Brown Olivia, Smith Laura G E, Davidson Brittany I, Racek Daniel, Joinson Adam
University of Bath, UK.
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Germany.
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2024 Jul 31:1461672241266866. doi: 10.1177/01461672241266866.
Psychological theories of mobilization tend to focus on explaining people's motivations for action, rather than mobilization ("activation") processes. To investigate the online behaviors associated with mobilization, we compared the online communications data of 26 people who subsequently mobilized to right-wing extremist action and 48 people who held similar extremist views but did not mobilize ( = 119,473 social media posts). In a three-part analysis, involving content analysis (Part 1), topic modeling (Part 2), and machine learning (Part 3), we showed that communicating ideological or hateful content was not related to mobilization, but rather mobilization was positively related to talking about violent action, operational planning, and logistics. Our findings imply that to explain mobilization to extremist action, rather than the motivations for action, theories of collective action should extend beyond how individuals express grievances and anger, to how they equip themselves with the "know-how" and capability to act.
动员的心理学理论往往侧重于解释人们采取行动的动机,而非动员(“激活”)过程。为了调查与动员相关的在线行为,我们比较了26名随后动员起来采取右翼极端主义行动的人和48名持有类似极端主义观点但未动员的人的在线通信数据(=119,473条社交媒体帖子)。在一个由内容分析(第1部分)、主题建模(第2部分)和机器学习(第3部分)组成的三部分分析中,我们发现传播意识形态或仇恨性内容与动员无关,而动员与谈论暴力行动、行动规划和后勤保障呈正相关。我们的研究结果表明,为了解释向极端主义行动的动员,而非行动动机,集体行动理论应超越个体如何表达不满和愤怒,延伸至他们如何为自己配备行动的“技能”和能力。