CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 325Social and Intergroup PsychologySocial Movements and Cultural IdentitySocial Power and Status Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 357 of the 358 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Toward a comprehensive and potentially cross-cultural model of why people engage in collective action: a quantitative research synthesis of four motivations and structural constraints

Open access
Agostini, Maximilian, van Zomeren, Martijn·2021·Psychological Bulletin
DOI 10.1037/bul0000256
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Sociopsychological theorizing and research on collective action (e.g., social protests) has mushroomed over the last decade, studying a wide variety of groups, contexts, and cultures. Through a quantitative research synthesis of four motivations for collective action (1,235 effects from 403 samples; total N = 123,707), we summarize and synthesize this body of research into the dual chamber model, a comprehensive and potentially cross-cultural model of collective action. We aim to replicate previous meta-analytic conclusions (about identity, injustice, and efficacy) and break new theoretical ground by (a) integrating a fourth motivation (morality) into the very heart of the psychology of collective action, (b) extending these four motivations to advantaged group members acting in solidarity with the disadvantaged, and (c) integrating theoretically relevant structural (i.e., cultural and other contextual) constraints. Results substantiated the dual chamber model as all four motivations yielded unique, positive, medium-sized effects and interrelationships were positive (particularly among morality and identity, conceptualized as the dual chambers of the protester’s beating heart). Meta-analytic structural equation modeling supported the added value of including morality. Moreover, findings confirmed that the strongest specific motivations were emotional injustice and politicized identification, while newly adding moral conviction to that list. Finally, the four motivations extended to advantaged group members acting in solidarity with the disadvantaged, while only the identity motivation was constrained by theoretically relevant cultural dimensions and values (e.g., collectivism and hierarchy). We discuss the implications and limitations of the dual chamber model for integrative theorizing, innovative research, and the practice of collective action.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/bul0000256

Cites

357 of 357 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 358 references

1 of the 358 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 325

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Agostini, M., & van Zomeren, M.
Affiliations
University of Groningen (NL)
Corresponding author
Agostini, Maximilian
ORCID
Venue
Psychological Bulletin
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2021-07
Volume
147
Issue
7
Pages
667-700
ISSN
  • 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1455
DOI
10.1037/bul0000256
OpenAlex
W4206327683
Cited by
301
References
358
Citations by year
2026: 58 · 2025: 114 · 2024: 71 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 3
FWCI
44.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Dutch Research Council (406.18.519)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Movements and Cultural Identity
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
Keywords
collective action, social protest, protest motivation, moral conviction, perceived injustice, perceived efficacy, identity motivation, solidarity, cultural constraints, collectivism, hierarchy, cross-cultural comparison

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review