Cited by 129Social Movements and Cultural IdentityManagement and Organizational StudiesPolitical Influence and Corporate Strategies

The Tactical Disruptiveness of Social Movements: Sources of Market and Mediated Disruption in Corporate Boycotts

Brayden G King·2011·Social Problems

Abstract

This article examines factors associated with social movements’ abilities to disrupt corporate targets. I identify two kinds of disruption: market disruption and mediated disruption. Market disruption deters the ability of the corporate target to effectively accrue and use market resources, while mediated disruption occurs as a tactic communicates a movement's claims about the target through third party intermediaries, like the media, thereby disrupting the target's image and reputation. Using data on corporate boycotts in the United States from 1990 to 2005, the analyses assess the extent to which movement characteristics or target characteristics cause stock price declines of boycotted companies—i.e., market disruption—and the frequency of national media attention given to boycotts—i.e., mediated disruption. The analyses indicate that target characteristics matter more in shaping a boycott's initial market disruption; however, both movement and target characteristics affect mediated disruption. Certain movement characteristics, like social movement organization (SMO) formality, public demonstrations, and celebrity endorsements, enable mediated disruption but have no effect on market disruption. A firm's size makes it vulnerable to both market and mediated disruption, while slack resources help a firm avoid market disruption. A target's reputational ranking initially buffers it from market disruption but increases its vulnerability to mediated disruption. The results indicat…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1525/sp.2011.58.4.491

Cites

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.

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?

  • Organizations with strong generalized reputations are generally more visible and disproportionately celebrated by the public and media.

    “Organizations that have established strong generalized reputations are generally more visible than their peers and are disproportionately celebrated by the public”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 105 · Cited by 129

Authors
King, B. G.
Affiliations
Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
Brayden G King
Venue
Social Problems
Published
2011-11
Volume
58
Issue
4
Pages
491-517
ISSN
  • 0037-7791 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-8533
OpenAlex
W2287270320
Cited by
129
References
105
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
16.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Social Problems (publishedVersion)
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 › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Political Influence and Corporate Strategies
Keywords
social movements, corporate boycott, market disruption, stock price decline, media attention, corporate reputation, firm size, slack resources, social movement organizations, celebrity endorsement, public demonstrations, corporate social responsibility

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