Running head: FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE

French Collective Action Salience: Why Does the World Pay Attention?

An Analysis of Protest Event Location and International Media Coverage

Ciera DuBan

Drury University
FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 2

Abstract

France is regarded as a country that regularly engages in forms of collective action. Media

accounts and history books depict French protest activity as a pillar of their civilization. Most

scholars agree on the salience of French protest. However, there is debate about why French

protest is salient. Why does the world pay attention to French collective action? Using two

competing theories of collective action, resource mobilization theory and breakdown theory, one

can view two variables (media coverage and social structures) that impact French protest

salience. A theoretical framework is outlined to test France’s geographic and political

centralization against collective action media reports.

FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 3

France is regarded as a country that regularly engages in forms of collective action.

Media accounts and history books depict French protest activity as a pillar of their civilization.

There is little debate about the importance of French protest. However, there is debate about why

French protest behavior is important. Using two competing theories of collective action, resource

mobilization theory and breakdown theory, one can view two variables (media coverage and

social structures) that impact French protest salience.

The puzzle of the matter lies in common assumptions about French protest. Some

scholars, news sources, and laypeople view French protest and believe that protest events occur

frequently in France. This would be an easy explanation of French protest salience. Frequency of

French protest is important to address because if France does not protest at an abnormal rate,

then why is their protest salient to the world? In looking at frequency and policy outcomes, one

can see that the argument surrounding French protest goes beyond common assumptions.

Frequency

A common assumption among scholars is that the French people regularly engage in

collective action. The stereotype of the protesting Frenchmen is well documented (Wilson,

1994). It follows that, due to protest frequency, French protest behavior is viewed as salient.

Collective action is seen to regularly occur in France. French citizens, scholars, and the rest of

world takes note, identifying France as having a culture of protest. Murphy (2011) identified this

phenomenon as dating back to the French revolution of 1789. From that point, public displays of

discontent have permeated French culture. This cultural identity is further proven through the

work of Chabanet and Lacheret (2016). In their study of the Occupy movement in France, they

addressed the popular thought that the movement should have gaining more traction in France

(Chabanet & Lacheret, 2016). The Occupy movement was a progressive international collective
FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 4

action to oppose inequality and to support democracy. Cahbanet and Lacheret (2016) looked at

data from 1990 to1995 to show France had more protest events than any other European country.

They concluded that Occupy’s inability to gain ground in France was due more to characteristics

of the movements and less to French protest potential. Scholars agree that, historically, the

French did protest routinely between 1948-1977 due to regime changes, military rebellion,

coups, and a student-worker revolt (Wilson, 1994; William,1990). Compared to other European

democracies, some view France as an anomaly.

The French have a history of protests and rebellions. Due to protest frequency, France

would gain a noteworthy reputation. This assumption is easy to understand. It’s as if the

precipitation is seen as salient in the Rainforest because of the location’s annual rainfall. The

rainforest has rain, the French have protest. France is viewed as protesting more but that does not

necessarily translate to outside knowledge. The world may view French protest at a higher rate,

but other scholars debate whether this is due to protest frequency or media representation of

protest. A better explanation of the salience of French protest behavior is media reporting. Media

reporting leads to a perception that French protest is salient, even when protest frequency is not

supported.

Political collective action seeks to achieve political change. Breakdown theory and

resource mobilization theory delve deeper into the societal and individual factors that push an

individual to protest. Most would assume that policy outcomes are a common goal for protestors.

However, without a clear link between action and result, this does not fully capture why protest

occurs. To better understand French protest saliency, one must look at the relationship between

protest and policy outcomes.

FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 5

Policy outcomes

Rochon and Mazmanian (1993) discuss how social movements relate to policy outcome.

Usually, movements that work within structures are slow and a direct link is unclear. Many

social movements impact policy but this connection goes unreported because of the length of

time between social movement and policy outcome. Wilson (1994) explained that the ‘protesting

Frenchman’ is a widespread stereotype that had credence in the past. It has held up today due to

the unpredictable nature of French protest. That is, French history has demonstrated that any

protest can lead to something bigger (Wilson, 1994). As Wilson explained earlier, every 20 years

or so the French perform large levels of collective action that breakdown the government. This

pattern establishes a link between protest and regime overthrow that makes current protest more

salient.

