Social Networks and Social Movements: A Microstructural Approach to Differential
Recruitment
Author(s): David A. Snow, Louis A. Zurcher, Jr., Sheldon Ekland-Olson
Source: American Sociological Review, Vol. 45, No. 5 (Oct., 1980), pp. 787-801
Published by: American Sociological Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2094895
Accessed: 16/02/2009 16:16
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asa.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
American Sociological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
American Sociological Review.
http://www.jstor.org
SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS: A
MICROSTRUCTURAL APPROACH TO DIFFERENTIAL
RECRUITMENT*
DAVID
Louis A. ZURCHER, JR.
A. SNOW
University of Texas at Austin
University of Texas at Austin
SHELDON EKLAND-OLSON
University of Texas at Austin
AmericanSociologicalReview 1980, Vol. 45 (October):787-801
Past examinationsof differentialrecruitmentto andthe differentialgrowthof social movements
level of analysis.That
have typicallysoughtexplanationat a social psychological/motivational
focus has recently been called into question by scholars concernedwith the process through
which movementorganizationsexpandtheir ranksand mobilizesupportfor their causes. Yet,
as Useem (1975)and Zald and McCarthy(1979)have noted, there has been little systematic
researchconducted on the details of the influence process. Drawingon data derived from a
synthesis of existing research and two primarysources, this paper attemptsto shed greater
empiricalandtheoreticallight on the movementrecruitmentprocess. The findingsindicatethat
differentialrecruitmentis not merely a functionof dispositionalsusceptibility,but is strongly
influenced by structuralproximity, availability, and affective interaction with movement
members.The findingsalso indicatethata movementorganization'snetworkattributesfunction
as an importantdeterminantof its recruitmentstrategiesand growth.
Amongthe variousissues and questions
relatingto the study of social movements,
few have generated as much discussion
and research as those pertaining to differential recruitment. Why are some
people ratherthan others recruitedinto a
particularsocial movementorganization?1
Given the number of competing and
functionallyequivalent movement organizations frequently on the market at the
same time, how is it that people come to
* Addressall communicationsto: David A. Snow;
Department of Sociology; University of Texas;
Austin, TX 78712.
We wish to thank the anonymousreviewers and
the editorsof ASR for theirinsightfuland instructive
suggestions.Preparationof the article was partially
fundedby a grantfrom the UniversityResearchInstitute, Universityof Texas.
1 Here we are following McCarthy and Zald's
(1977:1217-9)distinction between a social movement and a movementorganization.They define a
social movementas "a set of opinionsand beliefs in
a populationwhich representspreferences"in support of or opposition to social change. A social
movementorganizationis definedas "a complex, or
formal, organizationwhich identifies its goals with
the preferencesof a social movementor a countermovementand attemptsto implementthose goals."
We think this is a conceptually useful distinction
since individualsare recruitedinto and devote time
and energy to movementorganizations.
participate in one rather than another!
Why do some movement organizations
attract a larger following and grow at a
more rapidrate than others? Whetherone
scans the literatureon religious cults and
movements, political protest, the ghetto
revolts of the 1960s, or student activism,
the problem of differential recruitment
surfaces as a dominant focal concern,
both theoretically and empirically. Indeed, the study of movement recruitment
has been "one of the most prominent
characteristics of collective behavior research in recent years" (Marxand Wood,
1975:388).
Nonetheless, understandingof the process of differential recruitment, its underlying determinants, and implications
for the spreadand growth of social movements is still quite limited (Marx and
Wood, 1975:393).As Zald and McCarthy
(1979:240) concluded in their recent review of the resource mobilization approach, very little is known about the
movement recruitment process and the
conditions under which various recruitment techniques are more or less successful.
The purposeof this articleis to advance
understandingof the movement recruit-
787
788
AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICALREVIEW
ment process by assembling quantitative
and qualitativedata which bear on the relationshipbetween movementrecruitment
and such microstructuralfactors as social
networks, and by developing a set of correspondingpropositions. Four focal questions structurethe inquiry: (1) What are
the microstructuralavenues of movement
recruitment?(2) What accounts for the
differential availability of people for
movementparticipation?(3) What are the
structuralcharacteristicsof social move
ments which predict differentrecruitment
strategiesand patterns?(4) What implications do different recruitment strategies
and patterns have for the spread and
growth of a movement?
half, his informalinterviews with recruits
and members, and his examination of a
random sample of members' testimonies
appearingin the movement's newspaper,
The World Tribune.3 Since most editions
The article draws on three sets of data.
The first is derivedfroman examinationof
social movement case studies through
which we synthesize quantitative data
pertaining to the recruitment process.
References to the salience of such microstructural factors as social networks
are not uncommon, but our review of the
literaturerevealed that most of the references tend to be impressionistic.There is
a dearth of harddata specifying the function of social networks in relation to differential recruitmentto and the differential spread and growth of movements.
However, we did find ten studies with
quantitative data bearing directly on the
recruitmentprocess. The sample size of
the ten studies varies from 31 to 310 participants, with the combined N totalling
more than 1,200.
The second data set comes from an examinationof recruitmentto the Nichiren
Shoshu Buddhist movement in America.2
These data were derived from the senior
author's observations and experiences as
a participant-observerfor a year and a
of the newspaper contain several members' testimonies, 504 were randomly
selected from 1966 to 1974 (six per
month), excluding a two-year period in
which the newspaper was not readily
available. Three hundredand thirty of the
504 testimonies provided information
specifying mode of recruitment into the
movement. These 330 cases, coupled with
15 other membersfrom whom recruitment
information was informally elicited,
yielded a sample of 345. Informal interviews with 25 Hare Krishna devotees
supplement the data pertainingto Nichiren Shoshu. Twenty of the interviews
were with members of the Krishna commune in Los Angeles, and five were with
members of the Dallas commune. The
interviews were conducted during the
course of six visits to the Los Angeles
commune and two visits to the Dallas
commune.4
The thirddata set is derivedfrom a nonrandom sample of University of Texas
students. A questionnaire designed to
gather information pertaining to movement recruitment and participation was
administeredto 550 students enrolled in
ten different university courses in the
Spring semester of 1979. The first part of
the questionnaire contained a list of
twenty-five social movement organizations within the Austin, Texas, area.
The respondents were initially asked to
indicate for each movement whether they
were (a) unfamiliarwith it; (b) familiarbut
not sympathetic or supportive; (c) sympathetic but not a participant;or (d) associated with it as a participantat one time
or another. Three hundredof the 550 respondents indicated that they either were
2
Nichiren Shoshu of America (NSA) is a
Japanese-based,culturallytransplanted,proselytizing Buddhist movement that seeks to change the
worldby changingindividuals.It was formallyintroduced into Americain 1960andclaims to have since
attracted more than 200,000 members, the vast
majority of wbom are Occidental. For a detailed
examinationof the movement'sideology, goals, and
operationin America, see Snow (1976; 1979).
