What are the consequences of affect and efficacy for protest intentions, and do these consequences stem from personal disposition and/or situational characteristics? Here, we test a dual-pathway model of collective action in which anger and efficacy operate at multiple levels of analysis. To test this model, we administer a factorial survey experiment of student protest to a random sample of undergraduate students (N = 880). We find that the effect of anger on protest intentions follows two routes—one dispositional and one situational—and that the effect of efficacy flows through a situational channel. We also find that anger and efficacy are triggered by a broad set of situational conditions (incidental grievances, selective rewards and punishments, collective action frames, and protest size) and that anger is also a function of a narrow set of dispositional factors (protest attitudes). Taken together, our findings support a multilevel, dual-pathway model of collective action.
AgostiniMaximilianvan ZomerenMartijn. 2021. “Toward a Comprehensive and Potentially Cross-Cultural Model of Why People Engage in Collective Action: A Quantitative Research Synthesis of Four Motivations and Structural Constraints.” Psychological Bulletin147:667–700.
BanduraAlbert. 1997. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York, NY: Freeman & Co.
6.
BeedieChristopherTerryPeterLaneAndrew. 2005. “Distinctions between Emotion and Mood.” Cognition and Emotion19:847–78.
7.
BergstrandKelly. 2014. “The Mobilizing Power of Grievances: Applying Loss Aversion and Omission Bias to Social Movements.” Mobilization: An International Quarterly19:123–42.
8.
BernburgJon Gunnar. 2022. “Collective Action and the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: The Case of the Panama Papers Protest in Iceland.” European Sociological Review38:304–20.
9.
BerkowitzLeonard. 1972. “Frustrations, Comparisons, and Other Sources of Emotion Arousal as Contributors to Social Unrest.” Journal of Social Issues28:77–91.
10.
BullockJohn G.GreenDonald P.HaShang E.2010. “Yes, But What’s the Mechanism? (Don’t Expectd an Easy Answer).” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology98:550–558.
11.
ChongDennis. 1991. Collective Action and the Civil Rights Movement. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
12.
CollettJessica L.ChildsEllen. 2011. “Minding the Gap: Meaning, Affect, and the Potential Shortcomings of Vignettes.” Social Science Research40:513–22.
13.
CollinsRandall. 2004. Interaction Ritual Chains. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
14.
DeCellesKatherine A.SonensheinScottKingBrayden G.2019. “Examining Anger’s Immobilizing Effect on Institutional Insiders’ Action Intentions in Social Movements.” Administrative Science Quarterly65:847–886.
15.
DoanLong. 2012. “A Social Model of Persistent Mood States.” Social Psychology Quarterly75:198–218.
16.
DülmerHermann. 2016. “The Factorial Survey: Design Selection and Its Impact on Reliabiity and Internal Validity.” Sociological Methods & Research45: 304–347.
17.
FishbeinMartinAjzenIcek. 1975. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
18.
FleesonWilliam. 2001. “Toward a Structure- and Process-Integrated View of Personality: Traits as Density Distribution of States.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology80:1011–27.
19.
GamsonWilliam A.1992. “The Social Psychology of Collective Action.” Pp. 53–76 in Frontiers in Social Movement Theory, edited by MorrisA. D.MuellerC. M.New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
20.
GoffmanErving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. London, UK: Harmondsworth.
21.
GoodwinJeffJasperJames M.PollettaFrancesca, eds. 2001. Passionate Politics: Emotions and Social Movements. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
22.
GranovetterMark. 1978. “Threshold Models of Collective Behavior.” American Journal of Sociology83:1420–43.
23.
GurrTed. 1970. Why Men Rebel. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
24.
HainmuellerJensHangartnerDominikYamamotoTeppei. 2015. “Validating Vignette and Conjoint Survey Experiments Against Real-World Behavior.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences112: 2395–2400.
25.
HardinRussell. 1982. Collective Action. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
26.