It is widely concluded that France is not a leader in political protest (Ambler, 1994;

Wilson, 1994; Baumgartner, 1994; Ancelovici, 2011). However, French citizens do have a strong

relationship with education protest. Ambler (1994) found that French education protests are

effective at changing policy. Protests about education regularly occur in France due to

ideological conflict, competing interest groups, and status anxiety (Ambler, 1994). The factors

add to France’s existing protest factors: centralized authority, protest identity, and political

history. Ambler explains that education protests are salient because the world can see policy

outcomes from protest actions.

French protest behavior can be explained by France’s status as an ‘old democracy’

(Dubrow, Slomczynski & Tomescu-Dubrow, 2008). Old democracies have institutions in place

that are responsive to protest activity. Post-communist, new democracies are less likely to

engage in protest due to lingering communist ideologies. Instead, citizens in these countries
FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 6

accept their status and disengage from politics. One might pay attention to French politics

because the structures in place mean citizens are more likely to express their demands and

government is more likely to listen. An example of this is seen in a comparative analysis of U.S.

and French labor strikes (Friedman, 1988). French union workers were more radical in their

protest approach than U.S. union workers. That is because the French government had a history

of being willing to intervene when strikes were large and committed. Knowing this, union

workers acted in such a way with little perceived risk of failure.

One can see conflicting ideas about protest and policy. Policy outcomes are usually

unclear and occur out of context with protest activity. Yet, scholars claim that French protest is

salient because of potential policy outcomes. Ambler explained that education protests do bring

greater policy outcomes. However, with such an unclear link between action and result, policy

outcome cannot be a main explanation of protest behavior. Breakdown theory and resource

mobilization theory (RM) consider the individual and social levels that policy outcomes do not.

In looking at breakdown theory and RM theory, one can see the outcome of protest (policy) is

not the driving force for French protest.

Why people protest

To better understand the salience of French protest, one must explore why people are

driven to protest. It is difficult to explain the phenomenon of French protest behavior, but protest

behavior in general can be explained. In turn, one can apply a general view of protest to the

popular behavior in France. Scholars have found two major theories that explain protest

behavior: breakdown theory and resource mobilization (RM) theory.

FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 7

Breakdown Theory

Breakdown theory is a classical explanation of hostile collective action like civil

violence, rebellion, and riots. According to Oberschall (1978) breakdown theory stresses the

similarities between collective action and deviant behavior like crime. Like deviant behavior,

collective action events occur when individuals are not under social control (Useem, 1998). To

better understand this theory, one must consider protest in two categories: routine action and

nonroutine action. Routine collective action is orchestrated within society (Useem, 1998).

Peaceful protests, rallies, and sit-ins do not disrupt what is socially acceptable. Nonroutine

collective action disrupts social order and goes against acceptable moral and physical behavior

(rebellion, riots, revolution) (Useem, 1998; Buechler, 2007).

The theory has two competing explanations for why individuals would deviate from

society and participate in nonroutine collective action. The first explanation is the mass society

theory (Useem, 1980). Mass society theorists explain that individuals will participate in

nonroutine collective action when they feel isolated from society. Oberschall (1978) theorizes

this is likely to occur in disorganized rural communities with little moral guidance. As a result of

their isolation, individuals do not identify with their communities and do not act through routine

collective action (Useem, 1980; Oberschall, 1978; Khawaja, 1994). Instead, individuals gravitate

to deviant collective behavior for social belonging (Kornhauser 1959).

The second explanation is the discontent model (Useem, 1980). The discontent model

argues that isolation is a crucial component, but more important is the feeling of discontent

(Useem, 1980). An important factor in the discontent model is relative deprivation. It is the

feeling that one is deprived of something they desire in comparison to others who are not

deprived (Useem, 1980). As a result of social isolation and discontent, individuals are driven to
FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 8

protest in nonroutine ways. The discontent model holds that individuals are driven to collective

action to eliminate their relative deprivation (Grasso & Giugni, 2016).

