sign in sign up
<<
Home , Hysterical contagion, Role, Socialization, Social relation

Sociological Perspectives on Psychology

EDITED BY

KAREN S. COOK UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON

GARY ALAN FINE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA

JAMES S. HOUSE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN

IY1S- ALLYN AND BACON Boston London Toronto Sydney Tokyo Singapore

ii .,1'

To the memory of Morris Rosenberg, who originally stimulated the ASA Section to undertake volumes like this one, took the lead role in editing the HM ------CONTENTS first such volume, and supported and contributed to the development of this volume until 251 his untimely death in December 1991. We hope Manny would be pleased with the result. S68719 1995

201 y"(* ". Foreword vii Executive Editor: Karen Hanson Vice President and Publisher, Social Sciences: Susan Badger Introduction ix Editorial Assistant: Sarah Dunbar Production Administrator: Susan Mcintyre Acknowledgments xiii Editorial-Production Service: Ruttle, Shaw & Wetherill, Inc. Cover Administrator: Suzanne Harbison 'l~ ~,:..~ 0 IV s Manufacturing Buyer: Louise Richardson .t1- PART I The Person and Social Interaction 1 \ Introduction: Building Blocks and the Quadrant of ~.,. Gary Alan Fine o Chapter 1 Biology and Social Psychology: Beyond Nature Copyright © 1995 by Allyn and Bacon "'" versus Nurture 9 A Division of Simon and Schuster, Inc. C)'" Jane A. Piliavin and Paul C. LePore 160 Gould Street ~ Needham Heights, MA 02194 Chapter 2 Self and Identity 41 Viktor Gecas and Peter J. Burke All reserved. No part of the material protected by this copyright notice may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any storage and Chapter 3 Attitudes, Beliefs, and 68 retrieval system, without the written permission of the copyright owner. Howard Schuman Chapter 4 Social Cognition 90 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data o Judith A. Howard Sociological perspectives on social psychology / edited by Karen S. Cook, Gary Alan Fine, James S. House. Chapter 5 The of and Emotion 118 p. cm. Lynn Smith-Lovin Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-205-13716-4 Chapter 6 Language, Action, and Social Interaction 149 1. Social psychology. I. Cook, Karen (Karen S.) II. Fine, Gary Douglas W. Maynard and Marilyn R. Whalen Alan. III. House, James S. HM251.S68719 1995 Chapter 7 Social Interaction: Continuities and Complexities 302--dc20 94-1890 in the Study of Nonintimate Sociality 176 CIP Lyn H. Lofland

~ Th~ textbook ",inled 00 PART II Social Relationships and Group Processes 203 recycled, acid-free paper. Introduction: Social Interaction and Karen S. Cook Printed in the of America I~ Chapter 8 Social Exchange and Exchange Networks 209 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 99 98 97 96 95 94 Linda D. Molm and Karen S. Cook

J iii 570 P ART III Social Structure, Relationships, and the

Wethington, Elaine, and Ronald C. Kessler. 1986. Per­ Zborowski, M. 1952. Cultural components in response _____~_ CHAPTER 22 ______ceived support, received support, and adjustment to to pain. Journal of Social Issues 8:16-30. stressful life events. Journal of Health and Social Zola, Irving K. 1966. and symptoms-An Behavior 27:78-89. analysis of patients' presenting complaints. Ameri­ Whitcher-Alagna, Sheryle. 1983. Receiving medical can Sociological Review 31:615-630. Social Movements and Behavior help: A psychosocial perspective on patient reac­ --. 1972. Studying the decision to see a doctor: tions. Pp. 131-161 in New Directions in Helping, Review, critique and corrective. Pp. 216-236 in Social Psychological Dimensions and Considerations ed. A. Nadler, J. D. Fisher, and B. M. DePaulo. Advances in Psychosomatic Medicine, vol. 8, ed. Z. DA VID A. SNOW New York: Academic. Lipowski. Basel: Karger. Williams, David R. 1990. Socioeconomic differentials --. 1983. Socio-Medical Inquiries: Recollections, PAMELA E. OLIVER in health: A review and redirection. Social Psychol­ Reflections, and Reconsiderations. Philadelphia: ogy Quarterly 52:81-99. Temple University Press.

This chapter examines the social psychological as­ ganization; some degree of temporal continuity; pects of social movements and crowd and-some extrail1stitutional colleciive- aCtiOii;brat that occur in relation to them. Social movements least a mixiu~e o(~Jsocial movement organizations 1em-solving behavior that encompasses an array of (SMOs), reserving the term social movement for collective actions, ranging from protest demonstra­ sets of change-oriented opinions and beliefs (Mc­ tions, to behavior in disasters, to mass or diffuse Carthy and Zald 1977) or behaviors (Marwell and phenomena, such as fads and crazes, to social Oliver 1984; Oliver 1989) that transcend any par­ movements and even revolution. 1 Although the ticular organization. For our purposes, we can ig­ umbrella concept of collective behavior is still used nore these conceptual distinctions and keep in among scholars (Curtis and Aguirre 1993; Goode!, mind that social movements are marked by collec­ 1992; Turner and Killian 1987), most research and tive actions that occur with some degree of organi­ theoretical discussion tends to focus on either so­ zation and continuity outside of institutional chan­ cial movements or more transitory and ephemeral nels with the purpose of promoting or resisting events, such as disasters, emergency evacuations, change in the group, , or world order of crowd actions, andill9:~and crazes. Since review which they are a part (Benford 1992, 1880; Turner of both of these traditions within the space limi­ and Killian 1987,223; J. Wilson 1973,8; Zurcher tations would require too superficial a treatment, and Snow 1981,447). we focus primarily on social movements, but we In the case of crowds typically associated with do include findings about crowds and other col­ collective behavior, including social movements, lective behaviors as they are relevant to the the following dimensions have been emphasized as themes and arguments developed throughout the central defining characteristics: (1) joint action, in chapter.2 the sense that some number of are "en­ As with most concepts in , there gaged in one or more behaviors (e.g., orientation, is ambiguity and debate about the conceptualiza­ locomotion, gesticulation, tactile manipulation, tion of social movements and crowds, with differ­ and/or vocalization) that can be judged common or ent theoretical traditions defining the terms some­ convergent on one or more dimensions (e.g., direc­ what differently. In the case of social movements, tion, velocity, tempo, and/or substantive content)" most conceptualizations include the following ele­ (McPhail and Wohlstein 1983, 580-581; see also ments: change-oriented goals; some degree of or- McPhail 1991); (2) close physical proximity, such

571 572 PART III Social Structure, Relationships, and the Individual CHAPTER 22 Social Movements and Collective Behavior 573

that the partIcIpants can monitor each other by understanding of them. We begin with a brief over­ theory was firmly grounded in strands of rational earlier times, but social psychology was once again being visible to or within earshot of one another view of the historical association between social decision-making theory. Early resource mobili­ part of the mainstream'~.l (Lofland 1981, 416; Snow and Paulsen 1992); psychology and the study of crowds and social zation theorists also stressed the importance of (3) unconventional or extrainstitut~f!~L.gccur­ movements and then turn to a discussion of their social networks and preexisting organization as SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL DIMENSIONS rences, in the sense that they ate neither temporally key social psychological dimensions and the perti­ preconditions for mobilization and treated protest OF SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND CROWDS nor spatially routinized but instead involve the ap- nent literature. as goal-oriented action constrained by resources, ,I propriation and use Qf spatial areas {e.g., street, costs, network ties, and organizational capacities. The reasons for the linkage between social psy­ , park, mall) or physical structures (e.g., office The macro forces of politics and organization were chology and collective behavior phenomena are rTHE HISTORICAL LINKAGE building, lunch counter, theater) for purposes other seen as creating the structures and resources that not difficult to fathom. Stated boldly, there are than those for which they were designed and in­ The association between social psychology and the enabled people to act collectively, while the link aspects of the empirical phenomena of crowds and tended (Snow and Paulsen 1992; Snow, Zurcher, study of crowd and social movement phenomena between objective conditions and subjective per­ social movements that are impossible to grasp or and Peters 1981, 38) (4) regulation, in has a fairly 10f\g and intimate history, at least ceptions or grievances was seen as unproblematic. understand in the absence of social psychologi­ the sense that the various l:iehav-io~s are coordinated from the 1895 publication of Le Bon's The Crowd "Resource mobilization and it~ rationalist as­ cal and micro level theorizing and research. This rather than random and disconnected (Turner and (1960), which strongly influenced the study of col­ sumptions were largely ~egemonic in the 1970s. is because there are five basic social psychologi­ Killian 1987); and (5) ephemerality, in the sense lective behavior through the 1950s (McPhail 1991; The tide began to turn around 1980, however. Sev­ cal dimensions or aspects of crowds and social that they are relatively fleeting or "temporary gath­ Moscovici 1985). Other early influential works by eral published articles critically assessed the con­ movements: microstructural and social relational erings" (McPhail 1991, 153). These defining char­ psychologists treating collective behavior and so­ tributions of resource mobilization theory and dimensions; personality dimensions and related acteristics are not peculiar to the crowds associated cial movements as a subfield of social psychology called for a reconsideration of symbolic interac­ psychological processes; dimensions; with social movements, but they do distinguish include Freud's Group Psychology and the Analy­ tionism, attribution theory and other relevant social cognitive dimensions; and affective dimensions. In such crowds from more diffuse or mass collective sis of the Ego (1921), Allport's Social Psychology psychological perspectives that had been tossed the remainder of the chapter, we elaborate these behavior, such as fads: deviant epidemics, and (1924), Dollard et al.'s Frustration and Aggression out indiscriminately along with such questionable dimensions and the research relevant to them. mass hysteria, and frommore conventional crowds (1939), Miller and Dollard's Social Learning and notions as the "authoritarian personality" and the that are sponsored and orchestrated by the state or Imitation (1941), and Adorno et al.'s The Authori­ "conflict of generations" (Ferree and Miller 1985; Microstructural and Social , such as sporting events, holiday pa­ tarian Personality (1950). Through the 1960s, so­ Killian 1980; Turner 1981; Zurcher and Snow Relational Dimensions rades, and electoral political rallies (Aguirre 1984). ciologists also viewed collective behavior as an im­ 1981). Social psychological processes were once Thus, when we refer to crowds in this chapter, we portant subfield of social psychology. Work rooted again topics of discussion and research. Thus, The collective decisions and actions constitutive of have in mind those gatherings that share the above theoretically in symbolic was par­ Gamson and colleagues (1982) examined experi­ social movement activity, including crowd events, defining characteristics, such as protest marches ticularly important (Blumer 1939; Lang and Lang mentally how small groups mobilized to resist un­ have long been seen as the product of dynamic and rallies, victory celebrations, and riots, and 1961; Turner and Killian 1987).3 just situations; Klandermans (1984) stressed the interaction. However, there are two strikingly dif­ that are often associated with social movements as However, as the protest-ridden 1960s faded subjective nature of the terms in expected utility ferent social psychological perspectives for con­ well. into the 1970s, most social psychological perspec­ models and called for examination of the social ceptualizing the nature of that interaction. The study of crowds and social movements tives on collective behavior were largely jettisoned construction processes that lead to these SUbjective The older approach-variously discussed as has deep roots in both and so­ in favor of the "resource mobilization " perceptions; and Snow and colleagues (1986) drew "contagion theory" (Turner 1964; Turner and cial psychology, and a major trend in current schol- grounded in political sociology and the study of or­ on Goffman's framing concepts to examine and Killian 1972), "breakdown theory" (Tilly, Tilly, "arship is to integrate these traditions by focusing on ganizations (Gamson 1968, 1990; McCarthy and theorize the relevance of interpretive processes to and Tilly 1975), and the "transformation hypothe­ \the linkages between maCI'O and rnicr_o.J~~()cess~s_ Zald 1973, 1977; Oberschall 1973; Tilly 1978). movement mobilization. sis" (McPhail 1991)-argues that participan~ are., :(McAdam, McCarthy, and Zald 1988). In this One early advocate of resource mobilization even By the second half of the 1980s, then, students highly susceptible to the influence of others either chapter, we focus on the social psychological di­ went so far as to suggest that the social psychologi­ of social movements were rediscovering the rele­ because of the Jillonymity provide

