Personal Legitimacy in the Structure of Public Perception of Power Among VK Users

DOI: https://doi.org/10.15826/csp.2026.10.1.371

Abstract

The article explores the evolving structure of political legitimacy in contemporary Russia, focusing on the rising importance of personal legitimacy in public perceptions of power. Drawing on David Easton’s typology (ideological, structural, and personal legitimacy), the study reveals how moral character, biographical integrity, and symbolic alignment with collective values increasingly shape the acceptability of political leaders. An online survey of 1,500 VK users in Russia was conducted in 2024–2025, weighted by age and gender. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted using the Python package Factor Analyzer to provide an evidence-based mapping of citizens’ perceptions of the traits and risks associated with political leaders. The findings demonstrate that honesty, ideological consistency, and patriotic positioning are prioritized over institutional affiliation or political experience. The article argues that personal legitimacy in Russia functions as a hybrid construct, integrating moral expectations, performative coherence, and media-mediated imagery. This transformation reflects a broader shift in legitimation practices within hybrid regimes, where declining institutional trust intensifies the personalization of power.

Author Biographies

Dmitrii A. Mikhailov, Novosibirsk State Technical University, Novosibirsk

Dmitrii Mikhailov, Cand. Sci. (History), the Head of the Department of Sociology and Mass Communications at Novosibirsk State Technical University (Novosibirsk, Russia). His research interests include sociopolitical processes in contemporary Russia, nationalism, and Russian studies, with a particular focus on identity formation and state–society relations.

Nikolay M. Ternov, L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University, Astana

Nikolay Ternov, PhD (Journalism and Political Studies), Lecturer at the Department of Sociology, L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University (Astana, Kazakhstan). His research focuses on political processes in the post-Soviet space, digital governance, and computational social science. He works with network measurement data, machine learning, and natural language processing to study information control, online regulation, and state–infrastructure interactions.

References


  • Barker, R. (2001). Legitimating identities: The self-presentations of rulers and subjects. Cambridge University Press.

  • Beetham, D. (1991). The legitimation of power. Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Easton, D. (1965). A systems analysis of political life. Wiley.

  • Garzia, D. (2014). Personalization of politics and electoral change. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-66993-6

  • Gel’man, V. (2010). Regime changes despite legitimacy crises: Exit, voice, and loyalty in post-Communist Russia. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 1(1), 54–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euras.2009.11.004

  • Gilley, B. (2006). The meaning and measure of state legitimacy: Results for 72 countries. European Journal of Political Research, 45(3), 499–525.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2006.00307.x

  • Grigorieva, E. B. (2013). Vliianie avtoritarnogo sindroma na protsess legitimatsii institutov gosudarstvennoi vlasti v sovremennoi Rossii [The influence of the authoritarian syndrome on the process of legitimation of government institutions in today’s Russia]. RUDN Journal of Political Science, 3, 13–26.

  • Hadenius, A., & Teorell, J. (2007). Pathways from authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy, 18(1), 143–157. https://doi.org/10.1353/JOD.2007.0009

  • Kortukov, D., & Waller, J. G. (2025). The foundations of Russian statehood: The pentabasis, national history, and civic values in wartime Russia. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 58(2), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1525/cpcs.2024.2271407

  • Levitsky, S., & Way, L. A. (2002). Elections without democracy: The rise of competitive authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy, 13(2), 51–65. https://doi.org/10.1353/JOD.2002.0026

  • Lipset, S. (1959). Some social requisites of democracy: Economic development and political legitimacy. American Political Science Review, 53(1), 69–105. https://doi.org/10.2307/1951731

  • Maslinsky, K., Koltsov, S., & Koltsova, O. (2013). Changes in the topical structure of Russian language LiveJournal: The impact of elections 2011 (Higher School of Economics Research Paper No. WP BPR 14/SOC/2013). SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2209802

  • Mazepus, H., Veenendaal, W., McCarthy-Jones, A., & Trak Vásquez, J. M. (2016). A comparative study of legitimation strategies in hybrid regimes. Policy Studies, 37(4), 350–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2016.1157855

  • Nathan, A. J. (2020). The puzzle of authoritarian legitimacy. Journal of Democracy, 31(1), 158–168. https://doi.org/10.1353/JOD.2020.0013

  • Olędzka, J. (2017). Why do the Russians succumb to the “strong-hand” government? Historical-cultural legitimacy of the Russian state leadership in the context of Yuri Pivovarov’s theory. Review of Nationalities, 7, 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1515/pn-2017-0004

  • Roughan, N. (2019). The legitimacy of whom? In W. Sadurski, M. Sevel, & K. Walton (Eds.), Legitimacy: The state and beyond (pp. 82–105). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198825265.003.0006

  • Shipov, A. L. (2009). Rossiiskaia vlast' v otsenkakh grazhdan (1993–2008 g.g.) [Russian authorities in citizens’ assessments (1993–2008)] [Extended abstract of Candidate of Political Sciences Dissertation, National Research University Higher School of Economics]. NRU HSE. https://www.hse.ru/sci/diss/12044531

  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1995.9508080331

  • Ternov, N., & Mikhailov, D. (2023). Legitimacies conflict: The evolution of perceived legitimacy in modern Russia. Russian Politics, 8(3), 353–374. https://doi.org/10.30965/24518921-00803004

  • Ternov, N. M., & Mikhailov, D. A. (2025). Osobennosti mediatizatsii politicheskikh skandalov v sovremennoi Rossii [The features of the political scandals mediatization in contemporary Russia]. Political Science (RU), 2, 162–181. https://doi.org/10.31249/poln/2025.02.07

  • van Ham, C., Thomassen, J., Aarts, K., & Andeweg, R. (Eds.). (2017). Myth and reality of the legitimacy crisis: Explaining trends and cross-national differences in established democracies. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198793717.001.0001

  • Volkov, D. (2012). Putinism under siege: The protesters and the public. Journal of Democracy, 23(3), 55–62. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2012.0049

  • White, S., & McAllister, I. (2013). Did Russia (nearly) have a Facebook revolution in 2011? Social media’s challenge to authoritarianism. Politics, 34(1), 72–84. [Facebook™ is a trademark of Facebook Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. По решению Роскомнадзора, социальная сеть Facebook в России признана экстремистской организацией и заблокирована.] https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9256.12037

Published
2026-04-17
How to Cite
Mikhailov, D., & Ternov, N. (2026). Personal Legitimacy in the Structure of Public Perception of Power Among VK Users. Changing Societies & Personalities, 10(1), 11-27. doi:10.15826/csp.2026.10.1.371
Citation Formats
Issue
Vol. 10, No. 1 (2026)
Section
Articles
License