The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Contentiousness of Markets: Politics, Social Movements, and Institutional Change in Markets
Abstract
While much of economic sociology focuses on the stabilizing aspects of markets, the social movement perspective emphasizes the role that contentiousness plays in bringing institutional change and innovation to markets. Markets are inherently political, both because of their ties to the regulatory functions of the state and because markets are contested by actors who are dissatisfied with market outcomes and who use the market as a platform for social change. Research in this area focuses on the pathways to market change pursued by social movements, including direct challenges to corporations, the institutionalization of systems of private regulation, and the creation of new market categories through institutional entrepreneurship. Much contentiousness, while initially disruptive, works within the market system by producing innovation and restraining capitalism from destroying the resources it depends on for survival.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
McAdam, D., Tarrow, S., & Tilly, C. (2001) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511805431 · Cited by 5,558
Consumer Culture Theory (CCT): Twenty Years of Research
Arnould, E. J., & Thompson, C. J. (2005) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/426626 · Cited by 3,677
Creed, W. E. D., Scully, M. A., & Austin, J. R. (2002) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.13.5.475.7814 · Cited by 614
Briscoe, F., & Safford, S. (2008) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2189/asqu.53.3.460 · Cited by 335 · cited 2×
“For example, in the United States, the gay rights movement has been more successful in securing domestic partnership benefits for employees of Fortune 500 companies than for employees of the federal government (Raeburn 2004; Briscoe & Safford 2008).”
Background
Cited by
Scrutiny, Norms, and Selective Disclosure: A Global Study of Greenwashing
Marquis, C., Toffel, M. W., & Zhou, Y. (2016) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2015.1039 · Cited by 1,680
Keeping up Appearances: Reputational Threat and Impression Management after Social Movement Boycotts
McDonnell, M.-H., & King, B. (2013) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0001839213500032 · Cited by 618
Self-citationMcDonnell, M.-H., King, B. G., & Soule, S. A. (2015) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/0003122415581335 · Cited by 307
Self-citationVasi, I. B., & King, B. G. (2012) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/0003122412448796 · Cited by 286
Self-citationUzunca, B., Rigtering, J. P. C., & Ozcan, P. (2018) · Academy of Management Discoveries · doi:10.5465/amd.2016.0153 · Cited by 209
Metadata
- Authors
- King, B. G., & Pearce, N. A.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Sociology
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 2010-06-01
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 249-267
- ISSN
- 0360-0572 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-2115
- OpenAlex
- W2157428157
- Cited by
- 589
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 5.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Contentiousness of Markets: Politics, Social Movements, and Institutional Change in Markets. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1146/annurev.soc.012809.102606
- The paper
- King, B. G., & Pearce, N. A. (2010). The Contentiousness of Markets: Politics, Social Movements, and Institutional Change in Markets. Annual Review of Sociology. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.012809.102606
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
