nach oben

Political Behavior

Erschienen in:

17.01.2019 | Original Paper

Contentious Activities, Disrespectful Protesters: Effect of Protest Context on Protest Support and Mobilization Across Ideology and Authoritarianism

verfasst von: Raynee Sarah Gutting

Erschienen in: Political Behavior | Ausgabe 3/2020

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Protest is a tool more often wielded by the political left than right. Somewhat surprisingly, there has been little careful investigation of this asymmetry to date. I show that by examining how the protest context interacts with individual-level differences in ideology and authoritarianism, we gain insight into the protest asymmetry and the dynamics of public protest support and mobilization potential. Using an experimental design, I find that contentious protests and protesters that are disrespectful of police reduce public support, and that liberals and conservatives, and nonauthoritarians and authoritarians, are affected by the protest context in different ways. In my study, conservatives were found to be less supportive than liberals of protests that were disrespectful of police and were demobilized by violent protests. For authoritarians, however, violence did not decrease their support or mobilization. Rather, what decreased support and mobilization among authoritarians were protests that were disrespectful of authorities.

Vorheriger Artikel Economic Segregation and Unequal Policy Responsiveness

Nächster Artikel Resistance to Position Change, Motivated Reasoning, and Polarization

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

See Opp et al. (1995) for their broader theory, which includes party identification and selective incentives. Also see Dalton et al. (2010) for a similar point about the role of party id and political history.

This means that protest is not inherently a liberal or conservative phenomenon, according to Opp et al. (1995), but one in which the meanings and experiences associated with particular ideologies affect individual protest participation.

My results described below hold when controlling for beliefs about the effectiveness of protest and past participation in a variety of actions, including protest.

This is similar to Leeuwen et al. (2015) concept of “atmosphere”—“the affective state that people attribute to the idiosyncratic features of a demonstration” (p. 84). Important to these perceptions are interactions with others, especially interactions between police and demonstrators.

See the online Appendix for the geographic distribution of study participants.

Replication data and Stata syntax files for this project can be found on Dataverse at https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/COZN1F.

To my knowledge, no observational dataset is available that would allow me to test my hypotheses.

During the first launch of the study on Mturk there was a mistake in setting the restriction to U.S. workers only, which is how some non-U.S. workers snuck in. The mistake was detected early and rectified immediately.

Participants could not advance past the article until it had been displayed on screen for at least 20 s.

Using Pew Research Center Polling results, these issues were identified as being the most polarized across partisanship in terms of the importance that Democrats and Republicans assigned to these issues. A table summarizing these poll results can be found in the Online Appendix.

Full article wording for the anti-immigration conditions can be found in the Online Appendix.

Note: The issues themselves were not used in random assignment.

Full results in terms of which issues were chosen as most important can be found in the Online Appendix.

Mean levels of authoritarianism using the American National Election studies range from 0.60 in the 2004 ANES to 0.62 in the 2000 and 2012 ANES.

Random assignments checks can be found in the Online Appendix. Results show that random assignment effectively created equivalent groups in terms of gender, race, age, income, ideology, and authoritarianism.

For the proceeding analyses, I pool all the samples and use the combined data, as there were too few conservatives in the student and blog samples to make meaningful comparisons using those samples alone.

Because of the inclusion of the interaction term, the coefficients for each manipulated factor are interpreted as the average difference in peacefulness or respectfulness ratings for each manipulation when the other treatment factor is held at 0.

Figure A2 in the Online Appendix plots these results for ease of comparison.

The following results hold when controlling for a variety of other factors, including issue attitudes, beliefs that protest is an effective political activity, and past political behavior. Results also hold when using ordered probit regression, but for ease of interpretation and presentation, OLS results are presented.

These results are substantively unchanged when looking across individual samples or when dummies for the different samples are included. Mean levels of protest support and protest intentions by experimental condition, including the full and individual samples, are presented in the Appendix. Across all samples, the same pattern of experimental effects emerges.

Results that include dummy variables for each of the conditions and their interactions with ideology and authoritarianism can be found in the Online Appendix. The results are substantively the same and those reported in the main text.

It is important to note that the differences emerged on the conservative end of the spectrum. Liberals were not mobilized by these conditions—the movement was among conservatives who were demobilized by violence above and beyond their relative disinclination towards protest.

See Lipset (1959); Lipset and Raab (1978); Hofstadter (1967); Duncan and Stewart (1995); Duncan 1999; Duncan et al. 1997; Duncan et al. (2010) for work that attempts to examine authoritarians’ political activism.

Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. Oxford: Harpers.

Altemeyer, B. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press.

Altemeyer, B. (1988). Enemies of freedom. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press.

