A mixed-methods approach to understand victimization discourses by opposing feminist sub-groups on social media.

Opposing social movements are groups that have conflicting objectives on a shared social justice issue. To maximize the probability of their movement's success, groups can strategically portray their group in a favourable manner while discrediting their opposition. One such approach involves the construction of victimization discourses. In this research, we combined topic modelling and critical discursive psychology to explore how opposing groups within the feminist movement used victimization as a lens to understand their movements in relation to transgender women. We compiled a dataset of over 40,000 tweets from 14 UK-based feminist accounts that included transgender women as women (the pro-inclusion group) and 13 accounts, that excluded transgender women (the anti-inclusion group). Our results revealed differences in how victimization was employed by the opposing movements: pro-inclusion groups drew on repertoires that created a sense of shared victimhood between cisgender women and transgender women, while anti-inclusion groups invoked a competitive victimhood repertoire. Both groups also challenged and delegitimised their oppositions' constructions of feminism and victimhood. These findings add to our understanding of the communication strategies used by opposing movements to achieve their mobilization goals.

A world together: Global citizen identification as a basis for prosociality in the face of COVID-19.

How do global citizens respond to a global health emergency? The present research examined the association between global citizen identification and prosociality using two cross-national datasets-the World Values Survey (Study 1, N = 93,338 from 60 countries and regions) and data collected in 11 countries at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic (Study 2, N = 5,427). Results showed that individuals who identified more strongly as global citizens reported greater prosociality both generally (Study 1) and more specifically in the COVID-19 global health emergency (Study 2). Notably, global citizen identification was a stronger predictor of prosociality in response to COVID-19 than national identification (Study 2). Moreover, analyses revealed that shared ingroup identity accounted for the positive association between global citizen identification and prosociality (Study 2). Overall, these findings highlight global citizenship as a unique and promising direction in promoting prosociality and solidarity, especially in the fight against COVID-19.

My Fight or Yours: Stereotypes of Activists From Advantaged and Disadvantaged Groups.

In social movements, activists may belong to either the disadvantaged or the advantaged group (e.g., Black racial justice activists or White racial justice activists). Across three experimental survey studies, we examined the content of these stereotypes by asking participants to freely generate a list of characteristics to describe each target group-a classic paradigm in stereotype research. Specifically, we examined the stereotypes applied to Black and White activists within racial justice movements (Study 1, n = 154), female and male activists within feminist movements (Study 2, n =134), and LBGT and straight activists within Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender movements (Study 3, n =156). We found that the "activist" category was consistently differentiated into subcategories based on group status: Disadvantaged group activists were stereotyped as strong and aggressive, whereas advantaged group activists were stereotyped as altruistic and superficial. These findings underscore the importance of considering status differences to understand the social perception of activists.

The distinct associations of ingroup attachment and glorification with responses to the coronavirus pandemic: Evidence from a multilevel investigation in 21 countries.

While public health crises such as the coronavirus pandemic transcend national borders, practical efforts to combat them are often instantiated at the national level. Thus, national group identities may play key roles in shaping compliance with and support for preventative measures (e.g., hygiene and lockdowns). Using data from 25,159 participants across representative samples from 21 nations, we investigated how different modalities of ingroup identification (attachment and glorification) are linked with reactions to the coronavirus pandemic (compliance and support for lockdown restrictions). We also examined the extent to which the associations of attachment and glorification with responses to the coronavirus pandemic are mediated through trust in information about the coronavirus pandemic from scientific and government sources. Multilevel models suggested that attachment, but not glorification, was associated with increased trust in science and compliance with federal COVID-19 guidelines. However, while both attachment and glorification were associated with trust in government and support for lockdown restrictions, glorification was more strongly associated with trust in government information than attachment. These results suggest that both attachment and glorification can be useful for promoting public health, although glorification's role, while potentially stronger, is restricted to pathways through trust in government information.

A history of collective resilience and collective victimhood: Two sides of the same coin that explain Black Americans' present-day responses to oppression.

