[en] Using an ego-centered network approach, we examine across two studies whether and how injunctive network norms—behaviors that are approved by alters—are related to majority members’ decisions to participate in helping actions supporting migrants. We hypothesize that the more people perceive their personal social networks as positive toward humanitarian actions for migrants, the more they consider their opinions on migration issues as self-defining, and the more they are willing to mobilize in helping behaviors. With a name generator approach, we collected personal social network data among majority members of Belgian, mobilized volunteers (Study 1, N = 204) and Swiss, non-mobilized participants (Study 2, N = 247). Results demonstrate the impact of injunctive network norms in promoting and maintaining helping actions for migrants, and the role of self-defining attitudes. Overall, the results highlight the importance of injunctive norms within personal social networks for participation in intergroup helping behaviors.
Disciplines :
Sociologie & sciences sociales
Auteur, co-auteur :
Roblain, Antoine ; Center for Social & Cultural Psychology, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
Hanioti, Mado; Center for Social & Cultural Psychology, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium ; Fond National pour la Recherche Scientifique, Brussels, Belgium
PAULIS, Emilien ; University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences (FHSE) > Department of Humanities (DHUM) > Philosophy ; Cevipol, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
Van Haute, Emilie; Cevipol, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
Green, Eva G. T.; Institute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
Co-auteurs externes :
yes
Langue du document :
Anglais
Titre :
The social network of solidarity with migrants: The role of perceived injunctive norms on intergroup helping behaviors
Aeby, G. (2016). Who are my people? Strengths and limitations of ego-centred network analysis: A case illustration from the Family times survey. FORS Working Paper Series, 2.
Bader, D. (2018). Who ought to stay? Asylum policy and protest culture in Switzerland. In S. Rosenberger, V. Stern & N. Merhaut (Eds.), Protest movements in asylum and deportation (pp. 69–86). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Baumgärtel, M., & Oomen, B. (2019). Pulling human rights back in? Local authorities, international law and the reception of undocumented migrants. Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 51(2), 172–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2019.1624942
Becker, J. C., & Tausch, N. (2015). A dynamic model of engagement in normative and non-normative collective action: Psychological antecedents, consequences, and barriers. European Review of Social Psychology, 26(1), 43–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2015.1094265
Bienenstock, E. J., Bonacich, P., & Oliver, M. (1990). The effect of network density and homogeneity on attitude polarization. Social Networks, 12(2), 153–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(90)90003-R
Burt, R. (1984). Network items and the General Social Survey. Social Networks, 6(4), 293–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(84)90007-8
Christakis, N., & Fowler, J. (2009). Connected. How your friends’ friends’ friends affect everything you feel, think and do. New York, NY: Back Bay Book.
Cialdini, R. B., Kallgren, C. A., & Reno, R. R. (1991). A focus theory of normative conduct: A theoretical refinement and reevaluation of the role of norms in human Behavior. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 201–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60330-5
Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 1015–1026. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1015
Clary, E. G., & Snyder, M. (1991). A Functional analysis of altruism and prosocial behavior: The case of volunteerism. Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 12, 119–148.
Clary, E. G., & Snyder, M. (1999). The motivations to volunteer: Theoretical and practical considerations. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8(5), 156–159. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00037
Crandall, C. S., Eshleman, A., & O’Brien, L. (2002). Social norms and the expression and suppression of prejudice: The struggle for internalization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(3), 359–377. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.82.3.359
Crossley, N., Bellotti, E., Edwards, G., Everett, M. G., Koskinen, J., & Tranmer, M. (2015). Social network analysis for ego-nets. London, UK: Sage.
della Porta, D. (2018). Contentious moves: Mobilising for refugees’ rights. In D. della Porta (Eds.), Solidarity mobilizations in the ‘Refugee Crisis’, Palgrave studies in european political sociology. (pp. 1–38). Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71752-4_1
Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629–636. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046408
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Gabriel, U., Beyeler, G., Däniker, N., Fey, W., Gutweniger, K., Lienhart, M., & Gerber, B. L. (2001). Perceived sexual orientation and helping behaviour the wrong number technique, a Swiss Replication. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(6), 743–749. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022101032006008
Halabi, S., & Nadler, A. (2017). The intergroup status as helping relations model: Giving, seeking and receiving help as tools to maintain or challenge social inequality. In E. van Leeuwen & H. Zagefka (Eds.), Intergroup helping (pp. 205–221). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation and conditional process analysis, 2nd ed. London, UK: Guilford Press.
Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications. London, UK: Routledge.
Hutter, S., & Giugni, M. (2009). Protest politics in a changing political context: Switzerland, 1975–2005. Swiss Political Science Review, 15(3), 427–461. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1662-6370.2009.tb00141.x
Kashima, Y., Wilson, S., Lusher, D., Pearson, L. J., & Pearson, C. (2013). The acquisition of perceived descriptive norms as social category learning in social networks. Social Networks, 35(4), 711–719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2013.06.002
Kende, A., Lantos, N. A., Belinszky, A., Csaba, S., & Lukács, Z. A. (2017). The politicized motivations of volunteers in the refugee crisis: Intergroup helping as the means to achieve social change. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 5(1), 260–281. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v5i1.642
Klandermans, B. (1984). Mobilization and participation: Social-psychological expansions of resource mobilization theory. American Sociological Review, 49(5), 583–600. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095417
Klandermans, P. G. (2014). Identity politics and politicized identities: Identity processes and the dynamics of protest. Political Psychology, 35(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12167
Knoke, D. (1990). Networks of political action: Toward theory construction. Social Forces, 68(4), 1041–1063. https://doi.org/10.2307/2579133
Lazer, D., Rubineau, B., Chetkovich, C., Katz, N., & Neblo, M. (2010). The coevolution of networks and political attitudes. Political Communication, 27(3), 248–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2010.500187
Louis, W. R., Thomas, E., Chapman, C. M., Achia, T., Wibisono, S., Mirnajafi, Z., & Droogendyk, L. (2019). Emerging research on intergroup prosociality: Group members’ charitable giving, positive contact, allyship, and solidarity with others. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(3), e12436. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12436
MarinA., & Hampton, K. N. (2007). Simplifying the personal network name generator. Field Methods, 19(2), 163–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822x06298588
Marsden, P. (2011). Survey methods for network data. In J. Scott & P. Carrington (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social network analysis (pp. 370–388). London, UK: Sage.
Marta, E., Manzi, C., Pozzi, M., & Vignoles, V. L. (2014). Identity and the theory of planned behavior: Predicting maintenance of volunteering after three years. The Journal of Social Psychology, 154(3), 198–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2014.881769
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415
Merluzzi, J., & Burt, R. (2013). How many names are enough? Identifying network effects with least set of listed contacts. Social Networks, 35(1), 331–337.
Mescoli, E., Reidsma, M., Diels, E., Hondeghem, A., Mazzola, A., Roblain, A., & Rea, A. (2019). Mobilizations and opinions regarding asylum seekers, refugees and undocumented migrants in Belgium: Frames, motivations and actions. In A. Rea, M. Martiniello, A. Mazzola & B. Meuleman (Eds.), The refugee reception crisis in Europe polarized opinions and mobilizations, (pp. 171–224). Brussels, Belgium: Editions de l’Université de Bruxelles.
Nadler, A. (2002). Inter–group helping relations as power relations: Maintaining or challenging social dominance between groups through helping. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 487–502. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00272
Omoto, A. M., & Snyder, M. (1990). Basic research in action: Volunteerism and society’s response to AIDS. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 152–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167290161011
Omoto, A. M., & Snyder, M. (1995). Sustained helping without obligation: Motivation, longevity of service, and perceived attitude change among AIDS volunteers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 671–686. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.68.4.671
Omoto, A. M., & Snyder, M. (2002). Considerations of community: The context and process of volunteerism. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(5), 846–867+762. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764202045005007
Paluck, E. L. (2011). Peer pressure against prejudice: A high school field experiment examining social network change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(2), 350–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.11.017
Paulis, E. (2018). Party Members in Context. Social networks and local branches as context for party membership and activism. Doctoral dissertation. Brussels, Belgium: Université libre de Bruxelles.
Penner, L. A., Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A., & Schroeder, D. A. (2005). Prosocial behavior: Multilevel perspectives. Annual Review of Psychology, 56(1), 365–392. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070141
Petty, R. E., & Krosnick, J. A. (1995). Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
Rea, A., Martiniello, M., Mazzola, A., & Meuleman, B. (2019). The refugee reception crisis: Polarized opinions and mobilizations. Retrieved from http://www.oapen.org/record/1005529.
