414145

et al.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

PSPXXX10.1177/0146167211414145Becker

Article
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

Emotional Consequences of Collective 37(12) 1587­–1598

© 2011 by the Society for Personality
and Social Psychology, Inc
Action Participation: Differentiating Self- Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Directed and Outgroup-Directed Emotions

DOI: 10.1177/0146167211414145
http://pspb.sagepub.com

Julia C. Becker1, Nicole Tausch2, and Ulrich Wagner1

Abstract
The present research examines the emotional and behavioral consequences of collective action participation. It demonstrates
that “positive” and “negative” emotions can be experienced simultaneously as a result of collective action participation, yet
it is important to distinguish outgroup-directed from self-directed emotions. Results of two experiments (N = 71 and
N = 101) that manipulated participation in collective action illustrate that whereas collective action participants experience
more outgroup-directed anger and contempt, they feel more self-directed positive affect. Furthermore, collective action
participation predicted willingness to engage in moderate and radical collective actions in the future. These relations were
mediated by outgroup-directed, but not by self-directed, emotions, suggesting that outgroup-directed rather than self-
directed emotions play a crucial role in the maintenance of protest behavior. Theoretical and practical implications of these
findings are discussed.

Keywords
collective action participation, self-directed emotions, outgroup-directed emotions, intergroup emotions, moderate collective
action, radical collective action

