Factors that facilitate or hinder

individual activist participation

in social movements

Dimitris Barkas
Department of Psychology
Panteion University
Athens, Greece
Research Question

 This research project is concerned with

the factors that might facilitate or hinder
political participation at a personal level.
 The interaction between personal factors
and the socio-historical context: how the
socio-political context has an effect on the
individual decision for collective action
 Social Psychological Theories
Social Identity Social
Theory
Identity  Participation
(Tajfel 1974)
Simon et al. 1998 Social Identification Participation
Identity  with activists 

Simon & Triangulat Politicized

Klandermans ion of Collective Participation
2001 power Identity 
struggle 

Bandura Belief in the Participation

1997 efficacy of the
action 
Research Question Reloaded
 Organization of the representation

 Personal experience
 Interpersonal relations
 Positioning
 Ideological beliefs
Empirical Investigation
 Wider socio-historical context
 Personal experience & history of
participation through autobiographical
accounts
 Immediate context (Interpersonal
relations)
 Investigating the social motive the role of
significant others in the decision to
participate
Empirical Investigation
 Self-Positioning Collective identity
 Victims of asymmetric power relations
[/exploitation] (i.e. working class, lower-middle
class, immigrants)
 Others’-Positioning Social
Representation in terms of others’
oppression
 Privileged groups
 Victims of asymmetric power relations with
false consciousness
Empirical Investigation
 Ideological context
 Left/right political beliefs
 Beliefs about individual mobility or social change
 Beliefs about the role of the state and politics
 Beliefs about globalization
 Beliefs about social hierarchies (SDO, “just world”,
negative interdependence, group interests, system
justification)
 Perceptions of the goals and of the social
representation of society held by the activist
organization
Research Design
(Research I)

 Interview with trade-unionists

 1st, 2nd & 3rd degree
 Public & Private sector
 Different Groups
Research Design
(Research I)
 Interview with trade-unionists
 Interview structure:
 “Experts” on the issue of movement
participation
-What do workers think about trade unions?
-How do you motivate workers to take part to
the union’s actions?
 “Activists” (participants themselves):

-How did you take part for the fist time in the
trade union movement?
-Why did you choose this union front?
SURVEY 2

 Professors’
strike & students’ university
occupations (May – June 2006)

 Higher education bill to be passed

during the summer
 Asylum reduction
 Limit to studies duration

 Free Public Education (constitution #16)

SURVEY 2
June 8th 2006
SURVEY 2
SURVEY 2

 Questionnaires measuring
 Participation & Intention to participate in
a variety of actions (i.e. strike, state
property destruction, action through
parties, etc)
 Identification with Greeks & students
 Efficacy and admiration/ value/
agreement/ solidarity with those who do
these actions
 Trust on leaders of parties, trade unions,
NGOs & student groups
 And other…(sorry)
 SURVEY 2 - Predictor Models - participation 1
Participation in: getting signatures, supporting
resolutions, public denunciations (alpha: ,82)

Efficacy (Rsq ,23) Eff & greek & Eff & grec & stud &
student (Rsq ,25) activist (Rsq ,29)
Ef 1: ,20 (,08)
Work stop, sit in,
strike,
demonstration
 Ef 3: ,37*** Ef 3: ,35** Ef 3: ,24 (,06)
Action through
parties/ unions
Identification with
activists: ,31*
 SURVEY 2 - Predictor Models - participation 2
Participation in: spectacular actions, demonstration,
destroy state property, sit in (alpha: ,75)
Efficacy Eff & greek & Eff & greek & stud &
(Rsq ,432) student (Rsq ,483) activist (Rsq ,544)

Ef 1: ,40*** Ef 1: ,31** Ef 1: ,22*

Work stop, sit in,
strike,
demonstration Ef 2: ,24 (,06)
 Ef 2: ,46***
Ef 2: ,36***
Hunger strike, Greeks: -,28*
spectacular action,
Identification
destroy state
property with
greeks: - ,31* Identification with
activists: ,31*
 SURVEY 2 - Predictor Models - participation 3
Participation in: work stop, strike, action through trade
union (alpha : ,64)
Efficacy Eff & greek & Eff & greek & stud &
(Rsq ,191) student (Rsq ,208) activist (Rsq ,278)

