Protest behavior: Individual and group factors

2974

Abstract

Normative and nonnormative collective actions are the consequence of differences in estimation of political situation. The article regards the predictors in selection of normative (participation in meetings, signing petitions, etc.) vs. nonnormative (strike, violent actions, etc.) forms of protest behavior (perception of unfairness, self-efficacy, social identity, ideas of out-group). The carried out analysis showed that high self-efficacy, idea of out-group members as equal participants of interaction and experiencing of emotion of anger lead to the choice of various normative protest behavior. Low self-efficacy, steady social identity (including politicized identity), experiencing the emotion of contempt to out-group members often lead to choice of nonnormative forms. In conclusion the article regards the link of various predictors with the choice of individual and group forms of protest and analyzes the possible directions for further empirical studies.

General Information

Keywords: emotions; social identity; self-efficacy; out-group; protest behavior

Journal rubric: Social Psychology

Article type: review article

For citation: Agadullina E.R., Lovakov A.V. Protest behavior: Individual and group factors [Elektronnyi resurs]. Sovremennaia zarubezhnaia psikhologiia = Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology, 2013. Vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 131–140. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)

References

  1. Agadullina E.R. Kollektivnye deistviia: Prediktory i modeli // Sotsial'naia psikhologiia i obshchestvo. 2013. № 3. S. 42—51.
  2. Agadullina E.R., Kotova M.V. Sovremennye modeli kollektivnykh deistvii // Sovremennaia sotsial'naia psikhologiia: Teoreticheskie podkhody i prikladnye issledovaniia. 2012. № 4. S. 15—24.
  3. Becker J.C., Tausch N., Wagner U. Emotional consequences of collective action participation: Differentiating self-directed and outgroup-directed emotions // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2011. Vol. 37, Iss. 12. P. 1587—1598.
  4. Brunsting S., Postmes T. Movement participation in the digital age: Predicting offline and online collective action // Small group research. 2002. Vol. 33, Iss. 5. P. 525—554.
  5. Corcoran K.E., Pettinicchio D., Young J.T.N. The context of control: A cross-national investigation of the link between political institutions, efficacy, and collective action // British journal of social psychology. 2011. Vol. 50, Iss. 4. P. 575—605.
  6. Dalton R., Van Sickle A., Weldon S. The individual-institutional nexus of protest behaviour // British journal of political science. 2009. Vol. 40, Iss. 1. P. 51—73.
  7. Drury J., Reicher S. Collective action and psychological change: The emergence of new social identities // British journal of social psychology. 2000. Vol. 39, Iss. 4. P. 579—604.
  8. Duncan L.E. Motivation for collective action: Group consciousness as mediator of personality, life experience and women's rights activism // Political Psychology. 1999. Vol. 20, Iss. 3. P. 611—635.
  9. Giguère B., Lalonde R.N. Why do students strike? Direct and indirect determinants of collective action participation // Political psychology. 2010. Vol. 31, Iss. 2. P. 227—247.
  10. Hornsey M.J. The impact of individualist and collectivist group norms on evaluations of dissenting group members / M.J. Hornsey, J. Jetten, B. McAuliffe, M.A. Hogg // Journal of experimental social psychology. 2006. Vol. 42, Iss. 1. P. 57—68.
  11. Kawashima N. Multiple levels of perceived fairness and social protests: Effects of the immutability belief, social efficacy, and estimated costs / N. Kawashima, K.-I. Ohbuchi, T. Kumagai, N. Asai // Research in Social Psychology. 2012. Vol. 27, Iss. 2. P. 63—74.
  12. Opp K.-D. Collective identity, rationality and collective political action // Rationality and society. 2012. Vol. 24, Iss. 1. P. 73—105.
  13. Postmes T. Comparative processes in personal and group judgments: resolving the discrepancy / T. Postmes, N.R. Branscombe, R. Spears, H. Young // Journal of personality and social psychology. 1999. Vol. 76, Iss. 2. P. 320—338.
  14. Prati G., Pietrantoni L. Elaborating the police perspective: The role of perceptions and experience in the explanation of crowd conflict // European journal of social psychology. 2009. Vol. 39, Iss. 6. P. 991—1001.
  15. Scheepers D. The social functions of in-group bias: creating, confirming, or changing social reality / D. Scheepers, R. Spears, B. Doosje, A.S.R. Manstead // European review of social psychology. 2006. Vol. 17, Iss. 1. P. 359—396.
  16. Stott C., Reicher S. Crowd action as intergroup process: introducing the police perspective // European journal of social psychology. 1998. Vol. 28, Iss. 4. P. 509—529.
  17. Tausch N. Explaining radical group behavior: Developing emotion and efficacy routes to normative and nonnormative collective action / N. Tausch, J. C. Becker, R. Spears, O. Christ, R. Saab, P. Singh, R.N Siddiqui // Journal of personality and social psychology. 2011. Vol. 101, Iss. 1. P. 129—148.
  18. Thomas E.F., McGarty C., Mavor K.I. Aligning identities, emotions, and beliefs to create commitment to sustainable social and political action // Personality and social psychology review. 2009. Vol. 13, Iss. 3. P. 194—218.
  19. Tropp L.R., Brown A.C. What benefits the group can also benefit the individual: group-enhancing and individual-enhancing motives for collective action // Group processes & intergroup relations. 2004. Vol. 7, Iss. 3. P. 267—282.
  20. Van Zomeren M., Postmes T., Spears R. Toward an Integrative Social Identity Model of Collective Action: A Quantitative Research Synthesis of Three Socio-Psychological Perspectives // Psychological Bulletin. 2008. Vol. 134, Iss. 4. P. 504—535.
  21. Veenstra K., Haslam A. Willingness to participate in industrial protest // British journal of social psychology. 2000. Vol. 39, Iss. 2. P. 153—172.
  22. Thomas E.F., McGarty C., Mavor K.I. Aligning identities, emotions, and beliefs to create commitment to sustainable social and political action // Personality and social psychology review. 2009. Vol. 13, Iss. 3. P. 194—218.
  23. Tropp L.R., Brown A.C. What benefits the group can also benefit the individual: group-enhancing and individual-enhancing motives for collective action // Group processes & intergroup relations. 2004. Vol. 7, Iss. 3. P. 267—282.
  24. van Zomeren M., Postmes T., Spears R. Toward an Integrative Social Identity Model of Collective Action: A Quantitative Research Synthesis of Three Socio-Psychological Perspectives // Psychological Bulletin. 2008. Vol. 134, Iss. 4. P. 504—535.
  25. Veenstra K., Haslam A. Willingness to participate in industrial protest // British journal of social psychology. 2000. Vol. 39, Iss. 2. P. 153—172.

Information About the Authors

Elena R. Agadullina, PhD in Psychology, Associate Professor, School of Psychology, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1505-1412, e-mail: eagadullina@hse.ru

Andrey V. Lovakov, Junior Research Fellow, Center for Institutional Studies, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia, e-mail: lovakov@hse.ru

Metrics

Views

Total: 3683
Previous month: 12
Current month: 17

Downloads

Total: 2974
Previous month: 7
Current month: 4