Benefits and potential backlashes of allies engaging in solidarity-based collective action

该项目的目的是从四个角度研究盟友参与基于团结的集体行动的好处和潜在的反弹：a)第三方的观点，b)当局的观点，c)少数群体的观点，d)联盟的观点。我们已进行了建议的8项研究中的6项，并进行了另外8项研究，以便更有系统地探讨研究问题，以回应评审者的意见。鉴于评论家批评缺乏强有力的理论基础，我们写了一篇关于不同类型盟友的理论评论论文。我们认为，处于有利地位的群体盟友可以受到1)个人利益的激励(个人自利动机)，2)在保持自己群体地位的条件下(群体保护动机)，和/或3)改善弱势群体的地位，知道这将影响他们自己群体的地位(以外群为中心的动机)。比较优势群体和弱势群体成员的影响，我们发现，正如预期的那样，盟友对观察者有有利的影响；当更多的盟友在场时，他们更有可能认同抗议运动。相比之下，盟友的存在对目标没有太大影响--只有在盟友表现出主导行为时，才会对他们进行负面评估。在对目标和盟友的相互评价方面，目标更有可能正面评价盟友，而盟友更有可能正面评价目标。此外，我们发现，与弱势群体成员的跨群体接触并不会将优势群体成员转变为盟友。相反，有优势的群体成员只有在进行政治化接触并喜欢他们的接触伙伴时，才更有可能参与基于团结的集体行动。我们要求再延长18个月。尽管该项目进行得非常顺利，并揭示了重要的发现，但它需要额外的工作来解释意想不到的结果，并完成对ALI行动的全面研究。续签提案有三个主要目标。首先，我们的目标是完成两个项目，考察盟友对决策者的影响(项目2)，以及盟友相对于目标的不同动机(项目3)。其次，我们需要为两个项目收集额外的数据。在项目4中，我们的目标是更仔细地检查盟国愿意参与的行动类型。在项目5中，我们将测试盟友支持的边界条件，并旨在操纵中介，以便为我们提出的因果模型找到更多证据。第三，我们的目标是为项目1和7撰写手稿。这一续订将使我们能够系统地审查问题，从而产生更多和更有影响力的出版物，从而极大地有利于该项目。此外，我们的目标是组织一期关于盟军行动的特刊，这将有助于使我们的研究更引人注目。

The aim of this project is to study the benefits and potential backlashes of allies engaging in solidarity-based collective action from four perspectives: a) the third party perspective, b) the authority’s perspective, c) the minority’s perspective, and d) the perspective of allies.The project made significant progress so far. We have conducted six of the proposed eight studies and conducted eight additional studies in order to more systematically examine the research questions in response to the reviewers’ comments. Given that reviewers criticized the lack of a strong theoretical foundation, we wrote a theoretical review paper on different “types” of allies. We propose that advantaged group allies can be motivated 1) by personal benefits (personal self-interest motivation), 2) on the condition that the status of their own group is maintained (ingroup protection motivation), and/or 3) to improve the status of the disadvantaged group knowing that this will affect the status of their own group (outgroup-focused motivation). Comparing the effects of members of advantaged and disadvantaged groups, we found that, as expected, allies have beneficial effects on observers; they are more likely to identify with the protest movement when more allies are present. In contrast, the presence of allies did not greatly affect targets – allies are evaluated negatively only when they displayed dominant behavior. In terms of mutual evaluations of targets and allies, targets are more likely to positively evaluate allies, whereas allies are more likely to positively evaluate targets. Further, we found that cross-group contact with disadvantaged group members does not turn advantaged group members into allies. Instead, advantaged group members are more likely to engage in solidarity-based collective action only if they engage in politicized contact and like their contact partner.We ask for a renewal for further 18 months. Although the project went very well and revealed important findings, it needs additional work to explain unexpected results and to complete a comprehensive study of ally action. The renewal proposal has three main objectives. First, we aim to finish two projects examining the effects of allies on decision-makers (project 2), and different motivations of allies compared to targets (project 3). Second, we need to collect additional data for two projects. In project 4, we aim to examine more carefully which types of actions allies are willing to engage in. In project 5, we will test for boundary conditions of ally support and aim to manipulate the mediators in order to find more evidence for our proposed causal model. Third, we aim to write manuscripts for project 1 and 7. This renewal would greatly benefit the project by allowing us to systematically examine the questions, resulting in more and higher impact publications. Further, we aim to organize a special issue on ally action, which would help to make our research more visible.