actively used social media

channels to reach voters, with Instagram (24%) and WhatsApp (23%) emerging as

particularly favored platforms. This pattern indicates a notable shift from traditional

campaigning methods toward more modern, visual, and instant messaging platforms, which

allow politicians to engage directly and personally with constituents. This trend underscores

the importance for political strategists and campaign managers to prioritize these mobile-

centric channels, developing targeted content strategies that leverage the fast-paced,

multimedia nature of platforms like Instagram and WhatsApp to maximize outreach, mobilize

supporters, and counter the influence of misinformation.

Most respondents (50%) perceived political messages disseminated through social media as

frequent during the elections, underscoring the platform’s central role in shaping and

amplifying electoral narratives. This high perception of message frequency suggests that

social media served as a primary conduit for political content, enabling politicians and parties

to bypass traditional media filters and communicate directly with voters. Additionally, 78%

acknowledged that social media was used for the dissemination of campaign promises and

23
manifestos, which highlights its critical function in promoting transparency, accountability,

and engagement. The ease of sharing detailed policy proposals and campaign materials online

allows voters to access information more readily, potentially increasing political literacy.

However, this also underscores the platform’s dual nature while it can serve as a tool for

education and transparency, it also leaves room for the rapid spread of false or manipulated

content, emphasizing the need for credible, accurate information sources.

Regarding its influence, 46% of respondents claimed that social media affected their voting

decisions, illustrating that nearly half of the electorate considered online content a significant

factor in their electoral choices. This finding indicates that social media does not only serve

as a channel for information dissemination but also plays a substantial role in shaping

opinions, perceptions, and ultimately, voting behavior. Conversely, 54% stated that social

media did not influence their decisions, revealing a degree of skepticism or independence in

electoral decision-making among some voters. This division points to a complex landscape

where social media’s impact varies across different demographics and individual voter

dispositions. It underscores the importance for campaigns to understand the diverse ways in

which digital platforms influence electoral outcomes and tailor their communication

strategies accordingly.

A substantial majority (61%) of respondents agreed that social media contributed positively

to political awareness, emphasizing its potential as an educational and mobilization tool.

Many recognized that social media platforms offer easy access to ongoing political debates,

candidate profiles, and civic information, thereby broadening public understanding of

electoral issues. Furthermore, 49% of respondents reported that political discussions taking

place online influenced their opinions, indicating an active engagement with political

discourse facilitated by social media networks. This active participation highlights the role of

digital spaces in fostering democratic dialogue, encouraging voters to critically evaluate

24
competing narratives, and increase involvement in the electoral process. Yet, it also raises

questions about the quality and reliability of these discussions, especially in environments

where misinformation may distort facts or polarize opinions.

Despite these evident benefits, social media also presents notable challenges. A large

proportion of respondents, 76%, reported encountering misinformation or fake news, which

significantly undermines the trustworthiness of online political content. The widespread

presence of false information can mislead voters, distort electoral debates, and even influence

election results adversely. Additionally, 68% of respondents witnessed hate speech,

harassment, or offensive messages during the electoral period, signaling escalating hostility

and divisiveness in online political spaces. Such negativity can hinder constructive dialogue,

alienate marginalized groups, and create an unwelcoming environment for civic engagement.

These issues point to the urgent need for stronger moderation policies, media literacy

campaigns, and fact-checking initiatives aimed at curbing misinformation and fostering

respectful political conversations.

Further concerns revolve around manipulation, with 53% of respondents believing that social

media was exploited to sway opinions deceitfully, often through tactics like targeted

misinformation, bots, or coordinated campaigns. About 67% perceived that the lack of

adequate regulation and oversight worsened the integrity of the electoral process, allowing

malicious actors to operate with relative impunity. Technical barriers, such as poor internet

connectivity, affected 70% of participants, highlighting infrastructural limitations that prevent

equal participation. These obstacles are particularly detrimental to rural and underserved

communities, exacerbating the digital divide and potentially skewing election outcomes.

Addressing these issues requires multi-faceted interventions, including stronger regulatory

frameworks, investment in internet infrastructure, and the promotion of digital literacy to

empower voters to critically evaluate online content.

25
The findings reveal several critical areas for improvement to harness social media’s full

potential in democratic processes. The high prevalence of misinformation and hate speech

underscores the urgent need for stricter content moderation, regulatory oversight, and public

education campaigns aimed at enhancing media literacy and critical thinking. The influence

of social media on voters’ decisions emphasizes the importance of deploying verified,

trustworthy information sources and promoting responsible communication by political

actors. Infrastructure development, such as expanding affordable and reliable internet access,

is essential to ensure inclusive participation, particularly among marginalized and rural

populations. These improvements will be pivotal in creating a safer, more informed, and more

equitable digital political environment.

These results demonstrate that social media is a powerful yet complex tool shaping Nigeria’s

electoral landscape. While it facilitates increased political awareness, engagement, and

transparency, it also introduces significant risks related to misinformation, manipulation, hate

speech, and infrastructural deficits. Addressing these challenges through comprehensive

policy reforms, technological investments, and public education initiatives will be essential in

strengthening the democratic process. A balanced approach that promotes responsible use of

digital platforms, while safeguarding electoral integrity, can enhance the role of social media

as an asset rather than a liability in future elections.

4.6 Summary of Major Findings

i. Social Media Use and Political Engagement: The data reveals that social media

played a substantial role in the electoral process. 58% of respondents acknowledged

social media use by politicians, with platforms like Instagram (24%) and WhatsApp

(23%) being the most favored channels. More than half (78%) of respondents

indicated that social media was actively used for disseminating campaign promises

26
 and manifestos, fostering transparency. The majority (70%) perceived social media as

facilitating effective communication and interaction, with 46% stating it influenced

their voting decisions.

ii. Information and Misinformation: While social media contributed significantly to

political awareness 76% agreed it was beneficial there is a widespread concern

regarding misinformation, with 76% of respondents encountering fake news or false

information. Furthermore, 68% reported experiencing hate speech during the

elections, indicating a divisive online environment. Despite these issues, 53%

believed social media was used for manipulation, highlighting risks to electoral

integrity.

iii. Influence on Voter Behavior and Opinions: About 49% of respondents felt that

political discussions on social media influenced their opinions, demonstrating its role

in shaping electoral perceptions. Additionally, 61% of respondents learned about

candidates and political parties via social media, underscoring its importance as an

information source.

iv. Challenges in Using Social-Media: The primary challenges identified include

technical issues such as poor internet access (70%), which hindered participation.

Other concerns involved exposure to misinformation (76%) and hate speech (68%),

which undermine the quality of online political discourse. A significant majority

(67%) believed that the lack of effective regulation on social media negatively

affected the electoral process.

v. Perception of Support Systems: The study indicates a need for improved regulatory

frameworks and media literacy to combat misinformation and manipulation. The

findings urge stakeholders to enhance internet infrastructure, regulate social media

27
 content, and promote digital literacy to ensure fair and inclusive electoral processes in

future elections.

The study highlights the growing influence of social media in political communication, voter

engagement, and electoral outcomes, alongside notable challenges related to misinformation,

hate speech, and technical barriers that must be addressed to strengthen democratic

participation.

28