Repression and bystander mobilization in Africa

Lewis, Jacob S.

doi:10.1080/14742837.2022.2052837

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The first is defining mobilization using the tools that mobilize people, such as legal mobilization (Nolette, 2015), and so forth. The second is using the targeted subject to define mobilization, such as bystander mobilization (Lewis, 2022), and so forth. The last is using the purpose of mobilizing to define mobilization, such as political mobilization (Flavin & Hartney, 2015) and pro-government mobilization (Hellmeier & Weidmann, 2020).…”

Section: Accountability Mobilizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With regard to mobilizing bystanders, studies about social movements mentioned the need to understand why people who were not stakeholders participate in social movement or protests (Lewis, 2022; Zhang, 2017); for face‐to‐face violence prevention, mobilizing bystanders is an effective way to protect the victims (Banyard & Moynihan, 2011); in studies about cyberbullying, mobilizing bystanders is also an effective approach to break the chain of social reinforcement and protect the victims (Bastiaensens et al, 2014). These studies were designed to understand what factors influence non‐stakeholders into taking action.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Accountability mobilization, guanxi and social media‐induced polarization: Understanding the bystander's prosocial punishment to misinformation spreader

Zhu,

Zhang,

Ding

et al. 2023

Information Systems Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prosocial punishments by social media bystanders could block the path from misinformation spread to social media‐induced polarization (SMIP). However, prosocial punishments are inadequate for SMIP management because of the personal costs, and few studies propose effective ways to mobilize bystanders. The Chinese government implemented a regulation in 2017 to mobilize bystanders on social media through allocating accountability to act as misinformation supervisors. In China's guanxi culture, prosocial punishments are less observed considering the additional personal costs caused by breaking guanxi. Therefore, assessing the effectiveness of China's cyberspace accountability mobilization can help identify an effective tool for other governments to mitigate SMIP. We used a vignette survey experiment to collect data from WeChat users and applied a random regression model to analyse the data. Accountability mobilization significantly promotes bystanders' prosocial punishment to block the misinformation‐spread‐to‐SMIP path. Guanxi negatively moderates the relationship between accountability mobilization and prosocial punishment to the above path. The government could encourage the public to actively take prosocial punishments by using the new tool of accountability mobilization. Guanxi culture reduces the effectiveness of the tool.

show abstract