Many have observed that a new political generation of digital natives has heavily used social media as means of facilitating street protests. Nevertheless, the mechanisms by which social media affects protest participation are not completely understood due to the shortage of psychological explanations. This study employs a uniquely designed survey on a massive demonstration to address such concerns. Social media activity triggers the psychological incentives of anger, social incentives, identification, and individual efficacy. In particular, individual efficacy directly mediates the relationship between social media activity and protest participation. The findings substantiate new theories of connective action and suggest that social media may be a new mobilization structure via changing the decision-making processes of individuals. Theoretical implications on understanding digital natives and deliberative democracy are discussed.
BeauducelAHerzbergPY (2006) On the performance of maximum likelihood versus means and variance adjusted weighted least squares estimation in CFA. Structural Equation Modeling13(2): 186–203.
4.
BennettWLSegerbergA (2012) The logic of connective action. Information, Communication & Society15(5): 739–768.
5.
BerneyLRBlaneDB (1997) Collecting retrospective data. Social Science & Medicine45(10): 1519–1525.
6.
BoulianneS (2015) Social media use and participation: a meta-analysis of current research. Information, Communication & Society18(5): 524–538.
7.
CastellsM (2015) Networks of Outrage and Hope. Cambridge: Polity Press.
FinkelSEMullerEN (1998) Rational choice and the dynamics of collective political action. The American Political Science Review92(1): 37–49.
12.
FinkelSERuleJ (1986) Relative deprivation and related psychological theories of civil violence. Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change Series9: 47–69.
13.
FlaxmanSGoelSRaoJM (2016) Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly80: 298–320.
14.
FreedmanDAThorntonDCamburnDAet al. (1988) The life history calendar: a technique for collecting retrospective data. Sociological Methodology18: 37–68.
15.
GutmannAThompsonDF (1998) Democracy and Disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
16.
HechterMPfaffSUnderwoodP (2016) Grievances and the genesis of rebellion. American Sociological Review81(1): 165–89.
17.
HowardPNHussainMM (2011) The role of digital media. Journal of Democracy22(3): 35–48.
18.
JenkinsJCPerrowC (1977) Insurgency of the powerless. American Sociological Review42(2): 249–268.
19.
JenkinsJC (1983) Resource mobilization theory and the study of social movements. Annual Review of Sociology9(1): 527–553.
20.
JungNKimYde ZúnigaHG (2011) The mediating role of knowledge and efficacy in the effects of communication on political participation. Mass Communication and Society14(4): 407–430.
21.
JurisJS (2012) Reflections on #occupy everywhere: social media, public space, and emerging logics of aggregation. American Ethnologist39(2): 259–279.
22.
KavadaA (2015) Creating the collective: social media, the occupy movement and its constitution as a collective actor. Information, Communication & Society18(8): 872–886.
23.
KharroubTBasO (2016) Social media and protests: an examination of twitter images of the 2011 Egyptian revolution. New Media & Society18(9): 1973–1992.
24.
KlandermansB (1984) Mobilization and participation: social-psychological expansions of resource mobilization theory. American Sociological Review49(5): 583–600.
25.
KlandermansBDe WeerdM (2000) Group identification and political protest. In: Sheldon StrykerSOwensTJWhiteRW (eds) Self, Identity, and Social Movements. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 68–90.
26.
KlandermansBvan der ToornJvan StekelenburgJ (2008) Embeddedness and identity. American Sociological Review73(6): 992–1012.
27.
KlineRB (2015) Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: Guilford Press.
28.
LeeN-JShahDVMcLeodJM (2013) Processes of political socialization: a communication mediation approach to youth civic engagement. Communication Research40(5): 669–697.
29.
LimM (2012) Clicks, cabs, and coffee houses. Journal of Communication62(2): 231–248.
30.
McAdamD (1990) Freedom Summer. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
31.
McAdamDMcCarthyJDZaldMN (1996) Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32.
McCarthyJDZaldMN (1977) Resource mobilization and social movements. American Journal of Sociology82(6): 1212–1241.
33.
McPhersonSS (2009) Tim Berners-lee: Inventor of the World Wide Web. Minneapolis, MN: Twenty-First Century Books.
34.
MelucciA (1988) Getting involved: identity and mobilization in social movements. In: KlandermansBKriesiHTarrowS (eds) International Social Movement Research, Volume 1. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp. 329–348.
35.
MilkmanR (2017) A new political generation: millennials and the post-2008 wave of protest. American Sociological Review82(1): 1–31.
36.
MinSJ (2007) Online vs. face-to-face deliberation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication12(4): 1369–1387.
37.
MoellerJDe VreeseCEsserFet al. (2014) Pathway to political participation: the influence of online and offline news media on internal efficacy and turnout of first-time voters. American Behavioral Scientist58(5): 689–700.
38.
MorrisA (1981) Black southern student sit-in movement. American Sociological Review46(6): 744–767.
39.
MuthénBAsparouhovT (2002) Latent variable analysis with categorical outcomes. Mplus Web Notes4(5), 1–22.
40.
NoonanRK (1995) Women against the state. Sociological Forum10(1): 81–111.
41.
OlsonM (1965) The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
42.
OppKD (1988) Grievances and participation in social movements. American Sociological Review53(6): 853–864.
43.
OppKD (1998) Does anti-regime action under communist rule affect political protest after the fall?Sociological Quarterly39(2): 189–213.
44.
OppKD (2009) Theories of Political Protest and Social Movements. London: Routledge.
45.
OppKDGernC (1993) Dissident groups, personal networks, and spontaneous cooperation. American Sociological Review58(5): 659–680.
46.
OppKDKittelB (2010) The dynamics of political protest. European Sociological Review26(1): 97–109.
SegerbergABennettWL (2011) Social media and the organization of collective action. The Communication Review14(3): 197–215.
49.
ShenWC (1995) The Applications of Internet Skills of Internet/fidonet. Taipei, China: Songgang.
50.
SmithTW (1984) Recalling attitudes: an analysis of retrospective questions on the 1982 GSS. Public Opinion Quarterly48(3): 639–649.
51.
SnowDARochfordEBWordenSKet al. (1986) Frame alignment processes, micromobilization, and movement participation. American Sociological Review51(4): 464–481.
TajfelH (1974) Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Social Science Information13(2): 65–93.
54.
TauschNBeckerJCSpearsRet al. (2011) Explaining radical group behavior: Developing emotion and efficacy routes to normative and nonnormative collective action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology101(1): 129–148.
TremayneM (2014) Anatomy of protest in the digital era. Social Movement Studies13(1): 110–126.
58.
TufekciZWilsonC (2012) Social media and the decision to participate in political protest. Journal of Communication62(2):363–379.
59.
ValenzuelaSArriagadaASchermanA (2014) Facebook, twitter, and youth engagement. International Journal of Communication8: 2046–2070.
60.
Van StekelenburgJ (2013). The political psychology of protest. European psychologist18(4): 224–34.
61.
Van ZomerenMPostmesTSpearsR (2008) Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action. Psychological Bulletin134(4): 504–535.
62.
Van ZomerenMSpearsRFischerAHet al. (2004) Put your money where your mouth is! Explaining collective action tendencies through group-based anger and group efficacy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology: 87(5): 649–664.
Supplementary Material
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.
