The Dangers, Directness, and Purposes of Online Collective Actions

Catherine G. Lowery; Matthew Edwards; Laura G. E. Smith

doi:10.1111/pops.70097

The Dangers, Directness, and Purposes of Online Collective Actions

University of Bristol

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Most research on online collective action investigates low-effort, social media-based actions rather than tactics with highly disruptive potential. To better account for the variety of forms of collective actions that use digital technologies, we conducted an open-source intelligence search (Study 1a) and an expert consultation survey (Study 1b; N = 21), to create a database containing 31 types of actions. In Study 2, we interviewed activists (N = 20) and found six key dimensions underlying those actions. In Study 3, participants (N = 273) rated the actions across the dimensions. Based upon the (dis)similarities of each action's rating across the dimensions, we identified two main types and five subtypes of online collective actions: Ingroup-assisting actions (collaborative resource generation, ingroup mobilization, and digital picketing) and outgroup-attacking actions (disruptive clicktivism and technology-enabled attacks). The results showed that digital collective actions substantively differ from each other based on the six underlying dimensions, from the social psychological function, to the skill required, to the groups being targeted. This work offers a multi-dimensional explanation for the variations across the domain of online activism and offers a way forward for future collective action work to explore psychological motivations underlying choices across action type.

Original language	English
Article number	e70097
Pages (from-to)	1-33
Journal	Political Psychology
Volume	47
Issue number	3
Early online date	5 Dec 2025
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.70097
Publication status	Published - 30 Jun 2026

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in OSF at https://osf.io/um3ad/.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the participants for their time and contribution to this work. We also thank the editor and reviewers for their valuable comments and feedback.

Funding

This research was funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC grant ref.: EP/S022465/1) as a PhD studentship to C. G. L. via the CDT in Cybersecurity TIPS-at-scale. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Funders	Funder number
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council	EP/S022465/1

Access to Document

10.1111/pops.70097Licence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{1f16d82e1d4b4b80ab2521879f1b9e4d,

title = "The Dangers, Directness, and Purposes of Online Collective Actions",

abstract = "Most research on online collective action investigates low-effort, social media-based actions rather than tactics with highly disruptive potential. To better account for the variety of forms of collective actions that use digital technologies, we conducted an open-source intelligence search (Study 1a) and an expert consultation survey (Study 1b; N = 21), to create a database containing 31 types of actions. In Study 2, we interviewed activists (N = 20) and found six key dimensions underlying those actions. In Study 3, participants (N = 273) rated the actions across the dimensions. Based upon the (dis)similarities of each action's rating across the dimensions, we identified two main types and five subtypes of online collective actions: Ingroup-assisting actions (collaborative resource generation, ingroup mobilization, and digital picketing) and outgroup-attacking actions (disruptive clicktivism and technology-enabled attacks). The results showed that digital collective actions substantively differ from each other based on the six underlying dimensions, from the social psychological function, to the skill required, to the groups being targeted. This work offers a multi-dimensional explanation for the variations across the domain of online activism and offers a way forward for future collective action work to explore psychological motivations underlying choices across action type.",

author = "Lowery, \{Catherine G.\} and Matthew Edwards and Smith, \{Laura G. E.\}",

year = "2026",

month = jun,

day = "30",

doi = "10.1111/pops.70097",

language = "English",

volume = "47",

pages = "1--33",

journal = "Political Psychology",

issn = "0162-895X",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Dangers, Directness, and Purposes of Online Collective Actions

AU - Lowery, Catherine G.

AU - Edwards, Matthew

AU - Smith, Laura G. E.

PY - 2026/6/30

Y1 - 2026/6/30

N2 - Most research on online collective action investigates low-effort, social media-based actions rather than tactics with highly disruptive potential. To better account for the variety of forms of collective actions that use digital technologies, we conducted an open-source intelligence search (Study 1a) and an expert consultation survey (Study 1b; N = 21), to create a database containing 31 types of actions. In Study 2, we interviewed activists (N = 20) and found six key dimensions underlying those actions. In Study 3, participants (N = 273) rated the actions across the dimensions. Based upon the (dis)similarities of each action's rating across the dimensions, we identified two main types and five subtypes of online collective actions: Ingroup-assisting actions (collaborative resource generation, ingroup mobilization, and digital picketing) and outgroup-attacking actions (disruptive clicktivism and technology-enabled attacks). The results showed that digital collective actions substantively differ from each other based on the six underlying dimensions, from the social psychological function, to the skill required, to the groups being targeted. This work offers a multi-dimensional explanation for the variations across the domain of online activism and offers a way forward for future collective action work to explore psychological motivations underlying choices across action type.

AB - Most research on online collective action investigates low-effort, social media-based actions rather than tactics with highly disruptive potential. To better account for the variety of forms of collective actions that use digital technologies, we conducted an open-source intelligence search (Study 1a) and an expert consultation survey (Study 1b; N = 21), to create a database containing 31 types of actions. In Study 2, we interviewed activists (N = 20) and found six key dimensions underlying those actions. In Study 3, participants (N = 273) rated the actions across the dimensions. Based upon the (dis)similarities of each action's rating across the dimensions, we identified two main types and five subtypes of online collective actions: Ingroup-assisting actions (collaborative resource generation, ingroup mobilization, and digital picketing) and outgroup-attacking actions (disruptive clicktivism and technology-enabled attacks). The results showed that digital collective actions substantively differ from each other based on the six underlying dimensions, from the social psychological function, to the skill required, to the groups being targeted. This work offers a multi-dimensional explanation for the variations across the domain of online activism and offers a way forward for future collective action work to explore psychological motivations underlying choices across action type.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105024203241

U2 - 10.1111/pops.70097

DO - 10.1111/pops.70097

M3 - Article

SN - 0162-895X

VL - 47

SP - 1

EP - 33

JO - Political Psychology

JF - Political Psychology

IS - 3

M1 - e70097

ER -

The Dangers, Directness, and Purposes of Online Collective Actions

Abstract

Data Availability Statement

Acknowledgements

Funding

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this