3 The World Tribune is published five times
weekly in Santa Monica, California.It was first issued in August 1964 and now has over 55,000
monthlysubscriptions.It constitutesa useful record
of the growth and history of the Nichiren Shoshu
movementin America.
4 For a discussion of the origins, goals and ideology, and operation of Hare Krishna, see Daner
(1976)and Judah(1974).
DATA AND PROCEDURES
SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
movement participants or were sympathetic with the objectives of one or
more of the movements.5 Since we are
concerned with differential recruitment,
only the responses of the 135 participants
and the 165 sympathizersare considered.
The sympathetic nonparticipantsconstitute a kind of control group in that their
responses shed light on the question of
why it is that people who are in sympathy
with and supportive of a movement's
value orientation do not always participate in movement activities. A consideration of the responses of both participants
and sympathizers should yield a better
understandingof differentialrecruitment.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
The Microstructural Avenues of
Recruitment
Movement recruitment has generally
been approached from a sociallevel of
psychological/motivational
analysis, with various states-of-mind or
psychological attributes posited as the
majorcausal variables (see Cantril, 1941;
Feuer, 1969; Glock, 1964; Hoffer, 1951;
Classificationof Respondentsby Relationshipto
and Type of Movement
Movement
Type
ParticipantsaSympathizersbTotals
Religiousor
Psychiatric
54
50
104
81
Politicald
115
196
Totals
135
165
300
a "Participants"refers to those individualswho
devote time, energy, and other resources to the
movement organizationwith which they are affiliated. They are what McCarthyand Zald (1977:1221)
referto as the "constituents"of a social movement
organization.
b "Synpathizers"refers to those individualswho
believe in or agree with the goals of a movementor
movementorganization,but do not devote any personal resourcesto it. They are what McCarthyand
Zald (1977:1221)refer to as "adherents."
c Movementsclassified as "Religiousor Psychiatric" include TranscendentalMeditation,Churchof
Scientology, Baha'i, Jehovah's Witnesses, Campus
Crusadefor Christ, etc.
d Movements classified as "Political" include:
National Organization for Reform of Marijuana
Laws, NOW, Right to Life, Young Socialist Alliance, Lesbian-GayAlliance, John Birch Society,
Common Cause, University Mobilizationfor Survival (Anti-Nuke),etc.
789
Klapp, 1969; Toch, 1965). However reasonable the underlying assumption that
some people are more susceptible than
others to movement participation, that
view deflects attention from the fact that
recruitment cannot occur without prior
contact with a recruitment agent. The
potential participanthas to be informed
about and introduced into a particular
movement. Thus, even if one accepts the
popular contention that some individuals
are predisposed social-psychologicallyto
movement participation, the following
question still remains: What determines
which potential participants are most
likely to come into contact with and be
recruitedinto one movement rather than
another, if into any movement at all?
It is a basic sociologicaltenet that social
phenomenaare not distributedrandomly,
but are structuredaccordingto aggregate
or group membership, role incumbency,
and the like. It thus seems reasonable to
assume that movement recruitment,
rather than being random or merely the
function of social-psychological predispositions, will also be structuredby certain sociospatialfactors. Accordingly, we
can begin to answerthe above questionby
considering,first, the various sociospatial
settingsin which movementsandpotential
participantscan come into contact, and,
second, the variety of generally available
modes of communicationthrough which
informationcan be imparted.
Regardingthe first concern, most spatial settings or domains of social life can
be conceptualizedin terms of a continuum
ranging from public to private places.6
Examples of the formerinclude shopping
malls, communitysidewalks,airports,bus
stations, and city parks. Countryclubs, an
office, a sorority or fraternityhouse, and
an apartmentor home are illustrative of
the latter.
The means of informationdissemination
6 FollowingGoffman(1963)and Lymanand Scott
(1967), "public places" refer to those regions or
areas in a communityor society that are freely and
officially accessible to most membersof that community or society. "Private places," on the other
hand, refer to those spatial domains that are offlimits to all but acknowledgedmembersand guests,
and in which outsiders are consideredas actual or
potentialintruders.
AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICALREVIEW
790
FACE-TO-FACE
Face-to-face leafleting, petitioning, and
proselytizingon sidewalks;participation
in publicevents, such as parades;staging
events for public consumption,such as
sit-ins, protests, movement-sponsored
conventionsand festivals.
Door-to-doorleafleting,petitioning,and
proselytizing;informationdissemination
and recruitmentamong familiar others
along the lines of promoter's extramovement interpersonalnetworks.
PRIVATE
PUBLIC
CHANNELS
CHANNELS
Promotion and recruitment via radio,
television, and newspapers.
Promotionand recruitmentvia mail and
telephone.
MEDIATED
Figure 1. Classificationof GeneralOutreachand EngagementPossibilitiesfor MovementInformationDissemination,Promotion,and Recruitment
can be conceptualized generally in terms
of whether they are face-to-face or mediated. By face-to-face communication,we
refer to all information,whetherit be verbal or nonverbal, that is impartedwhen
two or more individuals or groups are
physically present. In contrast, mediated
communicationrefers to informationdisseminationthroughinstitutionalizedmass
communication mechanisms, such as
radio and television, or through institutionalized, but individualized and
privatized, communication mechanisms
such as the mail and telephone.
The cross-classification of these two
dimensions suggests four general and
fairly distinct microstructuralavenues for
movement informationdisseminationand
recruitment.Figure 1 schematicallysummarizesthese alternativeavenues, each of
which is distinguishedby the spatial domainof social life in which contact can be
established and the means throughwhich
informationcan be imparted.
Given the alternative microstructural
avenues, the question arises as to the relative yield of each in terms of actual recruits. In other words, is recruitment
among strangers in public places more
productive than recruitment along the
other avenues, or are movement recruits
typically drawn from existing members'
extramovement friends, acquaintances,
and kin?
Examinationof the movementliterature
strongly suggests that the network channel is the richest source of movement recruits. Numerous studies alludeto the im-
portance of social networks as a conduit
for the spreadof social movements. While
some of these works are theoretical or
critical in orientation (Oberschall, 1973;
Tilly, 1978; Useem, 1975; Wilson, 1973;
Wilson and Orum, 1976),most are empirical studies of religious movements (Bibby
and Brinkerhoff, 1974; Dator, 1969; Gerlach and Hine, 1970; Harrison, 1974;
Heirich, 1977; Judah, 1974; Lee, 1967;
Lofland, 1966;Murata,1969;White, 1970)
or political protest or reform-oriented
movements (Freeman, 1973; Jackson et
al., 1960;Leahy, 1975;Marx, 1969;Orum,
1972; Petras and Zeitlin, 1967; Pinard,
1971;Tygart and Holt, 1972;Von Eschen
et al., 1971;Woelfel et al., 1974;Zurcher
and Kirkpatrick, 1976). Although suggestive, few of the investigationsprovide
hard data specifying the relationbetween
social networks and differential recruitment. However, ten studies were found
with quantitativedata bearing on the recruitment process. Table 1 summarizes
the findingsof all but one of the studies,7
7 Heirich's(1977)findingsregardingconversionto
CatholicPentecostalismdo not neatly fit into Table
1. However, the findings are consistent with those
reported in Table 1. Among the 118 respondents
"introduced to the movement by trusted associates," 75% were converts. In contrast, among the
187 respondents who were not introduced to the
movement by trusted associates, only 31% were
converts. Based on similarfindingsfor other social
influence variables, Heirich (1977:667)concluded
that "it is clear that members of the movement,
when recruiting,turnto previousfriendsand to persons they meet daily."
SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
791
Table 1. Studies with Data SpecifyingMode of Recruitmentto Various Movements(Percentage)
Investigator
Sills (1957)
Murata(1969)
Dator (1969)
White (1970)
Gerlachand
Hine (1970)
Harrison(1974)
Movement
Marchof Dimes
Sokagakkai
Sokagakkai
Sokagakkai
Mode of Recruitment
RecruitedthroughSocial Networks
% By % By Friends, Tot. % Rec.
N Relatives Acquaintancesa thr. Ntwks.
C
234
90
90
100
16
76
92
120
65
35
100
e
24
86
96
% Recruited
Outside
Networksb
10
9
d
4
Pentecostal
47
77f
32
79
21
9
Catholic
169
59
g
59
Pentecostal
Bibby & Brinkerhoff Evangelistic
(1974)
Protestantism
132
74
45
29
26
Leahy (1975)
Anti-Abortion
31
26
65
91
9
Judah(1974)
Hare Krishna
63
0
3
3
97
a Includes all individualsrecruitedthroughnetworks other than
familialor kinship (e.g., occupational,
neighborhood).
b Includes all individualsrecruitedby strangersin the street or at mass meetings, or who sought out the
movement after learningabout it throughthe public media, or who joined on their own initiative.
I Percent recruitedby relatives, if any, not reported.Of the 90%recruitedthroughnetworks, 52%were
recruitedby friends, 20o throughcommunitynetwork, and 18%throughorganizationaland occupational
networks.
d Data derivedfrom 200 testimonialsof Americanmembersin a Sokagakkainewspaper.Of the 60%(120)
indicatingmode of recruitment,none was recruitedby strangersor throughthe media. The reason for the
large percentagerecruitedby relatives is that the majorityof the individualsin the samplewere American
GI's stationed in Japanwho were marriedto Japanesemembers.
e Sample size not given. Percentfigures based on the averageof three to five differentsurveys. Percent
figurefor friendsandacquaintancesbasedon the averageof threesurveys;percentfigurefor relativesandthe
last two columns based on the average of five surveys.
f Figures based on the compilationof Gerlachand Hine's (1970:79-80)reportedfindingsregardingtwo
separatePentecostal churches.
9 Percentrecruitedby relativesor strangers,if any, not reported.Thereforethe actualpercentagerecruited
throughnetworks may have been greaterthan the 59%reported.
preexisting,extramovement,interpersonal
tie. Although Nichiren Shoshu members
devote a considerableamountof time and
energy to proselytizing in public places,
these information dissemination and recruiting forays are not very productive.
The senior author accompaniedmembers
on over forty such expeditions, and only
twice were recruitsattracted.In contrast,
all but one of the twenty-five Krishnadevotees we interviewedwere recruited"off
the street" by other memberswho were
strangersat the time of contact. (Factors
Table 2. RecruitmentPatternsfor Nichiren Shoshu which account for the different recruitand Hare Krishna(Percentage)
ment patterns of Hare Krishna and the
later.)
Nichiren Shoshu Hare Krishna other movementswill be discussed
The importantbridgingfunction of so(N:25)
(N:345)
Recruitment
Percent
Percent
Avenues
cial networks in relationto movement recruitmentis furtherdemonstratedby our
96
17
Public Places
4
82
SocialNetworks
findingsregardingthe sampleof university
0
1
Mass Media
students participating in various social
0
0
Mail/Telephone
movements. Additionally, these findings
clearly demonstratingthe salience of social networks as a recruitment avenue.
For each of the movements studied, with
the exception of Hare Krishna, extramovement social networks constitute the
primarysource of recruits.
Our findings regardingrecruitment to
Nichiren Shoshu are consistentwith those
just presented. As indicated in Table 2,
Nichiren Shoshu members are typically
recruited into the movement by one or
more members with whom they have a
792
AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICALREVIEW
suggestthat networklinkagesare not only
importantin accountingfor differentialrecruitment into religious movements, but
also for politicalmovements. As indicated
in Table 3, 63% of the students participating in political movements were
drawn into their respective movement's
orbitof influenceby being linkedto one or
more members through a preexisting,
extramovementinterpersonaltie.
The findings associated with the three
data sets not only corroborateeach other,
but they also clearly demonstratethe importanceof preexistingsocial networks in
structuringmovement recruitment. It is
thus reasonable to suggest the following
summaryproposition:
Proposition 1: Those outsiderswho are
linked to one or more movement members through preexisting extramovement networkswill have a greater
probability of being contacted and recruited into that particular movement
than will those individualswho are outside of members' extramovement networks.
The Importance of Social Networks in
Accounting for Differential Availability
pertainingto Hare Krishna in particular
suggest that some movements recruit
most of their members through channels
other than social networks. The question
thus arises as to who out of the pool of
individuals contacted either through
existing ties or throughother recruitment
avenues is most likely to become a movement participant?
One plausible answer is suggested by
the many works that posit a psychofunctional linkage between social-psychological attributes (conceptualized as susceptibilities) and the goals and ideologies of
movements (construed as appeals). According to this view, participation in
movement activities is largely a function
of certain fertile dispositions, such as
alienation (Bolton, 1972; Oppenheimer,
1968; Ransford, 1968), relative deprivation (Aberle, 1966; Davies, 1971; Glock,
1964; Gurr, 1970); and authoritarianism
(Hoffer, 1951; Lipset, 1960; Lipset and
Raab, 1973). Although of longstanding
popularity, the social-psychological dispositional approach has in recent years
been called into question on both theoretical and empiricalgrounds.8Moreover,our
research suggests that the reason why
some ratherthan other individualsjoin a
movement once they have been introduced to it can be explained in large part
by their structural availability. Specifically, the findings pertainingto Nichiren
Shoshu and the sample of movement
sympathizers suggest that the reason for
participating or not participating in
movement activities once invited is
largely contingent on the extent to which
Proposition 1 and the data in which it is
groundedsuggest that recruitmentamong
social networks is likely to be more productive than recruitmentvia the other microstructuralavenues. However, the fact
remains that not all relatives, friends or
acquaintances of movement members
participate in movement activities when
invited. The findings reported in the preceding section indicate that, for all the
movements studied, at least some mem8 Muchof the literaturetouchingon the hypothetibers were recruited "off the street" or
cal
association between preexisting social psychothrough the public media. The findings logical
strains and participationin movements sugTable 3. Recruitment Avenues of a Sample of University Students Participating in Various
Movements (Percentage)
Movements
Recruitment
Avenues
Public Places
Social Networks
Mass Media
Mail/Telephone
Political
(N:81)
Percent
Religious
(N:54)
Percent
Totals
(N: 135)
Percent
7
63
30
0
0
80
20
0
4
70
26
0
gests a relatively indeterminaterelationship (see
Aberle, 1965;Bolton, 1972;Marx and Wood, 1975;
Petrasand Zeitlin, 1967;Portes, 1971;Useem, 1975).