Evidence of the importance of emergent social lysis of the dynamics of crowds and social move- / that their natural subdivisions are "groups, groups of crowd behavior, the focus of analysis should be relationships is particularly abundant in research ments should be focused in part on groups and the! of demonstrators, bystanders, press, police, and at the group level. This makes good sense socio­ on organizational and community responses to dis­ interaction among them. ' others" (1973, 1-2.) He acknowledges that "somei" logically, but what about social psychologically? asters (Dynes 1970; Ross 1978; Zurcher 1968). It To suggest such a focus must seem axiomatic demonstrations dissolve into individualistic behav- I j We think it makes good sense social psychologi­ has also been found in instances of rioting and from a sociological standpoint, yet the research and ior," but emphasizes that "no demonstration starts 1 cally, too-not only because it is consistent with looting associated with civil disturbances (Kerner writing on crowds and social movements varies this way" (1973, 2). recent research that has become increasingly more 1969; Quarantelli and Dynes 1970) and in various considerably in this regard. Group-level processes McPhail's (1991; McPhail and Wohlstein systematic, but also because a social psychology! social movements (Gould 1991; Killian 1984). For and dynamics have always figured more promi­ 1983) systematic empirical examination of behav­ that fails to anchor itself in social context, whether: instance, Gould (1991) found two bases of social nently in the analysis of social movements than of iors in crowd contexts for more than a decade also it be small groups or society writ large, is one that relation in the Paris Commune of 1871: preexisting crowds, largely because much social movement sheds light on the group nature and embeddedness misapprehends the locus of most social psycho-\ <.. neighborhood ties and emergent insurgent organ­ activity is highly organized. But the group focus of much of what transpires in those contexts. Al­ logical states and. prOcesses...... __ --~:.-, izational ties. Importantly, both sets of ties func­ has moved even more center stage in the study of though his research is heavily behavioral, aimed in tioned to build and maintain solidarity, thus social movements over the past twenty years, with large part at identifying, counting, and classifying prompting Gould to argue that "mobilization does the ascendance of the resource mobilization per­ the range of concrete behaviors occurring in crowd Personality Dimensions and Related not just depend on social ties; it also creates them" spective and its cornerst~ne--"conc~pt< of social contexts, those behaviors are judged to be collec­ Psychological Processes (1991, 719). SnowJJound this to be the case in his movement organizations (SMOs) (McCarthy and tive only insofar as they are "common or conver­ As has often been noted (Marx and Wood 1975, research on ihe rNichiren Shoshu Buddhist move­ Zald 1977; Zald and Ash 1966; Zald and McCarthy gent on one or more dimensions" at the same time, 388; Zurcher and Snow 1981, 449), few issues m_~Itt: commitm~nt and solidarity were based not 1987). Correctly noting that many movements and thus imply some coordinating mechanism or have generated as much research as differential 5 only on the pree?Cisting ties that facilitated recruit­ grow out of small groups, that such groups are source. recruitment: Why do some people rather than oth­ ment, but also