HechterMichaelPfaffStevenUnderwoodPatrick. 2016. “Grievances and the Genesis of Rebellion: Mutiny in the Royal Navy, 1740-1820.” American Sociological Review81:165–89.
27.
HoriuchiYusakuMarkovichZacharyYamamotoTeppei. 2022. “Does Conjoint Analysis Mitigate Social Desirability Bias?” Political Analysis30:535–49.
28.
JasperJames M.2018. The Emotions of Protest. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
29.
JenkinsCraig. 1983. “Resource Mobilization Theory and the Study of Social Movements.” Annual Review of Sociology9:527–33.
30.
KlandermansBert. 1984. “Mobilization and Participation: Social-Psychological Explanations of Resource Mobilization Theory.” American Sociological Review49:583–600.
31.
KlandermansBert. 1997. The Social Psychology of Protest. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
32.
KlandermansBertvan der ToornJojannekevan StekelenburgJacquelien. 2008. “Embeddedness and Identity: How Immigrants Turn Grievances into Action.” American Sociological Review73:992–1012.
33.
Le BonGustave. 1895. The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger.
34.
LewinKurt. 1936. Principles of Topological Psychology. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
35.
LivingstoneAndrew G.SpearsRussellMansteadAntony S.R.BruderMartinShephardLee. 2011. “We Feel, Therefore We Are: Emotion as a Basis for Self-Categorization and Social Action.” Emotion11:754–67.
36.
MarwellGeraldOliverPamela. 1993. The Critical Mass in Collective Action: A Micro-social Theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
37.
MatsuedaRossRobbinsBlainePfaffSteven. 2020. “Under What Conditions Are Students Willing to Protest? Selective Incentives, Production Functions, and Grievances.” SocArXiv. doi:10.31235/osf.io/z3myc.
38.
McAdamDougMcCarthyJohn D.ZaldMayer N.1996. Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
39.
MedinaLuis Fernando. 2007. A Unified Theory of Collective Action and Social Change. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
40.
MillerDaniel A.CroninTracey J.GarciaAmberBranscombeNyla R.2009. “The Relative Impact of Anger and Efficacy on Collective Action Is Affected by Feelings of Fear.” Group Processes & Intergroup Relations12:445–62.
41.
MorganStephen L.WinshipChristopher. 2007. Counterfactuals and Causal Inference: Methods and Principles for Social Research. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
42.
MorrisWilliam N.SchnurrPaula P.1989. Mood: The Frame of Mind. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag Publishing.
43.
NelsonThomas E.OxleyZoeClawsonRosalee A.1997. “Toward a Psychology of Framing Effects.” Political Behavior19:221–46.
44.
OliverPamela. 1980. “Rewards and Punishments as Selective Incentives for Collective Action.” American Journal of Sociology65:1356–75.
45.
OliverPamela E.MarwellGerald. 2001. “Whatever Happened to Critical Mass Theory? A Retrospective and Assessment.” Sociological Theory19:292–311.
46.
OliverPamelaMarwellGeraldTeixeriaRuy. 1985. “A Theory of Critical Mass. I. Interdependence, Group Heterogeneity, and the Production of Collective Action.” American Journal of Sociology91:522–56.
47.
OlsonMancur. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
48.
OppKarl-Dieter. 2009. Theories of Social Protest and Social Movements: A Multidisciplinary Introduction, Critique, and Synthesis. New York, NY: Routledge.
49.
OppKarl-Dieter. 2022. Advanced Introduction to Social Movements and Political Protests. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
50.
OppKarl-DieterGernChristiane. 1993. “Dissident Groups, Personal Networks, and Spontaneous Cooperation: The East German Revolution of 1989.” American Sociological Review58:659–80.
51.
PfaffStevenHechterMichel. 2020. The Genesis of Rebellion: Governance, Grievance, and Mutiny in the Age of Sail. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
52.
RobbinsBlaine G.MatsuedaRoss L.PfaffSteven J.2020. “Mapping the Production and Mobilization Functions of Collective Action.” Socius6. doi:10.1177/2378023120977722.
