Strategic Collective Action: Social Psychology and Social Change

By Stephen C. Wright. 2008

126 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f6fbb60e19d5865a2900dc39544f3235c5f9ec63

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Health Professions

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Appealing to common humanity increases forgiveness but reduces collective action among victims of historical atrocities (2011, background): “For example, much research has shown that collective action is most likely when people are highly identified with their ingroup (e.g., Simon, Trötschel, & Dähne, 2008; Wright, 2001).”
Gender-Bias Primes Elicit Queen-Bee Responses Among Senior Policewomen (2011, background): “…may reduce queen-bee responses, the results of this study also show that such a manipulation is likely to preserve inequality for women in the workplace: Inducing high identifiers to ignore gender bias when it is in fact present reduces their motivation to pursue collective action (Wright, 2001).”
Theory of planned behaviour, identity and intentions to engage in environmental activism (2008, background): “Although there is a great deal of literature examining activism more generally (e.g., Simon & Klandermans, 2001; Wright, 2001), to date, there is relatively little research focusing specifically on environmental activism.”
Another view of “we”: Majority and minority group perspectives on a common ingroup identity (2007, background): “Research on processes that facilitate social change indeed demonstrates that minority group members are more likely to challenge the social system when they identify with their group and perceive their disadvantage to be illegitimate (Doosje, Ellemers, & Spears, 1999; Ellemers & Barreto, 2001; Lalon”
A dynamic model of engagement in normative and non-normative collective action: Psychological antecedents, consequences, and barriers (2015, background): “Prior work has illustrated that (the prospect of) individual upward mobility can inhibit group members’ interest in social change (e.g., Ellemers, 2001; Wright, 2001).”
Collective Action as the Material Expression of Opinion‐Based Group Membership (2009, background): “In a very perceptive chapter, Wright and Lubensky (2008) observe that prejudice reduction interventions have the potential to demobilize collective action.”
Beyond dependence: An identity approach to social power and domination (2006, background): “In addition, conditions that promise individual upward social mobility or escape (Simon, 1998; Wright, 2001) as well as conditions of de-grouping and atomization (Apfelbaum, 1979; Foucault, 1977; Scott, 1990; Spears & Lea, 1994) can be responsible for the absence of resistance.”
Acting in Solidarity: Cross‐Group Contact between Disadvantaged Group Members and Advantaged Group Allies (2016, unknown): “Although likely to improve intergroup attitudes, recent research and theorizing also suggest that such positive contact may be disempowering for disadvantaged group members (e.g., Wright, 2001, Dixon, Levine, Reicher & Durrheim, 2012; Saguy, Tausch, Dovidio, & Pratto, 2009).”
Counterproductive work behavior as protest (2010, background): “In contrast to normative protest, non-normative protest typically violates implicit rules or formal laws within a given cultural context (e.g., Dion, 1986; Lalonde & Cameron, 1994; Martin, 1986; Taylor, Moghaddam, Gamble, & Zellerer, 1987; Wright, 2001; Wright et al., 1990).”