{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024531024531024532, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002886002886002886, 'mean_word_length': 5.57345971563981, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
More than Recruitment: How Social Ties Support Protest Participation


 Social movement scholars have frequently pointed to individuals’ personal networks to explain protest participation. While the recruitment function of micro networks has been explored in depth, the support effect of networks has received only scant attention. The study explores how and to what extent social support and social constraints in people’s personal networks explain differential protest participation. Three dimensions of support are distinguished: the politicization of a person’s network, the political agreement about the protest topic within a person’s network, and the social approval of protest participation within a person’s network. Drawing on panel survey data (N=1,684) of a large protest in Belgium including both participants and non-participants, we test whether the support effects of networks play a role on top of the recruitment effect. We find evidence that two functions of social networks (politicization and social approval) affect protest participation. Additionally, we find differences in support-effects across types of social ties. Co-members of an organization exert influence on protest participation across a variety of support functions. The most intimate ties prospective participants have (partners), in contrast, matter only in so far as they approve of participation.