Search

This paper critically examines the normative versus non‐normative distinction commonly used in collective action research. To explore the similarities and differences between antecedents of normative versus non‐normative actions, we conducted a systematic review on diverse predictors of non‐normative, radical and violent collective actions. We examined 37 social and political psychology studies published after 2010 and identified five recurring themes: identity, efficacy, injustice, emotions and norms. Findings exhibited significant overlaps with those predictors associated with normative collective action. Thus, a reconceptualization is needed to undermine the rigid boundaries between these action types, highlighting the intricate interplay of factors that transcend the conventional binary. Aiming to avoid conceptual ambiguity and challenge the perspective that associating particular collective actions with unwarranted violence using social norms as fixed and a priori, we propose the term 'confrontational collective action' to separate out form of action from societal approval. Through this reconceptualization, we discussed the main limitations in the literature, focusing on how studies approach normativity and efficacy and addressing the issue of decontextualization in the literature. This paper calls for a contextually informed understanding of confrontational collective action that recognizes what is seen as 'normative' can change over time through intra‐ and intergroup interactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, the questions of what populism is and how populist leaders mobilize their followers have been the subject of extensive debate. While the social psychology literature holds unique theoretical tools that can be used to explain leader‐follower dynamics, these have not yet been applied to understand populism and populist leadership. In this paper, we aim to discuss populism as a social‐psychological concept and provide a comprehensive approach to examine the interactions between populist leaders and followers by using the identity leadership model (see New Psychology of Leadership, Haslam et al., 2020). Accordingly, we propose an integrative model in which we suggest that populism should be treated as a social‐psychological concept based on (i) strong ingroup identification; (ii) interactive leadership processes that open spaces to followers for enacting their ingroup identity that end up with mobilization against vertical (e.g., elites) and horizontal (e.g., minorities, refugees, opponents) outgroups; (iii) leader's ingroup prototypicality and identity entrepreneurship that is boosted by using shared grievances, narratives of collective victimhood, and the destabilization of mainstream opponent leaders. Furthermore, by discussing real‐world examples and recent studies, we aim to show how the content of what it means to be 'us' and what is seen as moral to 'us' can be shaped by populist leaders for mobilization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Social & Political Psychology is the property of Leibniz Institute for Psychology (ZPID) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In recent years, and in the current climate crisis, the interest in veganism and sustainable diet/lifestyle has increased. This growing interest can also be seen within academia. Therefore, we set out to systematically document and organize the social psychological literature on veganism and vegan identity to identify where the field currently is, and what we need to do next. Following PRISMA guidelines we identified a data set of 26 academic papers published between 2010 and 2021. Through a thematic analysis of the data, we created four categories of study focus and content: (1) vegans as a disadvantaged/stigmatized group, (2) the role of ideology in negative attitudes toward vegans, (3) the role of moral and ethical beliefs in changing or sustaining dietary preferences, and (4) veganism as a social movement and vegan activism. Our analysis emphasizes issues with merging all non-meat eaters, reduction of veganism into dietary or lifestyle choices neglecting the politicized content and movement, lack of processes underlying emergence and endurance of veganism, and decontextualization of vegan identity. What is needed is a more fine-grained exploration that addresses the identified issues to account for the content of vegan identity. This would expand, for example, the motives literature to include and emphasize intersectionality in a vegan identity context. Specifically, to facilitate a more sustainable lifestyle, the content of social dimensions needs to be qualitatively explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current studies aim to examine the underlying predictors of heterosexual feminist women's willingness to participate in solidarity‐based collective action for LGBTQ+ rights. We hypothesized that feminist identification, perceived discrimination against LGBTQ+, and strategic intra‐minority alliance between feminists and LGBTQ+ would predict their willingness to participate in solidarity‐based collective action. Study 1 (N = 141) showed that higher feminist identification and more endorsement of the strategic intra‐minority alliance predicted more willingness to participate in solidarity‐based collective action among heterosexual feminist women in Turkey. Study 2 (N = 644) replicated and extended the findings of Study 1 with a larger sample by showing that higher awareness of sexual orientation privilege predicts more willingness to participate in solidarity‐based collective action. By following an intersectional and multi‐identity approach in Study 3 (N = 280), we showed that higher feminist identification predicted more willingness to participate in solidarity‐based collective action, whereas higher heterosexual identification predicted less willingness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent research on collective action indicates the importance of dynamic and culturally diverse perspectives. One of these models, the encapsulated model of social identity in collective action (EMSICA), claims that perceived injustice and group efficacy shape the emergence of novel forms of identity during protests. An emergent social identity is a strong predictor of collective action participation, as recent studies have demonstrated. In this study we aim to test the tenets of the EMSICA in a non-WEIRD context, the Gezi Park protests in Turkey. We conducted a retrospective survey study with 345 activists who participated in the Gezi Park protests. Findings showed that increased perception of injustice of the government's totalitarian policies, the decision to demolish Gezi Park, police brutality, as well as group efficacy