Research Question: Anger is believed to be a powerful motivator of group mobilization. The objective of this dissertation is to examine the role of anger in assisting individuals to overcome the collective action problem. Theory: I utilize Intergroup Emotional Theory in order to build and test hypotheses on when and how anger will lead to mobilization. Methods: I test my hypotheses through four experiments. Experiment 1 examines how individual level anger impacts mobilization. In Experiment 2, I implement a test to induce anger towards an out-group. In Experiment 3, I then examine how anger towards an out-group impacts mobilization under the contexts of threat and competition. In Experiment 4, I look at different threatening contexts and how anger towards an out-group, limited information, and discrimination all work together to impact mobilization. Results: In Experiment 1, I found that when an angry subject is asked to take action in a task unrelated to that anger, the subject fails to mobilize. In Experiment 2, I built and tested two experimental manipulations of out-group anger and was successful in inducing anger directed towards an out-group. Having successfully induced out-group anger, Experiment 3 then demonstrated that out-group anger increases mobilization under competition, but not under threat. The mobilizing effects of out-group anger was limited under threat because subjects also felt angry towards their own in-group. Lastly, I reexamine different variations of threat on mobilization. I attempt to reduce increases in in-group anger by limiting information and discriminating against the angry group, but as I stack the deck against the angry group, they responded by mobilizing less. Conclusions: The potential for anger to mobilize may be contingent upon the level of out-group and in-group anger within a group. These findings collectively shed light on how out-group anger can either facilitate action or lead to inaction.

No description available.

No description available.

This thesis investigated the effects of intergroup contact on different types of collective action tendencies among advantaged and disadvantaged groups. Studies 1 and 2 tested the simultaneous effects of intergroup contact and established predictors of collective action on collective action tendencies and ingroup and outgroup oriented policies among Blacks and Whites in South Africa, and compared the effects of intergroup contact and social identity on collective action tendencies via relative deprivation and group efficacy. The findings revealed that while social identity was positively associated with collective action tendencies, both directly and indirectly, effects of contact were negative and indirect via relative deprivation and group efficacy. Studies 3 and 4 investigated the effects of contact and social identity on collective action tendencies via perceived threats. Using data from Turkish and Kurdish groups in Turkey, I found that social identity predicted collective action tendencies positively, both directly and indirectly, while it predicted outgroup attitudes negatively and indirectly via perceived threats. Intergroup contact, on the other hand, predicted outgroup attitudes positively, both directly and indirectly, and collective action tendencies negatively via perceived threats. In Study 5, intergroup contact was positively associated, both directly and indirectly, via perspective taking and collective guilt, associated with outgroup oriented collective action tendencies. In Study 6, the effect of social identity on ingroup oriented collective action was positive and direct. Intergroup contact with the weaker minority group, on the other hand, was positively associated with outgroup oriented collective action tendencies via perspective taking. Additionally, intergroup contact with the majority outgroup moderated this relationship. When participants reported more contact with the majority group, intergroup contact with the weaker minority was not associated with outgroup oriented collective action tendencies. However, when the participants reported less contact with the majority group, intergroup contact positively predicted outgroup oriented collective action tendencies. Finally, Study 7 investigated the effects of two different dimensions of contact, contact with the majority and minority on collective action, via outgroup attitudes, dual-identification, and common ingroup identity in a three wave longitudinal design (N=610) among Turkish Cypriots in northern Cyprus. While the results did not support findings from the previous studies on the so-called paradoxical effects of contact on collective action tendencies, they revealed a robust negative reciprocal relationship between outgroup attitudes toward Greek Cypriots and collective action tendencies.