Also the magnitudeof statisticalassociationbetween
measures of social psychologicalvariablesand participation in movements and protest activities has
generally been quite small and unconvincing(see
Lewis and Kraut, 1972;McPhail,1971;Moinatet al.,
1972;Portes, 1971;Snyderand Tilly, 1972).For varied criticisms of the social psychologicaldispositional approach to movement joining, see
McCarthyandZald(1977:1214-5),Snow andPhillips
(1980), Turner and Killian (1972:365), Useem
(1975:11-18), and Zygmunt(1972).
SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
extramovement networks function as
countervailing influences. Since sets of
social relationships can be more or less
demandingin regardto time, energy, and
emotional attachment (Etzioni, 1975;
Kanter, 1972),it follows that they can also
vary in the extent to which they constitute
countervailing influences or extraneous
commitments(Becker, 1960)with respect
to alternative networks and lines of action. Hence, some individuals will be
more available for movement exploration
and participationbecause of the possession of unscheduled or discretionarytime
and because of minimal countervailing
risks or sanctions.
In the case of Nichiren Shoshu, these
observations seem to hold for both those
members recruited from the street and
those recruited through social networks.
Most were under 30, single, in a transitionalrole (such as that of student), employed in a line ratherthan in a managerial
position, or in a state of occupationalmarginality.As a consequence, they tended to
possess a greater amount of unscheduled
time and generallylacked the kinds of extraneous commitments that are likely to
inhibit movement participation. Aside
from the absence of a social tie to one or
more members prior to initial contact,
those recruited from the street differed
from those recruited through networks
only in that they were structurallymore
available for participation.This observation is illustratedby the following account
of how and why one street-recruit, a
twenty-five-year-old male, came to join
Nichiren Shoshu:
I found myself here in L.A. with
nothingbut the clothes I was wearing. I
didn'tknow anybody. I didn't have a lot
of money. It was a really strange situation.
I hadjust flown into L.A. airport,and
all my baggage came up missing. This
was on a Saturdaynight. Since I didn't
know anybody and didn't have any
place to go, I went to the airportpolice
station and was told to go to Travelers'
Aid. But I learnedthat they wouldn't be
open until Tuesday, since this was a
Labor Day weekend. So I waited
around the airport until Tuesday and
then went down to Travelers'Aid. They
793
sent me to the Welfare Department.
After spending four days waiting and
filling out forms, I was told that I
couldn't qualify for welfare because I
wasn't a Californiaresident.
At this point I didn't know what to
do. So I spent a few nights at the Midnight Mission, and then decided to go to
the Santa Monica Beach. That evening
while I was walking around downtown
Santa Monica, this guy came up to me
and started talking about NamMyoho-Renge-Kyo (the Nichiren
Shoshu chant), and asked if I would like
to go to a meeting. Since I didn't have
anything else to do, I went along.
All of a sudden I find myself at this
meeting where everybody was chanting. I didn't have the faintest idea about
what was going on. I had never heardof
the chant before, and didn't even know
there was such a group as NSA. But
since everybody was telling me to give
chanting a try, I figured why not. I literally didn't have anythingto lose. So I
joined, and I've been chanting ever
since-which is about four months.
Althoughthis account differs somewhat
from the stories of other street-recruitsin
its particulars, it underscores what was
common to the life-situation of the 85
street-recruitsabout whom we were able
to gather information.9They were either
recent arrivals to or passing through the
area in which they were recruited,or they
were minimallyinvolved in proximal and
demanding social relationships.10 Although one might argue that these streetrecruits were "susceptible" to the "ap9 The informationpertainingto street-recruitsis
based on the testimonies of 61 Nichiren Shoshu
members recruited off the street and on in-depth
interviewswith two street recruitsto NSA and with
24 Hare Krishnadevotees.
10 It thus follows that relatively few people are
recruiteddirectly off the streets for two basic reasons: First, most people walking the street are engaged in the business of completinga particularline
of action-such as shopping,going to a movie, and
the like-and, therefore, have little if any unscheduled or free time when confronted by movement
recruiters. Second, most individuals walking the
street in most urbanareas have a numberof fairly
strong,proximalsocial relationshipsthat functionas
countervailinginfluences, at least when confronted
by a proselytizingstranger.
794
AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICALREVIEW
peals" of the movements they joined because they were "social isolates," "loners," or "outcasts," we do not subscribe
to such an interpretation.Rather,we think
it is sociologically more compelling to
argue that individuals who join social
movements share the kinds of demographic and social characteristics that
allow them to follow their interests and/or
engage in exploratory behavior to a
greater extent than individuals who are
bound to existing lines of action by such
extraneous commitmentsas spouse, children, debts, job, and occupationalreputation."I
This microstructuralinterpretation is
also suggested by our findings regarding
the movementsympathizersin our sample
of university students. By movement
sympathizers,we refer to those individuals who indicate verbal support of or
agreementwith the goals of a movement,
but who do not devote any time, energy,
or other resources to advancing the
movement's objectives. The major reasons given by the sympathizers for remaining on the sidelines and not getting
involved are indicated in Table 4. Most
relevant to the present discussion is the
finding that nearly two-thirds indicated
that they did not have enoughtime to participate. Had their lines of action not been
constrained by competing, extramovement commitments and demands,
and had they been asked to participateby
a member with whom they were acquainted, then presumably they would
have become a participant or "con-
Table 4. Reasons for Not ParticipatingGiven by
Movement Sympathizers(Percentage)
Reasons
1. Didn't know anyone
actively involved
2. Not enough time
3. Wasn't asked
4. Just didn't want
to get involved
5. Fear of negative
reaction by
nonmovement
significantothers
6. Don't know/other
Movements
Political Religious Totals
(N:115) (N:50) (N:165)
Percent Percent Percent
73
64
57
66
61
47
71
63
54
18
16
18
7
4
12
4
9
4
stituent"ratherthanjust a sympathizeror
"adherent."
In light of these corroboratingfindings
and observations, it seems reasonable to
suggest that, given the existence of a social tie to one or more movement members, differentialrecruitmentis largely a
function of differentialavailability,which
is best conceptualizedas a microstructural
phenomenon. That is, it is a function of
how tightly individualsare tied to alternative networksand thus have commitments
that hinder the recruitmentefforts of social movement organizations. The following propositions summarizethe argument. The first pertains to the relation
between social networks and availability
for movement participation.The second
concerns the connection between
structuralavailabilityand the probability
of actual participation.
