Mobilizing in Black Boxes: Social Networks and Participation in Social Movement Organizations

Abstract

Recent research has focused on the role of social networks in facilitating participation in protest and social movement organizations. This paper elaborates three currents of microstructural explanation, based on information, identity, and exchange. In assessing these perspectives, it compares their treatment of multivalence, the tendency for social ties to inhibit as well as promote participation. Considering two dimensions of multivalence—the value of the social tie and the direction of social pressure—this paper discusses problems of measurement and interpretation in network analysis of movement participation. A critical review suggests some directions for future research.

Relational place‐making: the networked politics of place

“…Sociologists have long viewed networks as important influences on recruitment, participation and collective action in/through social movements (Gould 1993; Klandermans and Oegema 1987; Shemtov 2003; Snow et al 1980). In this view, networks are microstructural forms that socialise and connect activists, facilitate information flows, help to create solidarity and shared identities, influence decisionmaking processes, and that, importantly, can limit membership if they fail to create brokerage opportunities to (potentially) new participants (Heaney and Rojas 2008; Kitts 2000; Passy 2003). Studies typically focus on the nature, density and extent of relationships within social movements and/or how an actor’s centrality within a network, or positionality in relation to third parties, influences the possibilities for mobilisation or coalition formation (Diani 2000; Emirbayer and Goodwin 1994; Kitts 2000; Klandermans and Oegema 1987; Knoke 1990).…”

Individual Protest Participation in the United States: Conventional and Unconventional Activism

“…However, some scholars have argued that social networks can prevent participation if members of one's social network are hostile to the movement and would cause the potential participant to incur social sanctions by participating (Kitts, ). Additionally, networks can function to prevent people from engaging in social movements by burdening potential participants with other obligations (e.g., caring for family members).…”

Understanding Persistence in the Resistance

“…The role of social networks in facilitating participation in collective action has been a central focus of social movements research on participation in collective action (Bearman and Everett 1993;Gould 1991;Jasper and Poulsen 1995;Kim and Bearman 1997;Kitts 2000;Loveman 1998;Marwell, Oliver, and Prahl 1988;McAdam 1986;Oberschall 1973;Oegema and Klandermans 1994;Tilly 1978;Tindall 2015). To understand the specific role that social networks play in protest, scholars have explored how different types of social ties assist in social movement recruitment (Diani and McAdam 2003;Heaney and Rojas 2015;McAdam and Paulsen 1993; but see Jasper and Poulsen 1995;Zald and McCarthy 1987), which some studies have called structural availability (see particularly Saunders et al 2012;Schussman and Soule 2005).…”