Vaccines famously possess positive externalities that make them susceptible to the collective action dilemma: when I get vaccinated, I protect not only myself, but also those who I might otherwise have infected. Thus, some people will have an incentive to free ride on the immunity of others. In a population of rational agents, the critical level of vaccination uptake required for herd immunity will therefore be difficult to attain in the long run, which poses difficulties for disease eradication. In this doctoral dissertation, I explore different implications of the collective action dilemma of vaccination, and different ways of ameliorating it. First: given that coercion or force could solve the dilemma, and democracies may be less likely to engage in policies that violate the physical integrity of citizens, democracies may also be at a disadvantage compared to non-democracies when securing herd immunity. In essay I, I show that this is, empirically, indeed the case. Barring the use of extensive coercion therefore necessitates other solutions. In essay II, I highlight the exception to individual rationality found in other-regarding motivations such as altruism. Our moral psychology has likely evolved to take other's welfare into account, but the extent of our prosocial motivations vary: a wider form of altruism that encompasses not just family or friends, but strangers, is likely to give way to a more narrow form when humans pair-bond and have children. This dynamic is shown to apply to the sentiments underlying vaccination behavior as well: appeals to the welfare of society of getting vaccinated have positive effects on vaccination propensity, but this effect disappears in people with families and children. On this demographic, appeals to the welfare of close loved ones instead appears to have large effects. In essay III, I investigate whether the prosocial motivations underlying vaccination behavior are liable to be affected by motivation crowding - that is, whether they are crowded out when introducing economic incentives to get vaccinated. I find that on average, economic incentives do not have adverse effects, but for a small minority of highly prosocially motivated people, they might.

The aim of this thesis is to extend the social identity model of crowd behaviour (Reicher, 1984, 1987, 1996) by exploring the experience of collective participation, with an emphasis upon quality of within-crowd social relations (‘relatedness') and collective emotionality. A multi-method research strategy is employed to study these topics at a variety of crowd events. Studies 1 and 2 use ethnography and retrospective interviews at a student protest and public screenings of football matches to generate hypotheses for subsequent testing. Study 3 then tests these hypotheses by means of questionnaire data collected during Study 2. Using an experimental ‘visualisation' paradigm, Study 4 demonstrates the role of shared identity (and not simply self-categorization) in generating relatedness. Studies 5 and 6 present evidence that groups of high relatedness participants experience identity-relevant stimuli as more emotionally intense than low relatedness groups. Study 7 concludes the empirical work by using questionnaire data collected at political protests to test a model of collective experience based upon the findings of the previous studies. The thesis argues that a perception of shared identity with co-present others can positively transform social relations towards relatedness (connectedness, validation and recognition). Relatedness may then be experienced emotionally, and facilitate the realisation of group goals which may also have emotional consequences. Strength of social identity is also noted as an antecedent to group-based emotion. In this way the analysis offers three ways in which social identity may lead to emotionality of collective experience, contradicting ‘classic' crowd psychology in which crowd emotion was rooted in a loss of identity. Preliminary evidence is also presented suggesting that the experience of collective participation may have a role to play in determining future social identification and participation in co-action.

Written with a contemporary European context of economic, social and reproductive crisis in mind, this thesis presents research about, from and for social movements that struggle against precarity, austerity and capitalist accumulation. Based on accounts and analyses of feminist-autonomist militant practice and networks, this research project revolves around two terms: care and creativity. It maps out a historical-genealogical shift from a paradigm of creativity (reflected in neoliberal governance as well as in social movements of the decades before and after the millenium) to one oriented around care (reflected in the neo-communitarian policy as well as practices of commoning that arise with social and economic crisis in Europe). Structured into three broad sections on work, organisation and governance, the questions at stake here revolve around the possibilities and imaginaries of politics that affirm care and creativity in relation to one another. On the level of work, this means struggles within and against precarity, reproductive and illegalized work; on the level of organisation, it means relating the figure of the network to that of the care chain and the family, confronting new transnational forms of alliance and care; and on the level of governance, it is the relation between neoliberalism and its new communitarian forms that is in question. What the collectives, campaigns and networks constituting the ‘field’ of this research have in common is that they re-think the contemporary relations between autonomy and heteronomy, the global and the situated, as well as macro- and micropolitics. Dwelling on collective experiences and knowledges, this investigation takes care to articulate the dimensions of subjectivity, relation and association with those of economy and governance. Concerned and engaged with contexts of struggle and commoning in the face of crisis politics, precarity and dispersed sociality, a methodology of militant participatory-action research serves to map out contexts of practice in Spain, the UK and Argentina as of 2010-2013.

