‘To participate or not participate, that’s the question’: The role of moral obligation and different risk perceptions on collective action

IF 1.8 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Journal of Social and Political Psychology Pub Date : 2022-08-26 DOI:10.5964/jspp.7207
M. S. Uysal, Y. Acar, Jose-Manuel Sabucedo, H. Çakal
{"title":"‘To participate or not participate, that’s the question’: The role of moral obligation and different risk perceptions on collective action","authors":"M. S. Uysal, Y. Acar, Jose-Manuel Sabucedo, H. Çakal","doi":"10.5964/jspp.7207","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The current research investigates whether moral obligation and perceived close vs. distant risks of high vs. moderate risk collective actions are associated with willingness to participate in collective action in the case of Turkey. Two studies were conducted: one with re-placed university students after the July 15, 2016 coup d'état attempt (high-risk context; N₁ = 258) and one with climate strikes (moderate risk context; N₂ = 162). The findings showed that moral obligation predicts collective action in both studies, however, the strength of this relationship is contingent on the level of subjective likelihood of protest risk in the high-risk collective action (Study 1), but not in the moderate-risk collective action (Study 2). Study 2 extended the findings of Study 1 by showing that higher perceived climate crisis risks (e.g., extinction of many species, destroying the vast majority of vital resources; distant risk), but not risks of protest (e.g., being arrested, blacklisted; close risk) predicts higher willingness to participate in collective action. We discussed the role of moral obligation and different risk perceptions (e.g., distant, close, moderate, high) on climate movements and collective action of marginalized groups in repressive political contexts.","PeriodicalId":16973,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Social and Political Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Social and Political Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.7207","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The current research investigates whether moral obligation and perceived close vs. distant risks of high vs. moderate risk collective actions are associated with willingness to participate in collective action in the case of Turkey. Two studies were conducted: one with re-placed university students after the July 15, 2016 coup d'état attempt (high-risk context; N₁ = 258) and one with climate strikes (moderate risk context; N₂ = 162). The findings showed that moral obligation predicts collective action in both studies, however, the strength of this relationship is contingent on the level of subjective likelihood of protest risk in the high-risk collective action (Study 1), but not in the moderate-risk collective action (Study 2). Study 2 extended the findings of Study 1 by showing that higher perceived climate crisis risks (e.g., extinction of many species, destroying the vast majority of vital resources; distant risk), but not risks of protest (e.g., being arrested, blacklisted; close risk) predicts higher willingness to participate in collective action. We discussed the role of moral obligation and different risk perceptions (e.g., distant, close, moderate, high) on climate movements and collective action of marginalized groups in repressive political contexts.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“参与还是不参与,这是个问题”:道德义务的作用和对集体行动的不同风险认知
在土耳其的案例中,目前的研究调查了道德义务和感知到的高与中等风险集体行动的近与远风险是否与参与集体行动的意愿有关。进行了两项研究:一项是在2016年7月15日的未遂政变(高风险背景)后重新安置的大学生;N₁= 258)和一个气候罢工(中等风险情况;N₂= 162)。研究结果表明,道德义务预测了两项研究中的集体行动,然而,这种关系的强度取决于高风险集体行动(研究1)中抗议风险的主观可能性水平,而不是中等风险集体行动(研究2)。研究2扩展了研究1的发现,表明更高的感知气候危机风险(例如,许多物种灭绝,破坏绝大多数重要资源;遥远的风险),但不是抗议的风险(例如,被逮捕,被列入黑名单;接近风险)预示着更高的参与集体行动的意愿。我们讨论了在高压政治背景下,道德义务和不同的风险感知(例如,远、近、中等、高)在气候运动和边缘化群体集体行动中的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Social and Political Psychology
Journal of Social and Political Psychology Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
43
审稿时长
40 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Social and Political Psychology (JSPP) is a peer-reviewed open-access journal (without author fees), published online. It publishes articles at the intersection of social and political psychology that substantially advance the understanding of social problems, their reduction, and the promotion of social justice. It also welcomes work that focuses on socio-political issues from related fields of psychology (e.g., peace psychology, community psychology, cultural psychology, environmental psychology, media psychology, economic psychology) and encourages submissions with interdisciplinary perspectives. JSPP is comprehensive and integrative in its approach. It publishes high-quality work from different epistemological, methodological, theoretical, and cultural perspectives and from different regions across the globe. It provides a forum for innovation, questioning of assumptions, and controversy and debate. JSPP aims to give creative impetuses for academic scholarship and for applications in education, policymaking, professional practice, and advocacy and social action. It intends to transcend the methodological and meta-theoretical divisions and paradigm clashes that characterize the field of social and political psychology, and to counterbalance the current overreliance on the hypothetico-deductive model of science, quantitative methodology, and individualistic explanations by also publishing work following alternative traditions (e.g., qualitative and mixed-methods research, participatory action research, critical psychology, social representations, narrative, and discursive approaches). Because it is published online, JSPP can avoid a bias against research that requires more space to be presented adequately.
期刊最新文献
Heterosexist system justification: Identity and ideology explain variability in sexual minorities’ opposition to homophobia and support for LGBTQ+ rights Predicting radicalism after perceived injustice: The role of separatist identity, sacred values, and police violence Gender inequality discourse as a tool to express attitudes towards Islam Colonial mechanisms for repudiating indigenous sovereignties in Australia: A Foucauldian-genealogical exploration of Australia day ‘Warming up’ to populist leaders: A comparative analysis of Argentina and Spain
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1