Social Networks and Social Movements: A Microstructural Approach to Differential Recruitment Author(s): David A. Snow, Louis A. Zurcher, Jr.

, Sheldon Ekland-Olson Source: American Sociological Review, Vol. 45, No. 5 (Oct., 1980), pp. 787-801 Published by: American Sociological Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2094895 Accessed: 16/02/2009 16:16
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asa. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Sociological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Sociological Review.

http://www.jstor.org

SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS: A MICROSTRUCTURAL APPROACH TO DIFFERENTIAL RECRUITMENT*

DAVID

A. SNOW

Louis A. ZURCHER, JR.

University of Texas at Austin

University of Texas at Austin

SHELDON EKLAND-OLSON
University of Texas at Austin

AmericanSociologicalReview 1980, Vol. 45 (October):787-801 growthof social movements recruitment andthe differential to Past examinations differential of level have typicallysoughtexplanationat a social psychological/motivational of analysis.That focus has recently been called into question by scholars concernedwith the process through expandtheir ranksand mobilizesupportfor their causes. Yet, which movementorganizations as Useem (1975)and Zald and McCarthy(1979)have noted, there has been little systematic researchconducted on the details of the influence process. Drawingon data derived from a synthesis of existing research and two primarysources, this paper attemptsto shed greater and process. The findingsindicatethat empirical theoreticallight on the movementrecruitment is differential recruitment not merely a functionof dispositionalsusceptibility,but is strongly influenced by structuralproximity, availability, and affective interaction with movement function networkattributes members.The findingsalso indicatethata movementorganization's of as an importantdeterminant its recruitmentstrategiesand growth.

Amongthe variousissues and questions relatingto the study of social movements, few have generated as much discussion and research as those pertaining to differential recruitment. Why are some people ratherthan others recruitedinto a particularsocial movementorganization?1 Given the number of competing and functionallyequivalent movement organizations frequently on the market at the same time, how is it that people come to
* Addressall communications David A. Snow; to: Department of Sociology; University of Texas; Austin, TX 78712. We wish to thank the anonymousreviewers and the editorsof ASR for theirinsightfuland instructive of suggestions.Preparation the article was partially fundedby a grantfrom the UniversityResearchInstitute, Universityof Texas. 1 Here we are following McCarthy and Zald's (1977:1217-9)distinction between a social movement and a movementorganization.They define a social movementas "a set of opinionsand beliefs in a populationwhich representspreferences"in support of or opposition to social change. A social is movementorganization definedas "a complex, or which identifies its goals with formal, organization the preferencesof a social movementor a countermovementand attemptsto implementthose goals." We think this is a conceptually useful distinction since individualsare recruitedinto and devote time and energy to movementorganizations.

participate in one rather than another! Why do some movement organizations attract a larger following and grow at a more rapidrate than others? Whetherone scans the literatureon religious cults and movements, political protest, the ghetto revolts of the 1960s, or student activism, the problem of differential recruitment surfaces as a dominant focal concern, both theoretically and empirically. Indeed, the study of movement recruitment has been "one of the most prominent characteristics of collective behavior research in recent years" (Marxand Wood, 1975:388). of Nonetheless, understanding the process of differential recruitment, its underlying determinants, and implications for the spreadand growth of social movements is still quite limited (Marx and Wood, 1975:393).As Zald and McCarthy (1979:240) concluded in their recent review of the resource mobilization approach, very little is known about the movement recruitment process and the conditions under which various recruitment techniques are more or less successful. The purposeof this articleis to advance understandingof the movement recruit-

787

788

AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW half, his informalinterviews with recruits and members, and his examination of a random sample of members' testimonies appearingin the movement's newspaper,
The World Tribune.3 Since most editions

ment process by assembling quantitative and qualitativedata which bear on the relationshipbetween movementrecruitment and such microstructural factors as social networks, and by developing a set of correspondingpropositions. Four focal questions structurethe inquiry: (1) What are the microstructural avenues of movement recruitment?(2) What accounts for the differential availability of people for movementparticipation? What are the (3) structuralcharacteristicsof social move ments which predict differentrecruitment strategiesand patterns?(4) What implications do different recruitment strategies and patterns have for the spread and growth of a movement?
DATA AND PROCEDURES

The article draws on three sets of data. The first is derivedfroman examinationof social movement case studies through which we synthesize quantitative data pertaining to the recruitment process. References to the salience of such microstructural factors as social networks are not uncommon, but our review of the literaturerevealed that most of the references tend to be impressionistic.There is a dearth of harddata specifying the function of social networks in relation to differential recruitmentto and the differential spread and growth of movements. However, we did find ten studies with quantitative data bearing directly on the recruitmentprocess. The sample size of the ten studies varies from 31 to 310 participants, with the combined N totalling more than 1,200. The second data set comes from an examinationof recruitmentto the Nichiren Shoshu Buddhist movement in America.2 These data were derived from the senior author's observations and experiences as a participant-observerfor a year and a
2 Nichiren Shoshu of America (NSA) is a Japanese-based,culturallytransplanted,proselytizing Buddhist movement that seeks to change the worldby changingindividuals.It was formallyintroduced into Americain 1960andclaims to have since attracted more than 200,000 members, the vast majority of wbom are Occidental. For a detailed examination the movement'sideology, goals, and of operationin America, see Snow (1976; 1979).

of the newspaper contain several members' testimonies, 504 were randomly selected from 1966 to 1974 (six per month), excluding a two-year period in which the newspaper was not readily available. Three hundredand thirty of the 504 testimonies provided information specifying mode of recruitment into the movement. These 330 cases, coupled with 15 other membersfrom whom recruitment information was informally elicited, yielded a sample of 345. Informal interviews with 25 Hare Krishna devotees supplement the data pertainingto Nichiren Shoshu. Twenty of the interviews were with members of the Krishna commune in Los Angeles, and five were with members of the Dallas commune. The interviews were conducted during the course of six visits to the Los Angeles commune and two visits to the Dallas commune.4 The thirddata set is derivedfrom a nonrandom sample of University of Texas students. A questionnaire designed to gather information pertaining to movement recruitment and participation was administeredto 550 students enrolled in ten different university courses in the Spring semester of 1979. The first part of the questionnaire contained a list of twenty-five social movement organizations within the Austin, Texas, area. The respondents were initially asked to indicate for each movement whether they with it; (b) familiarbut were (a) unfamiliar not sympathetic or supportive; (c) symor pathetic but not a participant; (d) associated with it as a participantat one time or another. Three hundredof the 550 respondents indicated that they either were
3 The World Tribune is published five times weekly in Santa Monica, California.It was first issued in August 1964 and now has over 55,000 monthlysubscriptions.It constitutesa useful record of the growth and history of the Nichiren Shoshu movementin America. 4 For a discussion of the origins, goals and ideology, and operation of Hare Krishna, see Daner (1976)and Judah(1974).

SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

789

movement participants or were sympathetic with the objectives of one or more of the movements.5 Since we are concerned with differential recruitment, only the responses of the 135 participants and the 165 sympathizersare considered. The sympathetic nonparticipantsconstitute a kind of control group in that their responses shed light on the question of why it is that people who are in sympathy with and supportive of a movement's value orientation do not always participate in movement activities. A consideration of the responses of both participants and sympathizers should yield a better understanding differentialrecruitment. of
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

The Microstructural Avenues of Recruitment

Movement recruitment has generally been approached from a sociallevel of psychological/motivational analysis, with various states-of-mind or psychological attributes posited as the majorcausal variables (see Cantril, 1941; Feuer, 1969; Glock, 1964; Hoffer, 1951;
Classification Respondentsby Relationship of to and Type of Movement Movement Type Participantsa Sympathizersb Totals Religiousor Psychiatric 54 50 104 81 Politicald 115 196
Totals 135 165 300 a "Participants"refers to those individualswho

devote time, energy, and other resources to the movement organizationwith which they are affiliated. They are what McCarthy Zald (1977:1221) and referto as the "constituents"of a social movement organization. b "Synpathizers"refers to those individuals who believe in or agree with the goals of a movementor movementorganization,but do not devote any personal resourcesto it. They are what McCarthyand Zald (1977:1221) refer to as "adherents." c Movementsclassified as "Religiousor Psychiatric" include Transcendental Meditation,Churchof Scientology, Baha'i, Jehovah's Witnesses, Campus Crusadefor Christ, etc. d Movements classified as "Political" include: National Organization for Reform of Marijuana Laws, NOW, Right to Life, Young Socialist Alliance, Lesbian-GayAlliance, John Birch Society, Common Cause, University Mobilizationfor Survival (Anti-Nuke),etc.

Klapp, 1969; Toch, 1965). However reasonable the underlying assumption that some people are more susceptible than others to movement participation, that view deflects attention from the fact that recruitment cannot occur without prior contact with a recruitment agent. The potential participanthas to be informed about and introduced into a particular movement. Thus, even if one accepts the popular contention that some individuals are predisposed social-psychologicallyto movement participation, the following question still remains: What determines which potential participants are most likely to come into contact with and be recruitedinto one movement rather than another, if into any movement at all? It is a basic sociologicaltenet that social phenomenaare not distributedrandomly, but are structuredaccordingto aggregate or group membership, role incumbency, and the like. It thus seems reasonable to assume that movement recruitment, rather than being random or merely the function of social-psychological predispositions, will also be structuredby certain sociospatialfactors. Accordingly, we can begin to answerthe above questionby considering,first, the various sociospatial settingsin which movementsandpotential participantscan come into contact, and, second, the variety of generally available modes of communicationthrough which informationcan be imparted. Regardingthe first concern, most spatial settings or domains of social life can be conceptualizedin terms of a continuum ranging from public to private places.6 Examples of the formerinclude shopping malls, communitysidewalks,airports,bus stations, and city parks. Countryclubs, an office, a sorority or fraternityhouse, and an apartmentor home are illustrative of the latter. The means of information dissemination
6 FollowingGoffman(1963)and Lymanand Scott (1967), "public places" refer to those regions or areas in a communityor society that are freely and officially accessible to most membersof that community or society. "Private places," on the other hand, refer to those spatial domains that are offlimits to all but acknowledgedmembersand guests, and in which outsiders are consideredas actual or potentialintruders.

790

REVIEW AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL

FACE-TO-FACE Face-to-face leafleting, petitioning, and proselytizingon sidewalks;participation in publicevents, such as parades;staging events for public consumption,such as sit-ins, protests, movement-sponsored conventionsand festivals.
PUBLIC

Door-to-doorleafleting,petitioning,and dissemination proselytizing;information and recruitmentamong familiar others along the lines of promoter's extranetworks. movement interpersonal
PRIVATE

CHANNELS Promotion and recruitment via radio, television, and newspapers.

CHANNELS via Promotionand recruitment mail and telephone.

MEDIATED Disof Figure 1. Classification GeneralOutreachand EngagementPossibilitiesfor MovementInformation semination,Promotion,and Recruitment

can be conceptualized generally in terms of whether they are face-to-face or mediated. By face-to-face communication,we refer to all information,whetherit be verbal or nonverbal, that is impartedwhen two or more individuals or groups are physically present. In contrast, mediated communicationrefers to informationdismass seminationthroughinstitutionalized communication mechanisms, such as radio and television, or through institutionalized, but individualized and privatized, communication mechanisms such as the mail and telephone. The cross-classification of these two dimensions suggests four general and avenues for fairly distinct microstructural movement informationdisseminationand recruitment.Figure 1 schematicallysummarizesthese alternativeavenues, each of which is distinguishedby the spatial domainof social life in which contact can be established and the means throughwhich informationcan be imparted. Given the alternative microstructural avenues, the question arises as to the relative yield of each in terms of actual recruits. In other words, is recruitment among strangers in public places more productive than recruitment along the other avenues, or are movement recruits typically drawn from existing members' extramovement friends, acquaintances, and kin? Examinationof the movementliterature strongly suggests that the network channel is the richest source of movement recruits. Numerous studies alludeto the im-

portance of social networks as a conduit for the spreadof social movements. While some of these works are theoretical or critical in orientation (Oberschall, 1973; Tilly, 1978; Useem, 1975; Wilson, 1973; Wilson and Orum, 1976),most are empirical studies of religious movements (Bibby and Brinkerhoff, 1974; Dator, 1969; Gerlach and Hine, 1970; Harrison, 1974; Heirich, 1977; Judah, 1974; Lee, 1967; Lofland, 1966;Murata,1969;White, 1970) or political protest or reform-oriented movements (Freeman, 1973; Jackson et al., 1960;Leahy, 1975;Marx, 1969;Orum, 1972; Petras and Zeitlin, 1967; Pinard, 1971;Tygart and Holt, 1972;Von Eschen et al., 1971;Woelfel et al., 1974;Zurcher and Kirkpatrick, 1976). Although suggestive, few of the investigationsprovide hard data specifying the relationbetween social networks and differential recruitment. However, ten studies were found with quantitativedata bearing on the recruitment process. Table 1 summarizes the findingsof all but one of the studies,7
7 Heirich's(1977)findingsregarding conversionto CatholicPentecostalismdo not neatly fit into Table 1. However, the findings are consistent with those reported in Table 1. Among the 118 respondents "introduced to the movement by trusted associates," 75% were converts. In contrast, among the 187 respondents who were not introduced to the movement by trusted associates, only 31% were converts. Based on similarfindingsfor other social influence variables, Heirich (1977:667)concluded that "it is clear that members of the movement, turnto previousfriendsand to perwhen recruiting, sons they meet daily."

SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

Table 1. Studies with Data SpecifyingMode of Recruitmentto Various Movements(Percentage) Mode of Recruitment RecruitedthroughSocial Networks % By % By Friends, Tot. % Rec. N Relatives Acquaintancesa thr. Ntwks. C 234 90 90 100 16 76 92 120 65 35 100 e 24 86 96

791

Pentecostal 47 77f 32 79 21 9 Catholic 169 59 g 59 Pentecostal Bibby & Brinkerhoff Evangelistic (1974) Protestantism 132 74 45 29 26 Leahy (1975) Anti-Abortion 31 26 65 91 9 Judah(1974) Hare Krishna 63 0 3 3 97 a Includes all individualsrecruitedthroughnetworks other than familialor kinship (e.g., occupational, neighborhood). b Includes all individuals recruitedby strangersin the street or at mass meetings, or who sought out the movement after learningabout it throughthe public media, or who joined on their own initiative. I Percent recruitedby relatives, if any, not reported.Of the 90%recruitedthroughnetworks, 52%were recruitedby friends, 20o throughcommunitynetwork, and 18%throughorganizational occupational and networks. d Data derivedfrom 200 testimonials of Americanmembersin a Sokagakkai newspaper.Of the 60%(120) indicatingmode of recruitment, none was recruitedby strangersor throughthe media. The reason for the large percentagerecruitedby relatives is that the majorityof the individualsin the samplewere American GI's stationed in Japanwho were marriedto Japanesemembers. e Sample size not given. Percentfigures based on the averageof three to five differentsurveys. Percent figurefor friendsandacquaintances basedon the averageof threesurveys;percentfigurefor relativesandthe last two columns based on the average of five surveys. f Figures based on the compilationof Gerlachand Hine's (1970:79-80)reportedfindingsregarding two separatePentecostal churches. 9 Percentrecruitedby relativesor strangers,if any, not reported.Thereforethe actualpercentagerecruited throughnetworks may have been greaterthan the 59%reported.

Investigator Sills (1957) Murata(1969) Dator (1969) White (1970) Gerlachand Hine (1970) Harrison(1974)

Movement Marchof Dimes Sokagakkai Sokagakkai Sokagakkai

% Recruited Outside Networksb 10 9

d

clearly demonstratingthe salience of social networks as a recruitment avenue. For each of the movements studied, with the exception of Hare Krishna, extramovement social networks constitute the primarysource of recruits. Our findings regardingrecruitment to Nichiren Shoshu are consistentwith those just presented. As indicated in Table 2, Nichiren Shoshu members are typically recruited into the movement by one or more members with whom they have a

interpersonal preexisting,extramovement, tie. Although Nichiren Shoshu members devote a considerableamountof time and energy to proselytizing in public places, these information dissemination and recruiting forays are not very productive. The senior author accompaniedmembers on over forty such expeditions, and only twice were recruitsattracted.In contrast, all but one of the twenty-five Krishnadevotees we interviewedwere recruited"off the street" by other memberswho were strangersat the time of contact. (Factors Patternsfor Nichiren Shoshu which account for the different recruitTable 2. Recruitment and Hare Krishna(Percentage) ment patterns of Hare Krishna and the later.) Nichiren Shoshu Hare Krishna other movementswill be discussed The importantbridgingfunction of so(N:25) (N:345) Recruitment Percent Percent Avenues cial networks in relationto movement recruitmentis furtherdemonstratedby our 96 17 Public Places 4 the 82 SocialNetworks findingsregarding sampleof university 0 1 Mass Media students participating in various social 0 0 Mail/Telephone movements. Additionally, these findings

792

AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW pertainingto Hare Krishna in particular suggest that some movements recruit most of their members through channels other than social networks. The question thus arises as to who out of the pool of individuals contacted either through existing ties or throughother recruitment avenues is most likely to become a movement participant? One plausible answer is suggested by the many works that posit a psychofunctional linkage between social-psychological attributes (conceptualized as susceptibilities) and the goals and ideologies of movements (construed as appeals). According to this view, participation in movement activities is largely a function of certain fertile dispositions, such as alienation (Bolton, 1972; Oppenheimer, 1968; Ransford, 1968), relative deprivation (Aberle, 1966; Davies, 1971; Glock, 1964; Gurr, 1970); and authoritarianism (Hoffer, 1951; Lipset, 1960; Lipset and Raab, 1973). Although of longstanding popularity, the social-psychological dispositional approach has in recent years been called into question on both theoretical and empiricalgrounds.8Moreover,our research suggests that the reason why some ratherthan other individualsjoin a movement once they have been introduced to it can be explained in large part by their structural availability. Specifically, the findings pertainingto Nichiren Shoshu and the sample of movement sympathizers suggest that the reason for participating or not participating in movement activities once invited is largely contingent on the extent to which

suggestthat networklinkagesare not only in important accountingfor differentialrecruitment into religious movements, but also for politicalmovements. As indicated in Table 3, 63% of the students participating in political movements were drawn into their respective movement's orbitof influenceby being linkedto one or more members through a preexisting, extramovementinterpersonaltie. The findings associated with the three data sets not only corroborateeach other, but they also clearly demonstratethe importanceof preexistingsocial networks in structuringmovement recruitment. It is thus reasonable to suggest the following summaryproposition: Proposition 1: Those outsiderswho are linked to one or more movement members through preexisting extramovement networkswill have a greater probability of being contacted and recruited into that particular movement than will those individualswho are outside of members' extramovement networks.
The Importance of Social Networks in Accounting for Differential Availability