Amodio, D. M., Jost, J. T., Master, S. L., & Yee, C. M. (2007). Neurocognitive correlates of liberalism and conservatism. Nature Neuroscience, 10(10), 1246–1247.

Anderson, C. J., & Mendes, S. M. (2005). Learning to lose: Election outcomes, democratic experience and political protest potential. British Journal of Political Science, 36(1), 91–111.

Benjamin, A. J. (2006). The relationship between right-wing authoritarianism and attitudes toward violence: Further validation of the Attitudes Toward Violence Scale. Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 34(8), 923–926.

Berinsky, A. J., Huber, G. A., & Lenz, G. S. (2012). Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon. com’s Mechanical Turk. Political Analysis, 20(3), 351–368.

Brandstätter, H., & Opp, K. (2014). Personality traits (“Big Five”) and the propensity to political protest: Alternative models. Political Psychology, 35(4), 515–537.

Buechler, S. M. (2000). Social movements in advanced capitalism. New York: Oxford University Press.

Butler, J. C. (2000). Personality and emotional correlates of right-wing authoritarianism. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 28(1), 1–14.

Carney, D. R., Jost, J. T., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2008). The secret lives of liberals and conservatives: Personality profiles, interaction styles, and the things they leave behind.”. Political Psychology, 29(6), 807–840.

Cassese, E. C., Huddy, L., Hartman, T. K., Mason, L., & Weber, C. R. (2013). Socially mediated internet surveys: Recruiting participants for online experiments. PS: Political Science & Politics, 46(4), 775–784.

Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In David Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent. New York: Free Press.

Conover, P. J., & Feldman, S. (1981). The origins and meaning of liberal/conservative self- identifications. American Journal of Political Science, 25, 617–645.

Dalton, R. (2002). Citizen politics: Public opinion and political parties in advanced industrial democracies (3rd ed.). London: Chatham House Publishers.

Dalton, R. (2013). Citizen politics: Public opinion and political parties in advanced industrial democracies. Washington, DC: Cq Press.

Dalton, R., Van Sickle, A., & Weldon, S. (2010). The individual–institutional nexus of protest behaviour. British Journal of Political Science, 40(1), 51–73.

Doty, R. M., Peterson, B. E., & Winter, D. (1991). Threat and authoritarianism in the United States, 1978–1987. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(4), 629–640.

Duckitt, J. (1989). Authoritarianism and group identification: A new perspective of an old construct. Political Psychology, 10, 63–84.

Duncan, L. E. (1999). Motivation for collective action: Group consciousness as mediator of personality, life experiences, and women’s rights activism. Political Psychology, 20(3), 611–635.

Duncan, L. E., Peterson, B. E., & Winter, D. G. (1997). Authoritarianism and gender roles: Toward a psychological analysis of hegemonic relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(1), 41–49.

Duncan, L. E., Peterson, B. E., & Zurbriggen, E. L. (2010). Personality and politics: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Personality, 78(6), 1595–1600.

Duncan, L. E., & Stewart, A. J. (1995). Still bringing the Vietnam War home: Sources of contemporary student activism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(9), 914–924.

Feinberg, M., Willer, R., & Kovacheff, C. (2017). Extreme protest tactics reduce popular support for social movements. Unpublished manuscript. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2911177.

Feldman, S. (2003). Enforcing social conformity: A theory of authoritarianism. Political Psychology, 24(1), 41–74.

Feldman, S., & Johnston, C. (2014). Understanding the determinants of political ideology: Implications of structural complexity. Political Psychology, 35(3), 337–358.

Feldman, S., & Stenner, K. (1997). Perceived threat and authoritarianism. Political Psychology, 18(4), 741–770.

Gamson, W. A. (2004). Bystanders, public opinion, and the media. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, & H. Kriesi (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to social movements (pp. 242–261). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Gerber, A. S., Huber, G. A., Doherty, D., Dowling, C. M., & Ha, S. E. (2010). Personality and political attitudes: Relationships across issue domains and political contexts. American Political Science Review, 104(01), 111–133.

Giugni, M., McAdam, D., & Tilly, C. (Eds.). (1999). How social movements matter. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Hetherington, M. J., & Weiler, J. D. (2009). Authoritarianism and Polarization in American Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Hetherington, M., & Suhay, E. (2011). Authoritarianism, threat, and Americans’ support for the war on terror. American Journal of Political Science, 55(3), 546–560.

Hibbing, J. R., Smith, K. B., & Alford, J. R. (2014). Differences in negativity bias underlie variations in political ideology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 37, 297–350.

Hirsch, E. L. (1990). Sacrifice for the cause: Group processes, recruitment, and commitment in a student social movement. American Sociological Review, pp. 243–254.

Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375.

Jost, J. T., Nosek, B. A., & Gosling, S. D. (2008). Ideology: Its resurgence in social, personality, and political psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(2), 126–136.