tion is therefore irrational or expressive (e.g., structure (Forward and Williams 1970; Gamson and Rule 1986; Gurney and Tierney 1982)-that and contextualized, can affect differential recruit­ Smelser 1963). 1968; Paige 1971, Seeman 1975). More broadly, the jury is in and hypotheses linking relative depri­ ment and participation. The underlying psychological propensities Werner (1978) found, on controlling for vation to collective action are simply wrong. Such and mechanisms range from those that are· deep­ and abortion attitudes, that "activists" on both sides a conclusion is premature, however, for several Socialization Dimensions and Processes seated and personality-based, such as the authori­ of the abortion issue were more dominant, self­ reasons. First, few studies have directly measured tarian personality (Adorno et al. 1950) and the confident, energetic, and effective in using their a sense of relative deprivation or felt psychological Broadly defined, socialization refers to two inter­ Oedipal conflict of generations (Feuer 1969), to . capabilities than subjects who engaged in less ac- , tension. Instead, subjective deprivation is typically connected processes: the process through which more sociological notions, such as status inconsis­ tivism than their attitudes would otherwise predict. ' inferred from aggregate statistics of objective individuals learn the values, norms, motives, be­ tency theory, which suggests that class-based ten­ It thus appears that there is something to gain indicators, such as unemployment rates. The as­ liefs, and roles of the groups or society with which sions are often displaced onto movement issues .from reconsidering "personality," or at least per­ sumption of an unproblematic relation between ob­ they are associated, and a parallel process through such as temperance, pornography, and right-wing sonality variables, as a factor in movement partici­ jective conditions and subjective deprivation is not which individuals develop and change in terms of extremism (Geschwender 1967; Gusfield 1963; pation, but only if it is properly placed in context. only contrary to the theory, but "the relationship personality and self-concept or identity (Gecas Rush 1967; Zurcher and Kirkpatrick 1976). The If movement participation is viewed as problem­ between subjective evaluations of well-being and 1992). Both of these processes are apparent in so­ implication of such propositions is that secure per­ solving or instrumental behavior, it is plausible to external objective conditions is itself so filtered cial movements, yet there is a long-standing tradi­ sonalities or clear-thinking individuals would not speculate that, when attitudes and network ties are through individual circumstances that there is little tion of treating them as qualitatively different be lured by the questionable appeals of social controlled, activists will generally be found to have evidence of a systematic effect of macroenviron­ within movements than in the larger society. The mQvements. 6 , higher energy levels, greater sense of personal effi­ mental conditions upon overall sense of well-be­ result is that socialization is seldom used by move­ ----. Some proponents of this perspective have cacy, and greater skills for the actions they are ing" (Seeman 1981,396). ment scholars, and students of socialization rarely argued that movements are interchangeable or performing than nonactivists. There is scattered Second, there is little reason to expect social mention the occurrence of these processes within functional equivalents of one another inasmuch evidence that bears on these hypotheses (Gamson, psychological states such as deprivation to be a movements (e.g., Bush and Simmons 1981; Gecas as they provide prospective participants with Fireman, and Rytina 1982, 82-93; Oliver 1984) sufficient explanation for action. In a typical case, 1981). We believe this tendency is misguided, • similar outlets or opportunities for addressing and suggests that they merit more careful research. Klandermans and Oegema (1987) found that while since the two processes manifest themselves in at i their psychologiCiltDeeds (Hoffer 1951; Klapp 76 percent of the Dutch population endorsed a least three ways in relation to social movements: 1969). Other~'~~ntend that participation is contin­ Relative Deprivation. Rooted in models of both campaign against nuclear armaments, only 4 per­ intergenerationally, in terms of childhood sociali­ gent on correspondence between type of personal psychological process and cognition, the general cent actually attended a large demonstration in sup­ zation and the transmission of activist orientations; problem or need and type of movement appeal and concept of relative deprivation organized a great port of the campaign. However, some sort of rela­ intragenerationally, in terms of changes in world­ program (Feuer 1969; Lofland and Stark 1965). In deal of research in the 1960s and 1970s, including tive deprivation may well be a necessary condition view and identity; and intragenerationally, in terms either case, little empirical support has been forth­ related approaches with different names (Aberle for action. Finally, some research using direct changes over the life course. coming. 1966; Davies 1969; Gurr 1970). These approaches measures of subjective deprivation have found the are rooted in the seeming paradox that it is not the predicted relation to participation, as in the case of Intergenerational Transmission of Activist Val­ Personal Efficacy and Other Traits. Personality most emiserated popUlations that rebel, but those the antibusing movement in Boston and prison ri­ ues. Past emphasis on the disjunctive aspects of and psychological deficits have been largely aban­ that seem to be improving their position or those ots (Useem 1980, 1985; Useem and Kimball 1989). collective behavior and social movements has gen­ doned as explanations of differential recruitment that are among the more privileged sectors of an .Even here, however, it is not clear whether the erillly led scholars to neglect the ways movement by scholars of crowds and movements since the aggrieved group. All seek to subsume the causes of rather complex concept of relative deprivation can participation and activism are often continuous, 1970s because of both the lack of empirical support protest into an individual-level social psychologi­ be empirically distinguished from simpler con­ rather than discontinuous, with the past. There are and the tendency for such explanations to portray cal process in which what ought to be is compared cepts such as "grievance" or the instrumentalists' exceptions to this gloss, but most are based on participants in disparaging terms. However, if we with what is. "subjective interest." research on student activists of the early 1960s, accept the importance of movement issues and as­ Although deprivation theory is among the In sum, there is little reason to jettison person­ who tended to come from liberal to left activist sume that people participate only in movements most theoretically sophisticated social psychologi­ ality factors and related social psychological proc­ (Bengston 1970; DeMartini 1983; Flacks which make sense to them or which express their cal perspectives on collective action, it has not esses in the study of crowds and social movements. 1967; Westby and Braungart 1966; J. Wood and interests, there is clearly room for personality char­ fared particularly well when subjected to empirical Although it is clear that much of the earlier theoriz­ Ng 1980). Similarly, Johnston (1991) found that acteristics to affect the level and form of participa­ examination. Indeed, one might easily conclude­ ing was excessively psychological and wrong­ Catalonian nationalists' insurgent ethnic identities tion. One personality factor found to function in in light of major empirical studies (McPhail 1971; headed, it is also likely that there are "activist 1~ were formed in conversations and church this is "personal eff~c:acy't-the that Muller 1980; Portes 1971; Rule 1988; Snyder and types," that a sense of personal efficacy often figures . youth groups. ,'. one has the ability to make a difference, especially Tilly 1972; Spilerman 1970) and a number of criti­ in the participation equation, and that something Anecdotal and impressionistic evidence about when coupled with low trust in the existing power cal overviews of the concept and literature (Finkel like relative deprivation, appropriately measured other movements abounds. Some ethnic, racial, and 580 PART III Social Structure, Relationships, and the Individual CHAPTER 22 Social Movements and Collective Behavior 581 religious communities or groupings are facilitative are being reared with distinct moral and political suspension of analogical reasoning, and adoption been found for explanations of conversion that em­ contexts for the transmission of values and beliefs that have implications for subsequent of the convert role as a master status. phasize aberrant personality factors and "brain­ conducive to activism. Every continent in the identification with and involvement in various Since not all changes in orientation and iden­ washing" or "coercive ," there is consid­ world provides cases of ongoing ethnic, religious, kinds of movement activity. tity that occur in social movements are as drastic as erable support for such microstructural and social and tribal conflicts that are clearly sustained across Not only do preestablished communities often those captured by the concept of conversion, schol­ relational factors as network linkages, affective generations. In the United States, the transmission constitute the moral and ideological seedbeds out ars have proposed other terms, such as "alterna­ and intensive interaction, and role learning in the of a culture of race-consciousness and activism has of which ethnic, race, religious, and political move­ tion" and "regeneration," for these milder changes process through which conversion and the more been a central feature of African-American history. ments sometimes grow, but these communities and (see Snow and Machalek 1984, 169-170 for a sum­ milder personal changes are effected. Prominent African-American leaders often had ac­ their movements often give rise to ongoing cultures mary). Such distinctions are useful inasmuch as Second, monocausal explanations of these tivist parents, such as Martin Luther King, Sr., or of resistance or struggle that are transmitted across they signal that the change in orientation and iden­ changes have fallen out of favor as researchers Earl Little, the Garveyite father of Malcolm X. generations. In these contexts, children grow up tity frequently associated with movement partici­ increasingly have come to realize that personal High community political participation rates for with almost continuous exposure to a structure of pation is not unidimensional and that conversion is changes in orientation and identity, however dra­ educated African Americans are well established, grievances and beliefs that justify activism. Since but one variety of personal change that occurs in matic, result from the combined and interactive as are the cultural norms for "race work." Many there is little, if any, disjuncture between move­ social movements. influences of multiple factors-individual, inter­ African-American churches have a long tradition ment and community in such settings, it is difficult, Given that the personal changes associated personal, and contextual. of integrating , culture, politics; and resis­ if not impossible, to differentiate movement so­ with movement participation can be arrayed on a Last, the earlier presumption that conversion tance into a seamless whole (Morris 1984). And cialization from socialization more generally. continuum, ranging from the more thoroughgoing to off-beat groups, religious or otherwise, required general population surveys indicate that African changes associated with conversion at one extreme the operation of unique social and psychological Americans receive more explicit political educa­ Intragenerational Changes in Orientation to little, if any, change at the other, two issues beg processes has been derailed by the growing realiza­ tion about race and power than European Ameri­ and Identity. While students of social move­ for clarification: What is the relationship between tion that parallel processes are often at work, what­ cans and are generally more supportive than Euro­ ments may have neglected the contribution of pa­ movement type and the kinds of personal change ever the context or movement. Indeed, it can be pean Americans of government action to produce rental values and childhood socialization to sub­ required for participation? And, what are the causal argued that the entire conversion process applies social equality and of social movements and protest sequent activism, no such neglect is evident with factors that account for the change? Regarding the generally to most forms of intense, high-risk move­ (Isaac, Mutran, and Stryker 198d). This difference respect to changes in value orientation and identity first issue, there are a number of works that suggest ment activity in the political arena and is perhaps seems to extend quite broadly: Kane (1992) reports or self-concept among movement participants. that more dramatic personal changes associated also applicable to the process by which individuals that African Americans of both sexes support the Both conversion, the process through which dra­ with conversion are most likely to be required un­ become members of some voluntary organizations. women's movement and women's collective action matic changes in value orientation and identity are der the following conditions: when movement ide­ The difference in such seemingly diverse cases much more than European Americans of either effected, and commitment, the process through ology and practices are culturally idiosyncratic or resides not so much in the causal processes but in sex. which individuals come to pursue lines of action discontinuous or when a movement is stridently the content of the process and in the extent to Cultural traditions of activism are also found consistent with their beliefs and identities, have oppositional and defined as threatening or revolu­ which the new roles, beliefs, and identities are among some Americans of European ancestry. been extensively studied. tionary (McAdam 1989; Turner and Killian 1987); all-encompassing and pervasive in terms of their Secular and religious Jews have very strong tradi­ when a movement is more "exclusive" in terms of relevance to the various domains of life. tions of social activism and markedly more liberal Conversion and Other Personal Changes. Al­ membership eligibility and requirements (Machalek attitudes than other European Americans. Quakers, though research on religious conversion has been and Snow 1993; McAdam 1989; Zald and Ash Commitment Processes. Commitment processes Mennonites, and other groups have taught paci­ described as "a minor growth industry" (Machalek 1966); and when a movement is more "greedy" in encompass the socialization processes through fism, equality, and service for generations. Even and Snow 1993, 1),1 conceptualization and opera­ terms of membership demands (Coser 1967; Ger­ which individuals become bound to a group, result­ among the largely nonactivist Catholics and main­ tionalization of conversion have remained some­ lach and Hine 1970; Machalek and Snow 1993). ing in group solidarity and mutual identification of line Protestants, "social justice" and "peace" have what elusive. Conceptualized in its most extreme Regarding the issue of causation, there is an some durability. Whereas conversion entails radi­ been significant themes for generations. On the form, conversion involves a radical transformation extensive and continuously expanding literature. cal change in self and identity associated with the conservative side, Wood and Hughes (1984) docu­ of consciousness in which a new or formerly pe­ Indeed, the bulk of the literature on conversion and process of joining, commitment involves the devo­ ment the relationship between "moral reform" and ripheral universe of comes to function as related processes of personal change is concerned tion of time and energy to a cause, even in the face moral upbringing, showing that conservative mor­ a person's primary authority. In an attempt to op­ primarily with identification of the causal precipi­ of adversity, and implies that one's individual alists are reared in families, , and commu­ erationalize this conception, Snow and Machalek tants and processes. Since there are a number of needs and interests are congruent with those of the nities that socialize them into their moral world­ (1983, 1984, 173-174) have proposed four rhetori­ recent detailed reviews of this literature (see note group (Kanter 1972). view and thereby dispose them toward moral reform. cal indicators of conversion: biographical recon­ 7), we note only a few of the more general findings. Research on commitment in the collective be­ In short, many American children have been and struction, adoption of a master attribution scheme, First, while little compelling empirical support has havior arena has focused on the processes and 582 PART III Social Structure, Relationships, and the Individual CHAPTER 22 Social Movements and Collective Behavior 583 mechanisms contributing to the development and Intragenerational Changes over the Life Course. rational choice and social constructionist perspec­ Rational Decision Theories. The central assump­ persistence of commitment and on variation in A third area in which socialization processes and tives. These two labels point to theory groups that tions of all instrumentalist, rational choice, or sub­ commitment-building capacities, requirements, me­ the study of social movements converge concerns are themselves internally diverse, with many jective expected utility models are (1) that people chanisms, and success across groups or movements the long-term biographical consequences of com­ scholars in each group taking account of the in­ seek to obtain benefits and minimize costs, and (2) (Gerlach and Hine 1970; Hall 1988; Hechter 1987; mitted participation and activism. Accumulating sights from the other group. Nevertheless, we can that they cognitively process information about the Hirsch 1990; Kanter 1968, 1972; McAdam 1986; evidence indicates that movement participation clarify many issues by employing this dichotomy. likely benefits and costs of various courses of ac­ Turner and Killian 1987,337-344). Most recently, continues to have effects even long after the intense We believe the crucial difference between tion and then make a conscious choice about their there has been increasing interest in the develop­ activism has ceased. This is best established for the these two theory groups can be understood as the behavior (see Friedman and Hechter 1988). Thus, ment of collective identity (Cohen 1985; Hunt "60s activists," who, for the most part, continued to difference between treating cognitions as inde­ the central metatheoretical assumptions of these 1991; Melucci 1985, 1988, 1989; Taylor 1989), have relatively liberal to left political beliefs, main­ pendent variables versus dependent variables. The theories are that cognitions precede behaviors and which is clearly related to commitment. Indeed, tained involvement in political activity, were more "independent variable" group takes cognitions choices are conscious, intentional, and rational. both might be regarded as flip sides of the same likely to be employed in the "helping professions," more or less as givens and attempts to predict be­ Although usually assuming an unproblematic coin. and tended to marry less and have fewer children havior from cognitions. Variants of rational choice relation between objective conditions and subjec­ Research on commitment processes and (Demerath, Morwell, and Aiken 1971; Fendrich and are currently dominant in this theory cluster, but it tive cognitions, this tradition treats subjective pref­ mechanisms suggests four tentative conclusions. Lovoy 1988; Marwell, Aiken, and Demerath 1987; also includes control theory, learning theory, and erences (benefits and costs) as the operative terms. First, commitments often evolve during the course Marwell, Demerath, and O'Leary 1990; McAdam relative deprivation theory. The "dependent vari­ Altruism and solidarity can be subjective prefer­ of collective action itself. Joint action both en­ 1988, 1989; Whalen and Flacks 1989). Even those able" group, by contrast, seeks to explain the proc­ ences, and models can include imperfect infor­ hances existing commitments and engenders new who were minor participants in marches and rallies esses whereby the cognitions themselves are cre­ mation. These theories often make additional as­ ones (Gamson, Fireman, and Rytina 1982; Gould show similar, though milder, differences from non­ ated. This group rejects the notion that cognitions sumptions to permit construction of formal models 1991; Hirsch 1990; Snow 1987). Second, different participants, even when predictors of participation can ever be treated as unproblematic givens and and determinate calculations, such as the assump­ commitment-building mechanisms are relevant to are controlled (Sherkat and Blocker 1992). stresses that behavior and cognitions are intercon­ tions that everything can be reduced to a common different dimensions of commitment (Hall 1988; The persistence of activist values and identi­ nected in a dynamic and reflexive fashion. metric or that decisions are evaluated on an ex­ Hirsch 1990; Kanter 1968, 1972). Third, move­ ties has implications for organizations as well as pected value criterion. These are viewed as simpli­ ments vary not only in the commitments they re­ individuals. Yesterday's activists, for whom the Independent Variable (Rational Choice) Perspec­ fying assumptions, not empirical statements about quire, but in their capacity to deal successfully with "fire" continues to bum, often provide the organ­ tives. The perspectives falling into this theory how most people actually think. the problem of commitment (Hall 1988). izational skills and ideological inspiration for new group are concerned primarily with identifying A second crucial issue for rational choice theo­ Finally, the development of commitment to so­ movements or keep the torch burning for the old, as either the role of different cognitions in determin­ ries of collective action is the link between individ­ cial movements generally occurs in a context of Rupp and Taylor demonstrate in the case of the ing behavior or the mechanisms linking cognitions ual and group interests. Mancur Olson's The Logic competing commitments and in a stepwise fashion women's movement (1987; Taylor 1989). Thus, the and behavior. Cognitions are viewed as mediating of Collective Action (1968) is the crucial watershed and is thus a highly contingent process. Consider socialization consequences of earlier collective ac­ the relationship between objective conditions and in thinking about this issue. Prior to this work it these findings from a variety of contexts: there is tion can have long-term effects at both action and are assumed to bear a reasonably good was widely assumed that there was a natural ten­ an extraordinarily high incidence of defection the personal and the organizational levels. fit with objective . Thus, these perspectives dency for people with shared interests to act to­ from religious cults and movements (Barker 1984; speak more often of knowledge than of belief and gether to pursue those interests, that is, that there Bird and Reimer 1982); only a few members of often explicitly treat variations or changes in cog­ was an unproblematic congruence between indi­ Cognitive Dimensions and Perspectives neighborhood associations are consistently active nitions as crucial determinants of behavior (Oliver vidual interests and group interests. Olson argued (Oliver 1984); members of unions who are dissat­ Much of the discussion among scholars of crowds and MarwellI992). otherwise. Drawing on standard cost-benefit mi­ isfied are more likely to "exit" than exercise and social movements since the mid-1970s has fo­ Included in this broad grouping are tension croeconomics and public goods theory, he argued "voice" (Van der Veen and Klandermans 1989); cused on issues that are essentially cognitive: How reductionist perspectives, such as relative depriva­ that rational individuals would not contribute to the and the most active members in most kinds of vol­ do individuals decide to participate in a particular tion theory, discussed earlier; behaviorist or social provision of public or collective goods (i.e., goods untary associations are rarely the members with the crowd or movement activity? What is the nature of learning models (Macy 1990); and rational choice that are shared by everyone whether or not they longest tenure of association (Cress and McPher­ that decision-making process? What determines the or decision theory. Since the preponderance of re­ help to pay for them). There has been extensive son 1992). Taken together, these observations sug­ kinds of meanings that are attributed to particular cent work treating cognitions as independent vari­ work in the rational choice paradigm showing that gest that the development of strong, enduring com­ activities and events? How do these meanings get ables has done so by explicitly or implicitly em­ Olson's claim that collective action is "irrational" mitment may well be the exception rather than the constructed? We organize our discussion of such ploying aspects of the latter perspective, we will is overgeneralized and misleading (Hardin 1982; rule. questions and issues around the "debate" between concentrate on it in the remainder of this section. Marwell and Oliver 1993; Oliver and Marwell 584 PART III Social Structure, Relationships, and the Individual CHAPTER 22 Social Movements and Collective Behavior 585