In capital-intensive organizations formed to plan new infrastructure development projects, the promoter of the project (as a single organization or as part of a coalition) rarely controls all of the critical resources required to achieve the system-level goal. Instead, the direct control of interdependent resources is diffused across multiple legally independent stakeholders (Lundrigan, Gil and Puranam, 2015). As such, the core structure in these so-called 'megaproject' meta-organizations is a classic empirical instantiation of a pluralistic setting (Denis, Langley and Rouleau, 2007). In pluralistic settings, the authority to make strategic decisions is diffused across actors with heterogeneous objectives, interests, values and expertise. Hence, to achieve the goal, the promoter needs to cooperate with multiple stakeholders. Since some critical resources are not transactional or measurable, the cooperation problem is not a 'buy' problem. Instead, resolving the cooperation problem necessitates a search for mutually consensual solutions that reconcile conflicting interests. Moreover, this search unfolds without recourse to top-down authority characteristic of unitary organizations. Therefore, the promoter has to play a coordinating role that traverses organizational boundaries to coalesce competing preferences into a one-off plan. Against this backdrop, this doctoral research investigates how designed rules and structures influence consensus-building during the collective development process. We conduct the research by drawing on two cognitive lenses consolidated in two vast bodies of literature that have remained largely disparate: organization design (Puranam, Alexy and Reitzig, 2014; Burton & Obel, 1984; Lawrence & Lorsch, 1967; March & Simon, 1958; Mintzberg, 1979) and collective action (Ostrom 1990, 2005). Combining these two research streams allows us to investigate how to resolve the coordination and cooperation problems inherent in pluralistic settings. Our research method is a single case study with embedded units of analysis. This method allows us to probe deeply into operational details while maintaining the holistic features of the focal phenomena (Yin, 2009; Yin, 2013; Siggelkow, 2007; Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007). Our focal case is the planning stage of High Speed 2 (HS2), a new multi-billion-pound cross-country railway project in the UK. The scheme is promoted by the UK Government. However, the planning effort has required that the Government share local decision rights for planning choices related to the stations along the route with multiple local authorities. These local authorities are independent, resource-rich stakeholders who are impacted by local choices, and they have deep knowledge of local needs and constraints. Thus, in the HS2 case, organizing for collective action is a prerequisite for achieving the system-goal. Our research presents two major theoretical contributions. First, we contribute to organizational design literature by advancing our knowledge of how organizations can be designed to achieve system-level goals when decision-making authority is diffused across multiple organizational boundaries. Specifically, we advance our conceptual understanding of polycentric systems--a form of organizing that distributes decision-making authority across multiple local groups of independent stakeholders. As such, we illuminate the designed processes and structures that enable the core actors in a polycentric system to integrate effort and reconcile their differences over time. Organization design choices are about designing governance structures that enable and constrain collective action. Hence, we also contribute to the project management literature with insights on the governance of the planning stage of megaprojects. Specifically, we offer a deeper understanding of how to organize an inter-organizational setting to make planning decisions and manage interdependencies with the environment. Furthermore, we reveal that ambiguous evaluations of megaproject performance are rooted in collective efforts to resolve coordination and cooperation problems. Our research is grounded in the planning effort for the HS2 project and thus embedded in the UK context. We, therefore, encourage future studies to investigate the generalizability of our claims on organizing for collective action in other institutional contexts.

En förutsättning för att kunna förhindra att terrorattacker utförs är kunskap om de bakomliggande motiven och drivkrafterna. Om vi känner till de bakomliggande motiven och drivkrafterna finns det möjlighet att kunna påverka dessa faktorer och därigenom minska risken för nya terrorattacker. I den här studien undersöker jag om collective action frames och rational choice teorin var för sig eller tillsammans kan förklara orsakerna till terrorism. Fram till idag har den strategiska modellen varit den mest använda teorin för att förklara orsaker till terrorism. Modellen utgår från rational choice teorin men har avgränsats till att enbart hantera politiska faktorer, vilket har kritiserats. Kritikerna menar att människors känslor har en betydelse för deras handlingar. Här prövar jag två teorier som teoretiskt kan förklara känslornas betydelse för att människor utför terrorhandlingar, dels rational choice teorin och dels collective action frames. Studien visar att teorierna kompletterar varandra men det är enbart rational choice teorin som förklarar orsaker till handlingarna, och då endast rationellt motiverade instrumentella handlingar. Det är många handlingar som inte kan förklaras med någon av teorierna. Slutsatsen är att det sannolikt inte finns en generell teori som kan förklara alla olika typer av handlingar ner till en sådan detaljnivå att resultatet faktiskt är användbart. Det finns många olika motiv och drivkrafter som kan ligga bakom en handling och det finns så många olika användningsområden för resultaten att en enda teori skulle bli oanvändbar då det sannolikt är alldeles för många parametrar att hantera inom ett och samma teoribygge.

No description available.