doi:

DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2018.00558

Acta Psychologica Sinica (心理学报) 2018/50:5 PP.558-571

When will bystanders support collective actions? The roles of claim legitimacy, protest tactic and expectations of achieving goals


Abstract:
The success of protest in achieving its original aims may depend primarily on the events' extent which shape public opinion. Collective action may play a significant and indirect role in influencing social change through changing public opinion. Partly, the success of a movement may derive from mobilizing the public to perceive a current context as illegitimate and turning bystanders into supporters. Though there is vast literature on the psychological factors promoting collective action, little is known about how collective actions influence a broader non-protesting community. The obtained articles mainly focus on the processes or mechanisms underpinning bystanders' support for the social movement. We explored the effects of three key factors in shaping bystanders' endorsements.
This paper contains three experiments conducted to examine our hypothesis that participants were presented in a news article describing an instance of social protest during these studies. The details of the news were different in each group. Study1 was a 2(claim legitimacy:high vs. low)×2 (protest tactics:violent vs. non-violent) design. Study2 was a 2(claim legitimacy:high vs. low)×2 (protest tactics:violent vs. non-violent)×2(expectation of achieving goals:high vs. low) design. Participants were asked to indicate their perceptions of the claim legitimacy, their support for the protests and other questions. Study 3 followed the pattern of Study2, but the background event was different.
Results of Study1 showed that protests with legitimate claims were more supported than those with illegitimate claims in contexts of non-violent tactics. Meanwhile, there was only marginal difference of endorsements between participants in high-legitimacy group and low-legitimacy group when collective actions were violent. Study2 showed that in context of violent tactics, participants' expectations of achieving goals could moderate the relation between claim legitimacy and their endorsements for collective actions. Participants' supports for violent actions were positively predicted by claim legitimacy when there were little possibilities to achieve goals. However, this effect didn't exist when possibilities of achieving goals were high. While in contexts of non-violent tactics, expectations of achieving goals did not affect participants' endorsements for collective action. Only the factor of claim legitimacy was effective. The results of sStudy3 revalidated the results of Study2.
The conclusions of the research is as following. First, legitimacy of the claims is the primary factor affecting bystanders' support for collective action. Only when the protest's aims accord with moral standards of the public will it gain the endorsements of public. Second, the use of violent tactics could even reduce bystanders' endorsements of those protests with very legitimate claims. Violence may be seen as an action of alienation from the mainstream,which undermines the broader perceived legitimacy of a movement. Third, low possibility of achieving goals could inspire bystanders' endorsements of violent collective actions when the claims are legitimate. Bystanders will lower their hostilities toward violence when they expect it will be very hard to achieve legitimate claims.

Key words:collective action,bystander,claim legitimacy,non-violent action,violent action

ReleaseDate:2018-07-02 16:16:02



Barth, M., Jugert, P., Wutzler, M., & Fritsche, I. (2015). Absolute moral standards and global identity as independent predictors of collective action against global injustice. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(7), 918-930.

Bashir, N. Y., Lockwood, P., Chasteen, A. L., Nadolny, D., & Noyes, I. (2013). The ironic impact of activists:Negative stereotypes reduce social change influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 614-626.

Becker, J. C., Tausch, N., Spears, R., & Christ, O. (2011). Committed Dis (s)idents:Participation in radical collective action fosters disidentification with the broader in-group but enhances political identification. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(8), 1104-1116.

Blackwood, L., Terry, D., & Duck, J. (2015). When believing in the union is (not) enough:The role of threat and norms in intentions to act on union legitimacy and efficacy beliefs. Australian Journal of Psychology, 67(2), 65-74.

Blackwood, L. M., & Louis, W. R. (2012). If it matters for the group then it matters to me:Collective action outcomes for seasoned activists. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51, 72-92.

Gamson, W. A. (1990). The strategy of social protest. Belmont, CA:Wadsworth.

George, T. S. (2002). Minamata:Pollution and the struggle for democracy in postwar Japan. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.

Greenaway, K. H., Cichocka, A., van Veelen, R., Likki, T., & Branscombe, N. R. (2016). Feeling hopeful inspires support for social change. Political Psychology, 37(1), 89-107.

Jiménez-Moya, G., Spears, R., Rodríguez-Bailón, R., & de Lemus, S. (2015). By any means necessary? When and why low group identification paradoxically predicts radical collective action. Journal of Social Issues, 71(3), 517-535.

Klandermans, P. G. (2014). Identity politics and politicized identities:Identity processes and the dynamics of protest. Political Psychology, 35(1), 1-22.

Leach, C. W., Iyer, A., & Pedersen, A. (2006). Anger and guilt about ingroup advantage explain the willingness for political action. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 1232-1245.

Mannarini, T., & Fedi, A. (2012). Persisting or withdrawing? An insight into the psychosocial processes underlying sustained engagement. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 22(4), 300-315.

McGarty, C., Bliuc, A.-M., Thomas, E. F., & Bongiorno, R. (2009). Collective action as the material expression of opinion-based group membership. Journal of Social Issues, 65(4), 839-857.

Owuamalam, C., Issmer, C., Zagefka, H., Klaßen, M., & Wagner, U. (2014). Why do members of disadvantaged groups strike back at perceived negativity towards the in-group? Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 24, 249-264.