Received February 4, 2010; revision accepted May 19, 2011

How do people feel after they have participated in collective
protest? Does protest make them feel happy and satisfied or
does it inflame their anger and hate? Several models have
been developed to predict engagement in collective action
(e.g., Stürmer & Simon, 2004; Van Zomeren, Postmes, &
Spears, 2008; Van Zomeren, Spears, Fischer, & Leach, 2004;
Wright, 2001), but outcomes of collective action participa-
tion have remained relatively underresearched (Louis, 2009;
Wright, 2009). For instance, researchers have examined the
role of emotions (such as anger) in predicting collective action
(e.g., Leonard, Moons, Mackie & Smith, 2011; Van Zomeren
et al., 2004) but have neglected the role of emotions as a
result of collective action participation, at least in experimen-
tal research (for qualitative approaches, see Drury, Cocking,
Beale, Hanson & Rapley, 2005; Drury & Reicher, 2005). We
posit not only that emotions predict collective action partici-
pation but that collective action participation also feeds back
into the strength and valence of emotions, which in turn
motivate engagement in future actions.
Based on previous research, different predictions concern-
ing the impact of collective action participation on emotions
are possible. On one hand, it can be argued that collective
action participation increases “positive” emotions, such as
joy and happiness, because activism is positively related to
psychological well-being (Boehnke & Wong, 2011; Klar &
Kasser, 2009). In contrast, research on social identity pro-
cesses in collective action suggests that collective action par-
ticipation heightens the salience of one’s social identity, the
perception of group-based injustice, and corresponding emo-
tions (e.g., Drury & Reicher, 1999; Reicher, 1996; Reicher,
Spears, & Postmes, 1995; Stott & Reicher, 1998). Therefore,
it can be argued that collective action increases “negative” or
conflict-related emotions, such as feelings of anger and con-
tempt. In the present research, we integrate both perspec-
tives by distinguishing the targets of different emotions.
Specifically, we differentiate between self-directed and out-
group-directed emotions. Thus, the purpose of the present
research is to examine the strength and valence of self-
directed and outgroup-directed emotions as a result of collective
action participation. Moreover, it has been demonstrated that
activists who engaged in collective action in the past are more
1
University of Marburg, Marburg, Germany
2
University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews, UK
Corresponding Author:
Julia C. Becker, Philipps-University Marburg, Department of Psychology,
Social Psychology, Gutenbergstraße 18, 35032 Marburg, Germany
Email: beckerj2@staff.uni-marburg.de
1588 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 37(12)
likely to engage in collective action in the future (e.g., Stürmer
& Simon, 2004). To extend this work further, the present
research also aims to investigate to what extent self-directed
versus outgroup-directed emotions explain the relation
between past action and future participation intentions.
Emotional Consequences of
Collective Action Participation
We predict that collective action participation evokes
“positive” as well as “negative” emotions simultaneously.
There are several theoretical approaches that predict an
increase of positive emotions after collective action partici-
pation: In particular, researchers from sociology and politi-
cal science have argued that political activism can be
perceived as motivating “in and of itself” (Klar & Kasser,
2009, p. 756; Meier & Stutzer, 2008). Such intrinsically
motivated behavior can satisfy important psychological
needs (e.g., Ryan & Deci, 2001) and should therefore be
accompanied by positive emotional experiences. Indeed,
some recent research has demonstrated that indicators of
activism are positively related to psychological well-being
(Boehnke & Wong, 2011; Klar & Kasser, 2009), suggesting
that self-identified activists feel better than nonactivists.
Moreover, based on sociometer theory, it can be argued that
collective action participation satisfies the basic human need
to belong (e.g., Leary, 2006). Research has confirmed that
the quest for belonging and the formation and maintenance
of social bonds are important motivators of why individuals
join movements (e.g., Cable, 1992). By acting on behalf of
one’s own group, individuals can feel socially included and
might therefore experience positive emotions. Furthermore,
Tropp and Brown (2004) demonstrated that “what benefits
the group can also benefit the individual” by showing that
the motivation for individual enhancement was a significant
predictor for women’s willingness to participate in collec-
tive action. In this research, individual enhancement referred
to the anticipation of an increase in one’s self-esteem and
feelings of being important when getting involved in women’s
issues. Thus, individuals seem to anticipate that they can
personally benefit from collective action participation,
which is likely to be connected with the experience of posi-
tive emotions following past engagement in collective
action. Finally, research on social identity processes leads to
a similar prediction: When individuals categorize them-
selves as group members, they evaluate those group mem-
bers (including themselves) particularly positive who
represent the group values and interests best (e.g., Hogg,
Hardie, & Reynolds, 1995; Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, &
Wetherell, 1987). Thus, it is likely that individuals evaluate
themselves more positively when they do something good
for their ingroup by participating in collective action to pro-
mote the group’s interests (Tajfel & Turner, 1979).
Although the described findings are consistent with our
view that collective action participation might increase
positive self-directed emotions, these studies are unable to
provide evidence for the causal order of the relevant variables.
To our knowledge, there is only one experimental study that
tried to demonstrate the causal effect of activist activity on
individuals’ well-being (Klar & Kasser, 2009, Study 3). In
this study participants were asked to report their well-being
either before or after completing a survey about the improve-
ment of a cafeteria. The survey contained arguments for
improving ethical-political aspects of food in the cafeteria,
and participants were asked to rate the importance of the
arguments and were informed that their answers would be
sent to the college’s food services department. Contrary to
expectations, results did not indicate any difference in well-
being between the two experimental conditions (Klar &
Kasser, 2009). We argue that this lack of effect likely resulted
as a consequence of the operationalization of activism: Rating
arguments is a weak operationalization of activism and a
rather passive task (compared to, for instance, generating
and publicly presenting one’s own arguments) that does not
really operationalize collective action on behalf of a group.
In sum, based on the theoretical arguments and related
research findings summarized above, we test the idea that
collective action has positive consequences for the self and
evokes positive self-directed emotions. We further examine
whether these positive emotions are likely to drive future
participation in collective action.
Contrasting the research on positive outcomes of activ-
ism, it has also been demonstrated that collective action par-
ticipation can intensify conflicts in a framework of struggle
for justice and power (McLeod, 1999; Páez, Basabe, Ubillos,
& González-Castro, 2007). Many examples illustrate the
dynamic nature of collective protests that start with a peace-
ful demonstration and end in violent action (e.g., Drury &
Reicher, 2005, 2009). The elaborated social identity model
of crowd behavior (e.g., Drury & Reicher, 1999, 2000;
Reicher, 1996; Stott & Reicher, 1998) explains this dynamic
as an intergroup phenomenon by analyzing the emergence
and escalation of crowd conflict over time: If their social
identity and the identity of a relevant outgroup become
salient, individuals direct their behavior according to
ingroup norms. Therefore, collective action participation
can be perceived as the royal road to express one’s social
identity and to fight collectively against the outgroup
responsible for the injustice (Drury & Reicher, 2005, 2009).
If the outgroup is powerful (e.g., the police, the govern-
ment) and acts illegitimately in terms of ingroup under-
standings, this will unify members of the ingroup and evoke
more extreme behaviors among them. This can radicalize
collective protests, sharpen the perception of injustice, and
heat up “negative” emotions (Drury & Reicher, 1999;
Reicher, 1996; Reicher et al., 1995).
The Present Research
The present research aims to provide a greater understanding
of the emotional consequences of collective action participa-
tion using an experimental approach. Specifically, we bring
Becker et al. 1589
together the literature on activism and psychological well-
being with the predictions made by research on social iden-
tity processes in collective action by differentiating between
self-directed emotions (e.g., feeling satisfied with or good
about oneself) and outgroup-directed emotions (e.g., feeling
angry at an outgroup; e.g., Mackie, Devos, & Smith, 2000;
Smith, 1993; Smith, Seger, & Mackie, 2007). Distinguishing
these two types of emotions enables a more precise predic-
tion of why emotions of different valence (“positive” emotions
such as joy and “negative” emotions such as anger) can be