1988.)8 In particular, Olson confuses the "free benefits and costs, the problematic nature of mobi­ teer mobilizing technologies (Oliver and Marwell Rational choice theorists also point to the cen­ rider" problem, in which individuals are motivated lization, and the importance of individual incen­ 1992). tral importance of efficacy, the perception that to let others provide the good, with what Oliver and tives for action-mesh directly with the central An important trend in rational choice theory is one'~ actions will make a difference in accomplish­ Marwell (1988) call the "efficacy problem," in concerns of resource mobilization and political a move away from models of individual decisions ing the goals, which is the sense of hope and ur­ which each individual cannot make a large enough opportunity theories (Jenkins 1983; McAdam toward models of group mobilization processes. gency that marks' the historic moments of peak difference in the collective good to justify partici­ 1982; Tarrow 1989b; Tilly 1978; Zald and Mc­ Oliver and Marwells 's "critical mass theory" (Mar­ collective action (e.g., McAdam 1982). Consistent pation. What remains is broad agreement that both Carthy 1987). They focus attention on resources well and Oliver 1993; Marwell, Oliver, and Prahl with these arguments, research generally finds that the relationship between individual and group in­ and capacities and on a series of variables likely 1988; Oliver and Marwell 1988; Oliver, Marwell participants in movement activities are more opti­ terests and mobilization around shared interests are to promote or hinder the prospects for mobiliza­ and Teixeira 1985) provides a variety of models of mistic than nonparticipants about the prospect of vexing issues. tion. Objective structural conditions are assumed organizer-centered mobilization, in which re~ource­ change and about the efficacy of their participation. A third feature of rational choice theories also to be a major determinant of subjective interests constrained organizers try to maximize the total In other words, they are more likely to believe follows from Olson (1962). He argued that actors and perceived costs and capacities. Rational amount of resources mobilized from a heteroge­ change is possible and that their contribution will must be provided with selective incentives-pri­ choice theory puts the stated "goals" of a move­ neous pool of potential participants. Heckathorn make a difference. This patterq was found in re­ vate goods that reward contributors or coercive ment or action center stage as the central explana­ (1990) discusses chains of influence, in which search on riot participants of the 1960s (Forward measures that punish non participation. Although tion for participation and tends to describe partici­ group members may sanction each other to enforce and Williams 1970; Paige 1971; Seeman 1975), as the claim that such private incentives are necessary pants as people concerned about a problem trying with external demands. Macy (1990) noted earlier, and has been a frequent finding in has been rejected by subsequent theorists, Olson's to use their available resources to address that has modified these models to replace the rational more recent research on social movement activ­ work has led to a focus on individual incentives problem. decision maker with an adaptive leamer, showing ity (Finkel, Muller, and Opp 1989; Klandermans that reward participation or punish nonparticipa­ Besides its influence on political and organiza­ that different assumptions about individuals lead to 1984; McAdam 1982; Opp 1988). tion (see Oliver [1980] for a discussion of the dif­ tional studies in the resource mobilization para­ different predictions about group outcomes. In all However, there are two clear cases where data ference between rewards and as in­ digm, this general perspective has been employed these cases, illuminating conclusions about the dif­ conflict with the theory. First, rational choice mod­ centives). Olson stressed private material gain, but directly in a wide variety of studies, including re­ ferences between groups in their possibilities for els clearly predict that costs are negatively related subsequent scholars in the rational choice tradition bellious political behavior and violence (Muller collective action are obtained by making simplify­ to action, but this prediction seems to hold only in have extended the notion of incentives. Following 1980; Muller and Opp 1986; Muller, Dietz, and ing assumptions about the individuals in those the extreme cases of objective material constraints James Q. Wilson (1973), most scholars recognize Finkel 1991); antiwar protest crowds and riot par­ groups. or severe repression. Wealthy people give more three broad types of incentives: material, solidary, ticipation (Berk 1974; Bryan 1979); mobilization Ignoring for a moment the metatheoretical money to social causes than the poor, but they give and purposive. Material incentives are those Olson in the wake of nuclear accidents (Opp 1988; Walsh of the theory, we may consider its much lower proportions of their incomes. Busy discussed and include salaries, insurance pro­ and Warland 1983); organizational dynamics in the capacity as a predictive tool, which is often sub­ people contribute more time and energy to move­ grams, and threats of physical or economic retali­ John Birch society (Oliver and Furman 1989); and stantial. Attitude measures that can be construed as ment activity than those who are not busy (Oliver ation. Solidary incentives arise from social rela­ labor movement mobilization (Klandermans measures of a person's subjective interest in an 1984). Most important, several studies that have tions with other participants, such as praise, 1984). Specific theoretical issues addressed using action's goals have reasonably strong correlations measured costs subjectively found that it operated respect, and friendship shared among copartici­ this paradigm include identity incentives and with participation in many forms of collective ac­ opposite to the way the theory predicts. For exam­ pants or shame, contempt, and in the case collective action (Friedman and McAdam 1992); tion (Klandermans 1984; Klandermans and Oege­ ple, Hirsch (1990) found that participants in a cam­ of nonparticipants. Purposive incentives arise from ethnic mobilization (Hechter, Friedman, and Ap­ rna 1987; Oliver 1984; Opp 1988; Walsh and War­ pus divestment protest believed they were bearing internalized norms and values in which a person's plebaum 1982); individual thresholds for participa­ land 1983). Direct measures of solidary and heavy costs and making sacrifices, while nonpar­ self-esteem depends on doing the right thing. The tion in collective behavior events (Granovetter purposive incentives also have the expected posi­ ticipants downplayed the costs and assumed the concepts of solidary and purposive incentives have 1978); the difference between rewards and punish­ tive relations (Klandermans 1984; Klandermans participants were gaining intrinsic benefits. Opp permitted rational choice theories to incorporate ments as incentives (Oliver 1980); the difference and Oegema 1987; Opp 1988). Carden (1978) ar­ (1988, 1989) found a similar pattern regarding the the influences of social networks, culture, and so­ between collective goods that can be provided by a gues that activists motivated by purposive incen­ assessment of costs and risks associated with anti­ cialization. Thus, although the theory makes indi­ few large contributors and those that must be pro­ tives require control over their actions and decen­ nuclear protest activity. These findings can be in­ vidualistic assumptions about decisions as it is em­ vided by many small contributors (Oliver, Mar­ tralized organizations, but generally material terpreted in instrumentalist terms, but only when it ployed in the study of social movements, it has well, and Teixeira 1985); the difference between incentives have not been found to motivate activ­ is recognized that legitimacy is gained through come to recognize the influence of social networks, time and money as movement resources (Oliver ists. However, financial contributions from less in­ making sacrifices for a cause and that what is seen socialization, and culture on individuals. and Furman 1989; Oliver and Marwell 1992); terested members do allow for paid activism as a cost from the outside is reinterpreted as a These core features of rational choice theory­ and the dynamics of paid versus volunteer activism (Oliver 1983) and eqilble more committed mem­ benefit from the vantage point of the actors them­ conscious intentional decisions, the importance of (Oliver 1983) and professional versus volun- bers to pursue their goals (Knoke 1988). selves. But this alternative interpretation clearly 586 PART III Social Structure, Relationships, and the Individual CHAPTER 22 Social Movements and Collective Behavior 587 raises questions about the construction of such 1984; McAdam 1982; Snow et al. 1986; Turner space does not permit an overview of each of these and colleagues (1986) have identified four dis­ meanings and understandings, issues that rational 1983; Zurcher and Snow 1981).9 This was not so lines of theory and research, we consider the work tinct alignment processes: "bridging" frame decision models cannot really address. much a new initiative as it was an attempt to rescue associated with framing processes and collective congruent or ideologically isomorphic but immo­ The second problem is that self-reported indi­ and resuscitate previously glossed concepts, such identity, the two social constructionist themes that bilized sentiment pools; "amplifying" existing val­ vidual efficacy levels often seem implausible. as and grievances, and blend them with have generated the most attention in recent years. ues or beliefs; "extending" the SMO's interpretive Opp's (1989) movement participants claimed lev­ more recent strands of cognitive social psychology, framework to encompass interests and perspectives els of individual efficacy that are so objectively such as attribution theory, Praming Processes and Collective Action Frames. that are not directly relevant to its primary objec­ impossible that it is difficult to accept their answers broadly conceived, and the rediscovery of culture From a framing perspective, movement activists tives; and "transforming" old meanings and/or gen­ at face value, just as voters vastly overstate the in American sociology. By the early 1990s, this and organizations are not viewed merely as carriers erating new ones, usually through affecting conver­ impact their one vote has on election outcomes. initiative and the issues it raised were attracting of extant ideas and meanings, but as "signifying sion. Participants seem to attribute to themselves as indi­ increasing interest and being discussed under the agents" actively engaged in the production and Since the initial work on frame alignment viduals the efficacy they believe the whole move­ rubric of "." We thus use it maintenance of meaning for constituents, antago­ processes, the framing perspective has broadened ment has. Only if they are asked to distinguish very here as an integrative cover term that is suggestive nists, and bystanders. In addition, they are seen as and new research questions have been raised. First, carefully their own individual contribution from of an emerging perspective with respect to the being embroiled, along with the media, local what determines the effectiveness or mobilizing that of others will they acknowledge that their con­ study of crowds and social movements. governments, and the state, in "the politics of sig­ potency of movement framing efforts? Why do tribution alone is not likely to make much differ­ This perspective acknowledges the rationalist nification"-that is, the struggle to have certain some proffered framings affect mobilization, while ence. Instead, they appear to answer efficacy ques­ and resource mobilization insight that social move­ meanings and understandings gain ascendance others do not? What, in other words, accounts for tions as if their own answer refers to the joint effect ments constitute purposive, self-conscious at­ over others, or at least move up some existing "frame resonance" (Snow and Benford 1988; see of all people like themselves. That is, they simply tempts to produce or halt social change. But social hierarchy of credibility. Building on Goffman's also Gamson 1992)? Second, to what extent and gloss over the individual efficacy problem in favor constructionists also recognize that perceptions of Frame Analysis (1974), Snow and Benford (1992) under what conditions does a collective action of a collectivist perception. Although less clearly grievances, costs and benefits, and possibilities for conceptualize this signifying work with the verb frame sometimes come to function as a "master documented for most other cases, this kind of an­ action are all socially constructed: "what is at issue framing, to denote the process of reality construc­ frame" in relation to a cycle of protest or move­ swer or statement is often made by movement par­ is not merely the presence or absence of griev­ tion. This process is active, ongoing, and continu­ ment activity by coloring and constraining the ori­ ticipants. At one level, this finding is consistent ances but the manner in which grievances are in­ ously evolving; it entails in the sense that entations and activities of other movements in the with rational decision models, since this transfor­ terpre'ted'knd the generation and diffusion of those what evolves is the product of joint action by cycle (Snow and Benford 1992; Tarrow 1989b)? mation of the efficacy term makes action sensible interpretations" (Snow et al. 1986,466). Thus, so­ movement participants in encounters with antago­ Third, what is the link between collective action and possible. But at another level, this transforma­ cial constructionists are especially concerned with nists and targets; and it is contentious in the sense frames and the generation of incentives for action, tion itself begs for explanation. Although Opp of­ the processes whereby existing structures of mean­ that it generates alternate interpretive schemes that or what Klandermans calls "action mobilization" fers an individual cost-benefit account of why peo­ ing are challenged or modified and new ones are may challenge existing frames. (1984, 1988)? To what extent and how does the ple choose to modify their perceptions of efficacy, created, deployed, and diffused through processes Snow and Benford (1992) call the products of framing process generate "motivational frames" this tendency seems to cry out for a constructionist of collective discourse and action. this activity "collective action frames," which can that function as prods to action (Benford 1993b; A range of work clusters under the canopy of account. be defined as emergent action-oriented sets of be­ Snow and Benford 1988). Fourth, what are the social constructionism, including Turner and Kil­ liefs and meaning that inspire and legitimate social internal and external dynamics that affect the fram­ Dependent Variable (Social Constructionist) Per­ lian's (1987) continuously evolving emergent movement activities and campaigns. They perform ing process? Discussion, debate, and contention spectives. In response to the tendency for re­ norm perspective; the framing perspective of Snow this mobilizing function by identifying a problem­ exist within movements just as between move­ source mobilization and rational choice theorists to and Benford (Snow and Benford 1988, 1992; Snow atic condition and defining it as unjust, intolerable, ments and their antagonists, countermovements, treat preferences or values, costs and benefits, and et al. 1986); Klandermans's (1984, 1988) work on and deserving of corrective action (see also Gam­ and targets. How do these tensions, debates, and meanings and grievances as unproblematic givens consensus mobilization; Gamson's (1988; Gamson son, Fireman, and Rytina 1982, 14-16; Turner disputes affect the framing process and/or mobiliz­ or as data points that can be plugged into an equa­ and Modigliani 1989) theorizing and research on 1969; Turner and Killian 1987, 242-245); by at­ ing capacity of existing frames (Benford 1993a)? tion as independent variables, a number of scholars media discourse and packaging; Melucci's (1985, tributing blame or identifying the causal agent(s) And what is the role of the media in this process, began to call in the first half of the 1980s for 1988, 1989) work on the construction and negotia­ (Ferree and Miller 1985; Snow and Benford especially since one of its primary functions is renewed attention to such cognitive and ideational tion of collective identities; and a growing number 1992); and by articulating and aligning individ­ framing is.sues and agendas (Gamson 1992; Gitlin factors and the processes of interpretation and sym­ of works focusing on the interface of culture, real­ ual orientations, interests, and life experiences 1980)? bolization (Cohen 1985; Ferree and Miller 1985; ity construction, consciousness, and contention with the orientation and objectives of movement During the past several years, these questions Gamson, Fireman, and Rytina 1982; Klandermans (Benford and Hunt 1992; Fantasia 1988). Since organizations. Regarding the latter process, Snow about the link between collective action frames and CHAPTER 22 Social Movements and Collective Behavior 589 588 PART III Social Structure. Relationships. and the Individual

