bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Formaldehyde
Authors: Gerberich H. Robert , Seaman George C. ,   Updated by Staff
Published: January 2013

AbstractFormaldehyde is the first of the series of aliphatic aldehydes. It was discovered by Butlerov in 1859 and has been manufactured since the beginning of the twentieth century. At ordinary temperatures formaldehyde is a colorless gas with a pungent odor. Because of its relatively low cost, high purity, and variety of chemical reactions, formaldehyde has become on of the world's most important industrial and research chemicals. Historically, formaldehyde has been and continues to be manufactured from methanol via the silver catalyst process or the the metal oxide catalyst process. New processes are under development. Sources of human exposure to formaldehyde are many, ie, engine exhaust, tobacco smoke, natural gas, waste incineration, etc. It is known to be a human carcinogen. Formaldehyde is a basic chemical building block for the production of a wide range of chemicals. Its biggest use is in the production of industrial resins; urea‐formaldhyde; phenol formaldehyde; and melamine formaldehyde. It is also used, eg, in the production of 1,4‐butanediol, polyols, chelating agents, slow release fertilizers, hexamethylenetetramine, and paraformaldehyde.
Abeyance
Authors: Taylor Verta , Crossley Alison Dahl 
Published: January 2013

Abstract

Abeyance depicts a holding pattern in which a social movement manages to sustain itself and mount a challenge to authorities in a hostile political and cultural environment, thereby providing continuity from one stage of mobilization to another. Abeyance carries with it the connotation of movement decline, failure, and demobilization relative to peaks of mobilization. When a movement declines, it does not necessary disappear. Rather, pockets of movement activity may continue to exist and can serve as starting points of a new cycle of the same or a new movement at a later point in time. During periods of abeyance, movements sustain themselves but develop distinct repertoires of contention that are different from the mobilizing structures and tactical repertoires of movements in a stage of mass mobilization. A social movement in abeyance may provide linkages to new rounds of mobilization through
activist networks
, an established
repertoire of goals and tactics
, and by constructing a
collective identity
that can serve as a symbolic resource for subsequent mobilization.
Altruism and Social Movements
Authors: Passy Florence 
Published: January 2013

AbstractWhat is altruism? Since the 1990s scholars have agreed to define altruism as acts that seek toincrease another's welfare. Those acts are performedvoluntarilywithout external constraints or coercion, with theintentionof helping someone else, andwithout expecting any rewards(Simmons 1991). These are the four components of altruistic acts.
Catnets
Authors: Diani Mario 
Published: January 2013

Abstract
The expression “catnet” merges two distinct concepts, “categories” and “networks.” It was forged by Harrison White in the context of his attempt to develop an approach to the study of social structure that departed from the Parsonian view of attitudes and values as the driving forces behind patterns in human behavior. Alternatively, and also distancing himself from purely interactionist views of structure, White proposed that the building blocks of social structure be collectivities constituted by the intersection of specific patterns of interaction and categorical traits, on which boundary definition could be founded (White 2008).
Coalitions
Authors: Van Dyke Nella 
Published: January 2013

Abstract
Virtually all social movements involve organizations which sometimes work together on a common task, in what can be called a coalition. Coalitions take many forms; sometimes they are formal and endure for years, at other times they involve only temporary alliances that disband at the conclusion of an event. No matter what their form, coalitions are critically important for collective action, and a complete understanding of social movement dynamics is impossible without knowledge of organizational alliances and the factors that inspire or inhibit their formation.
Co‐Optation
Authors: Coy Patrick G. 
Published: January 2013

Abstract
As social and political movements gain enough strength to seriously challenge the more powerful forces that legitimate and protect status quo arrangements in a country, a society, an institution, an agency, an organization, or other social system, those in authority who are being challenged may reach out to and attempt to bring the challengers into the system as participants. This formalized inclusion of challengers into the authority system that they are challenging is the essence of co‐optation. An early and influential work on understanding co‐optation is Philip Selznik's (1949) study of how the Tennessee Valley Authority targeted and eventually absorbed local elites and community activists into its administrative structure in order to transform local opposition to TVA policies into support for those policies. Gamson's (1990) analysis of 53 challenging groups, in which he defined co‐optation as challengers gaining access to the public policy process but without achieving actual policy changes, is also important.
Countercultures
Authors: Haenfler Ross 
Published: January 2013