Proposition 1 and the data in which it is groundedsuggest that recruitmentamong social networks is likely to be more productive than recruitmentvia the other microstructuralavenues. However, the fact remains that not all relatives, friends or acquaintances of movement members participate in movement activities when invited. The findings reported in the preceding section indicate that, for all the movements studied, at least some mem8 Muchof the literature touchingon the hypothetibers were recruited "off the street" or cal association between preexisting social psychothrough the public media. The findings logical strains and participationin movements sugTable 3. Recruitment Avenues of a Sample of University Students Participating in Various Movements (Percentage) Movements Recruitment Avenues Public Places Social Networks Mass Media Mail/Telephone Political (N:81) Percent 7 63 30 0 Religious (N:54) Percent 0 80 20 0 Totals (N: 135) Percent 4 70 26 0

gests a relatively indeterminaterelationship (see Aberle, 1965;Bolton, 1972;Marx and Wood, 1975; Petrasand Zeitlin, 1967;Portes, 1971;Useem, 1975). of Also the magnitude statisticalassociationbetween measures of social psychologicalvariablesand participation in movements and protest activities has generally been quite small and unconvincing(see Lewis and Kraut, 1972;McPhail,1971;Moinatet al., 1972;Portes, 1971;Snyderand Tilly, 1972).For varied criticisms of the social psychologicaldispositional approach to movement joining, see and McCarthy Zald(1977:1214-5),Snow andPhillips (1980), Turner and Killian (1972:365), Useem (1975:11-18), and Zygmunt(1972).

SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

793

extramovement networks function as countervailing influences. Since sets of social relationships can be more or less demandingin regardto time, energy, and emotional attachment (Etzioni, 1975; Kanter, 1972),it follows that they can also vary in the extent to which they constitute countervailing influences or extraneous commitments(Becker, 1960)with respect to alternative networks and lines of action. Hence, some individuals will be more available for movement exploration and participationbecause of the possession of unscheduled or discretionarytime and because of minimal countervailing risks or sanctions. In the case of Nichiren Shoshu, these observations seem to hold for both those members recruited from the street and those recruited through social networks. Most were under 30, single, in a transitionalrole (such as that of student), employed in a line ratherthan in a managerial position, or in a state of occupationalmarginality.As a consequence, they tended to possess a greater amount of unscheduled time and generallylacked the kinds of extraneous commitments that are likely to inhibit movement participation. Aside from the absence of a social tie to one or more members prior to initial contact, those recruited from the street differed from those recruited through networks only in that they were structurallymore available for participation.This observation is illustratedby the following account of how and why one street-recruit, a twenty-five-year-old male, came to join Nichiren Shoshu: I found myself here in L.A. with nothingbut the clothes I was wearing. I didn'tknow anybody. I didn't have a lot of money. It was a really strange situation. I hadjust flown into L.A. airport,and all my baggage came up missing. This was on a Saturdaynight. Since I didn't know anybody and didn't have any place to go, I went to the airportpolice station and was told to go to Travelers' Aid. But I learnedthat they wouldn't be open until Tuesday, since this was a Labor Day weekend. So I waited around the airport until Tuesday and then went down to Travelers'Aid. They

sent me to the Welfare Department. After spending four days waiting and filling out forms, I was told that I couldn't qualify for welfare because I wasn't a Californiaresident. At this point I didn't know what to do. So I spent a few nights at the Midnight Mission, and then decided to go to the Santa Monica Beach. That evening while I was walking around downtown Santa Monica, this guy came up to me and started talking about NamMyoho-Renge-Kyo (the Nichiren Shoshu chant), and asked if I would like to go to a meeting. Since I didn't have anything else to do, I went along. All of a sudden I find myself at this meeting where everybody was chanting. I didn't have the faintest idea about what was going on. I had never heardof the chant before, and didn't even know there was such a group as NSA. But since everybody was telling me to give chanting a try, I figured why not. I literally didn't have anythingto lose. So I joined, and I've been chanting ever since-which is about four months. Althoughthis account differs somewhat from the stories of other street-recruitsin its particulars, it underscores what was common to the life-situation of the 85 street-recruitsabout whom we were able to gather information.9They were either recent arrivals to or passing through the area in which they were recruited,or they were minimallyinvolved in proximal and demanding social relationships.10 Although one might argue that these streetrecruits were "susceptible" to the "ap9 The informationpertainingto street-recruitsis based on the testimonies of 61 Nichiren Shoshu members recruited off the street and on in-depth interviewswith two street recruitsto NSA and with 24 Hare Krishnadevotees. 10 It thus follows that relatively few people are recruiteddirectly off the streets for two basic reasons: First, most people walking the street are enline gaged in the business of completinga particular of action-such as shopping,going to a movie, and the like-and, therefore, have little if any unscheduled or free time when confronted by movement recruiters. Second, most individuals walking the street in most urbanareas have a numberof fairly that functionas strong,proximalsocial relationships countervailinginfluences, at least when confronted by a proselytizingstranger.

794

REVIEW AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL

Table 4. Reasons for Not ParticipatingGiven by Movement Sympathizers(Percentage) Movements Political Religious Totals (N:115) (N:50) (N:165) Percent Percent Percent 73 64 57 18 66 61 47 16 71 63 54 18

peals" of the movements they joined because they were "social isolates," "loners," or "outcasts," we do not subscribe to such an interpretation. Rather,we think it is sociologically more compelling to argue that individuals who join social movements share the kinds of demographic and social characteristics that allow them to follow their interests and/or engage in exploratory behavior to a greater extent than individuals who are bound to existing lines of action by such extraneous commitmentsas spouse, children, debts, job, and occupationalreputation."I

This microstructuralinterpretation is also suggested by our findings regarding the movementsympathizersin our sample of university students. By movement sympathizers,we refer to those individuals who indicate verbal support of or agreementwith the goals of a movement, but who do not devote any time, energy, or other resources to advancing the movement's objectives. The major reasons given by the sympathizers for remaining on the sidelines and not getting involved are indicated in Table 4. Most relevant to the present discussion is the finding that nearly two-thirds indicated that they did not have enoughtime to participate. Had their lines of action not been constrained by competing, extramovement commitments and demands, and had they been asked to participateby a member with whom they were acquainted, then presumably they would have become a participant or "coninterpretationis suggested by McCarthy and Zald(1973)in their initialdiscussionof resource mobilization,and by McPhail and Miller's (1973) treatmentof the assemblingprocess. Althoughone must be cautious about assumingthat the dynamics underlying participation civil disordersand social in movementsare the same, it is worth notingthat this interpretationis consistent with McPhail's (1971) reinterpretation the riot participationliterature, of parLachmanand Singer's(1968)findingsregarding ticipationin the 1967 Detroit riot, and Snyder and Kelly's (1979) discussion of the development of urbandisorders.(Also see NationalAdvisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968:123.)Darley and Batson's (1973)work on helpingbehavioralso suggests that unscheduled or discretionary time is perhapsthe most importantdeterminantof Good Samaritanism.
I IThis