experienced simultaneously as a result of collective action
participation. Specifically, we predict that collective action
participants experience more outgroup-directed anger,
though they feel increased self-directed positive affect.
The Role of Emotions in
the Maintenance of Protest
The second aim of the present research is to understand
the role of emotions in the maintenance of protest behavior.
Therefore, we also examine whether the emotions elicited
by collective action participation do, in turn, predict the
willingness to engage in future actions. This research ques-
tion is important to understand how long-term political
activism works and why individuals often take part in col-
lective action for extended periods. We argue that emotional
consequences of collective action participation are crucial in
predicting the maintenance of political protest. In line with
this idea, Drury et al. (2005) demonstrated that a perception
of “atmosphere and energy” during the protest was related
to participants’ further involvement in collective action.
Moreover, based on the finding that collective action par-
ticipation can be predicted by a motivation for self-enhancement
(Tropp & Brown, 2004) and is associated with psychological
well-being (Klar & Kasser, 2009) and happiness (Boehnke
& Wong, 2011), it is reasonable to assume that activists
continue to engage in actions because they anticipate posi-
tive emotions. Similarly, it is possible that activists are
motivated to continue their actions because of a heightened
salience of group-based disadvantage and corresponding
negative outgroup-directed emotions. In the present research,
we examine the relative importance of self- versus outgroup-
directed emotions as possible motivators for future action
intentions.
In Study 1, we examined whether collective action par-
ticipation increases the willingness to participate in future
collective action and investigated to what extent this is due
to increases in self-directed positive affect or increased
outgroup-directed anger (and therefore the intention to fur-
ther engage against group-based injustice). Moreover, cur-
rent research is increasingly interested in predictors of
radical collective action. A recent theoretical extension of
the collective action literature (Tausch et al., 2011) suggests
that moderate and radical collective actions are predicted by
qualitatively different emotions. In Study 1, we specifically
assessed collective actions that were fairly moderate and
generally adhered to societal norms (Wright, Taylor, &
Moghaddam, 1990). However, these moderate actions can
be distinguished from radical collective actions, which are
often illegal and violate societal norms (e.g., arson attacks;
Wright et al., 1990). Tausch et al. (2011) demonstrated that
whereas outgroup-directed anger predicted moderate (but
not radical) collective actions, feelings of contempt predicted
radical (but not moderate) collective actions. These effects
can be explained in terms of the different social functions of
anger and contempt (Fischer & Roseman, 2007). Anger is
felt in relationships in which reconciliation is desired.
Therefore, activists need to stick to social norms to articulate
their concerns. In contrast, contempt is felt in relationships
that lack reconciliatory intentions and entail a psychological
distancing from the object of contempt (Fischer & Roseman,
2007). Therefore, activists who feel contempt toward an
opponent do not feel a need to follow social norms when
protesting against that target.
In Study 2, we included measures of radical collective
action and feelings of contempt. We predicted that collective
action participation against tuition fees increases the willing-
ness to engage in moderate collective action against the fees
in the future because respondents feel increased outgroup-
directed anger. Second, we predicted that participants who
engaged in actions against tuition fees would be more inter-
ested in engaging in radical actions against tuition fees in the
future because collective action participation can intensify
the conflict between students and the government. As a
response to a heightened salience that the ingroup is treated
unfairly, some students might respond not only with increased
outgroup-directed anger but also with feelings of contempt
against the government. Therefore, the relation between past
participation and the intention for radical future action
against tuition fees should be mediated by outgroup-directed
contempt.
Finally, previous research has illustrated that beyond
group-level emotions, social identification, particularly polit-
icized identification (Simon & Klandermans, 2001), as well
as group efficacy (Van Zomeren et al., 2004) predict collec-
tive action intentions. Thus, it is likely that these variables
also play a role in the relation between past and future
actions, such that participation leads to increased willingness
to participate in actions in the future because it increases
identification and perceived efficacy. We therefore exam-
ined the effects of self-directed and outgroup-directed emo-
tions while controlling for these variables to illustrate their
effects over and above other established predictors of collec-
tive action.
The Study Context
We tested our hypotheses in the context of the student
protests against tuition fees in the federal state of Hessen,
Germany. These protests have been ongoing since 2006,
when the conservative state government of Hessen intro-
duced tuition fees. Although the fees were abolished in 2008
1590 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 37(12)
after the conservative government lost power to the center-
left, their reintroduction is possible since the conservative
party regained power in 2009. At the time of data collection
(spring-summer 2010), the conservative party had just enforced
a hiring freeze and other financial cuts for the university but
had not yet reintroduced the fees.
In the present research, we heightened the salience of a
possible reintroduction of tuition fees by the government and
provided participants with the opportunity to engage in col-
lective action against the “pro-tuition fees” government.
Afterward, we measured participants’ self-directed and out-
group-directed emotions. In Study 1, we compared self-
directed and outgroup-directed emotions and intentions for
future collective action among participants who engaged in
collective action with those in a no-action control condition.
In Study 2, we included four further control conditions to
exclude potential alternative explanations and added a broader
range of negative outgroup-directed emotions and action
tendencies.
Study 1
Method
Participants. Participants in this web-based experiment
were students who participated for course credit (N = 71).
Participants’ ages ranged from 19 to 30 years (M = 21.30 years,
SD = 2.55). Most (92%) self-identified as German; 66%
were female. Three participants were excluded because they
reported to be in favor of the reintroduction of tuition fees.
Seventy-seven percent of those approached participated in
the study.
Design and procedure. The study had a 2 (collective action
participation: yes, no) × 2 (order of emotion measurements)
between-participants design. It was presented as a project of
students who were allegedly writing their empirical thesis on
the topic of tuition fees and wanted to connect their study
with a protest against tuition fees. After completing a num-
ber of demographic variables, participants read a text about
the current hiring freeze at universities in Hessen enacted by
the government. Students were informed that the hiring
freeze increases the likelihood of the reintroduction of tuition
fees. This information served to heighten the salience of a
potential reintroduction of fees by the government. Respon-
dents were asked whether they had heard of the hiring freeze,
whether they thought that the hiring freeze makes the rein-
troduction of tuition fees more likely, and about their general
attitudes toward tuition fees. Then, they were randomly
assigned to one of four experimental conditions: Half of the
participants were directly forwarded to the dependent mea-
sures, and the other half participated in collective action
against the government. Those in the collective action condi-
tion were told that a large-scale campaign against the gov-
ernment in Hessen was currently being conducted to prevent
the reintroduction of tuition fees. They were informed that the
aim was to collect as many arguments as possible against
tuition fees and to send them directly to the government.
Participants were asked to read and complete the following
protest note: “I, student at the University of Marburg, relent-
lessly condemn a reintroduction of tuition fees by the gov-
ernment in Hessen and strongly oppose to the government.
I protest against tuition fees, because . . .” At this point, stu-
dents were requested to list as many arguments as possible
against tuition fees and reminded that all arguments would
be sent to the government.
Afterward, all participants completed the dependent mea-
sures. They completed a measure of self-directed and out-
group-directed emotions, followed by the control variables
identification with students, identification with the protest
movement against the introduction of tuition fees (as a mea-
sure of politicized identity), and perceived group efficacy.
They then answered a measure about their future collective
action intentions. Finally, they were thanked and debriefed.
Measures
Unless otherwise indicated, all items were answered on a
7-point rating scale (0 = disagree strongly to 6 = agree
strongly). The order of self-directed versus outgroup-directed