Proposition 2A: The fewer and the
I IThis
interpretationis suggested by McCarthy
and Zald(1973)in their initialdiscussionof resource
mobilization,and by McPhail and Miller's (1973)
treatmentof the assemblingprocess. Althoughone
must be cautious about assumingthat the dynamics
underlyingparticipationin civil disordersand social
movementsare the same, it is worth notingthat this
interpretationis consistent with McPhail's (1971)
reinterpretationof the riot participationliterature,
Lachmanand Singer's(1968)findingsregardingparticipationin the 1967 Detroit riot, and Snyder and
Kelly's (1979) discussion of the development of
urbandisorders.(Also see NationalAdvisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968:123.)Darley and
Batson's (1973)work on helpingbehavioralso suggests that unscheduled or discretionary time is
perhapsthe most importantdeterminantof Good
Samaritanism.
weaker the social ties to alternative
networks, the greater the structural
availabilityfor movementparticipation.
Proposition
2B: The greater
the
structuralavailabilityfor participation,
the greater the probabilityof accepting
the recruitment"invitation."
Here it might be argued that even
though a social bond with one or more
movement members and structural
availability increase the probability of
movement participation,they are not sufficient conditions. We would agree, especially since social action on behalf of noncoercive organizations is unlikely in the
absence of instrumental, affective, or
SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
ideological alignment (Etzioni, 1975;
Kanter, 1972; Parsons and Shils, 1962).
However, it is important to emphasize
that people seldom initially join movements per se. Rather they typically are
asked to participatein movement activities. 12 Furthermore,it is duringthe course
of initial participation that they are
provided with the "reasons" or "justifications" for what they have alreadydone
and for continuing participation. As C.
Wright Mills emphasized some time ago
(1940), vocabularies of motives are frequentlysupplied"afterthe act" to explain
the "underlyingcauses of the act," even
though they have little to say about how
the act came about. We would thus argue
that the "motives" for joining or continued participationare generally emergent
and interactional rather than prestructured. That is, they arise out of a
process of ongoing interaction with a
movement organization and its recruitment agents. Althoughthis alignmentprocess has not received much empirical attention, its salience in relation to movement recruitmenthas been illustratedby
Lofland's (1977a; 1977b)reexaminationof
the process by which one becomes a
"Moonie" and by Snow's (1976) description of how Nichiren Shoshu strategically
goes about the business of "luring" and
"securing" recruits. In both cases the recruitment process is organized so as
gradually to "sell" prospects on the
"benefits" of participationand to provide
them with "reasons" for remaining a
member. This is not to suggest that prestructured cognitive states and tensions
12 This
has been amply illustratedby a numberof
studies. In his examinationof recruitmentand conversion to the Unification Church, Lofland
(1977a:306)found that initialcontact "commonlyinvolved an invitationto dinner, a lecture, or both"
(see also Bromleyand Shupe, 1979:171-4).Snow's
(1976)findingsregardingthe recruitmentpracticesof
the Nichiren Shoshu movement reveal similarpatterns. When recruitingin public places, Nichiren
Shoshumemberscoaxed prospectsto attenddiscussion meetings, chanting sessions, and other movement activities. Ourobservationsof the recruitment
effortsof Krishnadevotees also indicatethatthe first
step was to get prospects to the local temple. They
were invitedto attenda devotionalsession, to listen
to discussion of the philosophy,or to attend a Sunday "love feast" (see also Judah, 1974).
795
are irrelevant for understanding movement joining. Rather, it is to emphasize
that they must be aligned with the movement's value orientation, given specific
forms and means for expression and
amelioration,and put into the service of
the movement (Zygmunt, 1972).13 In light
of these observations,we arguethat initial
and sustainedparticipationis largely contingent on the countervailinginfluence of
alternative networks and intensive interaction with movement members.
Whereas the first factor determines
whether one is structurallyavailable for
participation,the second factor gives rise
to the rationalefor participation.
Structural Influences on Movement
Recruitment Strategies and Patterns
In analyzing the recruitment process
from the point of view of the movement
itself, the relationshipbetween movement
structure (as determined by its network
attributes) and recruitmentopportunities
and patterns requires attention. As indicated earlier, there are four general outreach and engagement channels that
movements can exploit for information
dissemination and recruitment:(1) They
can channel their promotion and recruitment efforts among strangers in public
places by face-to-facemeans;(2) They can
promote via the institutionalized, mass
communicationmechanisms;(3) They can
recruit among strangersin private places
by such means as door-to-door canvassing; (4) They can promote and recruit
through members' extramovement social
networks. The question thus arises as to
what determinesthe patterningand channelling of a movement's recruitmentefforts.
Depending on their resource base and
strategy, all nonsecretive movement or13 In arguingthat the "motives" for movement
participationare largely emergentand interactional
in character,we are at least implicitlyquestioning
the rational calculus assumptions accepted by resource mobilizationtheorists. That perspective is
most clearly representedin the work of McCarthy
and Zald (1973; 1977)and Oberschall(1973). For an
extensive critiqueof this "utilitarian"strandof resource mobilizationtheory, see Firemanand Gamson (1979)and Zurcherand Snow (forthcoming).
796
AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICALREVIEW
ganizations interested in expanding their
ranks can exploit the first three recruitment possibilities. However, not all such
movementsare structurallyable to use the
networkchannel to the same extent since
they do not all constitute open networks.
Some movementsare morerestrictiveand
exclusive than others in that membership
eligibilityis contingent on the possession
of certainascribedor achieved attributes.
In other movements, such as Hare
Krishna, core membershipmay even be
contingent upon the severance of extramovement interpersonal ties. Since
movement organizationscan vary in the
extent to which they are linked to or isolated from other networks of social relations, it follows that their recruitmentopportunities can vary considerably. Accordingly, it seems reasonableto suggest
the following propositions regardingthe
relation between a movement's network
attributes and the channelling and patterning of its recruitmentefforts:
Proposition 3A: Movements requiring
exclusive participationby their members in movement activities will attract
members primarilyfrom public places
rather than from among extramovement interpersonal associations
and networks.
Proposition 3B: Movements which do
not require exclusive participationby
their members in movement activities
will attract members primarily from
among extramovement interpersonal
associations and networks, rather than
from public places.
These two propositions are suggested
when we compare our findings regarding
recruitment into Nichiren Shoshu with
those pertaining to Hare Krishna. As
mentioned earlier, more than threequartersof our sample of NSA members
reportedthat they were recruitedinto the
movement by relatives, friends, or acquaintances. In contrast, only one of the
twenty-five Krishna devotees we interviewed was recruited by a former acquaintance. Judah (1974:162) similarly
found that only 3.32%of the Krishnadevotees he interviewed "learned about it
througha friendwho was a devotee." The
majority(66%)came into contact with the
movement by encountering a public
chantingsession or a devotee in the street.