In a cross-national study of protest events, Jenkins and Schock (2003) show that

protesting countries had a divided class system, repressive society, and military dependence. The

commonalities between protesting countries fulfill some breakdown theory criteria. Divided

class system would contribute to relative deprivation. A repressed society would contribute to

social isolation. Breakdown theory can explore protest behavior on an individual level. This is

beneficial to better understand what drives a person to protest. However, their definition of

protest is limiting to deviant behavior and their main criteria is social isolation. This is not a full

picture of all protest activity. Relative deprivation can help explain collective action as a mean

for political ends. Breakdown theory can help explain collective action as a deviant movement

against an isolating society. Later, this paper will explore breakdown theory’s applicability to

French protest behavior.

Resource Mobilization Theory

Resource Mobilization theory (RM) explains collective action as a power struggle

among groups vying for position (Useem, 1998). Useem explains that protest does not flourish

through isolation, but rather through common interest and collective identity. Protest through

RM theory is viewed as individuals acting within institutions rather than against society. Even

when protest turns to rebellion and seeks to topple existing institutions, it is just a different

avenue of political action (Buechler, 1993; Useem 1998). RM theory differs from breakdown

theory in protest goals and necessary factors. Protest under RM theory does not require societal

grievances in the form of deprivation or discontent (Buechler, 1993). Instead, actors are driven

by control of resources and the success of collective action. Jenkins (1983) argues that
FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 9

grievances are a constant factor without explanatory significance. According to Buechler (1993),

changes in resources is a primary factor in RM theory. Without it, protest is unlikely to occur.

Collective grievance is a secondary factor. Scholar either debate that collective grievance does

not matter or they assume it is always present within society. Contrary to breakdown theory, RM

theory explains that social change depresses social conflict because groups work to rebuild

resources before mobilizing (Oberschall, 1978). An example is social change for urban migrants.

In small villages, they may be members of a tight-knit group. They can mobilize for collective

gains. Once they move to urban centers, they must rebuild their resources and reorganize before

collective action can occur.

Dalton, Van Sickle, and Weldon (2010) found that grievances alone did not predict

political protest. Other factors must be present. Instead, individuals with resources are more

likely to be active. Individuals already advantaged with education, status, and group involvement

are more likely to use protest as a primary tool of political action. They state that “economic

development and open democratic institutions” lead individuals’ resources into political protest

(pg. 72). Individuals with resources in developed democracies are more likely to protest than

individuals with resources in poorer, less-democratic countries. Breakdown theory cannot

explain this. One would expect that less-democratic countries would create greater discontent

and therefore greater protest. However, RM theory can explain this through the difference in

development and resources that drive an individual to act. Education is also impactful because it

provides more opportunity to voice opposition and protest is less costly (Dalton, Van Sickle, &

Weldon, 2010). These factors tie into RM theory in that protest is evaluated in terms of

resources. For those that have fewer resources, protest is costly and therefore not an active

channel of political participation.

FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 10

Armed with a thorough understanding of protest theory, one can better understand protest

activity in France. On one hand, French protest activity closely aligns with breakdown theory, in

that actions regularly lead to societal upheaval. On the other hand, French protest activity fits

with RM theory regarding resources in wealthy democratic countries. French protest does not

neatly fit into a small box. One can use both theories to explain various degrees of protest

behavior. However, RM theory is more useful to explain protests as rational political actions

rather than deviant expressions of frustration. RM theory can help explain why protest occurs.

With the theory, one can better understand why collective actions is salient to the world. Two

variables can predict protest salience: media reporting and social structures.

Media Reporting

The first variable that can explain protest salience proposes through media coverage.

France may not protest more than any other democracy, but the world hears about their protests

more due to overreporting. There are multiple factors that explain why French protest is salient

to the media who then disseminate salient information to the world. French protest is noteworthy

because protest methods are radical, journalists are centralized, and historical precedence has

created a ritual of protest and reporting.

