ABSTRACT

Why do people participate in different forms of collective action? This article analyses the impact that perceptions of injustice in the way authorities treat citizens and the legitimacy of authorities have on attitudes towards normative, e.g., voting in a plebiscite or peacefully protesting, and non-normative, e.g., violent protests or barricades, collective action. We propose a dialogue between the social psychology of social movements and theories of social justice and legitimacy to consider the joint effect of perceived injustices and legitimacy on collective action. We analysed data from a representative sample of the Chilean population (n = 1,805). Through an analysis of structural equations we found that perceived injustice is related to lower beliefs in the legitimacy of authorities, and that this leads to a greater justification for non-normative collective action and lower justification for normative collective action. Results were analysed within the current context of radicalization of social mobilizations throughout the world and in Chile.

摘要

人们为什么参加各种形式的集体行动？本文分析了当局对待公民的方式中不公正观念的影响以及当局对合法性态度的影响，这些态度包括对规范的态度，例如在全民投票或和平抗议中投票，以及对非规范的态度，例如暴力抗议或路障，集体行动。我们提议在社会运动的社会心理学与社会正义和合法性理论之间进行对话，以考虑认为的不公正和合法性对集体行动的共同影响。我们分析了来自智利人口的代表性样本的数据（n = 1,805）。通过对结构方程式的分析，我们发现，感知上的不公正与对权威合法性的较低信念有关，这导致对非规范性集体行动的更大辩护和对规范性集体行动的更低辩护。在全球和智利社会动员激进的当前背景下对结果进行了分析。