Paladino, M. P., Zaniboni, S., Fasoli, F., Vaes, J., & Volpato, C. (2014). Why did Italians protest against Berlusconi's sexist behaviour? The role of sexist beliefs and emotional reactions in explaining women and men's pathways to protest. British Journal of Social Psychology, 53, 201-216.

Ransford, H. E. (1968). Isolation, powerlessness, and violence:A study of attitudes and participation in the Watts Riot. American Journal of Sociology, 73, 581-591.

Saab, R., Tausch, N., Spears, R., & Cheung, W.-Y. (2015). Acting in solidarity:Testing an extended dual pathway model of collective action by bystander group members. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54(3), 539-560.

Saguy, T., Chernyak-Hai, L., Andrighetto, L., & Bryson, J. (2013). When the powerful feels wronged:The legitimization effects of advantaged group members' sense of being accused for harboring racial or ethnic biases. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43(4), 292-298.

Scheepers, D., Spears, R., Doosje, B., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2006). Diversity in in-group bias:Structural factors, situational features, and social functions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 944-960.

Shepherd, L., Spears, R., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2013). "This will bring shame on our nation":The role of anticipated group-based emotions on collective action. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 42-57.

Shi, J., Hao, Z., Saeri, A. K., & Cui, L. J. (2015). The dual-pathway model of collective action:Impacts of types of collective action and social identity. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 18(1), 45-65.

Shuman, E., Cohen-Chen, S., Hirsch-Hoefler, S., & Halperin, E. (2016). Explaining normative versus nonnormative action:The role of implicit theories. Political Psychology, 37(6), 835-852.

Solak, N., Reifen Tagar, M., Cohen-Chen, S., Saguy, T., & Halperin, E. (2017). Disappointment expression evokes collective guilt and collective action in intergroup conflict:The moderating role of legitimacy perceptions. Cognition and Emotion, 31, 1112-1126.

Stewart, T. L., Latu, I. M., Branscombe, N. R., & Denney, H. T. (2010). Yes we can:Prejudice reduction through seeing (inequality) and believing (in social change). Psychological Science, 21(11), 1557-1562.

Tausch, N., Becker, J. C., Spears, R., Christ, O., Saab, R., Singh, P., & Siddiqui, R. N. (2011). Explaining radical group behavior:Developing emotion and efficacy routes to normative and nonnormative collective action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(1), 129-148.

Thomas, E. F., & Louis, W. R. (2014). When will collective action be effective? Violent and non-violent protests differentially influence perceptions of legitimacy and efficacy among sympathizers. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(2), 263-276.

Tilly, C. (1995). Popular Contention in Great Britain, 1758-1834. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.

van Bergen, D. D., Feddes, A. F., Doosje, B., & Pels, T. V. M. (2015). Collective identity factors and the attitude toward violence in defense of ethnicity or religion among Muslim youth of Turkish and Moroccan Descent. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 47, 89-100.

van Zomeren, M., Leach, C. W., & Spears, R. (2012). Protesters as "Passionate Economists":A dynamic dual pathway model of approach coping with collective disadvantage. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(2), 180 -199.

van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action:A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 504-535.

van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2012). On conviction's collective consequences:Integrating moral conviction with the social identity model of collective action. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51, 52-71.

van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Bettache, K. (2011). Can moral convictions motivate the advantaged to challenge social inequality? Extending the social identity model of collective action. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14(5), 735-753.

Wiley, S., Srinivasan, R., Finke, E., Firnhaber, J., & Shilinsky, A. (2013). Positive portrayals of feminist men increase men's solidarity with feminists and collective action intentions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37(1), 61-71.

Wright, S. C., Taylor, D. M., & Moghaddam, F. M. (1990). The relationship of perceptions and emotions to behavior in the face of collective inequality. Social Justice Research, 4, 229-250.

Xue, T., Chen, H., Yue, G. A., & Yao, Q. (2013). Collective action participation:Effects of multiple social identities on group-based emotions and efficacy paths. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 45(8), 899-920.[薛婷, 陈浩, 乐国安, 姚琦. (2013). 社会认同对集体行动的作用:群体情绪与效能路径. 心理学报, 45(8), 899-920.]

Yin, R., Zhang, F. F., Wang, Y. Y., & Zang, R. X. (2017). Protest encounters setback:Effects of emotional reactions on participation intention in context of frustrate collective action. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 49(4), 482-499.[殷融, 张菲菲, 王元元, 臧日霞. (2017). 当抗议遭遇挫折:集体行动失利情境下情绪反应对行动意愿的作用. 心理学报, 49(4), 482-499.]

Zaal, M. P., van Laar, C., Stahl, T., Ellemers, N., & Derks, B. (2011). By any means necessary:The effects of regulatory focus and moral conviction on hostile and benevolent forms of collective action. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 670-689.

Zhang, S. W., & Wang, E. P. (2011). The motivational and organizational mechanism of collective action in mass incidents. Advances in Psychological Science, 19(12), 1730-1740.[张书维, 王二平. (2011). 群体性事件集群行为的动员与组织机制. 心理科学进展, 19(12), 1730-1740.]

Zhang, S. W., Wang, E. P., & Zhou, J. (2012). The motivation mechanism of collective action in different contexts. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 44(4), 524-545.[张书维, 王二平, 周洁. (2012). 跨情境下集群行为的动因机制. 心理学报, 44(4), 524-545.]