beliefs predicted the Gezi Park protestor identity. Moreover, the emergent Gezi Park protestor identity directly predicted participation in the protests. Our findings highlight that the EMSICA has important predictive power in a non-WEIRD context, the Gezi Park protests, and showed that perceived injustices and group efficacy became facilitators of the emergence of an overarching protestor identity. We believe that the core drivers of collective action should be understood and tested as context-sensitive, and we should extend our understanding about core motivations from global categories to contextual outcomes of intergroup encounters. In conclusion, we hope this study pave the way for understanding dynamics of collective action participation in repressive contexts, demonstrating how injustices such as totalitarian policies and police brutality along with group efficacy become facilitators of the emergence of an overarching protestor identity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Much research effort is focused on developing an effective vaccine for combatting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Vaccine development itself, however, will not be enough given that a sufficient amount of people will need to be vaccinated for widespread immunity. Vaccine hesitancy is on the rise, varies across countries, and is associated with conspiratorial worldview. Given the rise in COVID-19-related conspiracy theories, we aimed to examine the levels of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and its association with beliefs on the origin of the novel coronavirus in a cross-cultural study. Methods: We conducted an online survey in the UK (N = 1088) and Turkey (N = 3936), and gathered information on participants' willingness to vaccinate for a potential COVID-19 vaccine, beliefs on the origin of the novel coronavirus, and several behavioural and demographic predictors (such as anxiety, risk perception, government satisfaction levels) that influence vaccination and origin beliefs. Results: In all, 31% of the participants in Turkey and 14% in the UK were unsure about getting themselves vaccinated for a COVID-19 vaccine. In both countries, 3% of the participants rejected to be vaccinated. Also, 54% of the participants in Turkey and 63% in the UK believed in the natural origin of the novel coronavirus. Believing in the natural origin significantly increased the odds of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Conclusions: Our results point at a concerning level of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, especially in Turkey, and suggest that wider communication of the scientific consensus on the origin of the novel coronavirus with the public may help future campaigns targeting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ambivalent sexism and related issues such as rape myths and gendered social norms serve to maintain structural gender inequalities. Exploring the implications of benevolent and hostile sexism separately in social practice, such as retaliatory acts in honour cultures, is essential for understanding gender‐based violence and inequalities. Although a vast majority of research focused on direct and interpersonal aggressive response or retaliatory acts against the honour threat in honour cultures, little is known about subtler collective social processes in honour‐damaging situations. To address the gap in our understanding of how retaliatory responses are carried out against honour threat in a subtler and collective way, we focused on the rising demands for reinstatement of the death penalty to stop the increased rates of sexual violence in Turkey as a collective retaliatory response against honour‐threat. To test this argument, we conducted a survey study with 450 participants to examine the role of ambivalent sexism, the gendered norms of honour culture, and rape myths in supporting the death penalty for rape offenders in Turkey. The results indicate that ambivalent sexism and honour culture's gendered norms predicted support for capital punishment. Furthermore, hostile sexism moderated the relationship between rape myth acceptance and support for death penalty. We find that individuals who have high hostile sexism and strong rape myth acceptance do not support capital punishment. These findings contribute to our understanding of the social mechanisms related to hostile and benevolent sexism which results in support for the death penalty in Turkey. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and objectives Most studies to date have focused on the negative aspects of anxiety. Anxiety, however, is an evolved emotional response that can provide protection in the face of risk. Pandemics are characterized by increased mortality risk coupled with future uncertainties, which both cause heightened anxiety. Here, we examine the factors associated with anxiety levels and risk avoidance behaviours during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. We asked how individual time perspectives (future-oriented consideration and attention to present moment experience) affect anxiety in uncertain times, and whether anxiety reduces mortality risk by promoting risk avoidance behaviour. Methodology We conducted an online survey in the UK (N = 1088) and Turkey (N = 3935) and measured participants' generalized and pandemic-related anxiety levels, future-oriented consideration, mindfulness, intolerance of uncertainty, risk perception and risk avoidance behaviours. Results We found that people less tolerant of uncertainties had higher levels of pandemic anxiety. Those with higher pandemic anxiety exhibited risk avoidance behaviours more frequently. Mindfulness and increased financial satisfaction reduced pandemic anxiety. People in Turkey reported higher levels of generalized and pandemic anxiety and greater engagement in risk avoidance behaviours than people in the UK. Conclusions and implications Our study shows an elevated anxiety response can help mitigate infection risk during pandemics and emphasizes the importance of the underlying situation in understanding whether an anxiety response is adaptive or pathological. Maintaining a healthy level of anxiety can promote engagement in protective behaviours. Therapies addressing anxiety can focus on increasing tolerance to future uncertainties. Lay summary Anxiety is an emotional response triggered in the anticipation of a possible threat. We found that intolerance of uncertainty strongly predicted anxiety and that people with elevated anxiety levels engaged in protective behaviours more frequently during the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting that anxiety can help mitigate mortality risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]