emotion scales was randomly counterbalanced: Half of the
participants completed the self-directed emotions measure
before the outgroup-directed emotions measure, whereas the
other half completed the outgroup-directed emotions mea-
sure before the self-directed emotions measure. Items were
given in a mixed but identical order for all participants.
Outgroup-directed anger. To measure outgroup-directed
anger, participants were asked to indicate their current feel-
ings as a student toward the government in Hessen using
three items “As a student, I feel anger towards/I am mad at/
I am in rage towards the government in Hessen” (α = .92).
Self-directed positive affect. To assess self-directed positive
affect, individuals were instructed to describe their current
feelings as an individual (“I feel good/happy/satisfied/glad/
proud/pleased/gratified”; α = .90). This measure was intro-
duced as follows: “In the following, please concentrate on
yourself as an individual and think about everything that
makes you unique as a person and differentiates you from
other people. Please describe your current feelings as an
individual.”
Collective action intentions. Respondents were asked to
indicate how likely it would be that they take part in the fol-
lowing actions in case of a planned reintroduction of tuition
fees (0 = very unlikely, 6 = very likely): participate in discus-
sion meetings, participate in plenary meetings, write flyers,
sign the complaint against unconstitutionality of tuition fees,
take part in street theatre, and demonstrations. We averaged
these six items to yield a composite of likelihood of engag-
ing in collective action (α = .83).
Becker et al. 1591
Table 1. Means (and Standard Deviations), Study 1
Collective action Control
condition condition
Outgroup-directed anger 4.08 (1.32) 2.66 (1.44)
Self-directed positive affect 3.64 (1.13) 3.01 (1.36)
Group efficacy 4.10 (1.15) 3.94 (1.13)
Identification with students 4.55 (1.04) 3.66 (1.20)
Identification with the protest 3.20 (1.62) 2.43 (1.21)
movement
Collective action intentions 3.53 (1.37) 2.89 (1.21)
Control variables. Student identification was measured
using three items, e.g., “Being a student reflects an important
part of my personality” (α = .90). Identification with the pro-
test movement against the introduction of tuition fees (“polit-
icized identity”) was measured using the same three items,
addressing the protest movement (α = .92). Group efficacy
was measured by three items (e.g., “I think that students can
stop the introduction of tuition fees”; α = .92).
Results
Self-directed positive affect and outgroup-directed anger
were not significantly correlated (r = .15, p = .20).
Effects on self-directed and outgroup-directed emotions. To
evaluate whether collective action participation affected
self-directed positive affect and outgroup-directed anger, we
conducted two 2 (collective action: yes, no) × 2(order of
emotions) ANOVAs. As expected, the first analysis with
self-directed positive affect as the dependent variable yielded
that participants who engaged in collective action felt more
self-directed positive affect, F(1, 71) = 6.05, p = .02, η2 = .08,
compared to the control condition (see Table 1). No other
effects were significant, Fs < 1. The same analysis with out-
group-directed anger as the dependent variable revealed that,
as predicted, participants who engaged in collective action
felt more outgroup-directed anger, F(1, 71) = 18.20, p < .001,
η2 = .21, compared to those assigned to the control condition
(see Table 1). No other effects were significant, Fs < 1.
Effects on future collective action intentions and mediation by
emotions. Next, we tested our hypothesis that participation in
collective action increases intentions to engage in collective
action in the future. The same ANOVA yielded a main effect
of collective action, F(1, 67) = 4.60, p = .04, η2 = .07, indicat-
ing that, in line with our prediction, participants who engaged
in collective action had a greater intention to participate in
collective action in the future, compared to those in the con-
trol condition (see Table 1). No other effects were signifi-
cant, Fs < 1.
Finally, we analyzed whether the relation between par-
ticipation in collective action and the intention to engage in
future collective action was mediated by increased outgroup-
directed anger and increased self-directed positive affect.
We did this while controlling for identification with stu-
dents, identification with the protest movement, and group
efficacy. Collective action participation was dummy coded
(1 = collective action condition, 0 = control condition) and
predicted both outgroup-directed anger (B = 1.41, SE = .33,
p < .001) and self-directed positive affect (B = .62, SE = .30,
p = .04). However, only outgroup-directed anger (B = .20,
SE = .08, p = .02) predicted the intention to engage in future
action, whereas self-directed positive affect did not (B = .03,
SE = .09, p = .73). In line with full mediation, the total effect
of participation in collective action regarding the intention to
engage in collective action in the future (B = .64, SE = .31,
p = .04) was reduced to nonsignificance when the potential
mediators were included (B = –.23, SE = .24, p = .34). The
total indirect effect was significant (B = .86, SE = .27, p = .002).
To examine the specific indirect effects, we tested a multiple
mediation model using bootstrapping (as recommended by
Preacher & Hayes, 2008; Shrout & Bolger, 2002). The boot-
strap estimates are based on 5,000 bootstrap samples, using
the SPSS version of the Preacher and Hayes (2008) macro.
As expected, outgroup-directed anger significantly mediated
the relation between participation in collective action and
future collective action intentions, because the 95% confi-
dence interval did not include zero, 95% CI [.05, .71].
However, self-directed positive affect did not prove to be a
significant mediator, 95% CI [–.12, .18]. Of the three control
variables, only identification with the protest movement
proved to be a significant mediator, 95% CI [.10, .93].
Discussion
Study 1 provided support for our hypotheses that collective
action participation increases self-directed positive affect as
well as outgroup-directed negative affect. Consistent with
previous research, this study also provided evidence that
individuals who have participated in collective action become
more willing to engage in collective actions in the future.
Extending previous research, we further demonstrated that
this relation was mediated by outgroup-directed anger but
not by self-directed positive affect. Thus, we provided evi-
dence that outgroup-related emotions are more important in
the process of maintaining political activism compared to
self-directed emotions. Furthermore, identification with the
protest movement proved to be a significant mediator. This
is in line with previous research, illustrating that particularly
the politicized identity (compared to identification with a
broader group) predicts collective action participation (Simon
& Klandermans, 2001; Stürmer & Simon, 2004).
However, there are some limitations to this study and sev-
eral reasons to replicate and extend these findings. This pri-
marily concerns the construct validity of our operationalization
of collective action participation. First, it is possible that our
results were not generated by engaging in collective action
but by dealing with the topic of tuition fees. More precisely,
1592 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 37(12)
it is possible that just thinking about tuition fees already
caused increased feelings of outgroup-directed anger.
Therefore, in Study 2 we used a control group that did not
engage in collective action but only dealt with the topic of
tuition fees. Second, it is likely that engagement in any type
of collective action is associated with a boost in self-directed
positive affect because individuals do something good for
their ingroup. Outgroup-directed negative affect should,
however, be target specific such that negative emotions
toward the government only increase after collective action
directed at the government. Therefore, in Study 2 we added
a control group to test whether engagement in any type of
collective action leads to changes in emotions. Finally,
although generating arguments that would be allegedly sent
to the government in the name of students represents collec-
tive action participation, it is not particularly confrontational.
Therefore, in Study 2 we used a different type of collective
action that would allow participants to get more involved
and to act in a more confrontational manner.
Study 2
Study 2 aimed to corroborate the findings of Study 1 and to
exclude potential alternative explanations. First, we selected
a type of collective action that offered participants the
opportunity to get more involved. Specifically, participants
were asked to read an unfriendly protest note against the
government as loudly as possible and to blow into a whistle
as long and loudly as possible while being recorded. This
audio-message would allegedly be sent to the government.
Four control conditions were added to this experimental
condition. Students in the first control condition read about
protests in the past against the government. We hypothesized
that simply reading about protest would not affect outgroup-
directed emotions to the same extent as collective action par-
ticipation. Students in the second control condition engaged
in collective action directed at another target group. We
hypothesized that engagement in protest against another
target group would not increase participants’ intentions to
