Social movements and collective behavior: an integration of meta-analysis and systematic review of social psychology studies.
collective behaviors
collective gatherings
meta-analysis
social movements
social psychology
systematic review
Journal
Frontiers in psychology
ISSN: 1664-1078
Titre abrégé: Front Psychol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101550902
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
12
11
2022
accepted:
29
03
2023
medline:
8
5
2023
pubmed:
8
5
2023
entrez:
8
5
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The impact of social movements (SMs) and collective behavior (CB) supports the relevance of approaching this phenomenon from social psychology. Several systematic reviews (10) and meta-analyses (6) have been carried out in the 21st century, but there is a lack of integration. This study seeks to review the patterns of CB and corroborate the psychosocial factors that explain participation in CB and SMs, as well as the long-term psychological effects of participating in them. A systematic search was carried out in the databases Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, Willey Online Library, EBSCO, and JSTOR for articles dated between 1969 and 2022. We searched for meta-analyses and systematic reviews that empirically evaluated social movements and collective behavior. Of the 494 initial records, after scanning and eligibility phases, 16 meta-analyses and systematic reviews were analyzed in the present work. The evidence reviewed shows that participation in collective gatherings and CB are common. A cross-cultural survey suggests that collective gatherings are mostly of a leisure type, to a lesser extent religious and sporting, and to an even lesser extent, demonstrations and large religious rites. World Value surveys found that one to three persons out of 10 participate in protests or CB related to SMs and four out of 10 movements achieved some kind of success. Studies challenged that CBs were characterized by unanimity of beliefs, identification and behavior, generalized excitement, as well as mass panic and riot after catastrophes. Only two out of 10 CB are violent. Meta-analysis and systematic reviews confirm that participation in CB and SMs was associated with (a) intergroup conflict and realistic threat ( Studies confirm the importance of explanatory factors for SMs, with data from various cultural regions. There is a lack of systematic studies of CB as well as meta-analyses and more culturally diverse studies of the effects of participation in them.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
The impact of social movements (SMs) and collective behavior (CB) supports the relevance of approaching this phenomenon from social psychology. Several systematic reviews (10) and meta-analyses (6) have been carried out in the 21st century, but there is a lack of integration.
Aim
UNASSIGNED
This study seeks to review the patterns of CB and corroborate the psychosocial factors that explain participation in CB and SMs, as well as the long-term psychological effects of participating in them.
Method
UNASSIGNED
A systematic search was carried out in the databases Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, Willey Online Library, EBSCO, and JSTOR for articles dated between 1969 and 2022. We searched for meta-analyses and systematic reviews that empirically evaluated social movements and collective behavior. Of the 494 initial records, after scanning and eligibility phases, 16 meta-analyses and systematic reviews were analyzed in the present work.
Results
UNASSIGNED
The evidence reviewed shows that participation in collective gatherings and CB are common. A cross-cultural survey suggests that collective gatherings are mostly of a leisure type, to a lesser extent religious and sporting, and to an even lesser extent, demonstrations and large religious rites. World Value surveys found that one to three persons out of 10 participate in protests or CB related to SMs and four out of 10 movements achieved some kind of success. Studies challenged that CBs were characterized by unanimity of beliefs, identification and behavior, generalized excitement, as well as mass panic and riot after catastrophes. Only two out of 10 CB are violent. Meta-analysis and systematic reviews confirm that participation in CB and SMs was associated with (a) intergroup conflict and realistic threat (
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
Studies confirm the importance of explanatory factors for SMs, with data from various cultural regions. There is a lack of systematic studies of CB as well as meta-analyses and more culturally diverse studies of the effects of participation in them.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37151317
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1096877
pmc: PMC10162496
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
1096877Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 da Costa, Páez, Martí-González, Díaz and Bouchat.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2012 Aug;16(3):203-32
pubmed: 22194251
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Apr 13;19(8):
pubmed: 35457548
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003 Nov;85(5):823-37
pubmed: 14599247
Psychol Bull. 2008 Jul;134(4):504-35
pubmed: 18605818
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2007 Oct;33(10):1340-52
pubmed: 17933732
J Couns Psychol. 2018 Jan;65(1):120-131
pubmed: 29355347
Front Psychol. 2017 Sep 12;8:1568
pubmed: 28955280
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2020 Mar;54(3):232-243
pubmed: 31989834
Front Psychol. 2022 Aug 31;13:974683
pubmed: 36118463
Nat Hum Behav. 2020 Apr;4(4):380-386
pubmed: 31988440
Br J Soc Psychol. 2011 Dec;50(4):606-27
pubmed: 22122025
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2015 May;108(5):711-29
pubmed: 25822033
Curr Opin Psychol. 2020 Oct;35:12-16
pubmed: 32244198
Psychol Bull. 2015 Mar;141(2):364-403
pubmed: 25602273
Front Public Health. 2019 Jun 04;7:141
pubmed: 31214561
Am J Community Psychol. 2017 Jun;59(3-4):333-362
pubmed: 28471507
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2001 Feb;80(2):325-39
pubmed: 11220449
Psychol Bull. 2021 Jul;147(7):667-700
pubmed: 34855427
Lancet. 2020 Jan 25;395(10220):273-284
pubmed: 31928765
Front Psychol. 2020 Jul 31;11:1721
pubmed: 32849030
Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 01;4:1
pubmed: 25554246
Front Psychol. 2020 Dec 11;11:607538
pubmed: 33362666
Front Psychol. 2018 Mar 27;9:418
pubmed: 29636720
Behav Brain Sci. 2012 Dec;35(6):447-8
pubmed: 23164320
Br J Soc Psychol. 2017 Dec;56(4):633-654
pubmed: 28612450
Br J Soc Psychol. 2013 Sep;52(3):525-42
pubmed: 22694314
Theory Soc. 2021;50(6):965-984
pubmed: 33746336
Front Psychol. 2021 Dec 09;12:764434
pubmed: 34955983