Judah (1974:162-3) concludes that
... the results seem to indicateratherclearly
the importanceof the Movement's method
of proselytizing. It has attractedthe attention of many by its practice of chantingthe
Hare Krishnamantrain public. Duringthese
public ceremonies, other devotees sell the
literatureand engage the curious in conversation about Krishna.
Anyone with firsthandknowledgeof the
Krishna movement will find little reason
to quibble with Judah's (1974) observations. However, he fails to note that the
movementin general and devotees in particularhave little choice other than to turn
to the streets in search of recruits. Since
core membership in Hare Krishna requires an austere communallifestyle and
the severance of extramovement interpersonal ties, the movement is
structurallycompelled to concentrate its
recruitmentefforts in public places. Consequently, most of its members are recruited "off the streets."
In contrast, the Nichiren Shoshu
movementdoes not involve communallife
or require its members to sever their
extramovement interpersonal ties. It is,
therefore, structurallyable to recruitboth
in public places and through members'
extramovementnetworks. Consequently,
it draws the bulk of its membershipfrom
those networks.
Implications of Recruitment Strategies for
Movement Spread and Growth
The differential spread and growth of
social movements has generally been analyzed in terms of the appealof movement
goals and value orientations to various
target populationsin the ambientsociety.
That a movement's organizational
structure,and particularlyits network attributes, might function as an important
determinantof its spread and growth has
received only brief attention in the literature (Curtis and Zurcher, 1973; 1974;
Messinger, 1955; Zald and Ash, 1966;
Zurcherand Kirkpatrick,1976). We now
address this issue. Specifically, do differences in network attributes and recruitmentopportunitieshave a significant
impact on the success of a movement's
SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
recruitmentefforts, as measured by the
number of outsiders actually recruited?
The answer hypothetically depends not
only on a movement's value orientation,
but also on whether recruitment among
social networks typically yields a greater
return than does recruitment "off the
street" or throughthe media. If the latter
is generally more productive, then a
movement's network attributeswould be
of little relevance to its overall growth.
However, if recruitmentamong strangers
is not as effective as recruitmentamong
movement members' acquaintances,
friends, and relatives, then a movement's
network attributeswould constitute a significant and importantvariablein relation
to its growth and spread.
Our findings indicate that for those
movements which recruit both in public
places and throughnetworks, recruitment
among acquaintances,friends, and kin is
generally more successful than recruitment among strangers.We thus conclude
that a movement's network attributesand
correspondingrecruitmentpatternsdo indeed make a significant difference in a
movement's recruitment efforts and
growth. Hence, the following propositions:
Proposition 4A: The success of movement recruitmentefforts, measured by
the numbers of outsiders actually recruited, will vary with the extent to
which movements are linked to other
groups and networks via members'
extramovement interpersonal ties,
such that:
Proposition 4B: Movements which are
linkedto other groupsand networkswill
normallygrow at a more rapidrate and
normally attain a larger membership
than will movements which are
structurallymore isolated and closed.
Aside from a few exceptions (Craven
and Wellman, 1974; Curtis and Zurcher,
1973; Turk, 1970), most social network
analyses have focused on the individual
and his or her interpersonalties, with a
paucity of social ties taken as evidence of
objective or structural social isolation.
That focus may be useful for understanding the structuraldeterminantsof individual behavioral patterns and propensities.
However, it obscures the fact that social
797
isolation can also occur at the group or
movementlevel, as when a movementhas
few, if any, direct links with other groups
and thereforeconstitutes a closed network
or insulated system of social relations.
Whenthis occurs, Propositions4A and 4B
suggest that such movements will differ
markedly from structurallyless isolated
movements in recruitment opportunities
and patterns, and overall growth.
Empirical support is provided for the
propositionsby a comparisonof the membershipclaims of the NichirenShoshu and
Hare Krishnamovement organizationsin
the United States. Since 1970 Nichiren
Shoshu's membership claims have consistently hovered between 200,000 and
250,000. In contrast, members of the Los
Angeles and Dallas Krishna communes
have reported that the number of communal Krishna devotees throughout the
country totals no more than 4,000. While
efforts to reach an objective estimate of
Nichiren Shoshu's membership suggest
that it is about half of what the movement
claims (see Snow, 1976:137-44), the
point still remainsthat Nichiren Shoshu's
membership far exceeds that of Hare
Krishna. Given the fact that both are
active, proselytizing movements, the
question arises as to why the spread and
growth of Nichiren Shoshu have far outdistanced those of Hare Krishna. Differences in the value orientation, promises, and membershipdemandsof the two
movements certainly constitute important
variables in accountingfor the difference
in their spread and growth.14 However,
14 Regardingthe differencesin the value orientations and promisesof the two movements,Nichiren
Shoshuis morepracticaland this-worldlyin orientation. Ratherthancallingfor a renunciationof worldly
attachmentsand promisinga transcendenceof the
materialworld, as is the case with Hare Krishna,
NichirenShoshupromisesthe realizationof personal
enlightenmentand happinessin the immediatehereand-now.It is thus reasonableto assume that Nichiren Shoshu would appeal to a greater number of
people than would Hare Krishna. Relatedly, membershipin NichirenShoshu is muchless demanding.
Not only are Krishnadevotees requiredto surrender
to the movementtheir personalpossessions and desiderata, but they are also requiredto sever their
preexisting, extramovement interpersonal associations and ties. In contrast, Nichiren Shoshu members are merelyrequiredto surrendersome time and
energy, and perhaps be willing to risk a negative
798
AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICALREVIEW
Propositions4A and 4B point to a perhaps
more significant determinantof the differential spread and growth not only of
these two movement organizations, but
also of social movement organizationsin
general: the extent to which a movement
organization is linked to or structurally
isolated from other groups and networks
within its environmentof operation.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
In recent years the study of differential
recruitmentto and the differentialspread
and growth of social movementshas been
characterizedby concern with the process
through which movement organizations
strategically expand their ranks and
mobilize support for their cause. Yet, as
both Useem (1975:43) and Zald and
McCarthy (1979:240) have noted, there
has been relatively little systematic research conducted on the details of the influence process. In order to shed greater
empiricaland theoretical light on the recruitment process, we have presented
data derived from three sources. Our
findings indicate that the probability of
being recruited into a particular movement is largely a function of two conditions: (1) links to one or more movement
members through a preexisting or emergent interpersonaltie; and (2) the absence
of countervailingnetworks. The first condition suggests who is most likely to be
broughtdirectly into a movement organization's orbit of influence and thereby
subjected to its recruitmentand realityconstructionefforts. The second indicates
who is structurallymost availablefor participationand thereforemost likely to accept the recruitmentinvitation. Our findings also indicate that a movement's recruitment strategies and its resultant
growth will vary considerably in the degree to which it constitutes a closed or
open network of social relations. Taken
reaction by nonmovement significant others. In
short, not only is it easier to be a Nichiren Shoshu
member than a Krishna devotee, but Nichiren
Shoshu adherents also live in and are "into" the
here-and-nowmaterialworld to a much greaterextent than are the saffron-robedchanters and promoters of the Krishnamantra.
together, these findingsindicate that both
the network attributes of movement organizations and membersfunction as important structural determinants of differential recruitmentto and the differential growth of movement organizations.15
Several theoretical and empiricalimplications are suggested by our findings and
correspondent propositions. First, in
contrastto the traditionalassumptionthat
movement recruitmentefforts are largely
a function of goals and ideology, our
findings indicate that the mobilization
process in general and the recruitment
process in particularare likely to vary significantly with changes in organizational
structure. Indeed, our findings indicate
that movement goals and organizational
structure may occasionally contradict
each other. When this occurs, as in the
case of Hare Krishna, the organizational
structure will function as the more important determinant of recruitment patterns.