engage in future action against the government. Similarly,
outgroup-directed emotions that target the government
should not be affected by participating in this alternative
protest, whereas self-directed emotions would be equally
affected in both collective action conditions as a conse-
quence of doing something good for the ingroup. Students in
the third control condition read about past protests against an
alternative target group. Finally, a fourth baseline control
group was added. As in Study 1, students assigned to this
baseline control group completed the dependent measures
directly, without any experimental manipulation.
In sum, we predicted that, compared to the four control
groups, only collective action against the government heats up
government-directed emotions. Second, we hypothesized that,
irrespective of the target group, collective action participation
increases self-directed positive affect, because by engaging in
protest, individuals do something positive for their ingroup and
represent group interests (e.g., Drury et al., 2005; Hogg et al.,
1995; Klar & Kasser, 2009; Leary, 2006; Turner et al., 1987).
Finally, we included measures of contempt and willingness
to participate in radical collective action in the future. We
tested our prediction that whereas the relation between past
participation and the intention for moderate future action
should be mediated by outgroup-directed anger, the relation
between past participation and the intention for radical future
action should be mediated by outgroup-directed contempt
(Tausch et al., 2011).
Method
Participants. Participants were students at the University
of Marburg (N = 101). Participation was voluntary. Partici-
pants’ ages ranged from 19 to 31 years (M = 22.94 years,
SD = 1.31). Most (92%) self-identified as German; 69%
were female. Students studied diverse subjects (42% social
science, 12% medicine, 5% economics, 5% education, 18%
were studying for a degree in teaching). Approximately every
second person approached (55%) agreed to participate.
Procedure. We used the same cover story as in Study 1.
Research assistants approached students in public areas and
asked whether they could spend 10 min participating in their
research project. If participants agreed, the experimenter
explained that the study is about attitudes and protest: One
part would be about attitudes toward nature protection
because there would be a waste transfer station in a neigh-
boring city, polluting the local river. A second part would be
about the social cuts and hiring freeze enacted by the govern-
ment in Hessen and the participants’ attitudes toward tuition
fees. First, participants were asked to indicate their overall
attitudes concerning nature protection and tuition fees to
exclude proponents of tuition fees before the experimental
manipulation. Only opponents of tuition fees were allowed
to participate in the experiment. Thus, we avoided selective
dropouts of proponents of tuition fees in the condition in
which they were asked to protest against the government.
Three proponents were directly thanked and debriefed. Next,
the experimenter randomly assigned participants to one of
five conditions by blindly picking one of five texts.
In the first condition (collective action against the gov-
ernment), participants were informed that they could partici-
pate in a protest against the government in Hessen. The
experimenter explained that they would collect 1,000 voices
and whistles of Marburg’s students to send to the govern-
ment of Hessen as a cumulative audio-message in the name
of students. They were handed a brief text and were asked to
read this text loudly into a recorder and then to blow into a
whistle as loudly and for as long as possible so that “the ears
of the members of the government would fly off.” Before
they started they were asked if they were willing to partici-
pate, and afterward they could select one of the whistles.1
The text said:
Becker et al. 1593
We, students of the University of Marburg resist the
planned social cuts of the government and demand an
immediate stop of the cost-cutting program!! Please
prick up your ears: In the name of the students of the
University of Marburg, I will now show you what
I think about your social cuts.
Then, they were asked to blow into the whistle. In the sec-
ond condition (reading about past collective action against
the government), students read a short text to themselves
that informed them about an alleged campaign against the
government that took place some time ago. This was
exactly the same campaign as described in the first condi-
tion. Participants indicated whether they had heard about
this campaign. The third condition (collective action
against pollution) was identical to the first condition and
included reading and blowing a whistle; however, the col-
lective action was directed at the city council of a neighbor-
ing city that manages a waste transfer station. Before
blowing the whistle, participants read the following text
into the recorder:
We, citizens of Marburg resist the pollution of the
river “Lahn” through the waste transfer station in your
city and demand an immediate stop of the pollution!!
Please prick up your ears: In the name of Marburg’s
citizens, I will now show you what I think about your
pollution.
The fourth condition (reading about past collective action
against pollution) was identical to the second condition
except that participants read about past collective action
against pollution as described in the third condition. In the
fifth condition (baseline control), participants only completed
the dependent measures.
After the experimental manipulation, all participants com-
pleted the same dependent measures as used in Study 1, as
well as a measure of contempt toward the government and a
measure of radical collective action tendencies. Finally, they
were thanked and debriefed. Their voices were immediately
deleted from the recorder.
Measures
Because we did not find any order effects of outgroup-
directed versus self-directed emotions in Study 1, we
decided to ask all participants for their outgroup-directed
emotions first. We used the same measures of outgroup-
directed anger (α = .79), self-directed positive affect (α = .82),
identification with students (α = .72), identification with the
protest movement (α = .85), and group efficacy (α = .88) as
in Study 1. Following Mackie et al. (2000), outgroup-
directed contempt was assessed using three items “As a
student, I feel contempt/disgust towards/I hate the govern-
ment of Hessen” (α = .89).
Collective action intentions. Respondents were asked to
indicate how likely it would be that they participate in 11
actions in case of a reintroduction of tuition fees (1 = very
unlikely, 7 = very likely). Principal axis factor analysis
yielded a two-factor solution, demonstrating that moderate
actions (all actions already used in Study1) were clearly
separable from radical actions (throwing stones or bottles,
arson attacks on university buildings, arson attacks on pri-
vate property of the people held responsible, attacks on
police, attacks on persons held responsible; eigenvalues = 3.50,
2.44, 1.13, .92, . . .). Therefore, we averaged the items mea-
suring moderate collective action (α = .76) and those mea-
suring radical collective action (α = .81).
Results
Outgroup-directed anger and contempt were correlated (r = .52,
p < .001), but neither correlated with self-directed positive
affect (r = .12, p = .25 and r = .11, p = .30, respectively).
Effects on self-directed positive affect. To test the hypothesis
that self-directed positive affect increases as a consequence
of engagement in collective action, independent of the target
group, but that reading about collective action does not affect
self-directed positive affect, we calculated two planned con-
trasts. Specifically, we compared the two collective action
conditions with the baseline control condition (1,0,1,0,–2)
and the two reading conditions with the baseline control con-
dition (0,1,0,1,–2). As expected, the first contrast was sig-
nificant, F(1, 96) = 4.64, p = .03, η2 = .05, supporting the
hypothesis that, independent of the target, people who par-
ticipated in collective action would feel more self-directed
positive affect compared to those assigned to the baseline
control condition (see Table 2). The second contrast was not
significant, F(1, 96) = .002, p = .96, η2 = .00, indicating that
those who just read about collective action did not differ
from the control condition in self-directed positive affect
(see Table 2). Two further exploratory post hoc tests (Tukey)
tested whether the two collective action conditions and the
two reading conditions differed in terms of self-directed
affect. Both tests were not significant, ps = 1.
Effects on outgroup-directed anger and contempt. To test the
hypothesis that outgroup-directed anger and contempt
against the government increased as a consequence of par-
ticipation in collective action directed against the govern-
ment, we contrasted the experimental group collective
action against tuition fees with all four control conditions
(–4,1,1,1,1). Six further post hoc tests (Tukey) examined the
hypothesis that respondents in the four control conditions did
not differ from each other in terms of outgroup-directed
emotions. As expected, participants in the experimental con-
dition collective action against tuition fees experienced more
outgroup-directed anger, F(1, 96) = 16.63, p < .001, η2 = .15,
and more outgroup-directed contempt, F(1, 96) = 27.21,
p < .001, η2 = .22, compared to respondents in the four con-
trol conditions (see Table 2). Furthermore, also in line with
1594 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 37(12)

