When groups in glass houses throw stones: Public expectations of how activist groups respond to identity threats

Abstract

This experimental study explores how the general public views an activist organization's affective threat appraisal as a function of three factors: the organization's anger level, efficacy level, and consistency of ascribed identity with avowed identity. Results shed light on the affective threat appraisal that activist organizations might use to manage emerging conflict with the general public. A typology of activist organizations is offered to account for levels of anger and likely efficacy when organizations face perceived disconnects between avowed identity and the identity ascribed to the activist group as a result of reported behavior. Empirical evidence suggests that an identity crisis involving identity discrepancies of an activist organization can have a profoundly negative impact on the organization's image, reputation, and even survival.

Keywords:

• Activist organization
• Affective threat appraisal
• Identity threats
• Anger
• Efficacy
• Crisis management
• Public relations