Reasons 1. Didn't know anyone actively involved 2. Not enough time 3. Wasn't asked 4. Just didn't want to get involved 5. Fear of negative reaction by nonmovement significantothers 6. Don't know/other

7 4

12 4

9 4

stituent"ratherthanjust a sympathizeror "adherent." In light of these corroboratingfindings and observations, it seems reasonable to suggest that, given the existence of a social tie to one or more movement members, differentialrecruitmentis largely a function of differentialavailability,which is best conceptualizedas a microstructural phenomenon. That is, it is a function of how tightly individualsare tied to alternative networksand thus have commitments that hinder the recruitmentefforts of social movement organizations. The following propositions summarizethe argument. The first pertains to the relation between social networks and availability for movement participation.The second concerns the connection between structuralavailabilityand the probability of actual participation.
Proposition 2A: The fewer and the

weaker the social ties to alternative networks, the greater the structural availabilityfor movementparticipation.
Proposition 2B: The greater the

structuralavailabilityfor participation, the greater the probabilityof accepting the recruitment"invitation." Here it might be argued that even though a social bond with one or more movement members and structural availability increase the probability of movement participation,they are not sufficient conditions. We would agree, especially since social action on behalf of noncoercive organizations is unlikely in the absence of instrumental, affective, or

SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

795

ideological alignment (Etzioni, 1975; Kanter, 1972; Parsons and Shils, 1962). However, it is important to emphasize that people seldom initially join movements per se. Rather they typically are asked to participatein movement activities. 12 Furthermore, is duringthe course it of initial participation that they are provided with the "reasons" or "justifications" for what they have alreadydone and for continuing participation. As C. Wright Mills emphasized some time ago (1940), vocabularies of motives are frequentlysupplied"afterthe act" to explain the "underlyingcauses of the act," even though they have little to say about how the act came about. We would thus argue that the "motives" for joining or continued participationare generally emergent and interactional rather than prestructured. That is, they arise out of a process of ongoing interaction with a movement organization and its recruitment agents. Althoughthis alignmentprocess has not received much empirical attention, its salience in relation to movement recruitmenthas been illustratedby Lofland's (1977a; 1977b)reexaminationof the process by which one becomes a "Moonie" and by Snow's (1976) description of how Nichiren Shoshu strategically goes about the business of "luring" and "securing" recruits. In both cases the recruitment process is organized so as gradually to "sell" prospects on the "benefits" of participationand to provide them with "reasons" for remaining a member. This is not to suggest that prestructured cognitive states and tensions
12 This has been amply illustrated a numberof by studies. In his examinationof recruitment and conversion to the Unification Church, Lofland (1977a:306) found that initialcontact "commonlyinvolved an invitationto dinner, a lecture, or both" (see also Bromleyand Shupe, 1979:171-4).Snow's (1976)findingsregarding recruitment the practicesof the Nichiren Shoshu movement reveal similarpatterns. When recruitingin public places, Nichiren Shoshumemberscoaxed prospectsto attenddiscussion meetings, chanting sessions, and other movement activities. Ourobservationsof the recruitment effortsof Krishnadevotees also indicatethatthe first step was to get prospects to the local temple. They were invitedto attenda devotionalsession, to listen to discussion of the philosophy,or to attend a Sunday "love feast" (see also Judah, 1974).

are irrelevant for understanding movement joining. Rather, it is to emphasize that they must be aligned with the movement's value orientation, given specific forms and means for expression and amelioration,and put into the service of the movement (Zygmunt, 1972).13 In light of these observations,we arguethat initial and sustainedparticipationis largely contingent on the countervailinginfluence of alternative networks and intensive interaction with movement members. Whereas the first factor determines whether one is structurallyavailable for participation,the second factor gives rise to the rationalefor participation.
Structural Influences on Movement Recruitment Strategies and Patterns

In analyzing the recruitment process from the point of view of the movement itself, the relationshipbetween movement structure (as determined by its network attributes) and recruitmentopportunities and patterns requires attention. As indicated earlier, there are four general outreach and engagement channels that movements can exploit for information dissemination and recruitment:(1) They can channel their promotion and recruitment efforts among strangers in public places by face-to-facemeans;(2) They can promote via the institutionalized, mass communicationmechanisms;(3) They can recruit among strangersin private places by such means as door-to-door canvassing; (4) They can promote and recruit through members' extramovement social networks. The question thus arises as to what determinesthe patterningand channelling of a movement's recruitmentefforts. Depending on their resource base and strategy, all nonsecretive movement or13 In arguingthat the "motives" for movement participation largely emergentand interactional are in character,we are at least implicitlyquestioning the rational calculus assumptions accepted by resource mobilizationtheorists. That perspective is most clearly representedin the work of McCarthy and Zald (1973; 1977)and Oberschall(1973). For an extensive critiqueof this "utilitarian"strandof resource mobilizationtheory, see Firemanand Gamson (1979)and Zurcherand Snow (forthcoming).

796

AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW chantingsession or a devotee in the street. Judah (1974:162-3) concludes that
... the results seem to indicateratherclearly the importanceof the Movement's method of proselytizing. It has attractedthe attention of many by its practice of chantingthe Hare Krishnamantrain public. Duringthese public ceremonies, other devotees sell the literatureand engage the curious in conversation about Krishna.

ganizations interested in expanding their ranks can exploit the first three recruitment possibilities. However, not all such movementsare structurally able to use the networkchannel to the same extent since they do not all constitute open networks. Some movementsare morerestrictiveand exclusive than others in that membership eligibilityis contingent on the possession of certainascribedor achieved attributes. In other movements, such as Hare Krishna, core membershipmay even be contingent upon the severance of extramovement interpersonal ties. Since movement organizationscan vary in the extent to which they are linked to or isolated from other networks of social relations, it follows that their recruitmentopportunities can vary considerably. Accordingly, it seems reasonableto suggest the following propositions regardingthe relation between a movement's network attributes and the channelling and patterning of its recruitmentefforts:
Proposition 3A: Movements requiring

exclusive participationby their members in movement activities will attract members primarilyfrom public places rather than from among extramovement interpersonal associations and networks.
Proposition 3B: Movements which do

not require exclusive participationby their members in movement activities will attract members primarily from among extramovement interpersonal associations and networks, rather than from public places. These two propositions are suggested when we compare our findings regarding recruitment into Nichiren Shoshu with those pertaining to Hare Krishna. As mentioned earlier, more than threequartersof our sample of NSA members reportedthat they were recruitedinto the movement by relatives, friends, or acquaintances. In contrast, only one of the twenty-five Krishna devotees we interviewed was recruited by a former acquaintance. Judah (1974:162) similarly found that only 3.32%of the Krishnadevotees he interviewed "learned about it througha friendwho was a devotee." The majority(66%)came into contact with the movement by encountering a public