Table 2. Means (and Standard Deviations), Study 2

Collective action conditions Reading conditions  

Baseline
  Tuition fees Pollution Tuition fees Pollution control
Outgroup-directed anger 5.63 (0.67) 4.42 (1.06) 4.41 (1.32) 4.70 (0.82) 4.68 (1.12)
Outgroup-directed contempt 4.27 (1.11) 2.15 (1.67) 2.39 (1.68) 2.41 (1.79) 1.75 (1.87)
Self-directed positive affect 3.86 (0.92) 3.94 (0.81) 3.33 (1.03) 3.35 (1.13) 3.35 (0.74)
Group efficacy 4.84 (1.18) 4.40 (1.32) 4.02 (1.26) 4.65 (1.15) 4.40 (1.01)
Identification with students 3.94 (1.36) 4.32 (1.38) 3.71 (1.22) 3.96 (1.39) 3.68 (1.34)
Identification with the protest movement 4.68 (1.01) 3.47 (1.51) 2.86 (1.26) 3.15 (1.35) 3.05 (1.29)
Moderate collective action intentions 4.87 (0.74) 4.32 (1.03) 4.33 (0.96) 4.22 (1.25) 4.33 (1.26)
Radical collective action intentions 0.68 (1.05) 0.18 (0.36) 0.21 (0.43) 0.32 (0.71) 0.12 (0.32)

