How does repression reshape the way online activists engage with target audiences? While prior research has primarily examined changes in overall online participation, it has paid less attention to how activists adjust their strategies in response to repression. Addressing this gap, this article argues that repression incentivizes online activists to broaden their support base by promoting inter-group engagement and signaling inclusivity. Focusing on the 2011 Occupy Wall Street movement, the study analyzes Twitter interactions using network measures of assortativity and cross-group tie proportions. It applies permutation tests and ARIMA-based Interrupted Time Series (ITS) analysis to compare network patterns across key phases, delineated by the Brooklyn Bridge mass arrests on October 1 and the eviction threat of Zuccotti Park on October 13. The results show that repression triggers a significant decrease in assortativity, indicating increased inter-group engagement, while cross-group tie proportions remain stable, suggesting structural rather than isolated behavioral changes.
AlmeidaP. (2008). Waves of protest: Popular struggle in El Salvador, 1925-2005. University of Minnesota Press.
2.
ArajB. (2008). Harsh state repression as a cause of suicide bombing: The case of the Palestinian–Israeli conflict. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 31(4), 284–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/10576100801925273
3.
ArslanalpM.ErkmenT. D. (2025). Resistance under confinement: Resilience of protests and their limits in authoritarian Turkey. Third World Quarterly, 46(2), 170–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2024.2355163
4.
BakkeK. M.CunninghamK. G.SeymourL. J. M. (2012). A plague of initials: Fragmentation, cohesion, and infighting in civil wars. Perspectives on Politics, 10(2), 265–283. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592712000667
5.
BeissingerM. R. (2013). The semblance of democratic revolution: Coalitions in ukraine’s Orange revolution. American Political Science Review, 107(3), 574–592. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055413000294
6.
BellS. R.MurdieA. (2018). The apparatus for violence: Repression, violent protest, and civil war in a cross-national framework. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 35(4), 336–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/0738894215626848
7.
BenfordR. D.SnowD. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 611–639. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611
8.
BuccafurriF.LaxG.NoceraA. (2015). A new form of assortativity in online social networks. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 80, 56–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2015.03.006
9.
ChangP. Y. (2008). Unintended consequences of repression: Alliance formation in south korea’s democracy movement (1970-1979). Social Forces, 87(2), 651–677. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.0.0153
10.
CunninghamK. G.DahlM.FrugéA. (2017). Strategies of resistance: Diversification and diffusion. American Journal of Political Science, 61(3), 591–605. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12304
11.
EarlJ. (2003). Tanks, tear gas, and taxes: Toward a theory of movement repression. Sociological Theory, 21(1), 44–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9558.00175
EarlJ.BeyerJ. L. (2014). The dynamics of backlash online: Anonymous and the battle for WikiLeaks. In WoehrleL. M. (Ed.), Research in social movements, conflicts and change (37, pp. 207–233). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0163-786X20140000037007
14.
FeldsteinS. (2021). The rise of digital repression: How technology is reshaping power, politics, and resistance. Oxford University Press.
15.
FinkelE. (2015). The phoenix effect of state repression: Jewish resistance during the holocaust. American Political Science Review, 109(2), 339–353. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000305541500009X
FranciscoR. A. (1995). The relationship between coercion and protest: An empirical evaluation in three coercive states. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 39(2), 263–282. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002795039002003
18.
FranciscoR. A. (1996). Coercion and protest: An empirical test in two democratic states. American Journal of Political Science, 40(4), 1179. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111747
19.
GohdesA. R. (2015). Pulling the plug: Network disruptions and violence in civil conflict. Journal of Peace Research, 52(3), 352–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343314551398
20.
GohdesA. R. (2020). Repression technology: Internet accessibility and state violence. American Journal of Political Science, 64(3), 488–503. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12509
21.
González-BailónS.Borge-HolthoeferJ.MorenoY. (2013). Broadcasters and hidden influentials in online protest diffusion. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(7), 943–965. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479371
22.
GurrT. R. (1970). Why men rebel (4. Printing). Princeton University Press.
23.
Hafner-BurtonE. M.KahlerM.MontgomeryA. H. (2009). Network analysis for international relations. International Organization, 63(3), 559–592. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818309090195
24.
HonariA. (2018a). From ‘the Effect of Repression’ Toward ‘the response to repression. Current Sociology. La Sociologie Contemporaine, 66(6), 950–973. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392118787585
25.
HonariA. (2018b). “we will either find a way, or make one”: How Iranian green movement online activists perceive and respond to repression. Social Media + Society, 4(3), Article 2056305118803886. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118803886
26.
HonariA.MuisJ. (2021). Refraining or resisting: Responses of green movement supporters to repression during the 2013 Iranian presidential elections. Global Policy, 12(S5), 106–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13000
27.
HuangH. (2018). The pathology of hard propaganda. The Journal of Politics, 80(3), 1034–1038. https://doi.org/10.1086/696863
28.
KangS. (2023). Upping the Ante Without Taking up Arms: Why Mass Movements Escalate Demands. Journal of Peace Research, 60(1), 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433221137614
29.
KhawajaM. (1993). Repression and popular collective action: Evidence from the west bank. Sociological Forum, 8(1), 47–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01112330
30.
KitscheltH. P. (1986). Political opportunity structures and political protest: Anti-nuclear movements in four democracies. British Journal of Political Science, 16(1), 57–85. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000712340000380X
31.
LichbachM. I. (1987). Deterrence or escalation? The puzzle of aggregate studies of repression and dissent. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 31(2), 266–297. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002787031002003
32.
