Search

Identity, injustice and group efficacy are key motivations for collective action engagement. However, little work has examined factors that influence their emergence. Across three studies (total N = 938), we test whether exposure to different actions (i.e., radical or conventional) and the perceived legitimacy and efficacy of those actions ('the means') predict observers' sense of injustice, identity, group efficacy about the issue, and in turn, future action engagement ('the ends'). As expected, radical (versus conventional) actions were perceived as less legitimate and effective. These evaluations indirectly predicted lower action via diminished identification and injustice, respectively. Paradoxically, legitimacy and efficacy evaluations also indirectly predicted higher radical and conventional action via diminished group efficacy. Thus, collective action is shaped by and reciprocally influences injustice, identity, and group efficacy. Simultaneous exposure to conventional and radical actions also offset these effects, indicating that conventional actions can mitigate the indirect effects of radical tactics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present research applies self‐determination theory (SDT) to the context of unhealthy eating. The extent to which each of the six types of motivations stemming from the SDT continuum applies to unhealthy eating is examined, as well as the contribution of each motivation for eating unhealthily in predicting psychological well‐being and frequency of unhealthy eating. A three‐wave longitudinal study (N = 379) was conducted before, during, and after the Christmas holidays. Results demonstrated that three types of motivations (i.e., identified, introjected, and external regulation) for unhealthy eating fluctuated over time and peaked during the holidays, a time when unhealthy eating becomes especially salient in Western societies. However, amotivation for unhealthy eating reached its lowest level during the holidays. While identified regulation was associated with greater well‐being, introjected regulation, and amotivation for unhealthy eating were linked with lower well‐being. Integrated regulation was associated with lower well‐being only before and after the holiday period. Finally, the integrated, introjected, external regulations, and amotivation were linked to higher frequency of unhealthy eating. These results confirm that each type of motivation presents distinct patterns of associations with well‐being and actual behavior. Results also demonstrate that the social context in which eating takes place can have an impact on the relationship between motivations and well‐being as well as behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article introduces a model of the internalisation of normative social harmdoing: the MINSOH. This model seeks to explain how group members internalise harmful social norms such that they personally endorse their groups' normative actions. To this aim, the MINSOH integrates two divergent yet complementary theoretical perspectives: self‐determination theory and the social identity approach. These perspectives differ in their basic assumptions about the possibility for harm to become internalised, yet when integrated, they provide a powerful account of how harmdoing can become internalised. The MINSOH proposes specific conditions under which harmful normative actions become accepted by group members. This article outlines multiple self‐determined motivations for harmdoing and discrete group processes that enable harmdoing to be internalised and autonomously enacted, and reviews factors that facilitate (i.e., strong/unique/comparative social identification; endorsement of ideological justifications) and block the internalisation process (presence of multiple identities/diverging norms; inclusive superordinate identity). Directions for future research are then discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]