When realization of this connection resurfaced Thus, Taylor and associates, in their research con~icts as those between antiabortionists and pro­ mobilization have generated considerable research in the late 1980s, attention shifted from individual on colle~tive identity in the women's movement chOIce adherents and between environmentalists that demonstrates the centrality of framing proc­ identity deficits and quests to the construction of ~nd ~esblan feminist mobilization, define collec­ and the lumber industry. Indeed, one is hard­ esses in mobilization in such diverse cases as the "collective identities." At the forefront of this line tIve Ide~tity as "the shared definition of a group pressed to think of instances of collective behavior U.S. peace movement (Benford 1987), the IRA of inquiry were several European scholars asso­ that denves from its members' common interests gathe~ings. that do not evoke strong sentiments, (White 1989), Italian protest cycles (Tarrow ciated with the "new social movements" perspec­ and soli~~ity" (Taylor 1989, 771; see also Taylor even If thelT expression is restrained, as in the case 1989a), protest demonstrations in West Germany tive (Melucci 1985, 1988, 1989; Pizzorno 1978; ~nd WhIttIer 1992). In his study of the construc­ of memorial gatherings for AIDS victims or the (Gerhards and Rucht 1992), ideology and abeyance Touraine 1981), with the work and voice of Me­ tIOn ~f c~llective identity in a peace movement homeless. processes in U.S. farmers' movements (Mooney orgamzatIOn, Hunt refers to it as "the qualities . Yet this affective dimension of collective be­ 1990), and the Catalonian nationalist movement lucci being most prominent. 10 For Melucci, collective identity is inseparable and characteristics attributed to a group by mem­ havI~r and social movements has been the least (Johnston 1991). These empirical works and other from collective action and is the key to under­ bers of that group" (1991, 1) and explicitly links the?nzed. and researched of all the social psycho­ critical assessments (Gamson 1992; Tarrow 1992) standing its dynamics. He defines collective identity the concept with the identity literature in social logIcal. dImensions. There are two major recent point to modifications and refinements of framing as "an interactive and shared definition produced psycho!ogy (e.g., Stryker 1980; Weigert, Teitge, exceptIOns: one is Turner and Killian's (1987 104- concepts while affirming their value. Transcending by several interacting individuals who are con­ ~nd ~eItge 1986). These definitions make collec­ 105) re~son~d linkage of emotion and expr~ssive framing theory itself, this research demonstrates cerned with the orientations of their action as well tIve Identity more empirically accessible, but tendencIes m collective behavior; the other is more generally that the cognitions relevant to col­ as the field of opportunities and constraints in they also make it almost indistinguishable from Lofland's (1981) original taxonomy of "elemen­ lective action-be they preferences, values, inter­ which their action takes place" (Melucci 1989,34). the concept of commitment. Perhaps that is not a tary .forms of collective behavior" based on the ests or utilities, costs or benefits, punishments or This means, according to Keane and Mier, who problem, however, so long as Melucci's central dommance of one of three primary emotions-joy, rewards, self-concepts or identities, or conscious­ edited Melucci's most explicit treatment of the contributions are not lost: that collective identity is an~er, and fear: ~~t coincidentally, that essay was ness itself-are social constructions that are concept, that collective identity is "a moveable ~~t mere~y shared opinions but emerges out of wntten for the mItIal volume of this book. Zurcher dynamic and evolving entities which must be ex­ definition (that actors) have of themselves and their JOInt actI~n; that collective identity is both and Snow's (1981, 477-479) discussion of social amined and explained. social world, a more or less shared and dynamic gr~unded In and helps to constitute the field of ~ovements in the same volume also called atten­ actIOn; and that identities and action fields are con­ tIOn to the neglect of passion in relation to the ebb Collective Identity and Collective Action. Al­ understanding of the goals of their action as well as stantly changing. and flow of social movements, and hypothesized though identity is a central concept in sociological the social field of possibilities and limits within that movement viability is contingent in part on the social psychology and identities are often at stake which their action takes place" (Melucci 1989,4). ma~ag~ment of the ongoing dialectic between or­ in movement activities, emphasis on identity in the Deconstructed even furth~r, Melucci's actors are in Affective Dimensions gamzatIOn and passion. But it was Lofland's chap­ study of collective behavior has waxed and waned. the "process of constructing an action system," Emoti~ns .are not peculiar to any particular domain ter (1981) and other work (1985) that constituted It figured prominently in a number of well-known and it is the product of this constructive process of socI~1 hfe. L~ke other inner states, however, they a c1a~ion call for greater attention to affect and works in the 1950s and 1960s (Hoffer 1951; Kenis­ that is constitutive of collective identity (Melucci ~e subject t~ dIffe~ential expression contingent on emotIon. Nevertheless, a decade later, the imbal­ ton 1968; Klapp 1969) and then lay fallow through­ 1989,34). dIfferences In SOCIal circumstances, regulations, ance :em~ins. ~cPhail's (1991) detailed and sys­ out the 1970s and the early 1980s. The reason for Turner (1991a) has noted that this provocative and cues. Thus, some situations are more evocative te~atIc dIscussIOn of the literature on crowds con­ its neglect was due largely to the tendency of ear­ conceptualization is very similar to the Blumerian ~f emotion and. its display than others. Clearly this tams only two mentions of emotion in its index lier accounts to portray participants as suffering strand of symbolic interactionism and resonates IS the case WIth collective behavior situations. one pointing to his review of Lofland's work and from spoiled identities (Hoffer 1951) or identity with social constructionism more generally. How­ ~ost people participate in crowd behavior and so­ the other to Couch's (1968) critique of older stereo­ deficits (Klapp 1969; Kornhauser 1959) and the ever; it is conceptually and empirically slippery. c~al movement activities because of problems or t~pes of collective behavior as emotional and irra­ dominance of organizational and political perspec­ How is it captured empirically or operationalized? dIlemmas they care about, and these events are tIonal. tives in the 1970s. But despite academic neglect, How can we probe for its presence or absence? often characterized by displays of emotion or at . Why the obvious neglect of emotion or affect there is always a very real connection between Collective identity is more than the aggregation of ~east a palpable sense of passion, anger, or solidar­ In recent studies of crowds and social movements? identity and movement participation. As Gamson corresponding individual identities, but how is that Ity. Such emotion and passion were evident in the Pro~~bly .the ultimate answer is the long-standing noted recently: difference grasped without rendering the concept tautological? Because of its empirical elusiveness, pro~democracy demonstrations in Beijing in the tradItIon I~ Western of treating reason Cleansed of its assumptions about a spoiled or it appears that scholars who find the idea of collec­ Spnng of 1989; in the throngs massing to celebrate and emotIOn as opposites. But the more proxi­ ersatz identity. there is a central insight that re­ tive identity tantalizing have opted for a conception the crumb~ing of the Berlin Wall in early Novem­ mate answer resides in two parallel occurrences: mains. Participation in social movements fre­ that highlights the kinds of shared commitments ber 19~9; In the outpouring of shock, dismay, and the ascendance of the resource mobilization and quently involves enlargement of personal identity and bonds of solidarity that give rise to a sense of anger In the wake of the Rodney King verdict in r~tional decision perspectives and the identifica­ for participants and offers fulfillment and realiza­ Los Angeles in May 1992; and in such ongoing "one-ness" or "we-ness." tIon of most scholars of collective action with the tion of self (1992. 56) CHAPTER 22 Social Movements and Collective Behavior 591 590 PART III Social Structure, Relationships, and the Individual NOTES ______60s movements. The result was a corresponding as to the array of behaviors with which they are tendency to impute heightened rationality to col­ often associated. The authors are indebted to Rob Benford, Bill Gamson, forging links between these aspects of movement reality Scott Hunt, Doug McAdam, Clark McPhail, and Ralph lective actors. This tendency notwithstanding, is now regarded as one of the important agendas for the Turner for their useful suggestions and comments. 1990s. more and more scholars today reject the dichotomy 1. Some readers might object to the conceptualization of 5. Drawing on the work of and of reason and action and would agree with Turner SUMMARY collective behavior as collective problem-solving activ­ William T. Powers, McPhail has developed a cybernetic and Killian: We have provided a working conceptualization of ity, yet an examination of virtually any collective behav­ model of coordination that entails individuals adjusting collective behavior, crowds, and social move­ ior reveals people engaging in joint action to deal with a their behavior to bring their perceptual signals in line ... the very distinctions themselves are difficult particular problem. Even in so-called panics, where indi­ ments, discussed the historic linkage between the with a reference signal (McPhail 1991; McPhail, Pow­ to make. Emotion and reason are not today re­ viduals are dealing with the perception of imminent ers, and Tucker 1992; McPhail and Tucker 1990). study of these social phenomena and social psy­ garded as irreconcilables. Emotion may ac­ danger, Johnson (1987a,1987b) finds that cooperative, 6. Space does not permit a comprehensive listing of the company the execution of a well-reasoned plan, chology, identified the five major social psycho­ coordinated behavior is typical. various mechanisms and hypotheses associated with this and the execution of an inadequately reasoned logical dimensions of crowds and social move­ 2. For discussion of the range of literature on crowd perspective, much less a detailed review treating their plan may be accompanied by no arousal of emo­ ments, and synthesized and critically assessed the phenomena and behavior in disaster situations, see Goode subtleties and complexities on their own terms, but over­ tions. (1987, 13) extensive literature relevant to these key social (1992), Turner and Killian (1987), and Dynes et al. (1987). views can be found in Zurcher and Snow (1981, 449- Moreover, emotion and cognition are often, and psychological dimensions. They include the mi­ 3. There has been a misguided tendency among re­ 4)4) and Turner and Killian (1987, 334--337). perhaps always, intimately linked. Emotion and crostructural and social relational dimension, the source mobilization and political opportunity theorists 1. Space does not permit a detailed review of the exten­ (e.g., McAdam 1982; McCarthy and Zald 1973; Morris sive literature on conversion; for comprehensive reviews emotional displays can be socially constructed and personality dimension and related social psycho­ logical processes, the socialization dimension, the 1984; Tilly 1978) to lump all pre-1965 work together as see Machalek and Snow (1993), Robbins (1988), and managed, as Zurcher (1982), among others, has the "collective behavior tradition," ignoring important Snow and Machalek (1984). amply demonstrated, and there is no necessary con­ cognitive dimension, and the affective or emo­ tional dimension. These social psychological di­ differences and distinctions among theories and thus 8. Most sociologists have misunderstood the logical im­ tradictory relationship between the study of emo­ missing important insights from past scholarship. Snow plication of Olson's argument about the "irrationality" mensions are relevant to all domains of social life, tion and rational choice perspectives. In fact, it is and Davis (1995) have attempted to correct this ten­ of collective action, which is not that collective action possible to have noninstrumentalist cost-benefit of course. But it is 'the way they operate, interact, dency in part by distinguishing among the "Harvard" never occurs-clearly a false empirical claim-but that decision models for what Turner and Killian (1987, and combine with structural and cultural factors in strain tradition, the "Michigan" resource mobilization when collective action occurs it must be either because 97-105) refer to as "expressive" crowd behavior each domain of social life that distinguishes one perspective, and the "Chicago" symbolic interactionist the participants are not rational actors or because they and what Rule (1988, 191, 196, pass.) calls "con­ domain from another. tradition. have additional individual motivations for action. summatory'; actions-actions that are ends in them­ We think our examination of the theorizing 4. In this same period, other scholars with more macro 9. For corresponding but more focused critiques of ra­ selves. Rule uses the example of African American and research pertinent to these dimensions not only. orientations were examining the variations and com­ tional choice perspectives on collective behavior and plexities of organizational forms and showing how social movements, see Ferree (1992), Fireman and Gam­ rioters' expressions of anger at white businesses demonstrates how social psychology has informed understanding of issues and questions central to the movements' organizational forms vary cross-nationally son (1979), and Turner (199Ib). and white police in the 1960s. In these cases, the and across time. By the late 1980s, however, most schol­ 10. For a number of useful and overlapping discussions benefit of the action is the consummatory pleasure study of crowds and social movements, but also indicates that the social psychology of this domain ars had abandoned the false dichotomy of micro verslis of this "new social movements" perspective, see Klan­ in the act itself, and the cost of the action is its macro, social psychology versus politics and organiza­ dermans (1986), Kriesi (1988a), Rucht (1988), and Tar­ of social life is alive and well. Indeed, we would consequences. There are also, obviously, mixed tion, and had come to see both as important. Indeed, row (1989b). cases, in which an action is both pleasurable as an agree with the former critic of social psychological perspectives on collective action, who has done an end in itself and a means to another end. REFERENCES The point is that cognitive perspectives, about-face and recently asserted that "many of the whether rational choice or social constructionist, major questions animating contemporary work on Aberle, David. 1966. The Peyote Religion Among the Asch, Solomon. 1952. Social Psychology. Englewood can inform understanding of the link between af­ social movements are intrinsically social psycho­ Navajo. Chicago: Aldine. Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. fect or emotion and crowd and social movement logical" (Gamson 1992, 54-55). While others Adorno, T., E. Frenkel-Brunswik, D. J. Levinson, and R. Aveni, Adrian. 1977. The not so-lonely-crowd: Friend­ dynamics, and vice versa. There are, then, only might take exception with this contention, there is N. Sanford. 1950. The Authoritarian Personality. ship groups in collective behavior. Sociometry 40: New York: Harper. 96-99. ideological reasons for not pursuing this linkage little question but that a full-bodied, thoroughgoing Aguirre, Benigno. 1984. Conventionalization of collec­ Barker, Eileen. 1984. The Making of a Moonie: Choice more vigorously. Clearly the time has come to heed understanding of the emergence, operation, and course and character of crowds and social move­ tive behavior in Cuba. American Journal of Sociol­ or ? Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Lofland's call and move forward on this front, ogy 90:541-566. Benford, Robert D. 1987. Framing Activity, Meaning, ments requires consideration of the social psycho­ bearing in mind the caveat that what Turner and Allport, Floyd H. 1924. Social Psychology. Boston: and Social Movement Participation: The Nuclear logical dimensions elaborated throughout this Killian (1987) have called the "illusion of homoge­ Houghton Mifflin. Disarmament Movement. Unpublished Ph.D. diss. neity" applies just as readily to emotional displays chapter. 592 PART III Social Structure, Relationships, and the Individual CHAPTER 22 Social Movements and Collective Behavior 593