Ef 1: ,35** Ef 1: ,40** Ef 1: ,3**

Work stop, sit in,
strike,
demonstration Ef 3: ,34**
 Ef 3: ,33**
Action through Identification with
parties/ unions activists: ,40**
 SURVEY 2 - Predictor Models - participation 4
Participation in: action through a party

Efficacy Eff & greek & Eff & greek & stud &
(Rsq ,41) student (Rsq ,41) activist (Rsq ,45)

Ef 3: ,69*** Ef 3: ,68** Ef 3: ,57***

Action through
parties/ unions

Ef 4: -,33** Ef 4: - ,35** Ef 4: -36**

Public
denunciation,
NGO action, Identification with
Get signatures, activists: , 30*
support resolution
 SURVEY 2 - Predictor Models - participation 5
Participation in: action through an NGO

Efficacy Eff & greek & Eff & greek & stud &
(Rsq ,15) student (Rsq ,16) activist (Rsq ,18)
Ef 4: ,34** Ef 4: ,34* Ef 4: ,36**
Public
denunciation,
NGO action,
Get signatures,
support resolution
Ef 3: - ,26
(p= , 06)
Action through parties/
unions
 SURVEY 2 - Predictor Models - intention 1
Intention to do: work stop, strike, demonstration, sit in,
act though unions (alpha: ,83)
Efficacy Eff & greek & student Eff & greek & stud &
(Rsq ,63) (Rsq ,66) activist (Rsq ,69)
Ef 1: ,59*** Ef 1: ,52*** Ef 1: ,45***
work stop, sit in,
strike, demonstration Ef 2: ,25*** Ef 3: ,26***
 Ef 2: ,31*** Ef 3: ,36***
Hunger strike,
spectacular action, Identification with
destroy state Greeks: -,26*
property greeks: - ,24*
Ef 3: ,37***
Action through Identification with
parties, & unions
activists: ,26*
 SURVEY 2 - Predictor Models - intention 2
Intention to do: hunger strike, spectacular actions,
destroy state property (alpha: ,72)
Efficacy Eff & greek & student Eff & greek & stud &
(Rsq ,69) (Rsq ,71) activist (Rsq ,74)
Ef 1: , 17* Ef 2: ,59***
work stop, sit in, strike,
demonstration
 Ef 2: ,77*** Ef 2: ,71***
Ef 3: -,19*
Hunger strike,
spectacular action, Action through
destroy state property parties, & unions
Ef 4: - ,17***
Public denunciation,
NGO action, get Identification with
signatures, support activists: ,29*
resolutions
 SURVEY 2 - Predictor Models - intention 3
Intention to do: act though party, get signatures, support
resolutions (alpha: ,73)
Efficacy Eff & greek & student Eff & greek & stud &
(Rsq ,63) (Rsq ,66) activist (Rsq ,69)
Ef 3: ,62*** Ef 3: ,60*** Ef 3: ,52***
Action through
parties, & unions

Identification with
activists: ,23
(p= ,06)
 SURVEY 2 - Predictor Models - intention 4
Intention to do: action through NGO

Efficacy Eff & greek & student Eff & greek & stud &
(Rsq ,22) (Rsq ,23) activist (Rsq ,28)
Ef 4: ,53*** Ef 4: ,53*** Ef 4: ,53***
Public denunciation,
NGO action, get
signatures, support
resolutions

Ef 1: - ,22*
(sig. ,09)
work stop, sit in,
strike, demonstration
 SURVEY 2 - Predictor Models - intention 5
Intention to do: public denunciation

Efficacy Eff & greek & student Eff & greek & stud &
(Rsq ,27) (Rsq ,29) activist (Rsq ,37)
Ef 1: - ,33** Ef 1: - ,49**
Ef 1: - ,38**
work stop, sit in,
strike, demonstration

Ef Ef 4: ,47***

4: ,53***
Ef 4: ,49***
Public denunciation,
NGO action, get Identification with
signatures, support activists: ,23**
resolutions
Conclusions
 Efficacy mainly related to the specific
action
 No student id effect
 Greek id effect: negative for
demonstration and radical actions
 Activist id works
 Radical action: needs to be more
explored