The notion that mass mobilization has analytically important stages is underappreciated in the li... more The notion that mass mobilization has analytically important stages is underappreciated in the literature. This paper proposes an approach that decomposes mass mobilization into three main phenomena: origins, protest and outcome. Each stage is characterized by unique factors and mechanisms. Accordingly, the research questions pertaining to each stage are dealt with by multiple levels of analysis and alternative explanations, allowing theory testing and theory development. The paper highlights separate causal mechanisms that operate in the emergence of grievances and protest motivation during the origins stage; mechanisms involving different forms of pressure, organization, psychological processes, and external forces during the protest stage; and mechanisms pertaining to key players and strategies that determine outcomes of mass mobilization. We illustrate that certain factors and mechanisms which are key in one stage have little or no causal relevance in the other stages. Other fac...
In 2011, a wave of protests spread to over 700 cities in over 60 countries around the globe. The ... more In 2011, a wave of protests spread to over 700 cities in over 60 countries around the globe. The protests of 2011, including the protests in Tel Aviv and New York, were characterized by the participation of young, well-educated members of the middle class, the occupation of public spaces, the use of non-hierarchical decision-making processes, and calls to decrease inequality, move towards direct democracy, and curtail the political power of corporations. An initial explanatory model was suggested which was based on a review of the literature on social movements. Further development of the model was guided by grounded theory, developed from a qualitative analysis of empirical data from two selected cases, the protests in the cities of Tel Aviv and New York.
At the center of the model, and the focus of the empirical work, were the processes of the mobilization of protesters and the mobilization of resources. The findings showed that protesters were mobilized by cognitive mobilization and affective mobilization. Cognitive mobilization took place through the adaption of cognitive frames, frames which operated on the level of understanding reality, while affective mobilization worked through emotional shifts, which shaped people’s emotional response to the world. The analysis of the mobilization of resources, what people do once they decide to participate, included material as well as the human resources, those skills or abilities people brought to the protests, whether because of their personal backgrounds or just as fungible protest participants.
The final explanatory model is based on several different social movement theories that are usually considered to be mutually exclusive. The model suggests an explanation as to how structural factors influence individual decisions to participate in social movements.
This model also allows for the identification of the ways in which global changes catalyzed the protests, and possibly demonstrates its use in understanding the broader global wave of protests in 2011 and future social movements. The analysis provides a way of understanding the impact of global changes on people living in global and globalizing cities, suggesting that the shared characteristics are connected to the difficulties experienced by members of the young, educated middle class living in such cities. They also suggest that there is a specific politics of inequality, and that changes brought by globalization and changing technology bring not just a characteristic set of results - of patterns of winners of losers, of changes in urban life – but also characteristic responses to those patterns.
The notion that mass mobilization has analytically important stages is underappreciated in the li... more The notion that mass mobilization has analytically important stages is underappreciated in the literature. This paper proposes an approach that decomposes mass mobilization into three main phenomena: origins, protest and outcome. Each stage is characterized by unique factors and mechanisms. Accordingly, the research questions pertaining to each stage are dealt with by multiple levels of analysis and alternative explanations, allowing theory testing and theory development. The paper highlights separate causal mechanisms that operate in the emergence of grievances and protest motivation during the origins stage; mechanisms involving different forms of pressure, organization, psychological processes, and external forces during the protest stage; and mechanisms pertaining to key players and strategies that determine outcomes of mass mobilization. We illustrate that certain factors and mechanisms which are key in one stage have little or no causal relevance in the other stages. Other factors and mechanisms may also dramatically change in content, meaning or configuration between the stages. This theoretical approach facilitates the integration of a large and diverse body of scholarship into a structured analysis of mass mobilization that allows for both a detailed case study as well as comparison of stages across mass protests. The analysis of stages and causal mechanisms is illustrated across cases of democratization, revolution, and protest within democracy.
The notion that mass mobilization has analytically important stages is underappreciated in the li... more The notion that mass mobilization has analytically important stages is underappreciated in the literature. This paper proposes an approach that decomposes mass mobilization into three main phenomena: origins, protest and outcome. Each stage is characterized by unique factors and mechanisms. Accordingly, the research questions pertaining to each stage are dealt with by multiple levels of analysis and alternative explanations, allowing theory testing and theory development. The paper highlights separate causal mechanisms that operate in the emergence of grievances and protest motivation during the origins stage; mechanisms involving different forms of pressure, organization, psychological processes, and external forces during the protest stage; and mechanisms pertaining to key players and strategies that determine outcomes of mass mobilization. We illustrate that certain factors and mechanisms which are key in one stage have little or no causal relevance in the other stages. Other fac...
In 2011, a wave of protests spread to over 700 cities in over 60 countries around the globe. The ... more In 2011, a wave of protests spread to over 700 cities in over 60 countries around the globe. The protests of 2011, including the protests in Tel Aviv and New York, were characterized by the participation of young, well-educated members of the middle class, the occupation of public spaces, the use of non-hierarchical decision-making processes, and calls to decrease inequality, move towards direct democracy, and curtail the political power of corporations. An initial explanatory model was suggested which was based on a review of the literature on social movements. Further development of the model was guided by grounded theory, developed from a qualitative analysis of empirical data from two selected cases, the protests in the cities of Tel Aviv and New York.
