Worker‐organization goal misalignment and support for collective action

Previous research has suggested that dual and superordinate identities are not only prerequisites of collective action among minority group members but they can also be associated with greater acceptance of the ingroup's disadvantaged position. In this three‐wave study among Ingrian Finnish migrants from Russia to Finland (N=153T1−85T3), we tested the indirect association between superordinate national identification (T1) and support for collective action (T3), via perceived permeability of group boundaries (T2). Support for collective action was operationalized as one's personal willingness, and the perceived need of the Russian‐speaking community, to engage in it. When controlling for the direct association between Russian minority identification and support for collective action, perceived permeability was shown to mediate the negative association between Finnish national identification and support for community's collective action. Thus, being close to the majority may make immigrants perceive group boundaries as more permeable and be less inclined to improve their group's position.

Drawing from the Social Identity Model of Collective Action, this study investigates whether Islamophobic political agitation increases perceived discrimination and support for collective action among young Muslims. Using a longitudinal experimental design, we exposed young Muslims aged 18 to 37 years (n = 143) to a variety of anti–Islamic right-wing populist social media messages either once (i.e., single exposure) or at several different time points (i.e., repeated exposure). Our findings show, for the first time, that anti–Islamic political messages not only increased perceived discrimination immediately after exposure, but that this effect was still detectable 2 and 3 weeks after initial exposure. Repeated exposure did not lead to an incremental effect beyond that of one-time exposure. Our findings also showed that perceived discrimination predicted support for nonviolent collective action, but not for violent collective action to improve young Muslims’ social status both after single and repeated exposure. From a democratic perspective, these findings are encouraging and have important theoretical and methodological implications.

Why, how and with whom? The impact of perceived ally motives on migrants’ support for collective actions

Politics in the current era are replete with unreliable media stories which lack evidence, sometimes disparagingly dubbed “fake news”. A survey on a sample of Muslims in Indonesia (N = 518) in this work found that participants’ endorsement of collective action in of support issues with little to no empirical evidence (i.e., post-truth collective action) increased as a function of their belief in fake news and prejudice against the outgroup (i.e., non-Muslims). Belief in fake news stemmed from participants’ generic and specific conspiratorial thinking, whereas prejudice was positively predicted by relative Muslim prototypicality, denoting how much Muslims in Indonesia view that their group is more representative than non-Muslims of the superordinate Indonesian identity that encompasses both groups. Additionally, our findings revealed that generic conspiratorial thinking and relative Muslim prototypicality were positively predicted by collective narcissism, which in turn spurred participants’ support for collective action by augmenting belief in fake news.

Collective action by outsiders to group conflict and inequality

This research investigates the positive and negative contact experiences of African migrants with native Italians and the association between contact and behavioural intentions to reduce social inequalities. Two studies examined the associations between intergroup contact of migrants and their collective action in support of their or other group members, by testing the mediating role of positive and negative emotions towards natives. Hypotheses were tested with two samples of first‐generation, legal African migrants living in Italy for less than 3 years (Ns = 242 [118 males], 251 [154]). Negative contact was positively associated with collective action in support of one's group, especially among respondents with higher positive intergroup experiences, and anger towards native people mediated this association. The association of positive contact with collective action to foster a more egalitarian society in general was mediated by reduced fear towards native people, and the association between positive contact and collective action at large was stronger for migrants with lower negative intergroup contact. Overall, this research provides further evidence on the impact of intergroup contact on migrants, specifically on the role of affective factors in their association with migrants' willingness to engage in collective action to reduce societal inequality at large.

The present study examined whether positive portrayals of feminist men could increase men’s sense of solidarity with feminists and, through it, their intentions to engage in collective action in support of women. A sample of 102 mostly White men between the ages of 18 and 63 was recruited from Mechanical Turk, an online crowdsourcing marketplace. They were exposed to a short article either portraying feminist men in a positive light, a negative light, or describing the history of feminism without mentioning men. Men who read the positive portrayal article expressed more solidarity with feminists and greater intentions to engage in collective action in support of women than men who read either the history of feminism article or the negative portrayal article. Feminist solidarity fully mediated the relationship between positive portrayals of feminist men and collective action intentions. Consistent with research among women, the findings demonstrate that feeling connected to feminists is an important antecedent of men’s collective action in support of women. They also suggest a novel approach for involving men in collective action in support of women: building a positive image of feminist men. The implications of the findings for the men’s role in the feminist movement are discussed.

