Abstract
Conspiracy theories on social media have been suspected of contributing to mobilization and radicalization. Yet, few studies have examined the prevalence of psychological variables that may serve to motivate normative and non-normative collective action in this material. Drawing from the “social identity model of collective action,” the current study uses a mixed-methods approach to examine the prevalence of collective action cues in conspiracy theory-endorsing social media spaces. Towards this end, I examined four German Facebook groups (Covid-19-Skeptic, Far-Right, Chemtrail, and Political Affairs) during the first months of the Covid-19 pandemic<em>. </em>The results of qualitative content analysis (<em>N</em> = 828 posts), a hierarchical cluster analysis, and the examination of popularity cues showed that: (a) collective action cues were frequent; (b) most posts transmitted alternative views (Cluster 1) or<em> </em>absolutist ideologies (Cluster 2) with few collective action cues—yet, more than one-third of the posts were either mobilizing (Cluster 3) or wrathful (Cluster 4), entailing multiple collective action cues including cues theoretically linked to non-normative action; (c) mobilizing and wrathful posts were more engaging than alternative views and absolutist ideologies; (d) the types of posts and levels of engagement varied between the examined groups such that the Chemtrail and the Far-Right group disseminated more content with a higher mobilizing potential. The Far-Right group was also the most active in responding to its members. The results of this study are novel in that they demonstrate the prevalence of cues that have been linked to non-normative collective action in psychological research within conspiracy theory-endorsing Facebook groups.
Reference61 articles.
1. Amsalem, E., & Zoizner, A. (2022). Real, but limited: A meta-analytic assessment of framing effects in the political domain. British Journal of Political Science, 52(1), 221–237. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123420000253
2. Baden, C., & Sharon, T. (2021). Blinded by the lies? Toward an integrated definition of conspiracy theories. Communication Theory, 31(1), 82–106. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtaa023
3. Bak, M., Tarp, K. N., & Liang, D. C. S. (2019). Delineating the attributes and phenomenon of violent extremism (Geneva Paper No. 24/19). Geneva Center for Security Policy. https://www.gcsp.ch/publications/defining-concept-violent-extremism
4. Becker, J. C., & Tausch, N. (2015). A dynamic model of engagement in normative and non-normative collective action: Psychological antecedents, consequences, and barriers. European Review of Social Psychology, 26(1), 43–92. https://doi.org/10/gf3gvc
5. Blassnig, S., Udris, L., Staender, A., & Vogler, D. (2021). Popularity on facebook during election campaigns: An analysis of issues and emotions in parties’ online communication. International Journal of Communication, 15, 4399–4419. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/17040/3573
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献