An Examination of the Social Identity Model of Collective Action in the Context of Vietnam

Abstract

Introduction: Although collective action relating to land and environmental disputes in Vietnam has been increasing over the past decades, there is little research from the perspective of social psychology on this topic. Objective: This study was conducted to examine the applicability of the social identity model of collective action [SIMCA] in the context of Vietnam. Specifically, we assessed the predictive powers of moral conviction, politicized identity, group-based anger, and group efficacy on people’s intentions to engage in collective action in a situation where people from three communes of Hanoi blocked garbage trucks to enter a waste treatment complex located in this area. Methods: The participants were 132 residents from these communes. We collected the data by a self-report survey and then executed regression and path analyses to test our hypotheses. Results and Discussion: The results indicated that, except for group efficacy, variables in SIMCA were capable of independently predicting intentions to participate in collective action. Also, politicized identity had directly and indirectly positive effects on collective action intentions through group-based anger but not group efficacy. Politicized identity and group-based anger played partial mediating roles in the relationship between moral conviction and collective action intentions. Conclusion: These findings partly supporting the proposed SIMCA demonstrated the impacts of Vietnam's unique cultural and political characteristics on individuals' engagement in collective action relating to land and environmental disputes between people and their local authorities.

Envisioning Change: An Empirical Test of the Social Psychological Model of Utopian Thinking and Collective Action

“…Anger is one of the most heavily researched approach-oriented emotions that involved in protest behavior. According to the Social Identity Model of Collective Action (SIMCA; van Zomeren, Postmes, et al, 2008), perceived injustice, through the experience of relative deprivation, invokes feelings of anger among members of disadvantaged groups, and this group-based anger in turn predicts willingness to protest and participate in collective action (Nguyen et al, 2021;Shepherd & Evans, 2020).…”

Investigating the predictors of collective action intensity and health

“…While some studies found it to explain environmental collective action (Bamberg et al, 2015, Study 1;Furlong & Vignoles, 2021;Haugestad et al, 2021;Keshavarzi et al, 2021), an increasing number of studies showed that collective efficacy does not predict collective action when other factors are considered Nguyen et al, 2021;van Zomeren et al, 2019;Wallis & Loy, 2021;but see van Zomeren et al, 2010). Similarly, we find studies showing that affective injustice predicts environmental collective action (Keshavarzi et al, 2021;Nguyen et al, 2021;van Zomeren et al, 2019;Wallis & Loy, 2021), and does not when other factors are accounted for Furlong & Vignoles, 2021).…”

“…Fourth, since conducting Study 1, more factors have been proposed to extend the original SIMCA that we sought to include. Agostini and van Zomeren (2021) published the dual chamber model comprising moral convictions (i.e., issue-specific attitudes that are based on core values, see alsoNguyen et al, 2021). Moreover, research suggests that injunctive norms (what other people think is good) and descriptive norms (what other people do) are important predictors of collective action that are oftentimes neglected…”

Bystanders, protesters, journalists: A qualitative examination of different stakeholders’ motivations to participate in collective action

“…Research testing the explanatory and predictive power of the Social Identity Model of Collective Action (SIMCA: Van Zomeren et al, 2008) has confirmed the central roles of collective identity, efficacy, negative emotions, and moral conviction in motivating non-activists to participate. While some research in Asian countries has found that SIMCA variables could be moderated by cultural factors, such as collectivism (Fukuzawa & Inamasu, 2020), other studies have found no evidence of cultural differences (e.g., Nguyen et al, 2021). However, this framework remains largely untested amongst other groups who may participate or observe collective action (e.g., journalists) and cultural contexts (van Zomeren, 2019).…”