Collective action from a distance: Distance shapes how people view victims of injustice and decreases willingness to engage in collective action

Abstract

The present research examines whether distance affects not only how people view victims of injustice, but also group members’ willingness to engage in collective action. Across two experiments, examining both spatial (Experiment 1) and temporal (Experiment 2) distance, distant victims were seen as less familiar and more likely to be viewed at a relatively more superordinate level of identity (less in terms of subgroup identity) compared to near victims. In addition, participants were less willing to engage in collective action on behalf of distant victims, relative to near victims. Across studies, decreased collective action on behalf of distant victims, relative to near victims, was explained by the tendency to view victims in a more abstract way—as less familiar (Experiment 2) and at a more superordinate level (Experiments 1 and 2). Across both studies, results also demonstrated that participants were less willing to engage in collective action on behalf of out-group targets, relative to in-group targets, which was explained by perceptions of familiarity (Experiment 2). Implications for collective action and more broadly social change are discussed.

Politics and Power in Global Health: The Constituting Role of Conflicts Comment on "Navigating Between Stealth Advocacy and Unconscious Dogmatism: The Challenge of Researching the Norms, Politics and Power of Global Health"

“…6 With reference to psychological research one could also give an empirical explanation to this often actual difference in how we perceive human value. 7 But both the normative justifications for such a difference and its empirical explanation are constituted on the basis of certain political structures, power relations and material interests. The fundamental point being simply that, the situation, in which HIV-patients in the developing world have to die due to lack of treatment, while HIV-patients in our neighborhood receive treatment, is not given by nature.…”

Triadic intergroup relations: Studying situations with an observer, an actor, and a recipient of behavior

“…In this situation, then, the three relevant entities in the triad are the self, other ingroup members, and outgroup members. In the case of collective action research, scholars (e.g., Glasford & Caraballo, ; Mallett, Huntsinger, Sinclair, & Swim, ) have recently focused on situations where members of a group might be motivated to engage in collective action to better the situation not of their own group, but of a second group who is being oppressed by a third group. In such situations, clearly three or more groups are psychologically relevant (the observer's ingroup A, a privileged group B, and an underprivileged group C).…”

Intraminority Support for and Participation in Race-Based Collective Action Movements: An Intersectional Perspective

“…These feelings of alienation may then decrease motivation to engage with cross-group collective action movements. An examination on intergroup engagement in collective action showed that people are less likely to engage in collective action behaviors for outgroup members (Glasford & Caraballo, 2016), however, these results may not be generalizable to intraminority relations, as this study measured Latinx students' motivation to engage in collective action for their own group (Latinx/Hispanic), or for majority outgroup members (White/non-Hispanic), who hold more relative power.…”