The purpose of this study was to propose an integrative model of activism that explains why and how individuals in the networked society are engaged in contentious issues. Incorporating the situational theory of problem solving (STOPS), hostile media perception, affective injustice, and social media efficacy, this study examined how the integrative model of activism predicts social media activism and offline activism on three issues of gun ownership, immigration, and police use of power. The integrative model of activism provides a valuable standpoint to understand activist publics and serves as a springboard for further scholarly discussion on activism and conflict resolution.
BennettW. L.SegerbergA. (2012). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society, 15, 739-768. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661
3.
BennettW. L.SegerbergA. (2013). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
4.
BerinskyA. J.HuberG. A.LenzG. S. (2012). Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon.com’s Mechanical Turk. Political Analysis, 20, 351-368. doi:10.1093/pan/mpr057
5.
BodeL.VragaE.BorahP.ShahD. (2014). A new space for political behavior: Political social networking and its democratic consequences. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19, 414-429.
6.
BotanC.TaylorM. (2004). Public relations: State of the field. Journal of Communication. 54, 645-661.
7.
BimberB.FlanaginA. J.StohlC. (2005). Reconceptualizing collective action in the contemporary media environment. Communication Theory, 15, 365-388. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2005.tb00340.x
8.
BoulianneS. (2015). Social media use and participation: A meta-analysis of current research. Information, Communication & Society, 18, 524-538. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2015.1008542
9.
ChenY. R.Hung-BaeseckeC. J.KimJ.-N. (2016). Identifying active hot-issue communicators and subgroup identifiers: Examining the situational theory of problem solving. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 94, 124-147.
10.
ChoiJ.YangM.ChangJ. (2009). Elaboration of the hostile media phenomenon: The roles of involvement, media skepticism, congruency of perceived media influence, and perceived opinion climate. Communication Research, 31, 54-75.
11.
CiszekE. L. (2015). Bridging the gap: Mapping the relationship between activism and public relations. Public Relations Review, 41, 447-455.
12.
CompeauD. R.HigginsC. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial Test. MIS Quarterly, 19, 189-211.
13.
della PortaD. (1988). Recruitment processes in clandestine political organizations: Italian left-wing terrorism. In KlandermansB.KriesiH.TarrowS. (Eds.), From structure to action (pp. 155-172). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
14.
DianiM. (1992). The concept of social movement. The Sociological Review, 40, 1-25.
15.
EarlJ.HuntJ.GarrettR. K.DalA. (2014). New technologies and social movements. In della PortaD.DianiM. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of social movements (pp. 355-366). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
16.
EastinM. S.LaRoseR. (2000). Internet self-efficacy and the psychology of the digital divide. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(1), JCMC611.
17.
FeldmanL.HartP.LeiserowitzA.MaibachE.Roser-RenoufC. (2015). Do hostile media perceptions lead to action? The role of hostile media perceptions, political efficacy, and ideology in predicting climate change activism. Communication Research, 44, 1099-1124.
18.
FerreeM, N. (1992). The political context of rationality: rational choice theory and resource mobilization. In MorrisA.McClurg MuellerC. (Eds.), Frontiers in social movement theory (pp. 29-52). New Haven: Yale University Press.
19.
FowlerF. J. (2002). Survey research methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
20.
FreelonD.McilwainC. D.ClarkM. D. (2016). Beyond the hashtags: #Ferguson, #Blacklivesmatter, and the online struggle for offline justice. Center for Media & Social Impact, School of Communication, American University. Retrieved from http://cmsimpact.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/beyond_the_hashtags_2016.pdf
21.
GerbaudoP.TreréE. (2015). In search of the “we” of social media activism: Introduction to the special issue on social media and protest identities. Information, Communication & Society, 18, 865-871.
22.
Gil de ZúñigaH.MolyneuxL.ZhengP. (2014). Social media, political expression, and political participation: Panel analysis of lagged and concurrent relationships. Journal of Communication, 64, 612-634.
23.
Gil de ZúñigaH. G.CopelandL.BimberB. (2014). Political consumerism: Civic engagement and the social media connection. New Media & Society, 16(3), 488
24.
