Haifeng Du* and Xiaochen He

Center for Administration and Complexity Science of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, Shanxi Province, China

*Corresponding Author: Haifeng Du, Center for Administration and Complexity Science of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, Shanxi Province, China.

Received: July 22, 2022; Published: July 29, 2022

The institutionalized status differences have created systemic disparities between diverse social groups. In this case, people may tend to take collective action to challenge the inequality or injustice [1], as illustrated in strikes of disadvantaged individuals and protests against the American invasion to Iraq, or collective action of vulnerable groups to ask for their lost rights. Collective action is concerned by both governments and scholars, and various frameworks have been proposed to explain the collective action participation. For example, Relative Deprivation Theory (RDT) claims that individuals will experience anger and take actions when they are relatively deprived [2-4].

References

1. Zomeren M V and Iyer A. “Introduction to the Social and Psychological Dynamics of Collective Action”. Journal of Social Issues4 (2009): 645-660.
2. Crosby F. “A model of egotistical deprivation”. Psychological Review 83.2 (1976): 85-113.
3. Runciman W G. “Relative deprivation and social justice: a study of attitudes to social inequality in twentieth-century England”. Berkeley: University of California Press (1966).
4. Gurr T R. “Why men rebel”. American Political Science Association 5.2 (1970).
5. Tajfel H and Turner J. “An integrative theory of intergroup conflict”. Worchel the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations 33 (1979): 94-109.
6. Tajfel H. “The achievement of inter-group differentiation”. In Tajfel H. (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups. London: Academic Press. (1978): 77-100.
7. Mummendey A., et al. “Strategies to cope with negative social identity: Predictions by social identity theory and relative deprivation theory”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2 (1999): 229.
8. Mccarthy J D and Zald M N. “Resource Mobilization and Social Movements: A Partial Theory”. American Journal of Sociology 6 (1977): 1212-1241.
9. Olson M. “The logic of collective action: public goods and the theory of groups”. Harvard University Press, (1971).
10. Blau P M. “Exchange and Power in Social Life”. New Brunswick: Transaction Books (1986).
11. Granovetter M S. “The Strength of Weak Ties”. American Journal of Sociology 6 (1973): 1360-1380.
12. Schelling T C. “Dynamic Models of Segregation”. Journal of Mathematical Sociology 1 (1971): 143-186.
13. “Collaborative Innovation in Social Governance in a Complex Network Structural Paradigm”. Social Science in China Press 4 (2014): 98-120.
14. McPherson M and Cook S L M. “Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks”. Annual Review of Sociology 27 (2001): 415-444.
15. Doreian P and Mrvar A. “Partitioning Signed Social Networks”. Social Networks1 (2009): 1-11.
16. Heider F. “Attitudes and cognitive organization”. The Journal of Psychology1 (1946): 107.
17. Cartwright D and Harary F. “Structural balance: a generalization of Heider's theory”. Psychological Review5 (1956): 277.
18. Girvan M and Newman M E. “Community structure in social and biological networks”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 12 (2002): 7821.

Citation

Citation: Haifeng Du and Xiaochen He. “A Simple Framework for Modeling Collective Action Based on Complex Network Theories". Acta Scientific Applied Physics 2.8 (2022): 18-20 .

Copyright

Copyright: © 2022 Haifeng Du and Xiaochen He. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.