Abstract

The term counterculture describes a variety of social subgroups possessing distinctive norms and values in opposition to the widely accepted beliefs and practices of the dominant culture. Countercultures espouse primarily a cultural, rather than explicitly political, challenge commonly enacted through alternative lifestyles rather than direct challenges to institutional authority structures such as governments or corporations. While the term is widely used in both scholarly and pop culture contexts, its usage is imprecise. In the context of social movement studies, countercultures may be considered as a type of social movement (e.g., forms of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender movements), part of a social movement (e.g., cultural feminism), separate from but overlapping with social movements (e.g., hippies and the New Left), or more distinct from movements and conceptually closer to subcultures (e.g., punk). Contemporary definitions of social movements are broad enough to include the sorts of collective behavior typically labeled countercultural, sometimes called
countercultural movements
. Specifically, countercultures are extra‐institutional challenges to
cultural
(rather than
institutional
) authority structures, generally informally organized yet having some degree of continuity (see Snow, Soule, & Kriesi 2004).
Demography and Social Movements and Revolutions
Authors: Hosoki Ralph I. 
Published: January 2013

AbstractOriginating with the strain and breakdown theories of the classical collective behavior tradition that dominated in the 1960s, the analytical repertoires for understanding contentious politics expanded to include structuralist (political opportunity) and post‐Marxist approaches as well as resource mobilization theories in the 1970s and 1980s, and constructivist and cultural approaches in the 1980s and 1990s (McAdam, Tarrow, & Tilly 2009). This progression entailed a general shift from deterministic collective behavior paradigms that focused on external causal explanations of movement emergence to more agency‐oriented resource mobilization paradigms that emphasized the importance of internal movement dynamics and rational, agentic, and interest‐based decisions of movement actors and collectives (Buechler 2004). Furthermore, collective action—originally understood by strain and breakdown theorists as irrational, disruptive, and spontaneous behavior stemming from social breakdown—was gradually cast in a more positive light with the emergence of empirical studies in the 1970s that pointed to organizational solidarity and not social malintegration as the necessary condition for collective action (Useem 1998; Buechler 2004). Somewhat lost in this transition, however, was the emphasis placed on what Goldstone and McAdam (2001) term, themacro determinants of contention. With the demise of strain and breakdown theories, the emphases placed on opportunities (over threats), and the conceptualization of contentious actors as rational entities, contemporary studies on social movements and revolutions have largely undervalued systematic efforts to understand how social and demographic factors might affect the emergence and development of political contention.
Elections and Social Movements
Authors: Heaney Michel T. 
Published: January 2013

AbstractSocial movements are organized efforts to bring about change in public policies and/or society. Elections are a mechanism whereby citizens decide collectively who occupies positions of responsibility in government. These two phenomena are reciprocally interrelated with one another (McAdam & Tarrow 2010). By affecting who wins elections, social movements may be able to influence changes in public policies and/or society. The outcomes of elections may affect the motivations of individuals to devote their time and energy to social movements. The interactions between electoral actors and movement activists are sometimes cooperative, and at other times conflictual, depending on the strategies employed by these actors (Schwartz 2010).
Extremism
Authors: Caiani Manuela 
Published: January 2013

Abstract
Extremism has become a very common term nowadays, both in social science and outside the academic sphere. However, its usage is rather awkward: nobody has arrived at a satisfactorily comprehensive definition. The concept refers to individuals or groups who advocate or resort to measures that lie beyond the moral and political center of society (Eatwell & Goodwin 2010: 8). It can be associated with ideologies (values systems) or behaviors. Historically, it has been also used to indicate totalitarian regimes such as communism and fascism. When applied to politics, extremism is commonly defined by the elements anticonstitutionalism and antidemocracy; it is the rejection of the fundamental values, procedures, and institutions of the democratic state (Carter 2005). In this sense some scholars, taking into account an action‐based and a values‐based form of extremism, also distinguish it as consisting of three components: extraordinary, excessive, and intolerant political opinion, belief, or activity; violent political activity; and activity aimed against the democratic constitutional state (Downs, Manning, & Engstrom 2009).
Factions/Factionalism
Authors: Kretschmer Kelsy 
Published: January 2013

AbstractA faction is a subgroup within a larger organization that is in conflict with other members of that organization. Factions occur when a subset of organizational members begin to develop a distinct collective identity that is at least partially at odds with other members. Factionalism refers to this conflict between an organizational faction and other members, or between competing organizational factions. Strictly speaking, factionalism refers to this intra‐organizational conflict. However, many social movement scholars have used the concept of factionalism to understand inter‐organizational conflict within a broader social movement. In other words, we can use the language of factions to understand a wider range of phenomena, including how different branches of a social movement form and interact. Scholars have paid attention to the ways factions originate, to how they disperse or strengthen over time, to the different outcomes of factionalism, and the consequences of factionalism for social movements generally.
Fields of Contention
Authors: Crossley Nick 
Published: January 2013

