The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Acts of Dissent: New Developments in the Study of Protest
Abstract
Chapter 1 Introduction: Protest as a Subject of Empirical Research Part 2 Methodological Issues Chapter 3 Studying Contentious Politics: From Event-ful History to Cycles of Collective Action Chapter 4 Methodological Issues in Collecting Protest Event Data: Units of Analysis, Sources and Sampling, Coding Problems Chapter 5 The Use of Protest Event Data in Comparative Research: Cross-National Comparability, Sampling Methods and Robustness Part 6 Protest and the Mass Media Chapter 7 Electronic and Print Media Representations of Washington, DC Demonstrations, 1982 and 1991: A Demography of Description Bias Chapter 8 Determining Selection Bias in Local and National Newspaper Reports on Protest Events Chapter 9 Unpacking Protest Events: A Description Bias Analysis of Media Records with Systematic Direct Observations of Collective Action-The 1995 March for Life on Washington, DC Part 10 Applications: Protest in Different Contexts Chapter 11 Plus ca change, moins ca change. Demonstrations in France During the Nineteen-Eighties Chapter 12 Radical Protest in Switzerland Chapter 13 Comparative Event Analysis: Black Civil Rights Protest in South Africa and the United States Chapter 14 Event Analysis in Transitional Societies: Protest Mobilization in the Former Soviet Union Chapter 15 Protest Event Analysis in the Study of Democratic Consolidation: Poland, 1989-1993
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
Cited by
Conceptualizing Political Opportunity
Meyer, D. S., & Minkoff, D. C. (2004) · Social Forces · doi:10.1353/sof.2004.0082 · Cited by 1,051
Koopmans, R., & Statham, P. (1999) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/210357 · Cited by 438
Self-citationSmith, J., McCarthy, J. D., McPhail, C., & Augustyn, B. (2001) · Social Forces · doi:10.1353/sof.2001.0053 · Cited by 396
Defining a typology of peri-urban land-use conflicts – A case study from Switzerland
von der Dunk, A., Grêt-Regamey, A., Dalang, T., & Hersperger, A. M. (2011) · Landscape and Urban Planning · doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.02.007 · Cited by 326
Who Demonstrates? Antistate Rebels, Conventional Participants, or Everyone?
Norris, P., Walgrave, S., & Van Aelst, P. (2005) · Comparative Politics · doi:10.2307/20072882 · Cited by 283
Metadata
- Authors
- Mueller, C., Rucht, D., Koopmans, R., & Neidhardt, F.
- Venue
- Contemporary Sociology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2000-01
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 275
- ISSN
- 0094-3061 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2147925992
- Cited by
- 213
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 37.74
- 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: Acts of Dissent: New Developments in the Study of Protest. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2654974
- The paper
- Mueller, C., Rucht, D., Koopmans, R., & Neidhardt, F. (2000). Acts of Dissent: New Developments in the Study of Protest. Contemporary Sociology. https://doi.org/10.2307/2654974
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.