GuntherA. C.ChiaS. C. (2001). Predicting pluralistic ignorance: The hostile media perception and its consequences. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78, 688-701.
25.
GrunigJ. E. (1968). Information, entrepreneurship, and economic development: A study of the decision making processes of Colombian Latifundistas. Unpublished doctoral
26.
GrunigJ. E.RepperF. C. (1992). Strategic management, publics, and issues. In GrunigJ. E. (Ed.), Excellence in public relations and communication management (pp. 117-157). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
27.
GrunigL. A.GrunigJ. E.DozierD. M. (2002). Excellence in public relations and communication management: A study of communication management in three countries. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
28.
HarlowS. (2011). Social media and social movements: Facebook and an online Guatemalan justice movement that moved offline. New Media & Society, 14, 225-243.
29.
HarlowS.GuoL. (2014). Will the revolution be Tweeted or Facebooked? Using digital communication tools in immigrant activism. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19, 463-478.
30.
HoS. S.BinderA. R.BeckerA. B.MoyP.SheufeleD. A.BrossardD.GuntherA. C. (2011). The role of perceptions of media bias in general and issue-specific political participation. Mass Communication and Society, 14, 343-374.
31.
HocevarK.FlanaginA. J.MetzgerM. J. (2014). Social media self-efficacy and information evaluation online. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 254-262.
32.
HyunK. D.KimJ. (2015). Differential and interactive influences on political participation by different types of news activities and political conversation through social media. Computers In Human Behavior, 45, 328-334.
33.
HwangH.PanZ.SunY. (2008). Influence of hostile media perception on willingness to engage in discursive activities: An examination of mediating role of media indignation. Media Psychology, 11, 76-97.
34.
KavadaA. (2015). Creating the collective: Social media, the occupy movement and its constitution as a collective actor. Information, Communication & Society, 18, 872-886.
35.
KawakamiK.DionK. L. (1995). Social identity and affect as determinants of collective action: Toward an integration of relative deprivation and social identity theories. Theory & Psychology, 5, 551-577. doi:10.1177/0959354395054005
36.
KimY.GlassmanM. (2013). Beyond search and communication: Development and validation of the internet self-efficacy scale (ISS). Computers in Human Behavior, 29.
37.
KimJ.-N.GrunigJ. (2011). Problem solving and communicative action: A situational theory of problem solving. Journal of Communication, 61, 120-149.
38.
KimJ.-N.GruingJ.NiL. (2010). Reconceptualizing the communicative action of publics: Acquisition, selection, and transmission of information in problematic situations. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 4, 126-154.
39.
KimJ.-N.NiL.KimS.KimJ. R. (2012). What makes people hot? Applying the situational theory of problem solving to hot-issue publics. Journal of Public Relations Research, 24, 144-164. doi:10.1080/1062726X.2012.626133
40.
KimJ.-N.ShenH.MorganS. (2011). Information behaviors and problem chain recognition effect: Applying situational theory of problem solving in organ donation issues. Health Communication, 26, 171-184.
41.
KimJ.-N.SrirameshK. (2009). A descriptive model of activism in global public relations research and practice. In SrirameshK.VercicD. (Eds.), The global public relations handbook (Rev. ed., pp. 79-97). New York, NY: Routledge.
42.
KimM. (2015). Partisans and controversial news online: Comparing perceptions of bias and credibility in news content from blogs and mainstream media. Mass Communication and Society, 18, 17-36. doi:10.1080/15205436.2013.877486
43.
LeeY.ChonM.OhY.KimJ.-N. (2017). Understanding communicative activism of publics in digital network society: A taxonomy of digitalized communicative actions. In DuhéS. C. (Ed.), New media and public relations (3rd ed., pp. 198-207). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
44.
McCarthyJ. D.ZaldM. N. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 1212-1241.
45.
MeyerD. S. (2015). The politics of protest: Social movements in America (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
46.