Department of Sociology, University of Texas, Coleman, James S. 1990. Foundations of Social Theory. Fernandez, Roberto and Doug McAdam. 1988. Social Friedman, Debra, and Michael Hechter. 1988. The con­ Austin. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. networks and social movements: Multiorganiza­ tribution of rational choice theory to macrosoci­ --.1992. Social movements. Pp. 1880-1887 in En­ Coser, Lewis A. 1967. Greedy organizations. Archives tional fields and recruitment to Mississippi Free­ ological research. 6:201-216. cyclopedia of Sociology, vol. 4, ed. E. Borgatta and Europeenes de Sociologie 8:196-215. dom Summer. Sociological,Forum 3:357-382. Friedman, Debra, and Doug McAdam. 1992. Identity M. Borgatta. New York: Macmillan. Couch, Carl J. 1968. Collective behavior: An exami­ ---. 1989. Multiorganizational fields and recruit­ incentives and activism: Networks, choices, and ---. 1993a. Frame disputes within the nuclear disar­ nation of some . Social Problems 15: ment to social movements, Pp. 217-231 in Organ­ the life of a social movement. Pp. 156-173 in mament movement. Social Forces 71:677-70l. 310-322. izing for Change: Social Movement Organizations Frontiers in , ed. A. Mor­ --. 1993b. "You could be the hundredth monkey": Cress, Daniel M., and J. Miller McPherson. 1992. The in Europe and the United States, ed. B. Klander­ ris and C. Mueller. New Haven: Yale University Collective action frames and vocabularies of mo­ paradox of persistence and participation. Unpub­ mans. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Press. tive within the nuclear disarmament movement. So­ lished manuscript. Ferree, Myra Marx. 1992. The political context of ra­ Gamson, William A. 1968. Power and Discontent. ciological Quarterly 34: 195-216. Curtis, Russell L., Jr., and Benigno E. Aguirre, ed. 1993. tionality: Rational choice theory and resource mo­ Homewood, IL: Dorsey. Benford, Robert D., and Scott A. Hunt. 1992. Drama­ Collective Behavior and Social Movements. Bos­ bilization. Pp. 29-52 in F;r.ontiers in Social Move­ ---. 1988. Political discourse and collective ac­ turgy and social movements: The social construc­ ton: Allyn and Bacon. ment Theory, ed. A. Morris and C. Mueller. New tion. International Social Movement Research 1: tion and communication of power. Sociological In­ Davies, James C. 1969. The J-curve ofrising and declin­ Haven: Yale University Press. 219-244. quiry 62:36-55. ing satisfaction as a cause of some great revolutions Ferree, My~a Mad; and Frederick D. Miller. 1985. Mo­ --. [1975] 1990. The Strategy of Social Protest. Bengston, L. 1970. The generation gap: A review and and a contained . Pp. 690-730 in Violence bilization and meaning: Toward an integration of Homewood, IL: Dorsey. typology of social psychological perspectives. in America: Historical and Comparative Perspec­ social psychological and resource perspectives on --. 1992. The social psychology of collective ac­ Youth and Society 25:7-32. tives, ed. Hugh David Graham and Ted Robert social movements. Sociological Inquiry 55:38-61. tion. Pp. 53-76 in Frontiers of Social Movement Berk, Richard. 1974. A gaming approach to crowd be­ Gurr. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Feuer, Lewis S. 1969. The Conflict of Generations. New Theory, ed. A. Morris and C. Mueller. New Haven: havior. American Sociological Review 39:355-373. Office. York: Basic Books. Yale University Press. Berk, Richard, and Howard Aldrich. 1972. Patterns of DeMartini, Joseph R. 1983. Social movement participa­ Fine, Gary Alan, and Randy Stoecker. 1985. Can the Gamson, William A., Bruce Fireman, and Steven vandalism during civil disorders as an indicator of tion: Political socialization, generational con­ circle be unbroken: Small groups and social move­ Rytina. 1982. Encounters with Unjust Authority. selection of targets. American Sociological Review sciousness and lasting effects. Youth and Society ments. Advances in Group Processes 2:1-28. Homewood, IL: Dorsey. 37:533-547. 15:195-233. Finkel, Steven E., Edward Muller, and Karl-Dieter Gamson, William A., and Andre Modigliani. 1989. Bird, Frederick, and William Reimer. 1982. Participa­ Demerath, N. J. III, Gerald Marwell, and Michael T. Opp. 1989. Personal influence, collective rational­ Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear tion rates in new religious movements and para-re­ Aiken. 1971. Dynamics ofIdealism: White Activists ity, and mass political action. American Political power: A constructionist approach. American Jour­ ligious movements. Journalfor the Scientific Study in a Black Movement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Science Review 83:885-903. nal of Sociology 95:1-37. of Religion 21:1-14. Diener, Edward. 1980. Deindividuation: The absence of Finkel, Steven E., and James B. Rule. 1986. Relative Gecas, Viktor. 1981. Contexts of socialization. Blumer, Herbert. 1939. Collective behavior. pp. 219-288 self-awareness and self-regulation in group mem­ deprivation and related psychological theories of Pp. 165-199 in Social Psychology: Sociological in Principles of Sociology, ed. R E. Park. New bers. Pp. 209-244 in Psychology of Group Influ­ civil violence: A critical review. Pp. 47-69 in So­ Perspectives, ed. M. Rosenberg and R. H. Turner. York: Barnes & Noble. ence, ed. P. Paulus. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. cial Movements, Social Conflicts, and Change, vol. New York: Basic Books. Broadbent, Jeffrey. 1986. The ties that bind: Social fab­ Dollard, John, Leonard Doob, Neal Miller, Herbert 9, ed. K. Lang and G. Lang. Greenwich, CT: JAI --. 1992. Socialization. pp. 1863-1872 in Encyclo­ ric and the mobilization of environmental move­ Mowrer, and Robert Sears. 1939. Frustration and Press. pedia of Sociology, ed. E. Borgatta and M. Bor­ ments in Japan. International Journal of Mass Aggression. New Haven: Yale University Press. Fireman, Bruce, and William A. Gamson. 1979. Utilitar­ gatta. New York: Macmillan. Emergencies and Disasters 4:227-253. Dynes, Russell R 1970. Organized Behavior in Disas­ ian logic in the resource mobilization perspective. Gerhards, Jurgen, and Dieter Rucht. 1992. Meso­ Bryan, Marguerite. 1979. The social psychology of riot ter. Lexington, MA: DC Heath. Pp. 8-45 in The Dynamics of Social Movements, mobilization: Organizing and framing in two pro­ participation. Research in Race and Ethnic Rela­ Dynes, Russell R., Bruna DeMarchi, and Carlo Pelanda, ed. M. Zald and J. McCarthy. Cambridge, MA: test campaigns in West Germany. American Jour­ tions 1:169-187. ed. 1987. Sociology of Disasters: Contribution of Winthrop. nal of Sociology 98:555-596. Bush, Diane Mitsch, and Roberta G. Simmons. 1981. Sociology to Disaster Research. Milan: Franco Fiacks, Richard. 1967. The liberated generation: an ex­ Gerlach, Luther, and Virginia Hine. 1970. People, Socialization processes over the life course. Pp. Angeli. ploration of the roots of student protest. Journal of Power and Change: Movements of Social Trans­ 133-164 in Social Psychology: Sociological Per­ Evans, Sara M., and Harry C. Boyte. 1986. Free Spaces: Social Issues 23:52-74. formation. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill. spectives, ed. M. Rosenberg and R. H. Turner. New The Sources of Democratic Change in America. Forward, J. R, and J. R Williams. 1970. Internal-exter­ Geschwender, James A. 1967. Continuities in theories York: Basic Books. New York: Harper & Row. nal control and black militancy. Journal of Social of status consistency and cognitive dissonance. So­ Carden, Maren L. 1978. The proliferation of a social Fantasia, Rick. 1988. Cultures of Solidarity: Conscious­ Issues 26:75-92. cial Forces 46:160-171. movement. pp. 179-196 in Research in Social ness, Action, and Contemporary American Work­ Freeman, Jo. 1973. The origins of the women's libera­ Gitlin, Todd. 1980. The Whole World Is Watching. Movements, Conflict and Change, vol. 1, ed. L. ers. Berkeley: University of California Press. tion movement. American Journal of Sociology 78: Berkeley: University of California Press. Kriesberg. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Fendrich, James, and Kenneth Lovoy. 1988. Back to 192-811. Goffman, Erving. 1974. Frame Analysis. New York: Cohen, Jean L. 1985. Strategy or identity: New theoreti­ the future: Adult political behavior of former stu­ Freud, Sigmund. 1921. Group Psychology and AnalYSis Harper. cal and contemporary social move­ dent activists. American Sociological Review 53: of the Ego. London: International Psychoanalytical Goode, Erich. 1992. Collective Behavior. New York: ments. 52:663-716. 780-784. Press. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. 594 PART III Social Structure, Relationships, and the Individual CHAPTER 22 Social Movements and Collective Behavior 595