Second, since social networks constitute microstructures,the findings suggest
that microstructural variables are of
equal, and perhaps greater, importance
than dispositional susceptibilities in the
determinationof differentialrecruitment.
We do not urgethat dispositionsbe wholly
ignored in attempts to understandthe recruitment process. The notion "disposition" perhapsusefully could be integrated
with the network perspective by conceptualizing it in terms of the normative, instrumentaland affective ties among current and potentialparticipants.People can
become encapsulated (Lofland, 1977a;
1977b) by a movement when they are
"dispositionally" linked to the proselytizing network, and when that connectionbecomes expandedby exposureto
increasinglybroadenedsocializationmessages.
15 Ourconcentrationupon microstructural
factors
in movementrecruitmentis not intendedto detract
scholars from equally necessary macrostructural
probingsof movement emergence, growth and decline. Blumer's(1951)identificationof generalsocial
movementsas seedbeds for specific movementsremains heuristicallyimportant.The shifts in societal
trends,especiallyin values and theirinterpretations,
can influencethe relevanceof networks(andrhetoric
in networks)for potentialmovementrecruits.
SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
Third, our analysis suggests that the
question of "why" people join social
movements cannot be adequately understood apart from an examination of the
process of "how" individuals come to
align themselves with a particularmovement. Indeed, it is our contentionthat the
"whys" or "reasons" forjoining arise out
of the recruitment process itself. We
would thus arguethat furtherexamination
of movement joining and participation
should give more attention to how movements solicit, coax, and secure participants, and more attention to the factors
that account for variationsin recruitment
strategiesand their efficacy. An examination of such factors should move us beyond our currentknowledge about the recruitmentprocess, which has, according
to Marxand Wood (1975:393),reached "a
point of diminishingreturns."
REFERENCES
Aberle, David
1965 "A note on relative deprivationtheory as
applied to Millenarian and other cult
movements." Pp. 537-41 in W. Lessa and
E. Vogt (eds.), Readerin ComparativeReligion:An AnthropologicalApproach.New
York: Harperand Row.
1966 The Peyote Religion Among the Navaho.
Chicago:Aldine.
Becker, Howard S.
1960 "Notes on the concept of commitment."
AmericanJournalof Sociology 66:32-40.
Bibby, ReginaldW. and MerlinB. Brinkerhoff
1974 "When proselytizing fails: an organizational analysis." Sociological Analysis
35:189-200.
Blumer, Herbert
1951 "Collective behavior." Pp. 166-222 in A.
M. Lee (ed.), New Outlineof the Principles
of Sociology. New York: Barnes and
Noble.
Bolton, CharlesD.
1972 "Alienation and action: a study of peace
,group members." American Journal of
Sociology 78:537-61.
Bromley, David A. and Anson D. Shupe, Jr.
1979 "Moonies" in America. Beverly Hills:
Sage.
Cantril,Hadley
1941 The Psychologyof Social Movements.New
York: Wiley.
Craven, Paul and Barry Wellman
1974 "The networkcity." Pp. 57-88 in M. Effrat
(ed.), The Community: Approaches and
Applications.New York: Free Press.
Curtis,Russell L., Jr., and Louis A. Zurcher,Jr.
1973 "Stable resources of protest movements:
799
the multi-organizational field." Social
Forces 52:53-61.
1974 "Social movements:an analyticalexploration of organizationalforms." Social Problems 21:356-70.
Daner, F. J.
1976 The American Children of Krishna: A
Studyof the Hare KrishnaMovement.New
York: Holt, Rinehartand Winston.
Darley, John M. and C. Daniel Batson
1973 "From Jerusalem to Jericho: a study of
situational and dispositional variables in
helping behavior." Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology 27:100-8.
Dator, James
1969 Soka Gakkai:Builderof the ThirdCivilization. Seattle, Wash.: University of Washington Press.
Davies, James C. (ed.)
1971 When Men Revolt and Why. New York:
Free Press.
Etzioni, Amatai
1975 A ComparativeAnalysis of Complex Organizations.New York: Free Press.
Feuer, Lewis
1969 The Conflict of Generations. New York:
Basic Books.
Fireman,Bruce and WilliamA. Gamson
1979 "Utilitarianlogic in the resource mobilization perspective." Pp. 8-44 in M. Zald and
J. McCarthy(eds.), The Dynamicsof Social
Movements. Cambridge,Mass.: Winthrop
Publishers.
Freeman,Jo
1973 "The origins of the women's liberation
movement." American Journal of Sociology 78:792-811.
Gerlach, Luther P. and VirginiaH. Hine
1970 People, Power and Change:Movementsof
Social Transformation, Indianapolis:
Bobbs-Merrill.
Glock, CharlesY.
1964 "The role of deprivationin the origin and
evolutionof religiousgroups." Pp. 24-36 in
R. Lee and M. Marty (eds.), Religion and
Social Conflict.New York:OxfordUniversity Press.
Goffman,Erving
1963 Behaviorin PublicPlaces. New York: Free
Press.
Gurr,Ted R.
1970 Why Men Rebel. Princeton:PrincetonUniversity Press.
Harrison,Michael L.
1974 "Sources of recruitmentto Catholic Pentecostalism." Journal for the Scientific
Study of Religion 13:49-64.
Heirich, Max
1977 "Change of heart: a test of some widely
held theories about religious conversion."
AmericanJournalof Sociology 83:653-80.
Hoffer, Eric
1951 The True Believer. New York: Harperand
Row.
Jackson, Maurice,E. Peterson, J. Bull, S. Monsen
and P. Richmond
1960 "The failure of an incipient social move-
800
AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICALREVIEW
ment." Pacific Sociological Review
3:35-40.
Judah,J. Stillson
1974 HareKrishnaandthe Counterculture.New
York: Wiley.
Kanter, RosabethM.
1972 Commitmentand Community:Communes
and Utopias in Sociological Perspective.
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Press.
Klapp, Orrin
1969 Collective Search for Identity. New York:
Holt, Rinehartand Winston.
Lachman,SheldonJ. and BenjaminSinger
1968 The Detroit Riot: 1967. Detroit: Behavior
ResearchInstitute.
Leahy, Peter J.
1975 "The anti-abortionmovement: testing a
theory of the rise and fall of social movements." Ph.D. dissertation.Departmentof
Sociology, Syracuse University.
