旁观者、抗议者、记者:对不同利益相关者参与集体行动动机的定性分析

IF 2.8 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Robyn E. Gulliver, C. Chan, W. W. Chan, Katy Y. Y. Tam, W. Louis
{"title":"旁观者、抗议者、记者:对不同利益相关者参与集体行动动机的定性分析","authors":"Robyn E. Gulliver, C. Chan, W. W. Chan, Katy Y. Y. Tam, W. Louis","doi":"10.1177/18344909231187018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Both bystanders and journalists can play important roles in mobilizing and supporting social movements. However, there are few empirical studies examining and contrasting their violent and nonviolent collective-action motivations or perspectives on social movement goals. This study presents a comparative analysis of motivations to engage or stand aside from social unrest comparing bystanders ( n = 9) and journalists ( n = 7) motivations against those of protesters ( n = 35). Thematic qualitative analysis of interview data using a Social Identity Model of Collective Action framework examined differences in motivations and goals across each group, as well as the influence of violent protest repertoires on participation behaviors. Identified barriers to participation include bystanders’ lack of issue consensus, low efficacy perceptions, and negative views of violent action. Our results also lend support to the predictive validity of collective identification, anger, and injustice in motivating participation in collective action. Journalists’ collective identity precluded overt protest participation. However, their emotional responses to injustice or violent actions generated tensions between their role obligations and desire to intervene. Implications for future research on collective-action responses to injustice are discussed.","PeriodicalId":45049,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bystanders, protesters, journalists: A qualitative examination of different stakeholders’ motivations to participate in collective action\",\"authors\":\"Robyn E. Gulliver, C. Chan, W. W. Chan, Katy Y. Y. Tam, W. Louis\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/18344909231187018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Both bystanders and journalists can play important roles in mobilizing and supporting social movements. However, there are few empirical studies examining and contrasting their violent and nonviolent collective-action motivations or perspectives on social movement goals. This study presents a comparative analysis of motivations to engage or stand aside from social unrest comparing bystanders ( n = 9) and journalists ( n = 7) motivations against those of protesters ( n = 35). Thematic qualitative analysis of interview data using a Social Identity Model of Collective Action framework examined differences in motivations and goals across each group, as well as the influence of violent protest repertoires on participation behaviors. Identified barriers to participation include bystanders’ lack of issue consensus, low efficacy perceptions, and negative views of violent action. Our results also lend support to the predictive validity of collective identification, anger, and injustice in motivating participation in collective action. Journalists’ collective identity precluded overt protest participation. However, their emotional responses to injustice or violent actions generated tensions between their role obligations and desire to intervene. Implications for future research on collective-action responses to injustice are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45049,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/18344909231187018\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18344909231187018","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

旁观者和记者都可以在动员和支持社会运动方面发挥重要作用。然而,很少有实证研究考察和对比他们的暴力和非暴力集体行动动机或对社会运动目标的看法。本研究将旁观者(n = 9)和记者(n = 7)的动机与抗议者(n = 35)的动机进行比较,对参与社会动荡或袖手旁观的动机进行了比较分析。使用集体行动框架的社会认同模型对访谈数据进行专题定性分析,研究了每个群体在动机和目标上的差异,以及暴力抗议曲目对参与行为的影响。已确定的参与障碍包括旁观者缺乏问题共识、低效能认知和对暴力行为的负面看法。我们的研究结果也支持了集体认同、愤怒和不公正在激励集体行动参与方面的预测有效性。记者的集体身份使他们无法公开参与抗议活动。然而,他们对不公正或暴力行为的情绪反应在他们的角色义务和干预愿望之间产生了紧张关系。讨论了对不公正的集体行动反应的未来研究的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Bystanders, protesters, journalists: A qualitative examination of different stakeholders’ motivations to participate in collective action
Both bystanders and journalists can play important roles in mobilizing and supporting social movements. However, there are few empirical studies examining and contrasting their violent and nonviolent collective-action motivations or perspectives on social movement goals. This study presents a comparative analysis of motivations to engage or stand aside from social unrest comparing bystanders ( n = 9) and journalists ( n = 7) motivations against those of protesters ( n = 35). Thematic qualitative analysis of interview data using a Social Identity Model of Collective Action framework examined differences in motivations and goals across each group, as well as the influence of violent protest repertoires on participation behaviors. Identified barriers to participation include bystanders’ lack of issue consensus, low efficacy perceptions, and negative views of violent action. Our results also lend support to the predictive validity of collective identification, anger, and injustice in motivating participation in collective action. Journalists’ collective identity precluded overt protest participation. However, their emotional responses to injustice or violent actions generated tensions between their role obligations and desire to intervene. Implications for future research on collective-action responses to injustice are discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology
Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信