Anyone with firsthandknowledgeof the Krishna movement will find little reason to quibble with Judah's (1974) observations. However, he fails to note that the movementin general and devotees in particularhave little choice other than to turn to the streets in search of recruits. Since core membership in Hare Krishna requires an austere communallifestyle and the severance of extramovement interpersonal ties, the movement is structurallycompelled to concentrate its recruitmentefforts in public places. Consequently, most of its members are recruited "off the streets." In contrast, the Nichiren Shoshu movementdoes not involve communallife or require its members to sever their extramovement interpersonal ties. It is, therefore, structurallyable to recruitboth in public places and through members' extramovementnetworks. Consequently, it draws the bulk of its membershipfrom those networks.
Implications of Recruitment Strategies for Movement Spread and Growth

The differential spread and growth of social movements has generally been analyzed in terms of the appealof movement goals and value orientations to various target populationsin the ambientsociety. That a movement's organizational structure,and particularlyits network attributes, might function as an important determinantof its spread and growth has received only brief attention in the literature (Curtis and Zurcher, 1973; 1974; Messinger, 1955; Zald and Ash, 1966; Zurcherand Kirkpatrick,1976). We now address this issue. Specifically, do differences in network attributes and recruitmentopportunitieshave a significant impact on the success of a movement's

SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

797

recruitmentefforts, as measured by the number of outsiders actually recruited? The answer hypothetically depends not only on a movement's value orientation, but also on whether recruitment among social networks typically yields a greater return than does recruitment "off the street" or throughthe media. If the latter is generally more productive, then a movement's network attributeswould be of little relevance to its overall growth. However, if recruitmentamong strangers is not as effective as recruitmentamong movement members' acquaintances, friends, and relatives, then a movement's network attributeswould constitute a significant and importantvariablein relation to its growth and spread. Our findings indicate that for those movements which recruit both in public places and throughnetworks, recruitment among acquaintances,friends, and kin is generally more successful than recruitment among strangers.We thus conclude that a movement's network attributesand correspondingrecruitmentpatternsdo indeed make a significant difference in a movement's recruitment efforts and growth. Hence, the following propositions: Proposition 4A: The success of movement recruitmentefforts, measured by the numbers of outsiders actually recruited, will vary with the extent to which movements are linked to other groups and networks via members' extramovement interpersonal ties, such that: Proposition 4B: Movements which are linkedto other groupsand networkswill normallygrow at a more rapidrate and normally attain a larger membership than will movements which are structurallymore isolated and closed. Aside from a few exceptions (Craven and Wellman, 1974; Curtis and Zurcher, 1973; Turk, 1970), most social network analyses have focused on the individual and his or her interpersonalties, with a paucity of social ties taken as evidence of objective or structural social isolation. That focus may be useful for understanding the structuraldeterminantsof individual behavioral patterns and propensities. However, it obscures the fact that social

isolation can also occur at the group or movementlevel, as when a movementhas few, if any, direct links with other groups and thereforeconstitutes a closed network or insulated system of social relations. Whenthis occurs, Propositions4A and 4B suggest that such movements will differ markedly from structurallyless isolated movements in recruitment opportunities and patterns, and overall growth. Empirical support is provided for the propositionsby a comparisonof the membershipclaims of the NichirenShoshu and Hare Krishnamovement organizationsin the United States. Since 1970 Nichiren Shoshu's membership claims have consistently hovered between 200,000 and 250,000. In contrast, members of the Los Angeles and Dallas Krishna communes have reported that the number of communal Krishna devotees throughout the country totals no more than 4,000. While efforts to reach an objective estimate of Nichiren Shoshu's membership suggest that it is about half of what the movement claims (see Snow, 1976:137-44), the point still remainsthat Nichiren Shoshu's membership far exceeds that of Hare Krishna. Given the fact that both are active, proselytizing movements, the question arises as to why the spread and growth of Nichiren Shoshu have far outdistanced those of Hare Krishna. Differences in the value orientation, promises, and membershipdemandsof the two movements certainly constitute important variables in accountingfor the difference in their spread and growth.14 However,
14 Regarding the differencesin the value orientations and promisesof the two movements,Nichiren Shoshuis morepracticaland this-worldlyin orientaof tion. Ratherthancallingfor a renunciation worldly attachmentsand promisinga transcendenceof the materialworld, as is the case with Hare Krishna, of NichirenShoshupromisesthe realization personal and enlightenment happinessin the immediatehereand-now.It is thus reasonableto assume that Nichiren Shoshu would appeal to a greater number of people than would Hare Krishna. Relatedly, membershipin NichirenShoshu is muchless demanding. to Not only are Krishnadevotees required surrender to the movementtheir personalpossessions and desiderata, but they are also requiredto sever their preexisting, extramovement interpersonal associations and ties. In contrast, Nichiren Shoshu memsome time and bers are merelyrequiredto surrender energy, and perhaps be willing to risk a negative

798

AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW together, these findingsindicate that both the network attributes of movement organizations and membersfunction as important structural determinants of differential recruitmentto and the differential growth of movement organizations.15 Several theoretical and empiricalimplications are suggested by our findings and correspondent propositions. First, in contrastto the traditional assumptionthat movement recruitmentefforts are largely a function of goals and ideology, our findings indicate that the mobilization process in general and the recruitment process in particular likely to vary sigare nificantly with changes in organizational structure. Indeed, our findings indicate that movement goals and organizational structure may occasionally contradict each other. When this occurs, as in the case of Hare Krishna, the organizational structure will function as the more important determinant of recruitment patterns. Second, since social networks constitute microstructures,the findings suggest that microstructural variables are of equal, and perhaps greater, importance than dispositional susceptibilities in the determinationof differentialrecruitment. We do not urgethat dispositionsbe wholly ignored in attempts to understandthe recruitment process. The notion "disposition" perhapsusefully could be integrated with the network perspective by conceptualizing it in terms of the normative, instrumentaland affective ties among current and potentialparticipants. People can become encapsulated (Lofland, 1977a; 1977b) by a movement when they are "dispositionally" linked to the proselytizing network, and when that connectionbecomes expandedby exposureto increasinglybroadenedsocializationmessages.
15 Ourconcentration upon microstructural factors in movementrecruitment not intendedto detract is scholars from equally necessary macrostructural probingsof movement emergence, growth and decline. Blumer's(1951)identification generalsocial of movementsas seedbeds for specific movementsremains heuristicallyimportant.The shifts in societal trends,especiallyin values and theirinterpretations, can influencethe relevanceof networks(andrhetoric in networks)for potentialmovementrecruits.

