Cited by 70Social Movements and Cultural IdentityManagement and Organizational StudiesSocial and Intergroup Psychology

Examining Anger’s Immobilizing Effect on Institutional Insiders’ Action Intentions in Social Movements

DeCelles, Katherine A., Sonenshein, Scott, King, Brayden G.·2020·Administrative Science Quarterly

Abstract

We theorize that anger incited by a social movement, which has a mobilizing effect among outsider activists, might immobilize collective action intentions for institutional insiders—those sympathetic to the movement and employed by its target. We conducted initial field surveys across a spectrum of social movements, including Occupy Wall Street and #metoo, as well as those related to business sustainability and gun control, which showed that institutional insiders are often just as angry as outsider activists. But the evidence from those surveys did not show that social movement anger translated into collective action intentions among institutional insiders. We tested our theory deductively with an experiment conducted with participants who were supportive of social movement issues in their organizations. Overall, our results show that anger about a social movement issue relates to greater collective action intentions among outsider activists but not among institutional insiders. Instead of anger emboldening institutional insiders to act despite the potential costs, anger triggers fear about the potential negative consequences of collective action in the workplace, which in turn results in withdrawal. While social movements often rely on anger frames to mobilize sympathizers, our work suggests that this practice may paradoxically cause fear that immobilizes those uniquely positioned to be able to influence organizations to change.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0001839219879646

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
DeCelles, K. A., Sonenshein, S., & King, B. G.
Affiliations
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Rice University (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
DeCelles, Katherine A.
Venue
Administrative Science Quarterly
Published
2019-10-21
Volume
65
Issue
4
Pages
847-886
ISSN
  • 0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-3815
OpenAlex
W2981995135
Cited by
70
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 3
FWCI
10.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Administrative Science Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Funders
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (435-2013-0086SSHRC)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Movements and Cultural Identity
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
anger, social movements, collective action intentions, fear, organizational change, Occupy Wall Street, #MeToo, gun control, corporate sustainability

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