Abstract
Contentious politics, in Tilly's sense, involves multiple relays of interaction (Tilly & Tarrow 2008). Activists interact amongst themselves, both within and between “social movement organizations” (SMOs); they interact with opponents and elites; with police and other security forces; and often also with journalists and even academics. The outcome of contentious politics is generated by these interactions and the concept of “fields of contention,” as coined by Crossley (2003, 2006), is intended to capture the network which they form.
Frame Disputes
Authors: Benford Robert D. 
Published: January 2013

AbstractFrame disputes refer to differences of opinion or preference regarding claims associated with framing activities that social movement actors fashion. Frame disputes are a pervasive dynamic within social movements, one of several contested discursive processes within the movement arena (Benford & Snow 2000). The concept derives from Erving Goffman's observations inFrame Analysisthat interpretations of what's going on in a particular circumstance are subject to disagreement. On such occasions “reality” must be negotiated. In the context of social movements, frame disputes erupt within a movement organization (intraorganizational dispute) and/or between representatives of two or more SMOs within a social movement (interorganizational dispute). Frame disputes in the wider political arena, such as those that often arise between social movements and their opponents (e.g., countermovements, targets of change, media, etc.), have been referred to as “framing contests” (Ryan 1991). The focus of this entry is on interpretive and discursive disagreements that occurwithina social movement.
Free Spaces
Authors: Polletta Francesca , Kretschmer Kelsy 
Published: January 2013

Abstract
Free spaces are small‐scale settings within a community or movement that are removed from the direct control of dominant groups, are voluntarily participated in, and generate the cultural challenge that precedes or accompanies political mobilization. Since the term became popular in studies of movements in the 1980s, scholars have sought to better identify the features of particular institutional sites that equip them to spur political challenges. They have also probed the role of free spaces in authoritarian regimes, in right‐wing movements, and in relation to new digital technologies.
Globalization and Movements
Authors: Agrikoliansky Eric 
Published: January 2013

AbstractHas globalization revolutionized contentious politics? Starting in the 1990s, a number of researchers announced that the growing internationalization of economic, cultural, and political exchanges, combined with nations' growing loss of control over these flows, had led, or would lead in the near future, to profound changes in social movements. The emergence of “transnational advocacy networks” (Keck & Sikkink 1998) and “transnational social movement organizations” (Smith, Chatfield, & Pagnucco 1997) foreshadowed the rise of the “global public sphere” (Guidry, Kennedy, & Zald 2000) and the “transnational civil society” (Florini 2000). These global social movements had seemingly moreover invented a third repertoire of actions (Cohen & Rai 2000), defined by its transnational character and solidarity. In the same way as the growth of market capitalism and liberal ideology, and the rise of the nation‐state, had reconfigured national protest movements in the nineteenth century (Tilly 1986), economic globalization and the free‐enterprise culture that accompanied it, together with the forecast decline of nation‐states, had apparently produced another substantial transformation in contentious politics at a global level.
Identity Politics
Authors: Bernstein Mary , Taylor Verta 
Published: January 2013

AbstractThe term “identity politics” refers to activism engaged in by status‐based social movements organized around such categories as gender, race/ethnicity, and sexuality, in contrast to class‐based movements. The term also applies to any mobilization related to politics, culture, and identity. It is sometimes used in a derogatory manner to criticize movements as exclusionary and focused on individual rather than societal change. Debates about the validity of identity politics reveal competing theoretical ways to understand the relationships among experience, culture, identity, politics, and power.
Immigration, Protest, and Social Movements
Authors: Weffer Simon 
Published: January 2013

AbstractAs pointed out in her 2010 piece on the state of the discipline vis‐à‐vis the immigration literature, Menjivar argues that the links between immigration and protest (or social movements more broadly) have been few and far between. In fact, she states that link “…has remained underdeveloped and thus could stand to benefit from a more active dialog” (18). She further argues that the immigration protests of 2006 in the United States served as a jumpstart to the study of the relationship between immigration and protest. While it is true that the study of this connection between immigration and protest has been sparse, there are four specific venues in which we can see this relationship engaged and examined: (1) immigration as an explanatory variable in protest research; (2) specific immigration‐related movements; (3) the aforementioned 2006 protests; and (4) the study of immigration and protest in a non‐US contexts.
Indymedia (The
I
ndependent
M
edia
C
enter)
Authors: Milan Stefania 
Published: January 2013

Abstract

Indymedia, short for Independent Media Center (IMC), is a global network of independent media organizations offering grassroots anticorporate news coverage. Its website,
indymedia.org
, operates as an “open publishing” platform, enabling anyone with Internet access to upload text and digital files.
Injustice Frames
Authors: Gamson William A. 
Published: January 2013