NekmatE.GowerK.ZhouS.MetzgerM. (2015). Connective-collective action on social media: Moderated mediation of cognitive elaboration and perceived source credibility on personalness of source. Communication Research, 46, 62-87. doi:10.1177/0093650215609676
47.
NiL.KimJ.-N. (2009). Classifying publics: Communication behaviors and problem-solving characteristics in controversial issues. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 3, 217-241.
OliverP. (1989). Bringing the crowd back in: The nonorganizational elements of social movements. In KriesbergL. (Ed.), Research in social movement, conflict and change, (pp. 1-30). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
50.
PaolacciG.ChandlerJ. (2014). Inside the Turk: Understanding Mechanical Turk as a participant pool. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 184-188.
51.
PaolacciG.ChandlerJ.IpeirotisP. G. (2010). Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Judgment and Decision Making, 5, 411-419.
52.
PasekJ.MoreE.RomerD. (2009). Realizing the social internet? Online social networking meets offline civic engagement. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 6, 197-215. doi:10.1080/19331680902996403
53.
PettigrewT. F. (2015). Samuel Stouffer and relative deprivation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 78, 7-24. doi:10.1177/0190272514566793
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 717-731.
56.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-891.
57.
RojasH. (2010). “Corrective” actions in the public sphere: How perceptions of media and media effects shape political behaviors. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 22, 343-363.
58.
RolfeB. (2005). Building an electronic repertoire of contention. Social Movement Studies, 4, 65-74.
59.
ScheufeleD. A.EvelandW. P.Jr. (2001). Perceptions of “public opinion” and “public” opinion expression. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 13, 25-44.
60.
ShahD. V.ChoJ.EvelandW. P.KwakN. (2005). Information and expression in a digital age: Modeling internet effects on civic participation. Communication Research, 32, 531-565. doi:10.1177/0093650205279209
61.
TillyC. (2004). Social movement, 1768-2004. London: Paradigm Publishers.
62.
ShinK. S.HanM. (2016). The role of negative emotions on motivation and communicative action: Testing the validity of situational theory of problem solving in the context of South Korea. Asian Journal of Communication, 26, 76-93.
63.
ShumateM.LippJ. (2008). Connective collective action online: An examination of the hyperlink network structure of an NGO issue network. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 178-201. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2008.01436.x
64.
SmithM. F. (2005). Activism. In HeathR. E. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of public relations (pp. 5-9). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
TangG.LeeF. F. (2013). Facebook use and political participation: The impact of exposure to shared political information, connections with public political actors, and network structural heterogeneity. Social Science Computer Review, 31, 763-773. doi:10.1177/0894439313490625
67.
TarrowS. (2011). Power in movement: Social movements, collective action, and mass politics (3rd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
68.
TouraineA. (1981). The voice and the eye: An analysis of social movements. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
69.
TufekciZ.WilsonC. (2012). Social media and the decision to participate in political protest: Observations from Tahrir Square. Journal of Communication, 62, 363-379. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01629.x
70.
UysalN.YangA. (2013). The power of activist networks in the mass self-communication era: A triangulation study of the impact of WikiLeaks on the stock value of Bank of America. Public Relations Review, 39, 459-469.
71.
VelasquezA.LaRoseR. (2015). Social media for social change: Social media political efficacy and activism in student activist groups. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 59, 456-474.
72.
WillnatL.WongW. J.TamamE.AwA. (2013). Online media and political participation: The case of Malaysia. Mass Communication and Society, 16, 557-585. doi:10.1080/15205436.2012.734891
73.
WojcieszakM. (2009). “Carrying online participation offline”—Mobilization by radical online groups and politically dissimilar offline ties. Journal of Communication, 59, 564-586.
74.
XenosM.VromenA.LoaderB. D. (2014). The great equalizer? Patterns of social media use and youth political engagement in three advanced democracies. Information, Communication & Society, 17, 151-167. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2013.871318
75.
YoumansW. L.YorkJ. C. (2012). Social media and the activist toolkit: User agreements, corporate interests, and the information infrastructure of modern social movements. Journal of Communication, 62, 315-329. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01636.x
76.
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, 504-535. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.504