Collective victimhood and collective resilience are two sides of the same coin. However, most literature to date has focused on the experiences and consequences of collective victimhood. In the present research, we focused on the experiences of Black Americans, a group that has a legacy of victimization and resilience. As a part of Black Americans' collective memory, we explored the nature of historical collective resilience and examined its role in explaining collective responses to present-day oppression, over and above any effect of historical collective victimhood. When they were asked to reflect on their group's history, across Studies 1 (N = 272) and 2 (N = 294), we found that Black Americans generated narratives of collective resilience. In both studies, we also found evidence that perceived historical collective resilience was linked to a greater sense of collective continuity, which, in turn, explained greater support for the ongoing Black Lives Matter movement. Our findings underscore the importance of considering narratives of resilience in a group's history and point to the way such collective resilience narratives can serve as a resource for the group in the present.

Double jeopardy: How lower levels of support during COVID-19 exacerbated the relationship between loneliness and distress.

While the relationship between loneliness and psychological distress is well documented, the mechanisms underlying this relationship are less clear. One factor known to be related to loneliness as well as psychological distress, is social support, with some studies suggesting that support-both received and provided-can serve as a mechanism to reduce the distress associated with loneliness. In this paper we examine the mediating role of both aspects of support in the relationship between loneliness and psychological distress in the COVID-19 context. We used a multi-country dataset collected at two timepoints during the pandemic; the first during the early stages (N = 6,842, 11 countries) and the second collected for a subset of countries (N = 1,299, 3 countries) 3 months later. Across all eleven countries, results revealed significant positive associations between loneliness and distress. Furthermore, using longitudinal data, we investigated the directionality of this relationship and found that increased loneliness over time was associated with increased psychological distress. The data also showed that both feeling unsupported and feeling unable to provide support to others mediated this relationship. These findings point to the need to facilitate people's ability to draw effective social support and help others-particularly at times when social connectedness is threatened-as a way of alleviating the psychological distress that commonly presents with loneliness.

Experiments make a good breakfast, but a poor supper.

Cesario's analysis has three key flaws. First, the focus on whether an effect is "real" (an "effects flaw") overlooks the importance of theory testing. Second, obsession with effects (a "fetishization flaw") sidelines theoretically informed questions about when and why an effect may arise. Third, failure to take stock of cultural and historical context (a "decontextualization flaw") strips findings of meaning.

Trust in scientific information mediates associations between conservatism and coronavirus responses in the U.S., but few other nations.

U.S.-based research suggests conservatism is linked with less concern about contracting coronavirus and less preventative behaviors to avoid infection. Here, we investigate whether these tendencies are partly attributable to distrust in scientific information, and evaluate whether they generalize outside the U.S., using public data and recruited representative samples across three studies (Ntotal = 34,710). In Studies 1 and 2, we examine these relationships in the U.S., yielding converging evidence for a sequential indirect effect of conservatism on compliance through scientific (dis)trust and infection concern. In Study 3, we compare these relationships across 19 distinct countries. Although the relationships between trust in scientific information about the coronavirus, concern about coronavirus infection, and compliance are consistent cross-nationally, the relationships between conservatism and trust in scientific information are not. These relationships are strongest in North America. Consequently, the indirect effects observed in Studies 1-2 only replicate in North America (the U.S. and Canada) and in Indonesia. Study 3 also found parallel direct and indirect effects on support for lockdown restrictions. These associations suggest not only that relationships between conservatism and compliance are not universal, but localized to particular countries where conservatism is more strongly related to trust in scientific information about the coronavirus pandemic.

Need satisfaction in intergroup contact: A multinational study of pathways toward social change.

What role does intergroup contact play in promoting support for social change toward greater social equality? Drawing on the needs-based model of reconciliation, we theorized that when inequality between groups is perceived as illegitimate, disadvantaged group members will experience a need for empowerment and advantaged group members a need for acceptance. When intergroup contact satisfies each group's needs, it should result in more mutual support for social change. Using four sets of survey data collected through the Zurich Intergroup Project in 23 countries, we tested several preregistered predictions, derived from the above reasoning, across a large variety of operationalizations. Two studies of disadvantaged groups (Ns = 689 ethnic minority members in Study 1 and 3,382 sexual/gender minorities in Study 2) support the hypothesis that, after accounting for the effects of intergroup contact and perceived illegitimacy, satisfying the need for empowerment (but not acceptance) during contact is positively related to support for social change. Two studies with advantaged groups (Ns = 2,937 ethnic majority members in Study 3 and 4,203 cis-heterosexual individuals in Study 4) showed that, after accounting for illegitimacy and intergroup contact, satisfying the need for acceptance (but also empowerment) is positively related to support for social change. Overall, findings suggest that intergroup contact is compatible with efforts to promote social change when group-specific needs are met. Thus, to encourage support for social change among both disadvantaged and advantaged group members, it is essential that, besides promoting mutual acceptance, intergroup contact interventions also give voice to and empower members of disadvantaged groups. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Unlocking collective cooperation in the midst of COVID-19: The role of social support in predicting the social class disparity in cooperation.