predictions, both outgroup-directed emotions did not differ
between the four control conditions, all ps > .71 (see Table 2).
Effects on future collective action intentions and mediation by
emotions. Next, we tested whether participation in collective
action increased the intention to engage in moderate and
radical collective action against tuition fees in the future. The
same contrasts as above were used to test our specific
hypothesis that only collective action against tuition fees
should increase participants’ intentions to engage in future
action against tuition fees. In line with predictions, partici-
pants in the experimental condition collective action against
tuition fees reported stronger intentions to engage in moder-
ate collective action, F(1, 96) = 4.94, p = .03, η2 = .05, as
well as in radical collective action, F(1, 96) = 9.21, p = .003,
η2 = .09, compared to those assigned to the control condi-
tions (see Table 2). In addition, as expected, post hoc tests
revealed that there were no differences between the four con-
trol conditions in terms of participant’s intentions to engage
in moderate or radical collective action in the future, all ps >.86
(see Table 2).
Finally, we examined whether the impact of participation
in collective action against tuition fees on intention to engage
in moderate and radical collective action in the future was
mediated by increased outgroup-directed anger and con-
tempt, and increased self-directed positive affect. As in
Study 1, this analysis controlled for student and politicized
identification and group efficacy. The experimental factor
was recoded into a dummy variable (1 = collective action
against tuition fees, 0 = all other conditions) and predicted
outgroup-directed anger (B = 1.01, SE = .24, p < .001) and
outgroup-directed contempt (B = 2.07, SE = .40, p < .001)
but did not predict self-directed positive affect (B = .35,
SE = .23, p = .14).
The first regression predicted the intention to engage in
moderate collective action in the future. Outgroup-directed
anger predicted the intention to engage in moderate future
action (B = .22, SE = .10, p = .03), whereas outgroup-directed
contempt and self-directed positive affect did not (B = .003,
SE = .06, p = .96 and B = –.05, SE = .10, p = .59, respec-
tively). In line with predictions, the total effect of collective
action participation against the government on the intention
to engage in moderate collective action in the future (B = .59,
SE = .25, p = .02) was reduced to nonsignificance when the
potential mediators were included (B = –.15, SE = .27, p = .59).
The total indirect effect was significant (B = .74, SE = .20,
p < .001), suggesting an overall mediation effect. As in Study 1,
to examine the specific indirect effects, we tested a multiple
mediation model using bootstrapping. Replicating findings
from Study 1, outgroup-directed anger significantly medi-
ated the relation between participation in collective action
against tuition fees and the intention to engage in moder-
ate actions, 95% CI [.03, .48]. Neither outgroup-directed
contempt nor self-directed positive affect was a significant
mediator, 95% CI [–.27, .28] and [–.07, .05], respectively.
Regarding the three control variables, only identification
with the protest movement proved to be a significant media-
tor, 95% CI [.14, .72].
The second regression predicted the intention to engage
in radical collective action in the future. Outgroup-directed
contempt predicted the intention to engage in radical future
action (B = .14, SE = .04, p < .001), whereas outgroup-
directed anger and self-directed positive affect did not (B = –.03,
SE = .06, p = .70 and B = .01, SE = .06, p = .94, respectively).
The total effect of collective action participation against the
government on the intention to participate in radical actions
(B = .47, SE = .16, p = .01) was also reduced to nonsignifi-
cance when the potential mediators were included (B = .11,
SE = .18, p = .53). Moreover, the total indirect effect was
significant (B = .36, SE = .12, p = .003). The bootstrapping
procedure revealed that only outgroup-directed contempt
mediated the relation between participation in collective
action against tuition fees and radical future collective action
intentions, 95% CI [.14, .49]. All other indirect effects were
not significant, 95% CI [–.19, .09] and 95% CI [–.05, .08] for
outgroup-directed anger and self-directed positive affect,
respectively.
Discussion
Study 2 corroborated findings of Study 1 and excluded a
number of alternative explanations. Importantly, outgroup-
directed anger and contempt increased only as a consequence
Becker et al. 1595
of participation in collective action against the government,
underlining the target specificity of outgroup-directed nega-
tive emotions resulting from collective action participation.
Neither reading about past protests opposing the government
nor engaging in an alternative type of protest (against pollu-
tion) affected outgroup-directed emotions in relation to the
government. Second, as predicted, collective action partici-
pation in general lead to increased self-directed positive
affect. Thus, irrespective of the target of protest, individuals
felt more satisfied when they acted on behalf of their
ingroup, be it “students” or “citizens of Marburg.”
Third, we replicated the finding that collective action par-
ticipation against the government increased the intention to
engage in moderate protest in the future and that this effect
was due to increased outgroup-directed anger. More intrigu-
ing, however, is the finding that collective action participa-
tion can also increase the intention to engage in radical
collective action and that this is mediated by increased feel-
ings of contempt toward the government. These differential
effects of outgroup-directed anger and contempt on willing-
ness to engage in either moderate or radical collective action
are consistent with recent findings by Tausch et al. (2011).
Finally, replicating results of Study 1, self-directed emotions
did not mediate the relation between collective action par-
ticipation and willingness to engage in future action.
General Discussion
This research extends the literature on the relation between
emotions and collective action in several important ways.
First, it provides two separate empirical tests illustrating that
collective action participation affects the emotional experi-
ence of activists. To our knowledge, this is the first direct
experimental evidence demonstrating the emotional conse-
quences of collective action. Second, this research advances
theory on emotions as outcomes of collective action by dis-
tinguishing outgroup-directed from self-directed emotions
and thereby providing an answer why “positive” and “negative”
emotions can be experienced simultaneously as a result of
collective action participation. Finally, by experimentally
examining the predictive power of the emotions evoked by
collective action participation regarding the willingness to
engage in moderate and radical collective action in the
future, this research contributes to the understanding of the
dynamic relation between collective action participation and
emotions. Moreover, it addresses a crucial question regard-
ing the relative importance of different types of emotion for
the maintenance of political protest behavior.
Emotional Consequences
of Collective Action Participation
To provide a greater understanding of the emotional conse-
quences of collective action participation, we brought together
the literature on activism and psychological well-being
(e.g., Klar & Kasser, 2009; Meier & Stutzer, 2008) with the
predictions made by work on social identity processes in
collective action (e.g., Drury & Reicher, 1999, 2005, 2009;
Reicher, 1996; Reicher et al., 1995; Tajfel & Turner, 1979)
and distinguished between self-directed and outgroup-
directed emotions as consequences of collective action
participation.
To our knowledge, emotional consequences of collective
action participation directed at different targets have not
been examined in previous experimental research. Thus, the
current work extends past research on the relation between
emotions and collective action participation by distinguish-
ing different types of emotions and by examining the impact
of these emotions on future collective action. Referring to
self-directed emotions, we demonstrated that collective
action participation increased positive affect such as joy and
satisfaction. Thus, our results are consistent with research
illustrating that activism is positively correlated with indi-
vidual’s well-being (Klar & Kasser, 2009), that activists
anticipate personal benefits from collective action participa-
tion (Tropp & Brown, 2004), and that collective action
participation can evoke a positive emotional climate by
emphasizing positive feelings (Páez et al., 2007; Rimé,
2007). This is also in line with research in the context of
confronting discrimination that demonstrated that confront-
ers experience personal satisfaction from defending their
group (Shelton, Richeson, Salvatore, & Hill, 2006).
However, we also demonstrate that collective action par-
ticipation against the government inflamed student’s outgroup-
directed anger and contempt. This finding supports predictions
based on a social identity theory approach to collective
action by showing that engaging in collective action height-
ens not only participants’ politicized identity but also corre-
sponding emotions by increasing “negative” emotions directed
at the outgroup. Thus, this research contributes to our under-
standing of the relation between collective action partici-
pation, social identity processes, and the experience of
self-directed versus outgroup-directed emotions.
The Dynamic Relation Between Collective
Action Participation and Emotions
The present research further illustrates the dynamic relation
between emotions and collective action and provides a first
answer regarding the relative importance of outgroup-directed
versus self-directed emotions in this process: Although both
outgroup-directed and self-directed emotions were affected
by collective action participation, only outgroup-directed
emotions predicted future action intentions. Specifically,
results of Study 2 showed that increased outgroup-directed
anger, which was evoked by collective action participation,
enhanced participant’s willingness to engage in moderate
but not radical collective action in the future. Feelings of
outgroup-directed contempt, on the other hand, which were
evoked by collective action participation, enhanced participants’
1596 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 37(12)
willingness to engage in radical but not in moderate collec-
tive action in the future. These findings are in line with the
recent conceptualization of anger and contempt as serving
different social functions (Fischer & Roseman, 2007; Tausch
et al., 2011). Anger is felt in relationships where reconcili-
ation and an improvement of the relationship are desired.
Thus, anger tends to result in actions that conform to social
norms, because actions outside the norms of the system
would jeopardize the reconciliation process. In contrast,
contempt is felt in relationships that lack reconciliation
intentions and often develops on top of anger (Fischer &
Roseman, 2007). Therefore, in line with our results, individu-
als are less compelled to adhere to social norms when acting
against the target toward which they feel contempt (see also
Tausch et al., in press).
In sum, we have demonstrated that outgroup-directed, but
not self-directed, emotions evoked by collective action par-
ticipation have implications for intentions to engage in future
action. Therefore, our research contributes to understanding
why political protest is often persistent and provides insights
into the roles of emotional consequences of collective action
participation in motivating future protest participation. By
showing that outgroup-directed anger and contempt are more
important than self-directed positive affect in predicting
future action, the current work supports the argument that
people engage in collective action to improve the conditions
of their group (e.g., Wright et al., 1990). That is, collective
action participation heightens the perception that the ingroup
is treated unfairly, which produces corresponding “negative”
outgroup-directed emotions and increases the intention to
engage in actions against this type of injustice in the future.
Therefore, the current research qualifies recent approaches
in which researchers focused on egoistic motivations for col-
lective action participation such as collective action partici-
pation as a means for reducing negative aversive tensions
(Stürmer & Simon, 2009). Although our work is consistent
with the idea that activists anticipate individual enhancement
after collective action participation (Tropp & Brown, 2004)
and feel good after collective action participation, we dem-
onstrated that outgroup-directed emotions rather than indi-
vidual enhancement (i.e., self-directed positive affect) are
the driving force in long-term political protest.
Limitations and Future Research
Although our findings clearly demonstrate that outgroup-
directed emotions are more important than self-directed
emotions in terms of explaining the maintenance of long-
term protest, we believe that this effect might be moderated
by individual-difference variables such as group identifica-
tion and self-esteem. Both variables may dictate how the
individual experiences collective action participation and
how these experiences relate to future action. It is conceiv-
able that self-directed positive affect mediates the relation
between past and future action for those who are less identified
with the disadvantaged group and for individuals with low
self-esteem, because these people may engage in protest for
different reasons than people high in identification and self-
esteem. Compared to activists highly identified with the