At the center of the model, and the focus of the empirical work, were the processes of the mobilization of protesters and the mobilization of resources. The findings showed that protesters were mobilized by cognitive mobilization and affective mobilization. Cognitive mobilization took place through the adaption of cognitive frames, frames which operated on the level of understanding reality, while affective mobilization worked through emotional shifts, which shaped people’s emotional response to the world. The analysis of the mobilization of resources, what people do once they decide to participate, included material as well as the human resources, those skills or abilities people brought to the protests, whether because of their personal backgrounds or just as fungible protest participants.
The final explanatory model is based on several different social movement theories that are usually considered to be mutually exclusive. The model suggests an explanation as to how structural factors influence individual decisions to participate in social movements.
This model also allows for the identification of the ways in which global changes catalyzed the protests, and possibly demonstrates its use in understanding the broader global wave of protests in 2011 and future social movements. The analysis provides a way of understanding the impact of global changes on people living in global and globalizing cities, suggesting that the shared characteristics are connected to the difficulties experienced by members of the young, educated middle class living in such cities. They also suggest that there is a specific politics of inequality, and that changes brought by globalization and changing technology bring not just a characteristic set of results - of patterns of winners of losers, of changes in urban life – but also characteristic responses to those patterns.
The notion that mass mobilization has analytically important stages is underappreciated in the li... more The notion that mass mobilization has analytically important stages is underappreciated in the literature. This paper proposes an approach that decomposes mass mobilization into three main phenomena: origins, protest and outcome. Each stage is characterized by unique factors and mechanisms. Accordingly, the research questions pertaining to each stage are dealt with by multiple levels of analysis and alternative explanations, allowing theory testing and theory development. The paper highlights separate causal mechanisms that operate in the emergence of grievances and protest motivation during the origins stage; mechanisms involving different forms of pressure, organization, psychological processes, and external forces during the protest stage; and mechanisms pertaining to key players and strategies that determine outcomes of mass mobilization. We illustrate that certain factors and mechanisms which are key in one stage have little or no causal relevance in the other stages. Other factors and mechanisms may also dramatically change in content, meaning or configuration between the stages. This theoretical approach facilitates the integration of a large and diverse body of scholarship into a structured analysis of mass mobilization that allows for both a detailed case study as well as comparison of stages across mass protests. The analysis of stages and causal mechanisms is illustrated across cases of democratization, revolution, and protest within democracy.
Uploads
Papers by Sarah Goldberg
At the center of the model, and the focus of the empirical work, were the processes of the mobilization of protesters and the mobilization of resources. The findings showed that protesters were mobilized by cognitive mobilization and affective mobilization. Cognitive mobilization took place through the adaption of cognitive frames, frames which operated on the level of understanding reality, while affective mobilization worked through emotional shifts, which shaped people’s emotional response to the world. The analysis of the mobilization of resources, what people do once they decide to participate, included material as well as the human resources, those skills or abilities people brought to the protests, whether because of their personal backgrounds or just as fungible protest participants.
The final explanatory model is based on several different social movement theories that are usually considered to be mutually exclusive. The model suggests an explanation as to how structural factors influence individual decisions to participate in social movements.
This model also allows for the identification of the ways in which global changes catalyzed the protests, and possibly demonstrates its use in understanding the broader global wave of protests in 2011 and future social movements. The analysis provides a way of understanding the impact of global changes on people living in global and globalizing cities, suggesting that the shared characteristics are connected to the difficulties experienced by members of the young, educated middle class living in such cities. They also suggest that there is a specific politics of inequality, and that changes brought by globalization and changing technology bring not just a characteristic set of results - of patterns of winners of losers, of changes in urban life – but also characteristic responses to those patterns.
At the center of the model, and the focus of the empirical work, were the processes of the mobilization of protesters and the mobilization of resources. The findings showed that protesters were mobilized by cognitive mobilization and affective mobilization. Cognitive mobilization took place through the adaption of cognitive frames, frames which operated on the level of understanding reality, while affective mobilization worked through emotional shifts, which shaped people’s emotional response to the world. The analysis of the mobilization of resources, what people do once they decide to participate, included material as well as the human resources, those skills or abilities people brought to the protests, whether because of their personal backgrounds or just as fungible protest participants.
The final explanatory model is based on several different social movement theories that are usually considered to be mutually exclusive. The model suggests an explanation as to how structural factors influence individual decisions to participate in social movements.
This model also allows for the identification of the ways in which global changes catalyzed the protests, and possibly demonstrates its use in understanding the broader global wave of protests in 2011 and future social movements. The analysis provides a way of understanding the impact of global changes on people living in global and globalizing cities, suggesting that the shared characteristics are connected to the difficulties experienced by members of the young, educated middle class living in such cities. They also suggest that there is a specific politics of inequality, and that changes brought by globalization and changing technology bring not just a characteristic set of results - of patterns of winners of losers, of changes in urban life – but also characteristic responses to those patterns.