The 2017 Women's March was estimated to be the largest single-day protest in recorded history. Yet, whether the March was a success or a failure was debated in national media. How does framing of past collective action as success or failure influence group members’ subsequent motivation to engage in collective action? Three studies (n = 1,497) examined the impact of success and failure framing of the 2017 Women's March on women's intentions to engage in collective action for gender equality and its psychological antecedents. Success framing increased efficacy beliefs, hope, and action intentions. Failure ascribed to external factors increased conventional action intentions, and it also increased radical action intentions among high movement identifiers. We did not find evidence for the hypothesized demobilizing effects of internally ascribed failure. In sum, this research provides evidence for mobilizing effects of past success, but not for demobilizing effects of past failure. Additional online materials for this article are available on PWQ’s website at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/03616843241286811
AubinR. M.AmiotC. E.Fontaine-BoyteC. (2016). The impact of group power and its perceived stability on hope and collective action: Applying the concept of hopelessness at the collective level of analysis. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 20(2), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1037/gdn0000045
2.
BeckerJ. C.TauschN.WagnerU. (2011). Emotional consequences of collective action participation: Differentiating self-directed and outgroup-directed emotions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(12), 1587–1598. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211414145
3.
BeckwithK. (2015). Narratives of defeat: Explaining the effects of loss in social movements. The Journal of Politics, 77(1), 2–13. https://doi.org/10.1086/678531
4.
BenfordR. D. (1993). “You could be the hundredth monkey”: Collective action frames and vocabularies of motive within the nuclear disarmament movement. Sociological Quarterly, 34(2), 195–216. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1993.tb00387.x
BilaliR.GodfreyE. B.FreelS. H. (2020). How an election loss leads to a social movement: Reactions to the 2016 US presidential election among liberals predict later collective action and social movement identification. British Journal of Social Psychology, 59(1), 227–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12335
7.
BoothroydS.BowenR.CattermoleA.Chang-SwansonK.DaltropH.DwyerS.GunnA.KramerB.McCartanD. M.NagraJ.SamimiS.Yoon-PotkinsQ. (2017). (Re)producing feminine bodies: Emergent spaces through contestation in the Women’s March on Washington. Gender, Place & Culture, 24(5), 711–721. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2017.1339673
8.
BuryS.WenzelM.WoodyattL. (2019). Against the odds: Hope as an antecedent of support for climate change action. British Journal of Social Psychology, 59(2), 289–310. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12343
DruryJ.ReicherS. (2005). Explaining enduring empowerment: A comparative study of collective action and psychological outcomes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35(1), 35–58. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.231
13.
DuncanL. E. (2012). The psychology of collective action. In DeauxK.SnyderM. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of personality and social psychology (pp. 781–803). Oxford University Press.
14.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA. G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39 (2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
15.
FaupelA. (2010). The pitfalls of winning: A comparison of two first-wave feminist organizations. In CoyP. G. (Ed.), Research in social movements, conflicts and change (Vol. 31, pp. 69–101). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0163-786X(2011)0000031006
FisherD. R.DowD. M.RayR. (2017). Intersectionality takes it to the streets: Mobilizing across diverse interests for the Women’s March. Science Advances, 3(9), eaao1390. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aao1390
18.
FreelS. H.BilaliR. (2022). Putting the past into action: How historical narratives shape participation in collective action. European Journal of Social Psychology, 52 (1), 204–222. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2813
19.
FreelS.BilaliR.GodfreyE. (2022). We are “the Resistance”: Predictors and consequences of self-categorization into the emerging movement to oppose Trump. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 25(2), 489–508. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1368430220974758
20.
HayesA. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
Lizzio-WilsonM.ThomasE. F.LouisW. R.WilcocksonB.AmiotC. E.MoghaddamF. M.McGartyC. (2021). How collective-action failure shapes group heterogeneity and engagement in conventional and radical action over time. Psychological Science, 32(4), 519–535. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620970562
23.
LouisW. R.Lizzio-WilsonM.CibichM.McGartyC.ThomasE. F.AmiotC. E.WeberN.RheeJ.DaviesG.RachT.GohS.MoghaddamF. (2022). Failure leads protest movements to support more radical tactics. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 13(3), 675–687. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506211037296
24.
LouisW.ThomasE.McGartyC.Lizzio-WilsonM.AmiotC.MoghaddamF. (2020). The volatility of collective action: Theoretical analysis and empirical data. Political Psychology, 41(S1), 35–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12671
25.
LuginbuhlJ. E.CroweD. H.KahanJ. P. (1975). Causal attributions for success and failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(1), 86–93. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076172
MikulaG. (2003). Testing an attribution-of-blame model of judgments of injustice. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33(6), 793–811. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.184
29.
MusgroveL.McGartyC. (2008). Opinion-based group membership as a predictor of collec- tive emotional responses and support for pro- and anti-war action. Social Psychology, 39, 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335.39.1.37
30.
SaabR.TauschN.SpearsR.CheungW. Y. (2015). Acting in solidarity: Testing an extended dual pathway model of collective action by bystander group members. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54(3), 539–560. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12095
SnyderC. R. (1994). The psychology of hope: You can get there from here. Free Press.
33.
StaggenborgS. (1998). Social movement communities and cycles of protest: The emergence and maintenance of a local women's movement. Social Problems, 45(2), 180–204. https://doi.org/10.2307/3097243
34.
StewartA. L.LeachC. W.BilaliR.ÇelikA. B.CidamA. (2019). Explaining different orientations to the 2013 Gezi Park demonstrations in Istanbul, Turkey. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(4), 829–852. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12316
35.
StuartA.ThomasE. F.DonaghueN. (2018). “I don't really want to be associated with the self-righteous left extreme”: Disincentives to participation in collective action. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 6(1), 242–270. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v6i1.567
36.
TauschN.BeckerJ. C. (2013). Emotional reactions to success and failure of collective action as predictors of future action intentions: A longitudinal investigation in the context of student protests in Germany. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52(3), 525–542. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2012.02109.x
37.
UluğÖ. M.AcarY. G. (2018). What happens after the protests? Understanding protest outcomes through multi-level social change. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 24(1), 44–53. https://doi.org/10.1037/pac0000269
38.
van ZomerenM.LeachC. W.SpearsR. (2012). Protesters as “Passionate Economists”: A dynamic dual pathway model of approach coping with collective disadvantage. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(2), 180–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868311430835
39.
van ZomerenM.PaulsI. L.Cohen-ChenS. (2019). Is hope good for motivating collective action in the context of climate change? Differentiating hope’s emotion-and problem-focused coping functions. Global Environmental Change, 58, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.04.003
40.
van ZomerenM.PostmesT.SpearsR. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134(4), 504–535. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.504
41.
VossK. (1996). The collapse of a social movement: The interplay of mobilizing structures, framing, and political opportunities in the Knights of Labor. Cambridge University Press.
42.
WlodarczykA.BasabeN.PáezD.ZumetaL. (2017). Hope and anger as mediators between collective action frames and participation in collective mobilization: The case of 15-M. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 5(1), 200–223. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v5i1.471
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