Rogers, T., Goldstein, N. J., & Fox, C. R. (2018). Social mobilization. Annual Review of Psychology, 69(1), 357–381. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033718
Rosenberger, S. (2018). Political protest in asylum and deportation. An introduction. In S. Rosenberger, V. Stern & N. Merhaut (Eds.), Protest movements in asylum and deportation (pp. 3–25). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Shang, J., & Croson, R. (2009). A field experiment in charitable contribution: The impact of social information on the voluntary provision of public goods. The Economic Journal, 119(540), 1422–1439. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2009.02267.x
Sherif, M. (1966). Group conflict and cooperation. London, UK: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Simon, B., Stürmer, S., & Steffens, K. (2000). Helping individuals or group members? The role of individual and collective identification in AIDS volunteerism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(4), 497–506. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167200266008
Sinclair, B. (2012). The social citizen. Peer networks and political behavior. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Smith, J. R., & Louis, W. R. (2008). Do as we say and as we do: The interplay of descriptive and injunctive group norms in the attitude–behaviour relationship. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47(4), 647–666. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466607X269748
Snyder, M. (1993). Basic research and practical problems: The promise of a “functional” personality and social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 251–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167293193001
Snyder, M., & Omoto, A. M. (2008). Volunteerism: Social issues perspectives and social policy implications. Social Issues and Policy Review, 2, 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-2409.2008.00009.x
Stürmer, S., Snyder, M., & Omoto, A. M. (2005). Prosocial emotions and helping: The moderating role of group membership. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(3), 532–546. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.532
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
Thomas, E. F., & McGarty, C. (2018). Giving versus acting: Using latent profile analysis to distinguish between benevolent and activist support for global poverty reduction. British Journal of Social Psychology, 57(1), 189–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12228
Turner-Zwinkels, F., van Zomeren, M., & Postmes, T. (2015). Politicization during the 2012 U.S. Presidential Elections: Bridging the personal and the political through an identity content approach. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(3), 433–445. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167215569494
van Bezouw, M. J., & Kutlaca, M. (2019). What do we want? Examining the motivating role of goals in social movement mobilization. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 7(1), 33–51. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v7i1.796
van Leeuwen, E. (2017). The SOUTH model: On the pros and cons of strategic outgroup helping. In E. van Leeuwen & H. Zagefka (Eds.), Intergroup helping (pp. 131–158). London, UK: Springer.
van Leeuwen, E., & Zagefka, H. (2017). Intergroup helping. London, UK: Springer.
van Zomeren, M., Kutlaca, M., & Turner-Zwinkels, F. (2018). Integrating who “we” are with what “we” (will not) stand for: A further extension of the Social Identity Model of Collective Action. European Review of Social Psychology, 29(1), 122–160.
van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134(4), 504–535. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.504
Vandevoordt, R. (2019). Eroding rights, crafting solidarity? Shifting dynamics in the state-civil society nexus in Flanders and Brussels. Social Inclusion, 7(2), 106–117. 10.17645/si.v7i2.2010. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v7i2.2010
Vandevoordt, R., & Verschraegen, G. (2019). Subversive humanitarianism and its challenges: Notes on the political ambiguities of civil refugee support. In M. Feischmidt, L. Pries & C. Cantat (Eds.), Refugee protection and civil society in Europe (pp. 101–128). Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wölfer, R., & Hewstone, M. (2017). Beyond the dyadic perspective: 10 Reasons for using social network analysis in intergroup contact research. British Journal of Social Psychology, 56(3), 609–617. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12195
Zuckerman, A. (2005). The social logic of politics: Personal networks as contexts. Boulder, CO: Temple University Press.
Zuckerman, A. S., Valentino, N. A., & Zuckerman, E. W. (1994). A structural theory of vote choice: Social and political networks and electoral flows in Britain and the United States. The Journal of Politics, 56(4), 1008–1033. https://doi.org/10.2307/2132071
Zunick, P. V., Teeny, J. D., & Fazio, R. H. (2017). Are Some attitudes more self-defining than others? Assessing self-related attitude functions and their consequences. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(8), 1136–1149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217705121
