Much research and theory has attempted to untangle an explanation for differential participation in collective action, yet still today, we are left asking why some individuals participate and others do not. Two theoretical branches – relative deprivation theory (RDT) and the social identity perspective (SIP), have advanced our understanding of this phenomenon of differential participation significantly. This research argues, however, that a greater understanding of an individual’s complex system of multiple identities is needed if we are to uncover more nuance in collective action. Moving past traditional research approaches that examine conflict and collective action as a function of a single salient identity, this study explores the seemingly more realistic case of an individual with multiple subgroup identities where one, or maybe all may conflict with their national or civic identity. More precisely, this study asserts that an individual’s (in)ability to reconcile a salient subgroup identity with their superordinate, or civic identity proves to be a powerful predictor of collective action potential within the context of a contested environment of political liberalization.
Employing a concurrent mixed methods approach for guiding data collection in the Republic of Turkey, this study draws upon a survey of 200 university students from Ankara and Diyarbakir. The research demonstrates that by extending Brewer’s (1991) Optimal Distinctiveness Theory within the SIP to scenarios of contested political liberalization within a national state, the proposed mechanism of social identity balance (SIB) can predict an individual’s proclivity for participation in collective action. The opposing psychological needs of assimilation and differentiation that underpin an individual’s social identity offer a new perspective from which to analyze conflict behaviors and more precisely assess potential participation outcomes. An individual’s religious commitment and belief in the efficacy of social movements were also observed as significant predictors of participation outcomes within the conceptual framework.
This study also investigates the factors that contribute to influencing differential participation for those individuals who have already committed to an identity-based group with an agenda of social change. The results indicate that, taken together as a whole, we can recognize that loyalty (action potential) and communication within social movement organizations (movement interaction) play significant roles in influencing higher levels of participation within activist groups. We also find that various identity-based activist groups align motivations against very different member incentives and that salient subgroup identities, unsurprisingly, are also confirmed as positively related to membership in an activist group.