Reports an error in "Is Martin Luther King or Malcolm X the more acceptable face of protest? High-status groups' reactions to low-status groups' collective action" by Cátia P. Teixeira, Russell Spears and Vincent Y. Yzerbyt (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Advanced Online Publication, Jun 06, 2019, np). In the article, Malcolm X was misspelled in the article title, in the second epigraph below the abstract, and in the second paragraph of the first paragraph and the first sentence of the fifth paragraph of the Implications for the Effectiveness of Low-Status Collective Action section. All versions of this article have been corrected. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2019-30725-001.) Work on collective action focuses mainly on the perspective of disadvantaged groups. However, the dynamics of social change cannot be fully understood without taking into account the reactions of the members of advantaged groups to collective action by low-status groups. In 10 experiments conducted in 4 different intergroup contexts (N = 1349), we examine advantaged groups support for normative versus non-normative collective action by disadvantaged groups. Experiments 1a to 1e show that normative collective action is perceived as more likely to improve the disadvantaged group's position and that non-normative collective action is perceived as more damaging to the advantaged group's social image. Also, these differences are due to differences in perceptions of actions violating norms of protest and perceptions of protesters as blaming the advantaged group for the inequality. Experiments 2a to 3 show that high compared with low identified members of advantaged groups distinguish more between types of collective action, showing a greater preference for the normative type. Both a mediational design and an experimental-causal-chain design (Experiments 3 and 4) show that support among high identifiers depends more on whether collective action damages the high-status group's social image than on whether it actually reduces inequality. Findings suggest that high-status groups' support for collective action is not only shaped by the perceived likelihood of change but also by its potential damage to the image of the high-status ingroup. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported online in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology on Jul 8 2019 (see record 2019-40588-001). In the article, Malcolm X was misspelled in the article title, in the second epigraph below the abstract, and in the second paragraph of the first paragraph and the first sentence of the fifth paragraph of the Implications for the Effectiveness of Low-Status Collective Action section. All versions of this article have been corrected.] Work on collective action focuses mainly on the perspective of disadvantaged groups. However, the dynamics of social change cannot be fully understood without taking into account the reactions of the members of advantaged groups to collective action by low-status groups. In 10 experiments conducted in 4 different intergroup contexts (N = 1349), we examine advantaged groups support for normative versus non-normative collective action by disadvantaged groups. Experiments 1a to 1e show that normative collective action is perceived as more likely to improve the disadvantaged group's position and that non-normative collective action is perceived as more damaging to the advantaged group's social image. Also, these differences are due to differences in perceptions of actions violating norms of protest and perceptions of protesters as blaming the advantaged group for the inequality. Experiments 2a to 3 show that high compared with low identified members of advantaged groups distinguish more between types of collective action, showing a greater preference for the normative type. Both a mediational design and an experimental-causal-chain design (Experiments 3 and 4) show that support among high identifiers depends more on whether collective action damages the high-status group's social image than on whether it actually reduces inequality. Findings suggest that high-status groups' support for collective action is not only shaped by the perceived likelihood of change but also by its potential damage to the image of the high-status ingroup. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Ideologies can legitimate inequality and undermine collective action. Yet research overlooks the effects culture-specific ideologies—ideologies that develop within a specific sociohistorical context—have on collective action support. We address this oversight by arguing that two culture-specific ideologies that deny the contemporary relevance of past injustices (historical negation) and reject Indigenous culture from the nation’s identity (symbolic exclusion) undermine support for collective action on behalf of the disadvantaged (namely, Māori—New Zealand’s Indigenous population). As predicted, historical negation and symbolic exclusion had independent negative cross-lagged effects on collective action support amongst Māori ( N = 561) and New Zealand European ( N = 4,104) participants. The cross-lagged effects of collective action support on historical negation and symbolic exclusion, however, were nonsignificant. Thus, the relationships these culture-specific ideologies have with collective action support are unidirectional. Our results highlight the need to incorporate culture-specific ideologies into models of collective action.

This study examines whether residing in a more gender-equal country (Spain) influences Romanian immigrants’ gender-related attitudes. Participants (N = 572; 202 Romanian immigrants, 187 Spaniards, 183 Romanians) completed an online questionnaire. Results show that, compared to Romanians, immigrants perceived: a) agentic roles in the household as less traditional and, in turn, attributed men more immorality; b) communal roles in the household as less traditional and, consequently, attributed men less immorality and women less sociability; c) manifested higher support for gender equality collective actions when gender inequality was perceived as low. Implications of the acculturation process of gender-related attitudes are discussed.