protest movement, less identified activists do not engage in
collective action because they feel outgroup-directed anger
but because of pragmatic and strategic reasons (e.g., Van
Zomeren et al., 2008). Therefore, the experience of outgroup-
directed anger should be less important for activists low in
group identification. Instead, the experience of personal
benefits (i.e., self-directed positive affect) might energize
participation in future actions. Furthermore, the experience
of self-directed positive affect (instead of outgroup-directed
anger) might be crucial for individuals with low self-esteem
as a motivator to engage in future action. These qualifica-
tions would be consistent with research illustrating that
activists who are members of an organization have different
motives to engage in collective action than activists who are
not organized (Hornsey et al., 2006). Therefore, one interest-
ing avenue for future work would be an investigation of the
moderating role of group identification and self-esteem:
Both variables might have differential implications for the
predictive power of outgroup-directed and self-directed
emotions on future action intentions. To test these hypothe-
ses, future research needs to measure these variables before
the experimental manipulation.
Furthermore, it is important to note that the nature of
emotions depends on the outcome of collective action. In our
research, participants did not know whether their protest
would be successful. However, it has been shown that suc-
cess versus failure of collective action affects activists (e.g.,
Drury & Reicher, 2005). For instance, activists who were
asked to describe empowering collective action experiences
reported positive feelings, whereas they reported feelings of
discouragement, fear, and disappointment when they were
asked to describe disempowering collective action experi-
ences (Drury et al., 2005). Similarly, Maitner, Mackie and
Smith (2006) demonstrated that outgroup-directed anger
depends on the success of the protest: If the ingroup’s protest
resulted in an apology by outgroup members, outgroup-
directed anger was reduced. However, if the ingroup’s protest
was not successful—that is, if it did not lead to an apology by
the outgroup—outgroup-directed anger increased. Thus, future
research is needed to examine changes in self-directed and
outgroup-directed emotional reactions depending on success
and failure of a protest. Moreover, it would be interesting to
investigate the emotions experienced by individuals who
participated in radical collective action. Engagement in radi-
cal compared to moderate collective action should have a
different psychological impact on activists. For instance, it
has been demonstrated that activists who engaged in radical
collective action on students’ behalf disidentified with stu-
dents when the mismatch of their actions with student norms
became apparent (Becker, Tausch, Spears, & Christ, 2011).
Engagement in moderate collective action, on the other hand,
Becker et al. 1597
did not affect student’s identification with the broader ingroup.
Thus, given that engagement in radical action is more risky
than participation in moderate action, it is likely to also result
in qualitatively different emotions, such as in increased lev-
els of anxiety and fear, but also in intensive feelings of pride
and exhilaration.
Finally, although we instructed our participants to focus
on themselves as individuals when measuring positive emo-
tions, it could be argued that we did not measure self-directed
but rather ingroup-directed emotions in our studies. We are
confident that the positive emotions measured in our studies
were not ingroup directed as they were not correlated with
identification with the protest movement against tuition fees
(p > .15). Moreover, ingroup-directed emotions would be
likely to mediate the relation between past and future action.
Yet, we did not find evidence that the positive emotions
mediated this relation. Future research is necessary to exam-
ine the impact of collective action participation on ingroup-
directed emotions. Moreover, recent research suggests that
individuals can also feel action-directed emotions. For
example, it has been demonstrated that if ingroup aggression
directed at an outgroup elicited feelings of satisfaction (satis-
fied, pleased, content), ingroup members are more likely to
support future ingroup aggression (Maitner, Mackie, & Smith,
2007). Thus, future research could extend the present work
by examining effects of collective action participation not
only on self-directed and outgroup-directed emotions but
also on ingroup-directed and action-directed emotions.
Authors’ Note
The authors thank Stephanie Laux, Marcus Raser, Lena Rupp and
Martin Vogel for their help with data collection. This research was
conducted while Julia Becker was Associated Postdoctoral Fellow
of the DFG Research Training Group “Group-Focused Enmity”
(GRK 884) at the University of Marburg and Nicole Tausch was
British Academy Postdoctoral Fellow at Cardiff University.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to
the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, author-
ship, and/or publication of this article.
Note
1. Two participants in both collective action conditions refused to
participate and were directly thanked and debriefed.
References
Becker, J. C., Tausch, N., Spears, R. & Christ, O. (2011). Commit-
ted dis(s)idents: Participation in radical collective action fos-
ters disidentification with the broader in-group but enhances
political identification. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 37, 1104-1116.
Boehnke, K., & Wong, B. (2011). Adolescent political activism
and long-term happiness: A 21-year longitudinal study on the
development of micro- and macrosocial worries. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 435-447.
Cable, S. (1992). Women’s social movement involvement: The
role of structural availability in recruitment and participation
processes. Sociological Quarterly, 33, 35-50.
Drury, J., Cocking, C., Beale, J., Hanson, C., & Rapley, F. (2005).
The phenomenology of empowerment in collective action. British
Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 309-328.
Drury, J., & Reicher, S. (1999). The intergroup dynamics of col-
lective empowerment: Substantiating the social identity model
of crowd behaviour. Group Processes and Intergroup Rela-
tions, 2, 1-22.
Drury, J., & Reicher, S. D. (2005). Explaining enduring empower-
ment: A comparative study of collective action and psycho-
logical outcomes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35,
35-38.
Drury, J., & Reicher, S. (2009). Collective psychological empow-
erment as a model of social change: Researching crowds and
power. Journal of Social Issues, 65, 707-725.
Fischer, A. H., & Roseman, I. J. (2007).Beat them or ban them: The
characteristics and social functions anger and contempt. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 103-115.
Hogg, M. A., Hardie, E. A., & Reynolds, K. J. (1995). Prototypical
similarity, self-categorization, and depersonalized attraction: A
perspective on group cohesiveness. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 25, 159-177.
Hornsey, M. J., Blackwood, L., Louis, W., Fielding, K., Mavor, K.,
Morton, T., & . . . White, K. M. (2006). Why do people engage in
collective action? Revisiting the role of perceived effectiveness.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 1701-1722.
Klar, M., & Kasser, T. (2009). Some benefits of being an activist:
Measuring activism and its role in psychological well-being.
Political Psychology, 30, 755-777.
Leary, M. R. (2006).Sociometer theory and the pursuit of relational
value: Getting to the root of self-esteem. European Review of
Social Psychology, 16, 75-111.
Leonard, D. J., Moons, W. G., Mackie, D. M., & Smith, E. R. (2011).
We’re mad as hell and we’re not going to take it anymore:
Anger self-stereotyping and collective action. Group Processes
and Intergroup Relations, 14, 99-111.
Louis, W. R. (2009). Collective action—and then what? Journal of
Social Issues, 65, 727-748.
Mackie, D. M., Devos, T., & Smith, E. R. (2000). Inter-group emotions:
Explaining offensive action tendencies in an inter-group context.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 602-616.
Maitner, A. T., Mackie, D. M., & Smith, E. R. (2006). Evidence
for the regulatory function of intergroup emotion: Implement-
ing and impeding intergroup behavioral intentions. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 720-726.
Maitner, A. T., Mackie, D. M., & Smith, E. R. (2007). Antecedents
and consequences of satisfaction and guilt following ingroup
aggression. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10,
225-239.
1598 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 37(12)
McLeod, J. R. (1999). The sociodrama of presidential politics.
American Anthropologist, 101, 359-373.
Meier, S., & Stutzer, A. (2008). Is volunteering rewarding in itself?
Economica, 75, 39-59.
Páez, D., Basabe, N., Ubillos, S., & González-Castro, J. L. (2007).
Social sharing, participation in demonstrations, emotional cli-
mate, and coping with collective violence after the March 11th
Madrit bombings. Journal of Social Issues, 63, 323-337.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008).Asymptotic and resam-
pling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects
in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods,
40, 879-891.
Reicher, S. (1996). “The Battle of Westminster”: Developing the
social identity model of crowd behaviour in order to explain
the initiation and development of collective conflict. European
Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 115-134.
Reicher, S., Spears, R., & Postmes, T. (1995). A social identity
model of deindividuation phenomena. European Review of
Social Psychology, 6, 161-198.
Rimé, B. (2007).The social sharing of emotion as an interface
between individual and collective processes in the construction
of emotional climates. Journal of Social Issues, 63, 307-322.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human poten-
tials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being.
Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141-166.
Shelton, J. N., Richeson, J. A., Salvatore, J., & Hill, D. M. (2006).
Silence is not golden: Intrapersonal consequences of not con-
fronting prejudice.In S. Levin & C. Van Laar (Eds.), Social
stigma and group inequality: Social psychological perspec-
tives. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and
nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommenda-
tions. Psychological Methods, 7, 422-445.
Simon, B., & Klandermans, B. (2001). Politicized collective iden-
tity: A social psychological analysis. American Psychologist,
56, 319-331.
Smith, E. R. (1993). Social identity and social emotions: Toward
new conceptualizations of prejudice. In D. M. Mackie &
D. L. Hamilton (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and stereotyping:
Interactive processes in group perception (pp.297-315). San
Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Smith, E. R., Seger, C. R., & Mackie, D. M. (2007). Can emo-
tions be truly group-level? Evidence regarding four concep-
tual criteria. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
93, 431-446.
Stott, C., & Reicher, S. (1998). Crowd action as intergroup process:
Introducing the police perspective. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 26, 509-529.
Stürmer, S., & Simon, B. (2004). The role of collective identifi-
cation in social movement participation: A panel study in the
context of the German gay movement. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 30, 263-277.
Stürmer, S., & Simon, B. (2009). Pathways to collective protest:
Calculation, identification or emotion? A critical analysis of
the role of group-based anger in social movement participation.
Journal of Social Issues, 65, 681-705.
Tausch, N., Becker, J. C., Spears, R., Christ, O., Saab, R., Singh, &
Siddiqui, R. N. (2011). Explaining Radical Group Behaviour:
Developing Emotion and Efficacy Routes to Normative and
Non-normative Collective Action. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 101, 129-148.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup
conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychol-
ogy of intergroup relations (pp. 33-48). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Tropp, L. R., & Brown, A. C. (2004). What benefits the group can
also benefit the individual: group-enhancing and individual-
enhancing motives for collective action. Group Processes and
Intergroup Relations, 7, 267-282.
Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., &
Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-
categorization theory. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an
integrative social identity model of collective action: A quan-
titative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspec-
tives. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 504-535.
Van Zomeren, M., Spears, R., Fischer, A. H., & Leach, C. W.
(2004). Put your money where your mouth is!: Explaining
collective action tendencies through group-based anger and
group efficacy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
87, 649-664.
Wright, S. C. (2001). Strategic collective action: Social psychol-
ogy and social change. In R. Brown & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.),
Intergroup processes: Blackwell handbook journal of social
psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 409-430). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
Wright, S. C. (2009). The next generation of collective action
researh. Journal of Social Issues, 65, 859-879.
Wright, S. C., Taylor, D. M., & Moghaddam, F. M. (1990).
Responding to membership in a disadvantaged group: From
acceptance to collective protest. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 58, 994-1003.