Kam, C. D., & Simas, E. N. (2010). Risk orientations and policy frames. The Journal of Politics, 72(2), 381–396.

Kerpelman, L. C. (1969). Student political activism and ideology: Comparative characteristics of activists and nonactivists. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 16(1).

Klandermans, B., & Mayer, N. (Eds.). (2005). Extreme right activists in Europe. Through the magnifying glass. London and New York: Routledge.

Klandermans, B., & Van Steekelenberg, J. (2013). Social movements and the dynamics of collective action. In L. Huddy, D. O. Sears, & J. Levy (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political psychology (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Fuchs, D., & Klingemann, H.-D. (1990). The left-right schema. In M. K. Jennings & J. W. Van Deth (Eds.), Continuities in political action: A longitudinal study of political orientations in three western democracies (Vol. 5, pp. 203–234). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.

Linden, A., & Klandermans, B. (2006). Stigmatization and repression of extreme-right activism in the Netherlands. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 11(2), 213–228.

Lipset, S. M. (1959). Democracy and working-class authoritarianism. American Sociological Review, 24, 482–501.

Lipset, S. M., & Raab, E. (1978). The politics of unreason: Right-wing extremism in America, 1790–1977 (Vol. 5). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

McCrae, R. R. (1996). Social consequences of experiential openness. Psychological Bulletin, 120(3), 323.

McLeod, D. M. (1995). Communicating deviance: The effects of television news coverage of social protest. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 39(1), 4–19.

McLeod, D. M., & Hertog, J. K. (1992). The manufacture of public opinion by reporters: Informal cues for public perceptions of protest groups. Discourse & Society, 3(3), 259–275.

Meyer, D. S., & Tarrow, S. G. (1998). The social movement society: Contentious politics for a new century. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Opp, K., Finkel, S. E., Muller, E. N., Wolfsfeld, G., Dietz, H., & Green, J. (1995). Left-right ideology and collective political action: A comparative analysis of Germany, Israel, and Peru. In C. J. Jenkins (Ed.), The politics of social protest: comparative perspectives on states and social movements (pp. 63–95). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Rasmussen Reports. (2015). Most see baltimore riots as criminal, not protest. Retrieved November 20, 2017 from http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/april_2015/most_see_baltimore_riots_as_criminal_not_protest.

Schussman, A., & Soule, S. A. (2005). Process and protest: Accounting for individual protest participation. Social Forces, 84(2), 1083–1108.

Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). Academic Press.

Soule, S. A., & Earl, J. (2005). A movement society evaluated: Collective protest in the United States, 1960–1986. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 10(3), 345–364.

Stenner, K. (2005). The authoritarian dynamic. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T. D., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L. (1999). A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Human ecology review, 6(2), 81–97.

Tarrow, S. G. (2011). Power in movement: Social movements and contentious politics. Cambridge University Press.

Thorisdottir, H., Jost, J. T., Liviatan, I., & Shrout, P. E. (2007). Psychological needs and values underlying left-right political orientation: Cross-national evidence from Eastern and Western Europe. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71(2), 175–203.

Van der Meer, T., Van Deth, J., & Scheepers, P. (2009). The politicized participant: Ideology and political action in 20 democracies. Comparative Political Studies, 42(11), 1426–1457.

Van Hiel, A., Kossowska, M., & Mervielde, I. (2000). The relationship between openness to experience and political ideology. Personality and Individual Differences, 28(4), 741–751.

Van Leeuwen, A., Klandermans, B., & van Stekelenburg, J. (2015). A study of perceived protest atmospheres: How demonstrators evaluate police-demonstrator interactions and why. An International Quarterly, 20(1), 81–100.

Velez, Y. R., & Lavine, H. (2017). Racial diversity and the dynamics of authoritarianism. The Journal of Politics, 79(2), 519–533.

Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., Brady, H., & Nie, N. H. (1993). Citizen activity: Who participates? What do they say?. American Political Science Review, 87(2), 303–318.

Titel: Contentious Activities, Disrespectful Protesters: Effect of Protest Context on Protest Support and Mobilization Across Ideology and Authoritarianism
verfasst von: Raynee Sarah Gutting
Publikationsdatum: 17.01.2019
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Political Behavior / Ausgabe 3/2020
Print ISSN: 0190-9320
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-6687
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-018-09523-8

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2020

Resistance to Position Change, Motivated Reasoning, and Polarization

Mind This Gap, Too: Political Orientations of People with Disabilities in Europe

What to Believe? Social Media Commentary and Belief in Misinformation

EPOVB Award Winners 2020

Economic Segregation and Unequal Policy Responsiveness

Grand Old (Tailgate) Party? Partisan Discrimination in Apolitical Settings

Premium Partner