Suchergebnisse

This paper explores the expression of multiple social identities through coordinated collective action. We propose that perceived compatibility between potentially contrasting identities and perceived legitimacy of protest serve as catalysts for collective action. The present paper maps the context of the "Euromaidan" anti-regime protests in Ukraine and reports data (N = 996) collected through an online survey following legislation to ban protests (March–May, 2014). We measured participants' identification with three different groups (the Ukrainian nation, the online protest community, and the street movement), perception of compatibility between online protest and the street movement,perception of the legitimacy of protest, and intentions to take persuasive and confrontational collective action. We found evidence that the more social groups people "stood for," the more they "fought" for their cause and that identifications predicted both forms of collective action to the degree that people saw the protest and the online movement as compatible with each other and believed protest to be legitimate. Collective action can be interpreted as the congruent expression of multiple identities that are rendered ideologically compatible both in online settings and on the street.

We argue that pity can motivate collective action intentions toward groups that are both politically and economically deprived. We tested this connection in four online surveys and an experiment. In Study 1 (N = 1,007), pity for the Roma in Hungary predicted collective action intentions, which was replicated in Study 2 in connection with refugees in Germany (N = 191) and in Hungary (N = 563). Study 3 (N = 475) demonstrated that for not economically but politically disadvantaged groups (e.g., sexual minorities), pity was not a predictor of ally action. In an experiment (Study 4, N = 447), pity was just as strong a predictor of collective action intentions as outrage on behalf of an economically and politically disadvantaged outgroup. Pity can be a mobilizing emotion when it comes to groups that are both economically and politically disadvantaged; however, outrage remains more important in the absence of economic hardship.

This article investigates whether the perceived threat of terrorism explains the support for right-wing Eurosceptic parties and Euroscepticism above and beyond other relevant variables, including perceived economic and immigration threats. We first examined the entire Eurobarometer samples of 2014 and 2015, and then conducted survey experiments in four European Union (EU) countries, that is, United Kingdom (N = 197), France (N = 164), Italy (N = 312), and Romania (N = 144). Our findings suggest that the perceived threat of terrorism has a small effect on the negative attitudes toward the EU above and beyond the effect of immigration and economic threats and other basic control variables. The relationship between these variables varies across countries and it is less linear than we might expect.