Lee, Robert
1967 Stranger in the Land. London: Lutterworth.
Lewis, Steven H. and Robert E. Kraut
1972 "Correlates of student political activism
and ideology." Journal of Social Issues
28:131-49.
Lipset, S. M.
1960 Political Man. New York: Doubledayand
Company
Lipset, S. M. and Earl Raab
1973 The Politics of Unreason:Right-WingExtremism in America, 1790-1970. New
York: Harperand Row.
Lofland, John
1966 Doomsday Cult. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
Prentice-Hall.
1977a Doomsday Cult. Enlarged Edition. New
York: IrvingtonPublishers.
1977b "Becoming a world-saver revisited."
AmericanBehavioralScientist 20:805-19.
Lyman, StanfordM. and MarvinB. Scott
1967 "Territoriality:a neglected sociological dimension." Social Problems15:236-48.
Marx, Gary T.
1969 Protest and Prejudice.New York: Harper
and Row.
Marx, Gary T. and James Wood
1975 "Strandsof theory and researchin collective behavior."Pp. 363-428 in A. Inkeleset
al. (eds.), Annual Review of Sociology I.
Palo Alto, Calif.: AnnualReviews.
McCarthy,John and Mayer Zald
1973 The Trend of Social Movements in
America:Professionalizationand Resource
Mobilization. Morristown, N.J.: General
LearningPress.
1977 "Resource mobilizationand social movements:a partialtheory." AmericanJournal
of Sociology 82:1212-41.
McPhail,Clark
1971 "Civil disorderparticipation:a critical examinationof recent research." American
Sociological Review 36:1058-73.
McPhail,Clarkand David Miller
1973 "The assemblingprocess: a theoreticaland
empirical examination." American
SociologicalReview 38:721-35.
Messinger, Sheldon L.
1955 "Organizational transformation: a case
study of a declining social movement."
AmericanSociologicalReview 20:3-10.
Mills, C. Wright
1940 "Situatedactions and vocabulariesof motive." American Sociological Review
5:404-13.
Moinat,Sheryl, W. Raine, S. Burbeckand K. Davison
1972 "Blackghettoresidentsas rioters."Journal
of Social Issues 28:45-62.
Murata,Kiyoaki
1969 Japan'sNew Buddhism:An ObjectiveAccount of Soka Gakkai. New York: John
Weatherhill.
National Advisory Commissionon Civil Disorders
1968 Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders.New York:Bantam
Books.
Oberschall,Anthony
1973 Social Conflictand Social Movements.En-.
glewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Oppenheimer,Martin
1968 "The student movement as a response to
alienation." Journal of Human Relations
16:1-16.
Orum, Anthony
1972 Black Students in Protest: A Study of the
Origins of the Black Student Movement.
Washington,D.C.: American Sociological
Association, ArnoldM. and CarolineRose
MonographSeries.
Parsons, T. and E. A. Shils
1962 Towarda GeneralTheory of Action. New
York: Harperand Row.
Petras, James and MauriceZeitlin
1967 "Miners and agrarianradicalism."American Sociological Review 32:578-86.
Pinard,Maurice
1971 The Rise of a ThirdParty:A Studyin Crisis
Politics. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
Prentice-Hall.
Portes, Alejandro
1971 "On the logic of post-factumexplanations:
the hypothesisof lower-classfrustrationas
the cause of leftist radicalism." Social
Forces 50:26-44.
Ransford,H. Edward
1%8 "Isolation, powerlessness and violence: a
study of attitudes and participationin the
Wattsriot." AmericanJournalof Sociology
73:581-91.
Sills, Davis L.
1957 The Volunteers. Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press.
Snow, David A.
1976 The Nichiren Shoshu BuddhistMovement
in America:A SociologicalExaminationof
Its Value Orientation,RecruitmentEfforts
and Spread. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University
Microfilms.
1979 "A DramaturgicalAnalysis of Movement
Accommodation: Building Idiosyncrasy
Credit as a Movement MobilizationStrategy." Symbolic Interaction2:23-44.
SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
801
Von Eschen, Donald, Jerome Kirk, and Maurice
Pinard
1971 "The organizationalsubstructureof disorderlypolitics." Social Forces 49:529-44.
White, James W.
1970 The Sokagakkaiand Mass Society. Stanford: StanfordUniversity Press.
Wilson, John
1973 Introductionto Social Movements. New
York: Basic Books.
Wilson, Kenneth and Tony Orum
1976 "Mobilizingpeople for collective political
action." Journal of Political and Military
Sociology 4:187-202.
Woelfel, Joseph, John Woelfel, James Gillhamand
Thomas McPhail
1974 "Political radicalizationas a communication process." CommunicationResearch
1:243-63.
Zald, Mayer N. and RobertaAsh
1966 "Social movement organizations:growth,
Toch, Hans
decay and change." Social Forces
1965 The Social Psychology of Social Move44:327-41.
ments. Indianapolis:Bobbs-Merrill.
Zald, Mayer N. and John D. McCarthy(eds.)
1979 The Dynamics of Social Movements: ReTurk, Herman
1970 "Interorganizational
networksin urbansosource Mobilization, Social Control, and
Tactics. Cambridge,Mass.: WinthropPubciety: initial perspectives and comparative
research." American Sociological Review
lishers.
Zurcher,Louis A. and R. George Kirkpatrick
35:1-20.
1976 Citizens for Decency: Antipornography
Turner,RalphH. and Lewis M. Killian
Crusadesas StatusDefense. Austin,Texas:
1972 Collective Behavior. Englewood Cliffs,
University of Texas Press.
N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Zurcher,Louis A. and David A. Snow
Forth- "Collective behavior:social movements."
Tygart, ClarenceE. and Norman Holt
1972 "Examining the Weinberg and Walker coming In Morris Rosenberg and Ralph Turner
(eds.), SociologicalContributionsto Social
typology of student activists." American
Psychology. New York: Basic Books.
Journalof Sociology 77:957-66.
Zygmunt,Joseph
Useem, Michael
1972 "Movements and motives: some unre1975 Protest Movements in America. Insolved issues in the psychology of social
movements."HumanRelations25:449-67.
dianapolis:Bobbs-Merrill.
Snow, David A. and CynthiaL. Phillips
1980 "The Lofland-Starkconversion model: a
critical reassessment." Social Problems
27:430-47.
Snyder, David and WilliamR. Kelly
1979 "Strategies for investigatingviolence and
social change:illustrationsfromanalysesof
racialdisordersand implicationsfor mobilization research." Pp. 212-37 in M. Zald
and J. McCarthy(eds.), The Dynamics of
Social Movements. Cambridge, Mass.:
WinthropPublishers.
Snyder, David and CharlesTilly
1972 "Hardship and collective violence in
France, 1830-1960." AmericanSociological Review 37:520-32.
Tilly, Charles
1978 FromMobilizationto Revolution.Reading,
Mass.: Addison-WesleyPublishingCo.