Propositions4A and 4B point to a perhaps more significant determinantof the differential spread and growth not only of these two movement organizations, but also of social movement organizationsin general: the extent to which a movement organization is linked to or structurally isolated from other groups and networks within its environmentof operation.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

In recent years the study of differential recruitmentto and the differentialspread and growth of social movementshas been characterizedby concern with the process through which movement organizations strategically expand their ranks and mobilize support for their cause. Yet, as both Useem (1975:43) and Zald and McCarthy (1979:240) have noted, there has been relatively little systematic research conducted on the details of the influence process. In order to shed greater empiricaland theoretical light on the recruitment process, we have presented data derived from three sources. Our findings indicate that the probability of being recruited into a particular movement is largely a function of two conditions: (1) links to one or more movement members through a preexisting or emergent interpersonal and (2) the absence tie; of countervailingnetworks. The first condition suggests who is most likely to be broughtdirectly into a movement organization's orbit of influence and thereby subjected to its recruitmentand realityconstructionefforts. The second indicates who is structurally most availablefor participationand thereforemost likely to accept the recruitmentinvitation. Our findings also indicate that a movement's recruitment strategies and its resultant growth will vary considerably in the degree to which it constitutes a closed or open network of social relations. Taken
reaction by nonmovement significant others. In short, not only is it easier to be a Nichiren Shoshu member than a Krishna devotee, but Nichiren Shoshu adherents also live in and are "into" the here-and-now materialworld to a much greaterextent than are the saffron-robedchanters and promoters of the Krishnamantra.

SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

799

Third, our analysis suggests that the question of "why" people join social movements cannot be adequately understood apart from an examination of the process of "how" individuals come to align themselves with a particularmovement. Indeed, it is our contentionthat the "whys" or "reasons" forjoining arise out of the recruitment process itself. We would thus arguethat furtherexamination of movement joining and participation should give more attention to how movements solicit, coax, and secure participants, and more attention to the factors that account for variationsin recruitment strategiesand their efficacy. An examination of such factors should move us beyond our currentknowledge about the recruitmentprocess, which has, according to Marxand Wood (1975:393),reached "a point of diminishingreturns."
REFERENCES Aberle, David 1965 "A note on relative deprivationtheory as applied to Millenarian and other cult movements." Pp. 537-41 in W. Lessa and ReE. Vogt (eds.), Readerin Comparative Approach.New ligion:An Anthropological York: Harperand Row. 1966 The Peyote Religion Among the Navaho. Chicago:Aldine. Becker, Howard S. 1960 "Notes on the concept of commitment." AmericanJournalof Sociology 66:32-40. Bibby, ReginaldW. and MerlinB. Brinkerhoff 1974 "When proselytizing fails: an organizational analysis." Sociological Analysis 35:189-200. Blumer, Herbert 1951 "Collective behavior." Pp. 166-222 in A. M. Lee (ed.), New Outlineof the Principles of Sociology. New York: Barnes and Noble. Bolton, CharlesD. 1972 "Alienation and action: a study of peace ,group members." American Journal of Sociology 78:537-61. Bromley, David A. and Anson D. Shupe, Jr. 1979 "Moonies" in America. Beverly Hills: Sage. Cantril,Hadley 1941 The Psychologyof Social Movements.New York: Wiley. Craven, Paul and Barry Wellman 1974 "The networkcity." Pp. 57-88 in M. Effrat (ed.), The Community: Approaches and Applications.New York: Free Press. Curtis,Russell L., Jr., and Louis A. Zurcher,Jr. 1973 "Stable resources of protest movements:

the multi-organizational field." Social

Forces 52:53-61.

1974 "Social movements:an analyticalexploraforms." Social Probtion of organizational lems 21:356-70. Daner, F. J. 1976 The American Children of Krishna: A Studyof the Hare KrishnaMovement.New York: Holt, Rinehartand Winston. Darley, John M. and C. Daniel Batson 1973 "From Jerusalem to Jericho: a study of situational and dispositional variables in helping behavior." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 27:100-8. Dator, James 1969 Soka Gakkai:Builderof the ThirdCivilization. Seattle, Wash.: University of Washington Press. Davies, James C. (ed.) 1971 When Men Revolt and Why. New York: Free Press. Etzioni, Amatai 1975 A ComparativeAnalysis of Complex Organizations.New York: Free Press. Feuer, Lewis 1969 The Conflict of Generations. New York: Basic Books. Fireman,Bruce and WilliamA. Gamson 1979 "Utilitarianlogic in the resource mobilization perspective." Pp. 8-44 in M. Zald and (eds.), The Dynamicsof Social J. McCarthy Movements. Cambridge,Mass.: Winthrop Publishers. Freeman,Jo 1973 "The origins of the women's liberation movement." American Journal of Sociology 78:792-811. Gerlach, Luther P. and VirginiaH. Hine 1970 People, Power and Change:Movementsof Social Transformation, Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill. Glock, CharlesY. 1964 "The role of deprivationin the origin and evolutionof religiousgroups." Pp. 24-36 in R. Lee and M. Marty (eds.), Religion and Social Conflict.New York:OxfordUniversity Press. Goffman,Erving 1963 Behaviorin PublicPlaces. New York: Free Press. Gurr,Ted R. 1970 Why Men Rebel. Princeton:PrincetonUniversity Press. Harrison,Michael L. 1974 "Sources of recruitmentto Catholic Pentecostalism." Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 13:49-64. Heirich, Max 1977 "Change of heart: a test of some widely held theories about religious conversion." AmericanJournalof Sociology 83:653-80. Hoffer, Eric 1951 The True Believer. New York: Harperand Row. Jackson, Maurice,E. Peterson, J. Bull, S. Monsen and P. Richmond 1960 "The failure of an incipient social move-

800

REVIEW AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL

empirical examination." American SociologicalReview 38:721-35. Messinger, Sheldon L. 1955 "Organizational transformation: a case study of a declining social movement." AmericanSociologicalReview 20:3-10. Mills, C. Wright 1940 "Situatedactions and vocabulariesof motive." American Sociological Review
5:404-13.

