The perceptual bases of collective efficacy and protest participation: The case of pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong

International Journal of Public Opinion Research

Volumn 22, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 392-411

  Lee, Francis L F ^a  

^a CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77956596098     PISSN: 09542892     EISSN: 14716909     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ijpor/edq023     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Abramson, P. R. (1983). Political attitudes in America: Formation and change. San Francisco, CA: Freeman.
2. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
3. Amenta, E., Carruthers, B. G., & Zylan, Y. (1992). A hero for the aged? The Townsend Movement, the political mediation model, and U.S. old-age policy, 1934-1950. American Journal of Sociology, 98, 308-339.
4. Anderson, C. J., & Mendes, S. M. (2006). Learning to lose: Election outcomes, democratic experience and political protest potential. British Journal of Political Science, 36(1), 91-111.
5. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: Social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
6. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
7. Bynner, J., & Ashford, S. (1994). Politics and participation: Some antecedents of young people's attitudes to the political system and political activity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24(2), 223-236.
8. Chan, J. M., & Lee, F. L. F. (2006). Media convergence and revision of political parallelism in times of energized public opinion: A case analysis of the 2003 July 1 demonstration in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Journal of Social Sciences, 31, 71-96 (in Chinese).
9. Chan, J. M., & Lee, F. L. F. (2007). Political opportunities, social mobilization and collective actions: The re-invigorated pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong. The China Review, 7(2), 93-122.
10. Chan, J. M., & Lee, F. L. F. (2008). Who can mobilize Hong Kong people to protest? A survey-based study of three large-scale rallies. In M. Sing (Ed.), Politics and government in Hong Kong: Crisis under Chinese sovereignty (pp. 14-37). London: Routledge.
11. Dalton, R. (1996). Citizen politics (2nd ed.). Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
12. Finkel, S. E., & Muller, E. N. (1998). Rational choice and the dynamics of collective political action: Evaluating alternative models with panel data. American Political Science Review, 92(1), 37-49.
13. Finkel, S. E., Muller, E. N., & Opp, K. D. (1989). Personal influence, collective rationality, and mass political action. American Political Science Review, 83(3), 885-903.
14. Foster, M. D., & Matheson, K. (1995). Double relative deprivation: combining the personal and political. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(11), 1167-1177.
15. Gans, H. (2003). Democracy and the news. New York: Oxford University Press.
16. Gamson, W. A. (1968). Power and discontent. Homewood, IL: Dorsey.
17. Gamson, W. A. (1990). The strategy of social protest (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
18. Gibson, C. B. (2003). The efficacy advantage: Factors related to the formation of group efficacy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33, 2153-2186.
19. Giugni, M. (2004). Social protest and policy change. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
20. Goddard, R. D. (2001). Collective efficacy: A neglected construct in the study of schools and student achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 467-476.
21. Kim, Y. C., & Ball-Rokeach, S. (2006). Community storytelling network, neighborhood context, and civic engagement: A multilevel approach. Human Communication Research, 32, 411-439.
22. Klandermans, B. (1997). The social psychology of protest. Oxford: Blackwell.
23. Klandermans, B. (2002). How group identification helps to overcome the dilemma of collective action. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(5), 887-900.
24. Lee, F. L. F. (2006). Collective efficacy, support for democratization, and political participation in Hong Kong. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18, 297-317.
25. Lee, F. L. F., & Chan, J. M. (2008). Making sense of participation: The political culture of the pro-democracy demonstrators in Hong Kong. The China Quarterly, 193, 84-101.
26. Lippmann, W. (1922). Public opinion. New York: McMillan.
27. Lubell, M., Zahran, S., & Vedlitz, A. (2007). Collective action and citizen response to global warming. Political Behavior, 39, 391-413.
28. McAdam, D. (1982). Political process and the development of black insurgency, 1930-1970. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
29. McAdam, D. (1996). Political opportunities: Conceptual origins, current problems, future directions. In D. McAdam, J. McCarthy & M. Zald (Eds.), Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements (pp. 23-40). New York: Cambridge University Press.
30. McAdam, D., Tarrow, S., & Tilly, C. (2001). Dynamics of contention. New York: Cambridge University Press.
31. McAllister, I., & White, S. (1994). Political participation in post-communist Russia: Voting, activism, and the potential for mass protest. Political Studies, 42(4), 593-615.
32. Muller, E. N., & Opp, K. D. (1986). Rational choice and rebellious collective action. American Political Science Review, 80(2), 471-489.
33. Opp, K. D. (1989). The rationality of political protest. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
34. Opp, K. D. (2000). Adverse living conditions, grievances, and political protest after communism: The example of East Germany. Social Forces, 79(1), 29-65.
35. Opp, K. D. (2004). ''What is is always becoming what ought to be'': How political action generates a participation norm. European Sociological Review, 20(1), 13-29.
36. Opp, K. D., & Roehl, W. (1990). Repression, micromobilization, and political protest. Social Forces, 69(2), 521-547.
37. Passy, F. (2003). Social networks matter, but how? In M. Diani & D. McAdam (Eds.), Social movements and networks (pp 21-49). New York: Oxford University Press.
38. Pepper, S. (2007). Keeping democracy at bay: Hong Kong and the challenge of Chinese political reform. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
39. Poon, K. (2008). The political future of Hong Kong: Democracy within Communist China. London: Routledge.
40. Rochon, T. R., & Mazmanian, D. A. (1993). Social movements and the policy process. Annals of the Academy of Political and Social Science, 528, 75-87.
41. Sampson, R. J., Morenoff, J. D., & Earls, F. (1999). Beyond social capital: Spatial dynamics of collective efficacy for children. American Sociological Review, 64, 633-660.
42. Seligson, M. A. (1980). Trust, efficacy and modes of political participation: A study of Costa Rican peasants. British Journal of Political Science, 10, 75-98.
43. Sturmer, S., & Simon, B. (2004). The role of collective identification in social movement participation: A panel study in the context of the German gay movement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 263-277.
44. Van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three sociopsychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134(4), 504-535.
45. Watson, C. B., Chemers, M. M., & Preiser, N. (2001). Collective efficacy: A multilevel analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1057-1068.