Explore the vast range of titles available.

The past 20 years have seen an explosion of research and theory into the emotions of protest and social movements. At one extreme, general theoretical statements about emotions have established their importance in every aspect of political action. At the other, the origins and influence of many specific emotions have been isolated as causal mechanisms. This article offers something in between, a typology of emotional processes aimed not only at showing that not all emotions work the same way, but also at encouraging research into how different emotions interact with one another. This should also help us overcome a residual suspicion that emotions are irrational, as well as avoid the overreaction, namely demonstrations that emotions help (and never hurt) protest mobilization and goals.

In the context of the COVID-19 infodemic, the global profusion of monikers and hashtags for COVID-19 have found their way into daily communication and contributed to a backlash against China and the Chinese people. This study examines public engagement in crisis communication about COVID-19 during the early epidemic stage and the practical strategy of social mobilization to mitigate the infodemic. We retrieved the unbiased values of the top-ranked search phrases between December 30, 2019, and July 15, 2020, which normalized the anonymized, categorized, and aggregated samples from Google Search data. This study illustrates the most-searched terms, including the official COVID-19 terms, the stigmatized terms, and other controls, to measure the collective behavioral propensities to stigmatized terms and to explore the global reaction to the COVID-19 epidemic in the real world. We calculated the ratio of the cumulative number of COVID-19 cases to the regional population as the cumulative rate (R) of a specific country or territory and calculated the Gini coefficient (G) to measure the collective heterogeneity of crowd behavior. People around the world are using stigmatizing terms on Google Search, and these terms were used earlier than the official names. Many stigmatized monikers against China (eg, \"Wuhan pneumonia,\" G=0.73; \"Wuhan coronavirus,\" G=0.60; \"China pneumonia,\" G=0.59; \"China coronavirus,\" G=0.52; \"Chinese coronavirus,\" G=0.50) had high collective heterogeneity of crowd behavior between December 30, 2019, and July 15, 2020, while the official terms \"COVID-19\" (G=0.44) and \"SARS-CoV-2\" (G=0.42) have not become de facto standard usages. Moreover, the pattern of high consistent usage was observed in 13 territories with low cumulative rates (R) between January 16 and July 15, 2020, out of 58 countries and territories that have reported confirmed cases of COVID-19. In the scientific literature, multifarious naming practices may have provoked unintended negative impacts by stigmatizing Chinese people. The World Health Organization; the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization; and the media initiated campaigns for fighting back against the COVID-19 infodemic with the same mission but in diverse voices. Infodemiological analysis can articulate the collective propensities to stigmatized monikers across search behaviors, which may reflect the collective sentiment of backlash against China and Chinese people in the real world. The full-fledged official terms are expected to fight back against the resilience of negative perceptual bias amid the COVID-19 epidemic. Such official naming efforts against the infodemic should be met with a fair share of identification in scientific conventions and sociocultural paradigms. As an integral component of preparedness, appropriate nomenclatures should be duly assigned to the newly identified coronavirus, and social mobilization in a uniform voice is a priority for combating the next infodemic.

\"This book uses Portland, Oregon to bring to life the transformation of U.S. cities during the first truly national war mobilization effort. World War I had an enormous impact on urban life and the relationship between cities and the federal government that has been almost entirely unexplored until now\"--Provided by publisher.

Occupy Wall Street, the Greek and Spanish indignados, and other important movements swept across the Western world from 2011 onward, redefining political and social conflict during the global economic meltdown of the Great Recession. These movements have earned well-deserved academic attention, but the resulting scholarship is lacking a crucial pillar: a comparative analysis of the collective action frames employed by movement entrepreneurs. To identify the master frame at work and uncover shared processes of strategic meaning making and collective identity construction during this transnational cycle of contention, I analyze primary data, exploring diagnostic, prognostic, and adversarial framing elements as found in the movements' widely circulated manifestos. The populist frame emerges as the master frame of the cycle, encapsulating the adversarial discourse of the dominant dichotomy of a noble \"people\" and a corrupt \"elite\" that resonated strongly with mobilized individuals and allowed movement entrepreneurs to construct a transnationally shared collective identity across populations of widely diverging social, political, and economic backgrounds.

This study develops a model of emergent strategy formation at a large telecommunications firm. It integrates prominent traditions in strategy process research—strategy as patterned action, as iterated resource allocation and as practice—to show how emergent strategy originates as a project through autonomous strategic behavior, then subsequently becomes realized as a consequence of mobilizing wider support to provide impetus, manipulating strategic context to legitimate the project by constructing it as consonant with the prevailing concept of strategy, and altering structural context to embed it within organizational units, routines, and objectives. The study theorizes the role of \"practices of strategy articulation\" in emergent strategy formation, and explains why some autonomous strategic behavior becomes \"ephemeral\" and disappears rather than enduring to become emergent strategy.

We examine the link between corporations and community by showing how corporate density interacts with the local social and cultural infrastructure to affect the growth and decline of the number of local nonprofits between 1987 and 2002. We focus on two subpopulations of nonprofits in 100 American cities: (1) elite-oriented cultural and educational institutions and (2) social welfare-oriented organizations. We find that corporate density enhances the growth of both types of nonprofits, as does location in the northeast United States and a long-established business community, but corporate density is especially potent for the growth of elite-oriented nonprofits—but not social welfare nonprofits—when local networks and cultural norms support elite mobilization. We conclude that despite globalizing trends, the local geographic community continues to be an important unit of analysis for unpacking multisector organizational processes among corporations and nonprofits.

This article proposes that by studying grievances as not only materially but also ideationally constituted claims, scholars can gain analytical leverage on puzzles of social movement emergence and development. This meaning-laden approach to grievances recognizes that the ideas with which some claims are imbued might be more conducive to motivating political resistance than others. The approach is inherently grounded in context—scholars begin by understanding the meanings that grievances take on in particular times and places. But it is also potentially generalizable; as scholars uncover the ways in which apparently different grievances may index similar ideas across time and place, those grievances can be categorized similarly and their potential relationship to social mobilization explored. Drawing on evidence from the 2000 Bolivian water wars, the article proposes that market driven threats to subsistence resources offer one such potential categorization.

Our research examines how parties challenging established social systems collaborate with defenders of those systems to achieve mutual goals. With field interviews and observations from four community projects in the open-source movement, we examine how these projects collaborated with firms defending proprietary approaches to software development. Drawing on social movement and organizational theory, we explain how challenging parties not only mobilize to achieve their goals but how they are able to transform contestation into collaboration. Open-source projects and firms held divergent interests but discovered areas of convergent interest and were able to adapt their organizing practices to collaborate through the creation of a boundary organization. By showing how boundary organizations help challengers and defenders manage four critical domains of organizing practices—governance, membership, ownership, and control over production—we provide analytic levers for determining when boundary organizations work. At the same time, we reveal the subsequent triadic role structure that unfolded among communities, the boundary organizations they designed, and firms.