2011
DOI: 10.1037/a0022728
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Explaining radical group behavior: Developing emotion and efficacy routes to normative and nonnormative collective action.

Abstract: A recent model of collective action distinguishes 2 distinct pathways: an emotional pathway whereby anger in response to injustice motivates action and an efficacy pathway where the belief that issues can be solved collectively increases the likelihood that group members take action (van Zomeren, Spears, Fischer, & Leach, 2004). Research supporting this model has, however, focused entirely on relatively normative actions such as participating in demonstrations. We argue that the relations between emotions, eff… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

40
658
7
21

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 576 publications
(726 citation statements)
references
References 94 publications
(212 reference statements)
40
658
7
21
Order By: Relevance
“…This relates to work within the collective action literature which explores the roles of specific emotions including anger (Van Zomeren, Spears, Leach, & Fischer, 2004;Livingstone, Spears, Manstead, Bruder, & Shepherd, in press) and contempt (Tausch, Becker, Spears, Christ, Saab, Singh, & Siddiqui, 2011) in encouraging participation in collective action. Our analysis suggests that in addition to emotion generated through specific appraisal of events, there exists a dynamic process whereby experience of collective action may in turn give rise to future participation;…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This relates to work within the collective action literature which explores the roles of specific emotions including anger (Van Zomeren, Spears, Leach, & Fischer, 2004;Livingstone, Spears, Manstead, Bruder, & Shepherd, in press) and contempt (Tausch, Becker, Spears, Christ, Saab, Singh, & Siddiqui, 2011) in encouraging participation in collective action. Our analysis suggests that in addition to emotion generated through specific appraisal of events, there exists a dynamic process whereby experience of collective action may in turn give rise to future participation;…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is consistent with the SIA claims that people will be most inclined to engage in collective behavior when they perceive societal to be both impermeable and insecure. It is in these situations that people are most inclined to feel they have "nothing to lose", and therefore support radical and extreme solutions to problems, including violent collective action [34].…”
Section: When People Perceive Inequality As a Justice Problemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The literature on engagement in conventional/moderate versus extreme/radical forms of collective action (e.g., Tausch et al, 2011;van Stekelenburg, 2014) has highlighted that decision making about actions is nuanced and strategic . Our study suggests that participative efficacy -the belief that one's individual contribution to the collective cause will make a difference (van Zomeren et al, 2013) -is unachievable if (some of) the group's actions are seen as illegitimate.…”
Section: Perceptions Of Protesters and Collective Actionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Given our broad definition of action, it is also the case that participants may have been drawing upon rather different forms of collective action -for example violent or non-violent (Becker & Tausch, 2015;Tausch et al, 2011), or benevolent versus activist (Thomas & McGarty, 2017, 2018 and we would expect that these different forms of action would also meaningfully shape perceptions. Thus, although we cannot claim which identities or groups our participants were thinking of as they completed their responses, the assumption that protest represents typical collective action, and the hostility towards protesters, does suggest that these participants are coming from a more moderate perspective.…”
Section: Limitations and Suggestionsmentioning
confidence: 99%