How Collective-Action Failure Shapes Group Heterogeneity and Engagement in Conventional and Radical Action Over Time

Area of Science:

• Social Psychology
• Political Science
• Sociology

Background:

• Collective action participation is well-researched, but the impact of outcomes on sustained engagement is less understood.
• Social movements evolve based on the success or failure of their actions.
• Understanding these dynamics is crucial for predicting future movement trajectories.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate how collective action outcomes (success vs. failure) influence subsequent engagement in social movements.
• To identify distinct subgroups that emerge among movement participants and opponents based on these outcomes.
• To explore the psychological predictors of these divergent responses.

Main Methods:

• Latent profile analysis was used to analyze data collected before and after the 2017 Australian marriage-equality debate.
• Participant responses were categorized into distinct profiles based on their engagement levels and strategies.
• Baseline levels of social identification, group efficacy, and anger were assessed as predictors.

Main Results:

• Success in collective action unified supporters.
• Failure led to the emergence of four distinct subgroups among opponents: resigned acceptors, moderates, stay-the-course opponents, and innovators.
• Innovators were more likely to engage in conventional and justify radical action, while resigned acceptors were least likely to act.

Conclusions:

• Collective action outcomes significantly and dynamically shape participation in social movements.
• Divergent reactions to outcomes are predicted by individual differences in social identification, group efficacy, and anger.
• Future research should continue to explore these dynamic processes in social movement engagement.