Three studies (N1 = 1,019;N2 = 312;N3 = 494) tested whether seeing intergroup relations as inherently antagonistic shaped advantaged social groups’ allyship intentions. More specifically, we tested whether endorsingzero‐sum beliefsrelated to their willingness to support system‐challenging and system‐supporting collective action. Zero‐sum beliefs were negatively correlated with system‐challenging and positively correlated with system‐supporting collective action intentions. Zero‐sum beliefs were more common among advantaged than disadvantaged groups and translated into lower allyship intentions. Advantaged group members with higher levels of zero‐sum beliefs were also more likely to experience anger and fear when considering the demographic racial shift in the United States. Increased fear was associated with greater support for system‐supporting and lower support for system‐challenging collective action. We find consistent evidence that advantaged group members see intergroup relations as a zero‐sum game and that these beliefs are negatively related to their intentions to become allies.

Paweł Adamowicz, the liberal mayor of Gdańsk, Poland, died on January 14, 2019, after being stabbed by a man who rushed onstage during a charity event. Four studies were carried out to analyze the predictors of willingness to engage in collective action in support of the progressive city policies he initiated. In Study 1 ( N = 214), collective angst was related to collective action intention. Identification with Gdańsk mediated this relation. In the next two studies, we tested the role of the perceived continuity of the in-group. The relationship between collective angst and willingness to support collective actions was mediated by perceived essentialist continuity of the group (Study 2, on snap election day, N = 121). Moreover, results confirmed that collective angst predicted strength of identification with Gdańsk. This identification was related to the perceived essentialist continuity of the group, which in turn was linked to willingness to engage in collective actions in support of progressive policies (Study 3, N = 98). In Study 4 ( N = 456), conducted within a few days before the presidential election in Poland, we replicated the model of mediation obtained in Study 3, and showed that contextualized collective angst also predicted collective action intentions.

Gender-based collective action is essential to close widespread gender gaps in the workplace and pursue gender equality. To understand the processes underlying engagement in different forms of action, this research focused on women’s relative deprivation arising from the perception of unjust disparity between women’s and men’s conditions at work. Across one correlational (Study 1; N = 455) and one experimental study (Study 2; N = 320) conducted in Italy, we tested a serial mediational model linking perceived relative deprivation in the workplace to women’s engagement in collective action through resentment about gender inequalities at work and moral conviction to address gender inequality in the workplace. Two forms of collective action were considered: traditional collective action (i.e., organized action, such as signing a petition) and small acts in the workplace (i.e., more informal behaviors for gender equality). Results of the serial mediation model showed that perceiving relative deprivation was associated with a greater willingness to engage in collective action, and this association was explained through resentment and moral conviction. These findings suggest that raising awareness of gender discrimination in the work domain is a critical step toward increasing women’s mobilization to act for gender equality.

Academic In this narrative review, we examined 134 studies of the relationship between intergroup contact and collective action benefiting disadvantaged groups. We aimed to identify whether, when, and why contact has mobilizing effects (promoting collective action) or sedative effects (inhibiting collective action). For both moderators and mediators, factors associated with the intergroup situation (compared with those associated with the out-group or the in-group) emerged as the most important. Group status had important effects. For members of socially advantaged groups (examined in 98 studies, 100 samples), contact had a general mobilizing effect, which was stronger when contact increased awareness of experiences of injustice among members of disadvantaged groups. For members of disadvantaged groups (examined in 49 studies, 58 samples), contact had mixed effects. Contact that increased awareness of injustice mobilized collection action; contact that made the legitimacy of group hierarchy or threat of retaliation more salient produced sedative effects. Public We present a review of existing studies that have investigated the relationship between intergroup contact and collective action aimed at promoting equity for disadvantaged groups. We further consider the influence of contact that is positive or negative and face-to-face or indirect (e.g., through mass or social media), and we distinguish between collective action that involves socially acceptable behaviors or is destructive and violent. We identified 134 studies, considering both advantaged (100 samples) and disadvantaged groups (58 samples). We found that intergroup contact impacts collective action differently depending on group status. Contact generally leads advantaged groups to mobilize in favor of disadvantaged groups. However, contact has variable effects on members of disadvantaged groups: It sometimes promotes their collective action in support of their own group; in other cases, it leads them to be less likely to engage in such action. We examine when and why contact can have these different effects.