Suchergebnisse

This article examines the narrative identity work that undocumented youth activists used to shift the boundary of and claim membership in the social category "American." Despite the seemingly inflexible, legalistic way American is conventionally defined in the United States (as a native-born or naturalized citizen), activists adopted a fluid interpretation that made room for them. Our theoretical contribution centers on articulating how the construction and deployment of identity codes within narrative processes can open spaces for claiming collective identification and belonging in seemingly closed collectivities. However, the use of such codes may unintentionally close access for others seeking to identify as part of the same collective. Data were collected through ethnographic fieldwork and in-depth interviews, and our analysis integrates insights from sociological research on identity with interdisciplinary work on storytelling. We outline activists' three main approaches to signifying Americanness, including constructing American as (1) a subjective feeling, (2) a status that can be earned, and (3) a quality that one can demonstrate through political engagement in the United States. We conclude by discussing the implications of such narrative identity work strategies for other undocumented immigrants who may face challenges presenting themselves as equally fitting "Americans."

Why do some people participating in transnational protest events identify with their foreign counterparts while others participating in the same events do not? We find that participants in a series of May Day and climate change events are aware that the events are part of a broader struggle, and many in fact identify with their overseas counterparts. However, there are differences between demonstrations. Some are populated with people who identify transnationally, while others are comprised of participants who more closely identify with their national companions. Focusing on differences in transnational identification at the participant level, our findings can be summarized in two statements: (1) protest participation is a stronger producer of transnational identification than associational activism; (2) expressive protesters identify more transnationally than instrumentally motivated protesters. Adapted from the source document.

Why do some people participating in transnational protest events identify with their foreign counterparts while others participating in the same events do not? We find that participants in a series of May Day and climate change events are aware that the events are part of a broader struggle, and many in fact identify with their overseas counterparts. However, there are differences between demonstrations. Some are populated with people who identify transnationally, while others are comprised of participants who more closely identify with their national companions. Focusing on differences in transnational identification at the participant level, our findings can be summarized in two statements: (1) protest participation is a stronger producer of transnational identification than associational activism; (2) expressive protesters identify more transnationally than instrumentally motivated protesters.

Does the emergence of a security community require a collective identity? This constitutive relationship has been hypothesized by prominent scholars from Deutsch to Adler & Barnett. Yet the Russian—Atlantic case shows that collective identification is not a necessary condition for a nascent security community to emerge. In less than two decades, the relationship between Russia and the transatlantic community has quickly transformed from a deep-seated rivalry structured by the specter of mutual assured destruction to a partnership in which the possibility of military confrontation has undeniably receded. Although bones of contention and power struggles continue to abound, empirical indicators attest to the emergence of a nascent Russian—Atlantic security community. But survey data also show that Russian and Western peoples do not meaningfully identify with one another. While the lack of we-ness certainly helps explain the striking instability of the post-Cold War rapprochement between Russia and the transatlantic community, it also recalls the need for constructivists to pay attention to other variables than mutual representations in the study of international peace. As a way forward, the article advocates a practice turn in the study of security communities: peace exists as a social fact when diplomacy becomes the self-evident practice among security elites to solve interstate disputes.

This study explores how team core self-evaluations (CSE) influence the emergence and effectiveness of shared leadership. Drawing on adaptive leadership theory, we propose that decisions to share leadership responsibilities rather than allocating the role to a single team member are influenced by homogeneity in members' CSE. In addition, we identify team collective identification as an emergent team state that interacts with CSE homogeneity to promote the emergence of shared leadership. We then argue that not all shared leadership teams are equally effective; applying group social capital theory, we propose that team mean CSE strengthens the impact of shared leadership on team performance. Results based on multisource and time-lagged data from 85 project teams provide support for our proposed moderated mediation model. We discuss how our theoretical model extends research on the role of team dispositional composition on the antecedents and consequents of shared leadership and highlight practical implications related to the design, recruitment, and socialization of autonomous work teams.