A Field-Experimental Study of Emergent Mobilization in Online Collective Action* (original) (raw)
Related papers
We ask why most online signature campaigns attract only a handful of supporters while a few are backed by millions. Using a field-experimental design on the popular petitioning website Change.org, we investigate the role of emergent phenomena during the mobilization process in determining levels of collective action. We demonstrate the significance of these emergent processes while controlling the structural profiles, organizing strategies, and initial signatory volumes of online petition campaigns. Differences in ultimate signatory support among similar petitions are as extreme as theories of critical mass and tipping points would suggest, yet the dynamics leading up to these arbitrary disparities are unexpected. Growth is highly erratic, with initially unpopular campaigns experiencing wholly unexpected revivals, limiting the predictability of future from past momentum to just the short run. The mechanism we identify driving these unpredictable dynamics we call " accidental activation, " the unanticipated recruitment of secondary mobilizers.
Success-Breeds-Success in Collective Political Behavior: Evidence from a Field Experiment
Scholars have proposed that the emergence of political movements is highly path-dependent, such that early mobilization successes may lead to disproportionately greater eventual success. This article replicates a unique field experiment testing for positive feedback in internet petition signing (van de Rijt et al. 2014). The prior study found no significant effect of signatures bestowed by the experimenters on the signing rate of 200 online petitions posted to a political petitions website (http://www.change.org), but this may have lacked power because of its sample size and variation across petitions. We report on results of a new field experiment in which we posted 400 petitions differing only in tightly controlled ways to the same website, varying the number of experimentally bestowed signatures across a wider range than in the original experiment. Subsequent petition signing increased monotonically with the treatment, confirming the presence of positive feedback. These results support the existence of success-breeds-success dynamics in the mobilization of collective political behavior, confirming that early success can increase the attractiveness of collective action to potential supporters. However, while significant, the effect of prior signatures was small, suggesting that cumulative advantage effects resulting from popularity metrics may play a minor role in collective action outcomes.
This study aims to reveal patterns of e-petition co-signing behavior that are indicative of the political mobilization of online ''communities''. We discuss the case of We the People, a US national experiment in the use of social media technology to enable users to propose and solicit support for policy suggestions to the White House. We apply Baumgartner and Jones's work on agenda setting and punctuated equilibrium, which suggests that policy issues may lie dormant for periods of time until some event triggers attention from the media, interest groups, and elected representatives. In the case study presented, we focus on 21 petitions initiated during the week after the Sandy Hook shooting (14–21 December 2012) in opposition to gun control or in support of policy proposals that are alternatives to gun control, which we view as mobilized efforts to maintain stability and equilibrium in a policy system threatening to change. Using market basket analysis and social ...
In this study, we aim to reveal patterns of e-petition co-signing behavior that are indicative of political mobilization of online " communities " in the case of We the People (WtP), the first web-enabled petitioning system developed by the US federal government. This Internet-based tool enables users to petition the Obama Administration and solicit support for policy suggestions. Using WtP petition data, we focused on 33 petitions that were initiated the week after the Sandy Hook shooting (December 14-21, 2012) involving gun control and collectively received a response from President Obama. We apply Baumgartner and Jones's (1993) work on agenda setting and punctuated equilibrium, which suggests that policy issues may lie dormant until a " focusing event " triggers the attention from political figures, interest groups, and the media. Using some techniques from market basket analysis and social network analysis we found evidence of the mobilization of online c...
E-petitioning as Collective Political Action in We the People
2015
In this study, we aim to reveal patterns of e-petition co-signing behavior that are indicative of political mobilization of online “communities” in the case of We the People (WtP), the first web-enabled petitioning system developed by the US federal government. This Internet-based tool enables users to petition the Obama Administration and solicit support for policy suggestions. Using WtP petition data, we focused on 33 petitions that were initiated the week after the Sandy Hook shooting (December 14-21, 2012) involving gun control and collectively received a response from President Obama. We apply Baumgartner and Jones’s (1993) work on agenda setting and punctuated equilibrium, which suggests that policy issues may lie dormant until a “focusing event” triggers the attention from political figures, interest groups, and the media. Using some techniques from market basket analysis and social network analysis we found evidence of the mobilization of online communities for and against g...
Birds of a feather petition together? Characterizing e-petitioning through the lens of platform data
E-petitioning platforms are increasingly popular in Western democracies and considered by some lawmakers and scholars to enhance citizen participation in political decision-making. In addition to social media and other channels for informal political communication, online petitioning is regarded as both an instrument to afford citizens a more important role in the political process and allow them to express support for issues which they find relevant. Building on existing pre-internet systems, e-petitioning websites are increasingly implemented to make it easier and faster to set up and sign petitions. However, little attention has so far been given to the relationship between different styles of usage and the causes supported by different groups of users. The functional difference between signing paper-based petitions versus doing so online is especially notable with regard to users who sign large numbers of petitions. To characterize this relationship, we examine the intensity of user participation in the German Bundestag's online petitioning platform through the lens of platform data collected over a period of five years, and conduct an analysis of highly active users and their political preferences. We find that users who sign just a single petition favor different policy areas than those who sign many petitions on a variety of issues. We conclude our analysis with observations on the potential of behavioral data for assessing the dynamics of online participation, and suggest that quantity (the number of signed petitions) and quality (favored policy areas) need more systematic joint assessment.