LichbachM. I. (1994). What makes rational peasants revolutionary? Dilemma, paradox, and irony in peasant collective action. World Politics, 46(3), 383–418. https://doi.org/10.2307/2950687
MalikM.LambaH.NakosC.PfefferJ. (2021). Population bias in geotagged tweets. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 9(4), 18–27. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v9i4.14688
35.
McCarthyJ. D.ZaldM. N. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. American Journal of Sociology, 82(6), 1212–1241. https://doi.org/10.1086/226464
36.
McPhersonM.Smith-LovinL.CookJ. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 415–444. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415
MooreW. H. (1998). Repression and dissent: Substitution, context, and timing. American Journal of Political Science, 42(3), 851. https://doi.org/10.2307/2991732
39.
MorozovE. (2011). The net delusion: How not to liberate the world (1. Publ). Allen Lane.
O’BrienK. J.DengY. (2015). Repression backfires: Tactical radicalization and protest spectacle in rural China. Journal of Contemporary China, 24(93), 457–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2014.953849
42.
O’HearnD. (2009). Repression and solidary cultures of resistance: Irish political prisoners on protest. AJS; American Journal of Sociology, 115(2), 491–526. https://doi.org/10.1086/599249
43.
OliverP. (1980). Rewards and punishments as selective incentives for collective action: Theoretical investigations. American Journal of Sociology, 85(6), 1356–1375. https://doi.org/10.1086/227168
44.
OlsonM. (1971). The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Harvard University Press.
45.
OsaM. (2003). Solidarity and contention: Networks of Polish opposition. University of Minnesota Press.
46.
PapadopoulosS.KompatsiarisY.VakaliA.SpyridonosP. (2012). Community detection in social media: Performance and application considerations. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 24(3), 515–554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10618-011-0224-z
47.
ParkinsonS. E. (2013). Organizing rebellion: Rethinking high-risk mobilization and social networks in war. American Political Science Review, 107(3), 418–432. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055413000208
PenneyJ.DadasC. (2014). (re)tweeting in the service of protest: Digital composition and circulation in the occupy wall street movement. New Media & Society, 16(1), 74–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813479593
50.
ProchnowT.PattersonM. S.Bridges HamiltonC. N.Umstattd MeyerM. R. (2022). Summer friends and physical activity: Social network effects on child self-reported physical activity at summer care programs. Health Education & Behavior, 49(5), 770–779. https://doi.org/10.1177/10901981221076399
51.
Reynolds-StensonH. (2022). Cultures of resistance: Collective action and rationality in the anti-terror age. Rutgers University Press.
52.
RødE. G.WeidmannN. B. (2015). Empowering activists or autocrats? The internet in authoritarian regimes. Journal of Peace Research, 52(3), 338–351. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343314555782
53.
RyckmanK. C. (2020). A turn to violence: The escalation of nonviolent movements. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 64(2–3), 318–343. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002719861707
54.
SaabR.TauschN.SpearsR.CheungW.-Y. (2015). Acting in solidarity: Testing an extended dual pathway model of collective action by bystander group members. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 54(3), 539–560. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12095
55.
SavioG. (2015). Coordination outside formal organization: Consensus-based decision-making and occupation in the occupy wall street movement. Contemporary Justice Review, 18(1), 42–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/10282580.2015.1005509
56.
SiegelD. A. (2011). When does repression work? Collective action in social networks. The Journal of Politics, 73(4), 993–1010. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381611000727
57.
SmithL. G. E.GavinJ.SharpE. (2015). Social identity formation during the emergence of the occupy movement: Social identity formation during occupy wall street. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(7), 818–832. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2150
58.
SmithN. R.ZivichP. N.FrerichsL. M.MoodyJ.AielloA. E. (2020). A guide for choosing community detection algorithms in social network studies: The question alignment approach. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 59(4), 597–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2020.04.015
59.
SullivanC. M.DavenportC. (2017). The rebel alliance strikes back: Understanding the politics of backlash mobilization. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 22(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.17813/1086-671X-22-1-39
60.
TillyC. (1978). From mobilization to revolution (1st). McGraw-Hill Publ.
61.
TitarenkoL.McCarthyJ.McPhailC.AugustynB. (2001). The interaction of state repression, protest form and protest sponsor strength during the transition from communism in minsk, Belarus, 1990-1995. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 6(2), 129–150. https://doi.org/10.17813/maiq.6.2.t1461545p3470856
62.
TraagV. A.WaltmanL.Van EckN. J. (2019). From louvain to leiden: Guaranteeing well-connected communities. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 5233. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-41695-z
WhiteR. W. (1989). From peaceful protest to guerrilla war: Micromobilization of the provisional Irish republican army. American Journal of Sociology, 94(6), 1277–1302. https://doi.org/10.1086/229155
65.
WoodE. J. (2015). The emotional benefits of insurgency in El Salvador. In GoodwinJ.JasperJ. M. (Eds.), The social movements reader: Cases and concepts (pp. 143–152). Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
66.
WozniakK.DrakulichK.CalfanoB. (2020). Theories of public opinion change versus stability and their implications for null findings. CrimRxiv. https://doi.org/10.21428/cb6ab371.bb19339e
67.
XuX. (2021). To repress or to co‐opt? Authoritarian control in the age of digital surveillance. American Journal of Political Science, 65(2), 309–325. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12514
68.
YangfangT. (2012). A review of the ‘Occupy Wall Street’ movement and its global influence. International Critical Thought, 2(2), 247–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/21598282.2012.684287
69.
ZechS. T.GabbayM. (2016). Social network analysis in the study of terrorism and insurgency: From organization to politics. International Studies Review, 18(2), 214–243. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viv011
