1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Leadership and discursive mobilizing of collective action in the Jonestown mass killing

      1 , 2
      British Journal of Social Psychology
      Wiley

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          We study a transcript of discourse recorded on an open mic during the mass suicide/murder of 909 members of a religious community in Jonestown in 1978. The ‘Jonestown massacre’ is often cited in psychology textbooks as a warning example of how powerful situations and charismatic leaders can lead ordinary people to extreme and destructive behaviours. These accounts suggest that individuals lose control of reason and will such that their behaviour becomes subject to outside control. We develop an alternative explanation of the mass killing as identity‐based collective action. Our analysis shows how a shared understanding of the community's situation and the options available to them were constructed and contested in discourse. We demonstrate how Jim Jones served as impresario, entrepreneur and champion of identity, recognizing his followers' agency, initiating collective meaning‐making and mobilizing action. Jones engaged his followers in jointly constructing the situation as hopeless, developing a shared view of their situated social identity and collectively formulating the identity‐congruent solution of collective suicide as a hopeful act of collective agency. Our analysis points to the importance of addressing the conditions that sustain narratives of collective hopelessness and helping groups successfully choose non‐extremist pathways out of hopelessness.

          Related collections

          Most cited references58

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: a quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives.

          An integrative social identity model of collective action (SIMCA) is developed that incorporates 3 socio-psychological perspectives on collective action. Three meta-analyses synthesized a total of 182 effects of perceived injustice, efficacy, and identity on collective action (corresponding to these socio-psychological perspectives). Results showed that, in isolation, all 3 predictors had medium-sized (and causal) effects. Moreover, results showed the importance of social identity in predicting collective action by supporting SIMCA's key predictions that (a) affective injustice and politicized identity produced stronger effects than those of non-affective injustice and non-politicized identity; (b) identity predicted collective action against both incidental and structural disadvantages, whereas injustice and efficacy predicted collective action against incidental disadvantages better than against structural disadvantages; (c) all 3 predictors had unique medium-sized effects on collective action when controlling for between-predictor covariance; and (d) identity bridged the injustice and efficacy explanations of collective action. Results also showed more support for SIMCA than for alternative models reflecting previous attempts at theoretical integration. The authors discuss key implications for theory, practice, future research, and further integration of social and psychological perspectives on collective action. PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2008 APA
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Politicized collective identity: A social psychological analysis.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Explaining radical group behavior: Developing emotion and efficacy routes to normative and nonnormative collective action.

              A recent model of collective action distinguishes 2 distinct pathways: an emotional pathway whereby anger in response to injustice motivates action and an efficacy pathway where the belief that issues can be solved collectively increases the likelihood that group members take action (van Zomeren, Spears, Fischer, & Leach, 2004). Research supporting this model has, however, focused entirely on relatively normative actions such as participating in demonstrations. We argue that the relations between emotions, efficacy, and action differ for more extreme, nonnormative actions and propose (a) that nonnormative actions are often driven by a sense of low efficacy and (b) that contempt, which, unlike anger, entails psychological distancing and a lack of reconciliatory intentions, predicts nonnormative action. These ideas were tested in 3 survey studies examining student protests against tuition fees in Germany (N = 332), Indian Muslims' action support in relation to ingroup disadvantage (N = 156), and British Muslims' responses to British foreign policy (N = 466). Results were generally supportive of predictions and indicated that (a) anger was strongly related to normative action but overall unrelated or less strongly related to nonnormative action, (b) contempt was either unrelated or negatively related to normative action but significantly positively predicted nonnormative action, and (c) efficacy was positively related to normative action and negatively related to nonnormative action. The implications of these findings for understanding and dealing with extreme intergroup phenomena such as terrorism are discussed.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                British Journal of Social Psychology
                British J Social Psychol
                Wiley
                0144-6665
                2044-8309
                October 2024
                June 19 2024
                October 2024
                : 63
                : 4
                : 2121-2134
                Affiliations
                [1 ] University of Johannesburg Johannesburg South Africa
                [2 ] University of Bath Bath UK
                Article
                10.1111/bjso.12772
                38894692
                0cdf03b7-229a-4a79-839c-d8cf0f95f62c
                © 2024

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content28

                Cited by1

                Most referenced authors499