53.
RossLeeNisbettRichard E.1991. The Person and the Situation: Perspectives of Social Psychology. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
54.
SheldonSuzanne H.1990. “Developing the Construct of General Self-Efficacy.” Psychological Reports66:987–94.
55.
ShiJingHaoZhenSaeriAlexanderCuiLijuan. 2015. “The Dual-Pathway Model of Collective Action: Impacts of Types of Collective Action and Social Identity.” Group Processes & Intergroup Relations18:45–65.
56.
ShiJingQiWeiCuiLijuan. 2023. “Online Collective Action: Procedural Unfairness and Action Support as Predictors Based on a Dual Pathway Model.” Social Behavior and Personality51(4):e12276. doi:10.2224/sbp.12276.
57.
SiedleckaEwaDensonThomas F.2019. “Experimental Methods for Inducing Basic Emotions: A Qualitative Review.” Emotion Review11:87–97.
58.
SimonBerndLoewryMichaelStürmerStefanWeberUlrikeFreytagPeterHabigCorinnaKampmeierClaudiaSpahlingerPeter. 1998. “Collective Identification and Social Movement Participation.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology74:646–58.
59.
Smith-LovinLynn. 1995. “The Sociology of Affect and Emotion.” Pp. 118–48 in Sociological Perspectives on Social Psychology, edited by CookK. S.FineG. A.HouseJ. S.Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
60.
SnowDavid A.OliverPamela. 1995. “Social Movements and Collective Behavior: Social Psychological Considerations.” Pp. 571–99 in Sociological Perspectives on Social Psychology, edited by CookK. S.FineG. A.HouseJ.Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
61.
SnowDavid A.RochfordBurke E.Jr.WordenSteven K.BenfordRobert D.1986. “Frame Alignment Processes, Micromobilization and Movement Participation.” American Sociological Review51:464–81.
62.
StürmerStefanSimonBernd. 2009. “Pathways to Collective Protest: Calculation, Identification, or Emotion? A Critical Analysis of the Role of Group-Based Anger in Social Movement Participation.” Journal of Social Issues65:681–705.
63.
TauschNicoleBeckerJulia C.SpearsRussellChristOliverSaabRimSinghPurnimaSiddiquiRoomana N.2011. “Explaining Radical Group Behavior: Developing Emotion and Efficacy Routes to Normative and Nonnormative Collective Action.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology101(1):129–48.
64.
TillyCharles. 1978. From Mobilization to Revolution. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
65.
Van StekelenburgJacquelienKlandermansBert. 2013. “The Social Psychology of Protest.” Current Sociology61:886–905.
66.
Van ZomerenMartijnLechColin WayneSpearsRussell. 2012. “Protesters as ‘Passionate Economists’: A Dynamic Dual Pathway Model of Approach Coping with Collective Disadvantage.” Personality and Social Psychology Review16(2):180–99.
67.
Van ZomerenMartijnPostmesTomSpearsRussell. 2008. “Toward an Integrative Social Identity Model of Collective Action: A Quantitative Research Synthesis of Three Socio-psychological Perspectives.” Psychological Bulletin134:504–35.
68.
Van ZomerenMartijnSpearsRussellFischerAgneta H.LeachColin Wayne. 2004. “Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is! Explaining Collective Action Tendencies through Group-Based Anger and Group Efficacy.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology87:649–64.
69.
Van ZomerenMartijnSpearsRussellLeachColin Wayne. 2010. “Experimental Evidence for a Dual Pathway Model Analysis of Coping with the Climate Crisis.” Journal of Experimental Psychology30:339–46.
70.
WickesRebeccaHippJohn R.SargeantEliseHomelRoss. 2013. “Collective Efficacy as a Task Specific Process.” American Journal of Community Psychology52:115–27.
71.
WillerRobb. 2009. “Groups Reward Individual Sacrifice: The Status Solution to the Collective Action Problem.” American Sociological Review74:23–43.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