Gould, Roger V. 1991. Multiple networks and mobiliza­ Jenkins, J. Craig. 1983. Resource mobilization theory Klapp, Orrin. 1969. Collective Search for Identity. New at the Annual Meetings of American Sociological and the study of social movements. Annual Review tion in the Paris commune, 1871. American Socio­ York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Association. of Sociology 9:527-553. logical Review 56:716-729. Knoke, David. 1988. Incentives in collective action or­ Marwell, Gerald, and Pamela Oliver. 1984. Collective ---. 1993. Trade cohesion, class unity, and urban Johnson, Norris R. 1987,£1. Panic and the breakdown of ganizations. American Sociological Review 53: action theory and social movements research. Pp. insurrection: Artisanal activisim in the Paris com­ : Popular myth, social theory, empirical 311-329. 1-27 in Research in Social Movements, Conflicts mune. American Journal of Sociology 98:721-754. evidence. Sociological Focus 20:171-183. Knopf, Terry Ann. 1975. Rumors, Race and Riots. New and Change, ed. L. Kriesberg. Greenwich, CT: JAI --. 1987b. Panic at "The Who concert stam­ Granovetter, Mark. 1978. Threshold models of collec­ Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. Press. tive behavior. American Journal of Sociology 83: pede": An empirical assessment. Social Problems 34: Kornhauser, William. 1959. The Politics of Mass Soci­ ---. 1993. The Critical Mass in Collective Action: A 362-373. 1420--1443. ety. New York: Free Press. Micro-Social Theory. New York: Cambridge Uni­ Johnston, Hank. 1991. Tales of : Catalonia, Gurney, J. N., and K. T. Tierney. 1982. Relative depri­ Kriesi, Hanspeter. 1988a. The interdependence of struc­ versity Press. 1939-1979. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Univer­ vation and social movements: A critical look at ture and action: Some reflections on the state of the Marwell, Gerald, Pamela Oliver, and Ralph Prahl. 1988. twenty years of theory and research. Sociological sity Press. art. International Social Movement Research 1: Social networks and collective action: A theory of Kane, Emily. 1992. Race, gender, and attitudes toward Quarterly 23:33-47. 349-368. the critical mass, III. American Journal of Sociol­ gender stratification. Social Psychology Quarterly Gurr, Ted. 1970. Why Men Rebel. Princeton: Princeton --. 1988b. Local mobilization for the people's so­ ogy 94:502-'534. (erratum in no. 4). 55:311-320. University Press. cial petition of the Dutch peace movement. Inter­ Marx, Gary T., and James L. Wood. 1975. Strands of Gusfield, Joseph R. 1963. Symbolic Crusade: Status Kanter, Rosabeth M. 1968. Commitment and social or­ national Social Movement Research 1:41-81. theory and research in collective behavior. Annual ganization: A study of commitment mechanisms in Politics and the American Temperance Movement. Lang, Kurt, and Gladys Engel Lang. 1961. Collective Review of Sociology 1 :363-428. utopian communities. American Sociological Re­ Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Dynamics. New York: Crowell. McAdam, Doug. 1982. Political Process and the Devel­ Haimson, Leopold. 1964. The problem of social stability view 33:499-517. Le Bon, Gustave. [1895] 1960. The Crowd: A Study of opment of Black Insurgency: 1930-1970. Chicago: ---. 1972. Commitment and Community: Com­ in urban Russia, 1905-1917, part one. Slavic Re­ the Popular Mind. New York: Viking. University of Chicago Press. munes and Utopias in Sociological Perspective. view 23:619-642. Lofland, John. 1968. The youth ghetto. Journal of ---. 1986. Recruitment to high-risk activism: The Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Hall, John R. 1988. Social organization and pathways of Higher Education 39:121-143. case of Freedom Summer. American Journal of Keniston, Kenneth. 1968. Young Radicals. New York: commitment: Types of communal groups, rational --. 1981. Collective behavior: The elementary Sociology 92:64-90. choice theory, and the Kanter thesis. American So­ Harcourt, Brace & World. forms. Pp. 378-446 in Social Psychology: Socio­ ---. 1988. Freedom Summer. Oxford University Press. Kerckhoff, Alan c., Kurt W. Back, and Norman Miller. ciological Review 53:679-692. logical Perspectives, ed. M. Rosenberg ,and R. H. ---. 1989. The biographical consequences of activ- Hardin, Russell. 1982. Collective Action. Baltimore: 1965. Sociometric patterns in . Turner. New York: Basic Books. ism. American Sociological Review 54:744-760. Sociometry 28:2-15. John Hopkins University Press. --. 1985. Protest: Studies of Collective Behavior McAdam, Doug, John McCarthy, and Mayer Zald. 1988. Hechter, MichaeL 1987. Principles of Group Solidarity. Kerner, Otto, et al. 1969. Report of the National Advi­ and Social Movements. New Brunswick, NJ: Social movements. pp. 695-737 in The Handbook sory Commission on Civil Disorders. New York: Berkeley: University of California Press. Transaction. of Sociology, ed. Neil Smelser. Newbury Park, CA: Hechter, Michael, Debra Friedman, and MaIka Apple­ Bantam Books. Lofland, John, and Rodney Stark. 1965. Becoming a Sage. baum. 1982. A theory of ethnic collective action. Killian, Lewis M. 1980. Theory of collective behavior: world saver: A theory of religious conversion. McCarthy John D., and Mayer Zald. 1973. The Trend of The mainstream revisited. Pp. 275-289 in Socio­ Internal Migration Review 16:412-434. American SOCiological Review 30:862-874. Social Movements in America. Morristown, NJ: logical Theory and Research, ed. H. Blalock. New Heckathorn, Douglas. 1990. Collective sanctions and MacCannell, Dean. 1973. Nonviolent action as theater. General Learning Press. compliance norms: A formal theory of group-medi­ York: Free Press. Nonviolent Action Research Project, monograph ---. 1977. Resource mobilization and social ated social control. American Sociological Review ---. 1984. Organization, rationality and spontaneity series no. 10, Haverford College Center for Non­ movements. American Journal of Sociology 82: 55:366-384. in the civil rights movement. American Sociologi­ violent Conflict Resolution. Haverford, P A. 1212-1242. cal Review 49:770-783. Hirsch, Eric L. 1990. Sacrifice for the cause: Group Machalek, Richard, and David A. Snow. 1993. Conver­ McPhail, Clark. 1971. Civil disorder participation. Klandermans, Bert. 1984. Mobilization and participa­ processes, recruitment, and commitment in a stu­ sion to new religious movements. Pp. 53-74 in Re­ American Sociological Review 36:1058-72. dent social movement. American Sociological Re­ tion. American Sociological Review 49:583-600. ligion and the Social Order, v. 38, ed. D. Bromley --. 1991. The Myth of the Madding Crowd. New ---. 1986. New social movements and resource mo­ view 55:243-254. and J. Hadden. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. York: Aldine de Gruyter. _ Hoffer, Eric. 1951. The True Believer. New York: Har­ bilization: The European and the American ap­ Macy, Michael. 1990. Learning theory and the logic of McPhail, Clark, and David L. Miller. 1973. The assem­ proach. International Journal ofMass Emergencies per & Row. the critical mass. American Sociological Review bling process: A theoretical and empirical investi­ Hunt, Scott A. 1991. Constructing collective identity in and Disasters 4:13-37. 55:809-826. gation. American Sociological Review 38:721-735. ---. 1988. The formation and mobilization of con­ a peace movement organization. Unpublished Marwell, Gerald, M. T. Aiken, and N. J. Demerath III. McPhail, Clark, William T. Powers, and Charles W. sensus. International Social Movement Research Ph.D. diss. Department of Sociology, University of 1987. The persistence of political attitudes among Tucker. 1992. Simulating purposive individual and 1:173-196. Nebraska, Lincoln. 1960's civil rights activists. Public Opinion Quar­ collective action. Social Science Computer Review Isaac, Larry, Elizabeth Mutran, and Sheldon Stryker. Klandermans, Bert, and Dirk Oegema. 1987. Potentials, terly 51:383-399. 10:1-28. networks, motivations and barriers: Steps toward 1980. Political protest orientations among black Marwell, Gerald, N. J. Demarath III, and Zena O'Leary. McPhail, Clark, and Charles W. Tucker. 1990. Pur­ participation in social movements. American So­ and white adults. American Sociological Review 1990. Trajectories of activism: 1960's civil rights posive collective action. American Behavioral Sci­ 45:191-213. ciological Review 52:519-532. workers from their 20s to their 40s. Paper presented entist 34:81-94. CHAPTER 22 Social Movements and Collective Behavior 597 596 PART III Social Structure, Relationships, and the Individual