Abstract
Students of social movements with different orientations share an emphasis on the importance of a strong injustice component in the political consciousness that supports collective action (Moore 1978: 88; McAdam 1982: 51; Turner & Killian 1987: 202). The main challenge on this point comes from those who accept that a sense of grievance is necessary but argue that it is so ubiquitous that it lacks any explanatory value (Oberschall 1973: 133–134; McCarthy & Zald 1977: 1215). But the view that grievances have little explanatory value, since it is so easy for leaders or organizations to link more elaborate world views with the sufferings of the “lower orders,” has not prevailed (Gamson 1992).
Internet and Social Movements
Authors: Carty Victoria 
Published: January 2013

AbstractThe emergence of new information communication technologies (ICTs) such as the Internet and the digital media boom in general, have strongly affected scholarship on social movements. The Internet has fuelled a new source of political energy that posits a new relationship between ICTs, political struggle, and public life. Electronic social movement organizations (SMOs) and online activists are redefining political struggle across the dimensions of contentious politics in terms of recruitment, mobilizing, strategizing, fundraising, and protest activities. The explosion of e‐movements, e‐protest, and e‐activism highlights the importance of the Internet as an organizational tool to the dissemination of information and wired activism, and shows it has become a significant, if not essential, repertoire for social movement actors (Carty 2010). Many scholars therefore argue that the novel intricacies of the ICT‐driven “network society” require a fundamental re‐conceptualization of social mobilization that was originally formulated for face‐to‐face contact.
Law and Social Movements
Authors: Boutcher Steven A. , Stobaugh James E. 
Published: January 2013

AbstractLegal institutions, elites, and norms played an important role in the development of social movements over the latter half of the twentieth century, yet social movement scholars have only recently begun to take notice. The subfield of law and social movements has developed in two separate but increasingly integrated fields—legal scholarship and social movement scholarship—and has developed around two broad sets of research questions. First, is litigation an effective strategy for social movements? Second, what role does law play in shaping the trajectories of social movements? Early research tended to focus on the question of effectiveness, but more recent scholarship has expanded to include analyses focusing on the dynamic role that law plays in shaping movement trajectories. Here we focus on how legal institutions and strategies have been incorporated into existing social movement theories.
Participation in Social Movements
Authors: Corrigall‐Brown Catherine 
Published: January 2013

AbstractSocial movements are one of the pre‐eminent vehicles for social change in contemporary Western society. From the civil rights movement to those for women, gays and lesbians, and the environment, social movements have left an indelible mark on public policy and cultural values. While social movements are larger than the individuals who comprise them, their survival and success is based on the participation of individuals. In fact, the rise and fall of campaigns at the macro‐level is largely the result of the shifting involvement of individuals in and out of movement organizations at the micro‐level. The discussion that follows outlines the variety of ways in which individuals can participate in social movements and the major factors which predict differential recruitment to social movements.
Participatory Budgeting
Authors: Röcke Anja 
Published: January 2013

AbstractParticipatory budgeting (PB) is a process that directly involves local people in the definition of priorities and/or spending for a defined public budget. PB represents aninstitutionalform of civic engagement implemented by an official body, but possibly involving social movement organizations (SMOs) in different ways. At the end of the 1980s, PB was jointly invented by local SMOs and members of the newly elected Workers' Party in the city of Porto Alegre, Brazil (1.4 million inhabitants). It is based on neighborhood assemblies and thematic meetings that take place throughout the year and involve volunteer citizens (principle of grassroots democracy). Allocation criteria are used in the discussions about local infrastructure in order to redistribute funds to those with the greatest needs (principle of social justice). Specific boards of citizen delegates, trained by independent nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), ensure that local priorities are taken up in the budget to the largest extent possible (principle of citizen control). In Porto Alegre, this process has led to huge changes: it involved large parts of the (poor) population—up to 33 600 people in 2002, reduced corruption, and rendered public administration more efficient and transparent (Abers 2000; Avritzer 2002; Baiocchi 2005). As a result it created great enthusiasm around the world and is recognized as good practice by international organizations. Although a government change in 2004, financial problems, and the newly established link between PB and ideas of “governance” have modified the original process, it has been widely diffused to Brazil, Latin America, and other continents. In 2010, between 795 and 1469 versions existed in the world: 511–920 in Latin America and the Caribbean, 174–296 in Europe, 2–10 in North America, 40–120 in Asia, 66–110 in Africa, and 2–10 in Oceania (Sintomer et al. 2010).
Petitions
Authors: Contamin Jean‐Gabriel 
Published: January 2013

Abstract
Petitions are usually defined as “protest texts which are intended to be signed by a number of persons, at least one of whom has not the opportunity to amend it.” This element of the repertoires of collective action has rarely been studied in sociology because it seemed too obvious. But, because it might be less obvious than it appears, it might be a fruitful opening to questioning social movement theory.