“…Gamson's work has raised a number of criticisms, mostly methodological (Goldstone 1980, Gurr 1980, Snyder & Kelly 1976, Webb et al 1983, Zelditch 1978, but also a series of reanalyses of his data, which the author had appended to the book (Frey et al 1992, Goldstone 1980, Mirowsky & Ross 1981, Steedly & Foley 1979.2 As in the case of the role of disruptive tactics, most of these works have confirmed Gamson's principal findings, at least in part. For example, Steedly & Foley (1979), using more sophisticated techniques, found group success related, in order of relative importance, to the nondisplacement nature of the goals, the number of alliances, the absence of factionalism, the existence of specific and limited goals, and the willingness to use sanctions.…”