1984. If you don't do it, nobody else will: Quarantelli, E. L., and Russell Dynes. 1968. Looting in Singer, Benjamin D. 1970. Mass media and communi­ McPhail, Clark, and Ronald Wohlstein. 1983. Individual Active and token contributors to local collective civil disorders: An index of social change. Pp. 131- cation process in the Detroit Riot of 1967. Public and collective behavior within gatherings, demon­ action. American Sociological Review 49:601-610. 141 in Riots and Rebellion, ed. L. Masotti and D. Opinion Quarterly 34:236-245. strations, and riots. Annual Review of Sociology __ . 1989. Bringing the crowd back in: The nonor­ Bowen. Beverly Hills: Sage. Smelser, Neil. 1963. Theory of Collective Behavior. 9:579-600. ganizational elements of social movements. pp. 1-30 --. 1970" Property norms and looting. Phylon New York: Free Press. Melucci, Alberto. 1985. The symbolic challenge of con­ 31:168-182. Snow, David A 1987. Organization, ideology, and mo­ temporary movements. Social Research 52:789-816. in Research in Social Movements, Conflict and Change, vol 11, ed. L. Kriesberg. Greenwich, CT: Robbins; Thomas. 1988. Cults, Converts and Charisma. bilization: The case of Nichiren Shoshu of Amer­ __ . 1988. Getting involved: Identity and mobiliza­ Newbury Park, CA: Sage. ica. Pp. 153-172 in The Future of New Religious tion in social movements. International Social JAI Press. Oliver, Pamela, and Mark Furman. 1989. Contradictions Rochford, E. Burke, Jr., 1982. Recruitment strategies, Movements, ed. D. Bromley and P. Hammond. Ma­ Movement Research 1:329-348. between national and local organizational strength: ideology, and organization in the Hare Krishna con, GA: Mercer University Press. --. 1989. Nomads of the Present: Social Move­ The case of the John Birch Society. International movement. Social Problems 29:399-410. Snow, David A, and Leon Anderson. 1985. Field meth­ ments and Individual Needs in Contemporary Rosenthal, Naomi, M. Fingrutd, M. Ethier, R. Karant, ods and conceptual advances in crowd research. Society. Edited by John Keane and Paul Mier. Social Movement Research 2:155-177. Oliver, Pamela, and Gerald Marwell. 1988. The paradox and D. McDonald. 1985. Social movements in net­ Paper presented at Conference on Research Meth­ Philadelphia: Temple University Press. of group size in collective action. American Socio­ work analysis: A case of nineteenth century wo­ ods in Collective Behavior and Social Movements Miller, Neal, and John Dollard. 1941. Social Learn­ men's reform in New York State. American Jour­ Research, Bowling Green State University. ing and Imitation. New Haven: Yale University logical Review 53: 1-8. --. 1992. Mobilizing technologies for collective nal of Sociology 90: 1022-1054. Snow, David A., and Robert Benford. 1988. Ideology, Press. action. In Frontiers in Social Movements Theory, Ross, G. Alexander. 1978. Organizational innovation in frame resonance, and participant mobilization. In­ Mooney, Patrick H. 1990. The ideological constitution ed. C. Mueller and A Morris. New Haven: Yale disaster settings. Pp. 215-232 in Disasters: Theory ternational Social Movement Research 1:197-217. of agrarian social movements in the United States. and Research, ed. E. L. Quarantelli. Beverly Hills: --. 1992. Master frames and cycles of protest. Pp. Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the University Press. Oliver, Pamela, Gerald Marwell, and Ruy Teixeira. 1985. Sage. 133-155 in Frontiers of Social Movement Theory, European Society for . A theory of the critical mass, I: Interdependence, Rucht, Dieter. 1988. Themes, logics, and arenas of so­ ed. A Morris and C. Mueller. New Haven: Yale Morris, Aldon. 1981. Black southern sit-in movement: group heterogeneity, and the production of collective cial movements: A structural approach. Interna­ University Press An analysis of internal organization. American So­ action. American Journal of Sociology 91:522-556. tional Social Movement Research 1:305-328. Snow, David A, and Phillip Davis. 1995. The Chicago ciological Review 46:744-767. Olson, Mancur. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action: Rule, James B. 1988. Theories of Civil Violence. approach to collective behavior. In The Second --. 1984. The Origins of the Civil Rights Move­ Berkeley: University of California Press. Chicago School of Sociology, ed. Gary Fine. Chi­ ment: Black Communities Organizing for Change. Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cam­ bridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Rupp, Leila J., and Verta Taylor. 1987. Survival in the cago: University of Chicago Press. New York: Free Press. Doldrums: The American Women's Rights Move­ Snow, David A, and Richard Machalek. 1983. The con­ Moscovici, Serge. 1985. The Age of the Crowd. Trans­ Opp, Karl-Dieter. 1988. Grievances and participation in social movements. American Sociological Review ment, 1945 to the 1960s. New York: Oxford Uni­ vert as a social type. Pp. 259-289 in Sociological lated by J. C. Whitehouse. Cambridge, UK: Cam­ versity Press. Theory 1983. ed. Randall Collins. San Francisco: bridge University Press. 53:853-864. --. 1989. The Rationality of Political Protest: A Rush, G. B. 1967. Status consistency and right wing Jossey-Bass. Muller, Edward N., 1980. The psychology of political extremism. American Sociological Review 32: ---. 1984. The sociology of conversion. Annual Re­ protest and violence. Pp. 69-99 in Handbook of Comparative Analysis of Rational Choice Theory. In 86-92. view of Sociology 10:167-190. Political Conflict, ed. T. R. Gurr. New York: Free collaboration with Peter and Petra Hartmann. Boulder: Westview. Seeman, Melvin. 1975. Alienation studies. Annual Re­ Snow, David A, and Ronelle Paulsen. 1992. Crowds Press. Paige, Jeffrey M. 1971. Political orientation and riot view of Sociology 1:91-123. and riots. Pp. 395-402 in The Encyclopedia of So­ Muller, Edward N., and Karl-Dieter Opp. 1986. Rational --. 1981. Intergroup relations. Pp. 378-410 in ciology, ed. Edgar Borgatta and Maria Borgatta. choice and rebellious collective action. American participation. American Sociological Review 36: 810-820. Social Psychology: Sociological Perspectives, New York: Macmillan. Political Science Review 80:471-487. ed. M. Rosenberg and R. Turner. New York: Basic Snow, David A, E. Burke Rochford, Jr., Steven K. Muller, Edward N., Henry A Dietz, and Steven E. Park, Robert E., and Ernest W. Burgess. 1921. Introduc­ tion to the Science of Sociology. Chicago: Univer­ Books. Worden, and Robert D. Benford. 1986. Frame Finkel. 1991. Discontent and the expected utility of Shelly, Robert K., Leon Anderson, and Christine Mat­ alignment processes, micromobilization and move­ rebellion: The case of Peru. American Political sity of Chicago Press. Petras, James, and Maurice Zeitlin. 1967. Miners and tley. 1992. Assembly processes in a periodic gath­ ment participation. American Sociological Review Sciene Review 85:1261-1282. agrarian radicalism. American Sociological Review ering: Halloween in Athens, Ohio. Sociological 51 :464-481. Oberschall, Anthony. 1973. Social Conflicts and Social Snow, David, Louis A Zurcher, Jr., and Sheldon Ek­ 32:578-586. Focus 25:139-150. Movements. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Sherif, Muzafer, and O. J. Harvey. 1952. A study in ego land-Olson. 1980. Social networks and social Oliver, Pamela E. 1980. Rewards and punishments as Pizzorno, Alesandro. 1978. Political exchange and col­ lective identity in industrial conflict. Pp. 277-298 functioning: The elimination of stable anchorages movements: A microstructural approach to differ­ selective incentives for collective action: Theoreti­ in individual and group situations. Sociometry 15: ential recruitment. American Sociological Review cal investigations. American Journal of Sociology in The Resurgence of Class Conflict in Western Europe since 1968, ed. C. Crouch and A. Pizzorno. 272-305. 45:787-801. 84:1356-1375. Sherkat, Darren E., and T. Jean Blocker. 1992. The Snow, David A, Louis A Zurcher, Jr., and Robert Pe­ __ . 1983. Paid and volunteer activists in neighbor­ London: Macmillan. Portes, Alejandro. 1971. Political primitivism, differ­ development and trajectory of sixties activists. Pa­ ters. 1981. Victory celebrations as theater: A hood organizations. Pp, 133-170 in Research in per presented at the American Sociological Asso­ dramaturgical approach to crowd behavior. Sym­ Social Movements, Conflict and Change, vol. 5, ed. ential socialization and lower-class radicalism American Sociological Review 36:820-835. ciation. bolic Interaction 4:21-42. L. Kriesberg. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Ii 598 PART III Social Structure, Relationships, and the Individual CHAPTER 22 Social Movements and Collective Behavior 599

Snyder, David, and Charles Tilly. 1972. Hardship and ---. 1981. Collective behavior and resource mobili­ White, Robert W. 1989. From peaceful protest to guer­ Zald, Mayer N., and John D. McCarthy. 1987. Social collective violence in France, 1830-1960. Ameri­ zation as approaches to social movements: Issues illa war: Micromobilization of the provisional Irish Movements in an Organizational Society. New can Sociological Review 37:520-532. and discontinuities. Pp. 1-24 in Research in Social Republican Army. American Journal of Sociology Brunswick: Transaction. Spilerman, Seymour. 1970. The causes of racial distur­ Movements, Conflict and Change, ed. L. Kriesberg. 94: 1277-1302. Zimbardo, Phillip. 1969. Individuation, reason and or­ bances: A comparison of alternative explanations. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Wilson, James Q. 1973. Political Organizations. New der vs. de individuation, , and chaos. In Ne­ American Sociological Review 35:627-649. --. 1983. Figure and ground in the analysis of York: Basic Books. braska Symposium on Motivation, vol. 17, ed. Stark, R., and W. S. Bainbridge. 1980. Networks of faith: contemporary social movements. Symbolic Interac­ Wilson, John. 1973. Introduction to Social Movements. W. J. Arnold and D. Levine. Lincoln: University of Interpersonal bonds and recruitment to cults and tion 6:175-181. New York: Basic Books. Nebraska Press. sects. American Journal of Sociology 85: 1376--395. --. 1991a. Reading Melucci: The dynamics of col­ Wiltfang, Greg, and Doug McAdam. 1991. Distinguish­ Zurcher, Louis A. 1968. Sociological functions of Stryker, Sheldon. 1980. Symbolic Interactionism: A So­ lective identity. Paper presented at the Annual ing cost and risk in sanctuary activism. Social ephemeral roles: A disaster work crew. Or­ cial Structural Version. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin Meetings of the Pacific Sociological Association. Forces 69:987-1010. ganization 27:281-297. Cummings. ---. 1991b. The use and misuse of rational models Wood, James L., and Wing-Cheung Ng. 1980. Sociali­ --. 1982. The staging of emotion: A dramaturgical Tarde, Gabriel. 1890. The Laws of Imitation. New York: in collective behavior and social psychology. Ar­ zation and student activism: Examination of a rela­ analysis. Symbolic Interaction 5: 1-19. Holt. chives of European Sociology 32:84-108. tionship. Pp. 21-44 in Research in Social Move­ Zurcher, Louis A., and R. G. Kirkpatrick. 1976. Citizens Tarrow, Sidney. 1989a. Democracy and Disorder: Pro­ Turner, Ralph H., and Lewis Killian. [1957, 1972]1987 ments, Conflicts and Change, ed. L. Kriesberg. for Decency: Anti-Pornography Crusade as Status test and Politics in Italy 1965-1975. Oxford, UK: Collective Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Protest. Austin: University of Texas Press. Clarendon Press. Hall. Wood, Michael, and Michael Hughes. 1984. The moral Zurcher, Louis A., and David A. Snow. 1981. Collective --. 1989b. Struggle, Politics, and Reform: Collec­ Useem, Bert. 1980. Solidarity model, breakdown model, basis of moral reform. American Sociological Re­ behavior: Social movements. Pp. 447-482 in So­ tive Action, Social Movements, and Cycles of Pro­ and the Boston anti-busing movement. American view 49:86--99. cial Psychology: Sociological Perspectives, ed. test. Ithaca NY: Center for International Studies, Sociological Review 45:357-369. Wright, Sam. 1978. Crowds and Riots: A Study in Social M. Rosenberg and R. Turner. New York: Basic ---. 1985. Disorganization and the New Mexico Cornell University. Organization. Beverly Hills: Sage. Books. ---. 1992. Mentalities, political cultures, and collec­ prison riot of 1980. American Sociological Review Zald, Mayer N., and Roberta Ash. 1966. Social move­ tive action frames: Construction meanings through 50:677-688. ment organizations: Growth, decay and change. So­ action. Pp. 174-202 in Frontiers in Social Move­ Useem, Bert, and Peter Kimball. 1989. States of Siege: cial Forces 44:327-341. ment Theory, ed. A. Morris and C. Mueller. New U.S. Prison Riots 1971-1986. New York: Oxford Haven: Yale University Press. University Press. Taylor, Verta. 1989. Social movement continuity: The Van der Veen, Gerrita, and Bert Klandermans. 1989. women's movement in abeyance. American Socio­ "Exit" behavior in social movement organizations. logical Review 54:761-775. International Social Movement Research 2: 179-198. Taylor, Verta, and Nancy Whittier. 1992. Collective Walsh, Edward, and Rex Warland. 1983. Social move­ identity in social movement communities: Lesbian ment involvement in the wake of a nuclear acci­ feminist mobilization. Pp. 104-129 in Frontiers in dent: Activists and free riders in the TMI area. Social Movements Theory, ed. A. Morris and C. American Sociological Review 48:764-780. Mueller. New Haven: Yale University Press. Weigert, Andrew J., J. Smith Teitge, and Dennis W. Teitge. Tilly, Charles. 1978. From Mobilization to Revolution. 1986. Society and Identity: Toward a Sociological Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Psychology. London: Cambridge University Press. Tilly, Charles, Louise Tilly, and Richard Tilly. 1975. Weller, Jack M., and E. L. Quarantelli. 1973. Neglected The Rebellious Century, 1830-1930. Cambridge, characteristics of collective behavi()r. American MA: Harvard University Press. Journal of Sociology 79:665-685. Toch, Hans. 1965. The Social Psychology of Social Werner, Paul. 1978. Personality and attitude-activism Movements. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill. correspondence. Journal of Personality and Social Touraine, Alain. 1981. The Voice and the Eye: An Ana­ Psychology 36:1375-1390. lysis of Social Movements. Cambridge, UK: Cam­ Westby, David L., and Richard G. Braungart. 1966. bridge University Press. Class and politics in the family backgrounds of Turner, Ralph H. 1964. Collective behavior. Pp. 382- student political activists. American Sociological 425 in Handbook of Modern Sociology, ed. Robert Review 31 :690-692. L. Faris. Chicago: Rand McNally. Whalen, Jack, and Richard Flacks. 1989. Beyond the ---. 1969. The theme of contemporary social move­ Barricades: The Sixties Generation Grows Up. ments. British Journal of Sociology 20:390-405. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.