ment." Pacific Sociological Review 3:35-40. Judah,J. Stillson 1974 HareKrishnaandthe Counterculture. New York: Wiley. Kanter, RosabethM. 1972 Commitmentand Community:Communes and Utopias in Sociological Perspective. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Klapp, Orrin 1969 Collective Search for Identity. New York: Holt, Rinehartand Winston. Lachman,SheldonJ. and BenjaminSinger 1968 The Detroit Riot: 1967. Detroit: Behavior ResearchInstitute. Leahy, Peter J. 1975 "The anti-abortionmovement: testing a theory of the rise and fall of social movements." Ph.D. dissertation.Department of Sociology, Syracuse University. Lee, Robert 1967 Stranger in the Land. London: Lutterworth. Lewis, Steven H. and Robert E. Kraut 1972 "Correlates of student political activism and ideology." Journal of Social Issues 28:131-49. Lipset, S. M. 1960 Political Man. New York: Doubledayand Company Lipset, S. M. and Earl Raab 1973 The Politics of Unreason:Right-Wing Extremism in America, 1790-1970. New York: Harperand Row. Lofland, John 1966 Doomsday Cult. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. 1977a Doomsday Cult. Enlarged Edition. New York: IrvingtonPublishers. 1977b "Becoming a world-saver revisited." AmericanBehavioralScientist 20:805-19. Lyman, StanfordM. and MarvinB. Scott 1967 "Territoriality: neglected sociological dia mension." Social Problems15:236-48. Marx, Gary T. 1969 Protest and Prejudice.New York: Harper and Row. Marx, Gary T. and James Wood 1975 "Strandsof theory and researchin collective behavior."Pp. 363-428 in A. Inkeleset al. (eds.), Annual Review of Sociology I. Palo Alto, Calif.: AnnualReviews. McCarthy,John and Mayer Zald 1973 The Trend of Social Movements in America:Professionalization Resource and Mobilization. Morristown, N.J.: General LearningPress. 1977 "Resource mobilizationand social movements:a partialtheory." AmericanJournal of Sociology 82:1212-41. McPhail,Clark 1971 "Civil disorderparticipation: critical exa aminationof recent research." American Sociological Review 36:1058-73. McPhail,Clarkand David Miller 1973 "The assemblingprocess: a theoreticaland

Moinat,Sheryl, W. Raine, S. Burbeckand K. Davison 1972 "Blackghettoresidentsas rioters."Journal of Social Issues 28:45-62. Murata,Kiyoaki 1969 Japan'sNew Buddhism:An ObjectiveAccount of Soka Gakkai. New York: John Weatherhill. National Advisory Commissionon Civil Disorders 1968 Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders.New York:Bantam Books. Oberschall,Anthony 1973 Social Conflictand Social Movements.En-. glewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Oppenheimer,Martin 1968 "The student movement as a response to alienation." Journal of Human Relations 16:1-16. Orum, Anthony 1972 Black Students in Protest: A Study of the Origins of the Black Student Movement. Washington,D.C.: American Sociological Association, ArnoldM. and CarolineRose Series. Monograph Parsons, T. and E. A. Shils 1962 Towarda GeneralTheory of Action. New York: Harperand Row. Petras, James and MauriceZeitlin 1967 "Miners and agrarianradicalism."American Sociological Review 32:578-86. Pinard,Maurice 1971 The Rise of a ThirdParty:A Studyin Crisis Politics. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Portes, Alejandro 1971 "On the logic of post-factumexplanations: as the hypothesisof lower-classfrustration the cause of leftist radicalism." Social Forces 50:26-44. Ransford,H. Edward 1%8 "Isolation, powerlessness and violence: a in study of attitudes and participation the of Journal Sociology Wattsriot." American 73:581-91. Sills, Davis L. 1957 The Volunteers. Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press. Snow, David A. 1976 The Nichiren Shoshu BuddhistMovement in America:A SociologicalExaminationof Its Value Orientation,RecruitmentEfforts and Spread. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University
Microfilms.

Analysis of Movement 1979 "A Dramaturgical Accommodation: Building Idiosyncrasy Credit as a Movement MobilizationStrategy." Symbolic Interaction2:23-44.

SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

Snow, David A. and CynthiaL. Phillips 1980 "The Lofland-Starkconversion model: a critical reassessment." Social Problems 27:430-47. Snyder, David and WilliamR. Kelly 1979 "Strategies for investigatingviolence and fromanalysesof social change:illustrations racialdisordersand implications mobilifor zation research." Pp. 212-37 in M. Zald and J. McCarthy(eds.), The Dynamics of Social Movements. Cambridge, Mass.: WinthropPublishers. Snyder, David and CharlesTilly 1972 "Hardship and collective violence in France, 1830-1960." AmericanSociological Review 37:520-32. Tilly, Charles 1978 FromMobilization Revolution.Reading, to Mass.: Addison-WesleyPublishingCo.

801

Von Eschen, Donald, Jerome Kirk, and Maurice Pinard 1971 "The organizationalsubstructureof disorderlypolitics." Social Forces 49:529-44. White, James W. 1970 The Sokagakkaiand Mass Society. Stanford: StanfordUniversity Press. Wilson, John 1973 Introductionto Social Movements. New York: Basic Books. Wilson, Kenneth and Tony Orum 1976 "Mobilizingpeople for collective political action." Journal of Political and Military Sociology 4:187-202. Woelfel, Joseph, John Woelfel, James Gillhamand Thomas McPhail 1974 "Political radicalizationas a communication process." CommunicationResearch 1:243-63. Zald, Mayer N. and RobertaAsh 1966 "Social movement organizations:growth, Toch, Hans decay and change." Social Forces 1965 The Social Psychology of Social Move44:327-41. ments. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill. Zald, Mayer N. and John D. McCarthy(eds.) 1979 The Dynamics of Social Movements: ReTurk, Herman 1970 "Interorganizational networksin urbansosource Mobilization, Social Control, and Mass.: WinthropPubTactics. Cambridge, ciety: initial perspectives and comparative research." American Sociological Review lishers. Zurcher,Louis A. and R. George Kirkpatrick 35:1-20. 1976 Citizens for Decency: Antipornography Turner,RalphH. and Lewis M. Killian Crusadesas StatusDefense. Austin,Texas: 1972 Collective Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, University of Texas Press. N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Zurcher,Louis A. and David A. Snow Forth- "Collective behavior:social movements." Tygart, ClarenceE. and Norman Holt 1972 "Examining the Weinberg and Walker coming In Morris Rosenberg and Ralph Turner to (eds.), SociologicalContributions Social typology of student activists." American Psychology. New York: Basic Books. Journalof Sociology 77:957-66. Zygmunt,Joseph Useem, Michael 1972 "Movements and motives: some unre1975 Protest Movements in America. Insolved issues in the psychology of social movements."HumanRelations25:449-67. dianapolis:Bobbs-Merrill.