Cultural differences and collective action: A social network perspective

This study investigates how cultural differences on the individualism-collectivism I-C dimension of social networks influence the outcomes of collective action. Evidence shows that I-C values are indicators of how people construct their social networks and use strong/weak ties as a behavioral reference. Specifically, when compared with individualists, collectivists tend to hold larger strong-tie networks and endow strong ties with greater interpersonal influence. Results obtained from agent-based modeling indicate that individualistic cultures are more effective at propagating collective action when one of the two following conditions is met: 1 people have a strong motivation to participate and 2 the connectivity of the social system is low. In contrast, spread of collective action in collectivistic cultures is more effective when motivation is not strong and the connectivity of the social system is high. These findings call for a serious consideration of the role of culture in collective action. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Complexity 20: 68-77, 2015

[1]  Jüri Allik,et al.  Radius of Trust , 2008 .

[2]  David A. Siegel Social Networks and Collective Action , 2009 .

[3]  D. Watts,et al.  Influentials, Networks, and Public Opinion Formation , 2007 .

[4]  Hoon Lee,et al.  Talking Politics and Engaging Politics: , 2005, Commun. Res..

[5]  R. Dunlap,et al.  Environmentalism, New Social Movements, and the New Class: A Cross-National Investigation* , 2009 .

[6]  Nicolás M. Somma How Strong are Strong Ties? The Conditional Effectiveness of Strong Ties in Protest Recruitment Attempts , 2009 .

[7]  Jun Lin,et al.  Structural heterogeneity mediates the effect of community structure on cooperation , 2012, Complex..

[8]  F. Passy,et al.  Socialization, Connection, and The Structure/Agency Gap: A Specification of The Impact of Networks on Participation in Social Movements , 2001 .

[9]  Herbert Kitschelt,et al.  Political Opportunity Structures and Political Protest: Anti-Nuclear Movements in Four Democracies , 1986, British Journal of Political Science.

[10]  Roger V. Gould MULTIPLE NETWORKS AND MOBILIZATION IN THE PARIS COMMUNE, 1871* , 1991 .

[11]  G. Hofstede,et al.  Culture′s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values , 1980 .

[12]  Kay Lehman Schlozman,et al.  Prospecting for Participants: Rational Expectations and the Recruitment of Political Activists , 1999, American Political Science Review.

[13]  H. Herrmann,et al.  Agent-based model for friendship in social networks. , 2009, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[14]  H. Triandis,et al.  Individualism and Collectivism: Cross-cultural Perspectives on Self-ingroup Relationships We Wish to Thank Our Research Collaborators for Stimulating Ideas, Data, and Moral Support in Carrying out a Complex Set of Studies. They , 2022 .

[15]  S. McClurg,et al.  Social Networks and Political Participation: The Role of Social Interaction in Explaining Political Participation , 2003 .

[16]  Vera J. Elleson,et al.  Competition: A Cultural Imperative?. , 1983 .

[17]  Christian Breunig,et al.  Communication and Political Mobilization: Digital Media and the Organization of Anti-Iraq War Demonstrations in the U.S. , 2008 .

[18]  Robert Huckfeldt,et al.  Disagreement, Ambivalence, and Engagement: The Political Consequences of Heterogeneous Networks , 2004 .

[19]  G. Hofstede Culture′s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations , 2001 .

[20]  M. Diani SOCIAL MOVEMENT NETWORKS VIRTUAL AND REAL , 2000 .

[21]  Roger Finke,et al.  Religious Persecution in Cross-National Context: Clashing Civilizations or Regulated Religious Economies? , 2007 .

[22]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[23]  Jun Lin,et al.  Prisoner's dilemma game on adaptive networks under limited foresight , 2013, Complex..

[24]  Doug McAdam,et al.  The Cross-National Diffusion of Movement Ideas , 1993 .

[25]  R. Freeman Working for Nothing: The Supply of Volunteer Labor , 1996, Journal of Labor Economics.

[26]  Summer Harlow,et al.  COLLECTIVE ACTION ON THE WEB , 2012 .

[27]  Yaneer Bar-Yam,et al.  An exploration of social identity: The geography and politics of news-sharing communities in twitter , 2012, Complex..

[28]  Doug McAdam Recruitment to High-Risk Activism: The Case of Freedom Summer , 1986, American Journal of Sociology.

[29]  Mark S. Granovetter The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[30]  William B. Gudykunst,et al.  The Influence of Individualism Collectivism, Self-Monitoring, and Predicted-Outcome Value on Communication in Ingroup and Outgroup Relationships , 1992 .

[31]  Mark S. Granovetter Threshold Models of Collective Behavior , 1978, American Journal of Sociology.

[32]  H. Silver,et al.  National Conceptions of the New Urban Poverty: Social Structural Change in Britain, France and the United States , 1993 .

[33]  M. Macy,et al.  Complex Contagions and the Weakness of Long Ties1 , 2007, American Journal of Sociology.

[34]  William P. Eveland,et al.  Political Discussion Frequency, Network Size, and “Heterogeneity” of Discussion as Predictors of Political Knowledge and Participation , 2009 .

[35]  Judith Torney-Purta,et al.  A Cross-National Analysis of Political and Civic Involvement Among Adolescents , 2003, PS: Political Science & Politics.

[36]  A-L Barabási,et al.  Structure and tie strengths in mobile communication networks , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[37]  Stephen Vaisey,et al.  Individualism revisited: Moral worldviews and civic engagement , 2013 .

[38]  Roger V. Gould Collective Action and Network Structure , 1993 .

[39]  Cliff Lampe,et al.  The Benefits of Facebook "Friends: " Social Capital and College Students' Use of Online Social Network Sites , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[40]  Duncan J Watts,et al.  A simple model of global cascades on random networks , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[41]  H. Triandis Individualism And Collectivism , 1995 .

[42]  Elka Korutcheva,et al.  Interdependent binary choices under social influence: Phase diagram for homogeneous unbiased populations , 2012, Complex..

[43]  M. Newman,et al.  Why social networks are different from other types of networks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[44]  Sejung Marina Choi,et al.  BRIDGING OR BONDING? , 2011 .