We examined whether (the lack of) social support can explain why researchers have found lower rates of adherence to follow public health guidelines amongst people who perceived themselves as coming from lower social class backgrounds during the COVID-19 pandemic. To do this, we surveyed 5818 participants from 10 countries during the first wave of lock-down. Contrary to previous findings, social class was not related to general adherence to COVID-19 regulations or desire to engage in citizenship behaviours (e.g., showing initiatives to help others during the pandemic). However, we found evidence of an indirect effect whereby those who perceived themselves as higher social class were more likely to be both the recipient and provider of social support which in turn predicted greater adherence and desire to engage in citizenship behaviours during the earlier wave of the pandemic. Our findings highlight the importance of social support in unlocking potential for collective cooperation (i.e., adherence to COVID-19 rules and desire to engage in citizenship behaviours). They suggest that instead of enforcing strict regulations, government authorities need to address existing social support barriers within lower income communities to facilitate cooperation from everyone in the community.

Collective psychological ownership and the rise of reactionary counter-movements defending the status quo.

Social movements pushing for social change are often met with reactionary counter-movements that defend the status quo. The present research examined this interplay by focusing on the role of racial majority group members claiming collective psychological ownership. We examined collective ownership that stems from being native to the land and from being founders of the nation. Study 1 found that in Malaysia, the Malay majority group endorsed more native ownership than Chinese and Indian minorities, which in turn predicted greater threat in response to protests demanding electoral reforms and subsequently greater support for a reactionary pro-government movement. Situated in the United States, Study 2 found that the more that White Americans endorsed founder ownership beliefs, the more they reported negative attitudes towards the Black Lives Matter protests, which in turn predicted more support for White nationalistic counter-protests. This effect was stronger among White people compared to people of colour. Study 3 examined both founder and native ownership in Australia. Founder (but not native) ownership beliefs predicted more negative attitudes towards Invasion Day protests, which subsequently predicted more support for counter-protests defending Australia Day celebrations. Implications of culture-specific beliefs about collective ownership for social movement research are discussed.

Author Correction: A large-scale test of the link between intergroup contact and support for social change.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

From marches to movements: building and sustaining a social movement following collective action.

Collective action has the potential to have large-scale implications for a society. We review the processes that are key to understanding the path from collective action to the continuation and success of a social movement. First, we consider how the experience of participating in collective action can foster continued commitment to a cause. Next, since gaining broader support from society is key to the success of social movements, we discuss how the very nature of collective action employed can mobilize support or elicit backlash from members of the general public. Finally, we describe the role of movement leaders whose task is to unite movement participants while also mobilizing the broader society to rally behind the cause for social change. Emergent research on the consequences of collective action contributes to our understanding of the dynamic processes involved in maintaining a movement.

A large-scale test of the link between intergroup contact and support for social change.

Guided by the early findings of social scientists, practitioners have long advocated for greater contact between groups to reduce prejudice and increase social cohesion. Recent work, however, suggests that intergroup contact can undermine support for social change towards greater equality, especially among disadvantaged group members. Using a large and heterogeneous dataset (12,997 individuals from 69 countries), we demonstrate that intergroup contact and support for social change towards greater equality are positively associated among members of advantaged groups (ethnic majorities and cis-heterosexuals) but negatively associated among disadvantaged groups (ethnic minorities and sexual and gender minorities). Specification-curve analysis revealed important variation in the size-and at times, direction-of correlations, depending on how contact and support for social change were measured. This allowed us to identify one type of support for change-willingness to work in solidarity- that is positively associated with intergroup contact among both advantaged and disadvantaged group members.