Conceptualizing Political Opportunity
Abstract
This article reviews central problems in political opportunity theory and explores the implications of adopting certain conceptualizations of political opportunities for explaining the emergence, development, and influence of protest movements. Results from multivariate analyses of civil rights protest, organizational formation, and policy outcomes indicate significant variation depending on (1) whether the political opportunity structure is conceptualized broadly or narrowly, (2) the dependent variable concerned, and (3) the underlying assumptions about the mechanisms through which opportunities translate into action. We argue that the variation in results can best be understood by adopting a broader understanding of protest and the political process and that theory development requires more careful and more explicit — although not necessarily more uniform — conceptualization and specification of political opportunity variables and models.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Gruppen wägen in ihren Handlungsentscheidungen mögliche Optionen auf Basis ihrer gruppenspezifischen Kapazitäten und der strukturellen Umgebung rationalistisch ab, wobei der strukturellen Umgebung ein bedeutender Stellenwert beigemessen wird.
“In ihren Handlungsentscheidungen wägen Gruppen also mögliche Optionen auf Basis ihrer gruppenspezifischen Kapazitäten und der strukturellen Umgebung in rationalistischer Natur ab, wobei letzteren ein bedeutender Stellenwert beigemessen wird.”
From Taxation Without Representation (2010) · cites this paper as Meyer & Minkoff 2004
Die politikwissenschaftlichen Erklärungsansätze bauen auf neoinstitutionellen Modellen aus dem Forschungsfeld der sozialen Bewegungen auf, nämlich politischen Opportunitätsstrukturen.
“Die dabei angewandten politikwissenschaftlichen Erklärungsansätze bauen auf neoinstitutionellen Modellen aus dem Forschungsfeld der sozialen Bewegungen auf, nämlich politischen Opportunitätsstrukturen.”
From Taxation Without Representation (2010) · cites this paper as Meyer & Minkoff 2004:1457f
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Briscoe, F., & Safford, S. (2008) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2189/asqu.53.3.460 · Cited by 335 · see citing works
The Context of Creating Space: Assessing the Likelihood of College LGBT Center Presence
Fine, L. E. (2012) · Journal of College Student Development · doi:10.1353/csd.2012.0017 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Taxation Without Representation
(2010) · Hong Kong University Press eBooks · doi:10.5790/hongkong/9789622090996.001.0001 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
- Authors
- Meyer, D. S., & Minkoff, D. C.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Irvine (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- Corresponding author
- Meyer, D. S.
- Venue
- Social Forces
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2004-06-01
- Volume
- 82
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1457-1492
- ISSN
- 0037-7732 (ISSN-L)
- 1534-7605
- OpenAlex
- W2140991242
- Cited by
- 1,051
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 35 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 61 · 2022: 84 · 2021: 60 · 2020: 81 · 2019: 91 · 2018: 69 · 2017: 53 · 2016: 62 · 2015: 42 · 2014: 44 · 2013: 39 · 2012: 46
- FWCI
- 59.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Social Forces (publishedVersion)
- Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Movements and Cultural Identity
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Race, History, and American Society
- Keywords
- political opportunity structure, protest movements, civil rights protest, organizational formation, policy outcomes, political process
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