The French use unconventional protest methods that gain national and international

attention. Radical action can lead to sensational media coverage. Oliver and Maney (2000)

explored the triadic relationship between protest, media, and politics. The media are rarely an

unbiased recorder of events. Selection bias determines which events receive media coverage. An

event is covered in media if it has ‘news value’. The criteria for news value include prominence,

human interest/drama, controversy, the unusual, timeliness, and proximity. Oliver and Maney

(2000) establish that most journalists have a feeling of civic responsibility. This feeling translates
FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 11

to greater reporting about local policy-making and public debate. It is plausible that protests tied

to politics have more news value than other protests. Due to the nature of contemporary media,

French protests are especially newsworthy. French protests affect daily life, incite controversy

and drama from different opinions, and usually occur in Paris, a centralized location for

journalists (Baumgartner, 1994). French protests fulfill these newsworthy criteria of prominence,

human interest, controversy, and proximity. Proximity is one of the main factors to protest

overreporting in France.

Baumgartner (1994) concentrated on the centralized nature of French protests and

journalists. He argued that protesting is not unique to France, nor does France do it more than

any other similar democracy. France has this identity because the French media report on protest

more. This can be explained by French centralization. Demonstrations and policymaking mostly

occur in Paris. Journalists in Paris can easily report on events nearby that satisfy newsworthy

criteria and fulfill their civic responsibility (Baumgartner, 1994). Some scholars explain a

different phenomenon that has gained attention over time: protest as a form of ritual.

Baumgartner (1994) explained that French citizens have a protest identity. This has led them to

celebrate protest anniversaries and exalt French protest culture (Wilson, 1994; Baumgartner,

1994). Journalists in centralized Paris can easily report on this behavior by building off

stereotypes and continuing the tradition of past revolution (Baumgartner, 1994). French protest is

an easy topic to report on as Baumgartner (1994) and Oliver and Maney (2000) explained. It is

also a sensational topic to report on because of the radical nature of French protest.

French protest behavior gains media attention because it is radical. Many scholars

compare protest in the United States to protest in France in order to demonstrate peculiarities in

protest behavior. Both countries had a history of strong unions and organized demonstrations. In
FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 12

comparison to U.S. protest, French protest is radical because protesters question capitalism and

there is less cost to citizens to engage (Friedman, 1988; Ancelovici, 2011). Where American

union protestors try to find their place within society through RM theory of competing resources,

French protest takes a more breakdown approach by attempting to change society instead of

working within it (Ancelovici, 2011; Friedman, 1988). An example of radical French protest was

the wave of ‘bossnappings’ that started in 2008 (Parsons, 2012). Bossnapping is deviant and

radical behavior that can be explained by breakdown theory. However, Parsons (2012) explained

the occurrence could not be rationalized by social tensions or unemployment. Instead it was

explained by weak institutions like collective bargaining. Where French unions could not

bargain, they became radicalized. This explanation begins to fall under RM theory because

bossnappings were organization and mobilized by unions to bargain with large corporations.

This fulfills ‘politics by other means’ of RM theory. While this was a more radical approach, it

was to achieve resources and work within society, not start a coup d'état. Media sources

overreport on French protest because of centralization, protest ritual, and radical strategies. As a

result, French protest is seen as a salient issue disseminated from the media.

Social Structures

The second variable focuses on social structures in place that influence the salience of

French protest activity. France is seen to have a protest identity worth watching because it is

focused and established. This is demonstrated by centralization and historical precedence.

Centralization

French protest is salient because of the centralized nature of French policy making and

protest activity. Centralization was brought up in the second school of thought to explain media

attention. Centralization affects the media, but it also affects the impact of protest activity
FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 13

(Baumgartner, 1994). Baumgartner compares protest impact in France to the impact of similar

protest activity in the United States. If all the elementary teacher in France went on strike, it

would be more impactful and have a greater scope than a month-long strike of a school district in

the U.S (Baumgartner, 1994). While the strike in the U.S. would affect more people over a

longer period, it would not have the same impact as a protest in France (Baumgartner, 1994).

Centralization increases the impact of French protest.

Geographic centralization of policymaking and protest activity give French protest

greater salience. As Baumgartner explained, similar events can be perceived differently due to

centralization. Centralization can also focus protest behavior (Wilson 1994; Baumgartner, 1994).

As a result, protest activity in France is more organized against a single target. To continue the

same example, protests in the U.S. are scattered: there is a separation of power, diverging focus

on local and national levels, and large geographic area (Baumgartner, 1994). French protest

benefits from centralized policymaking by focusing protestor attention against a single target in a

smaller area (Wilson, 1994; Baumgartner, 1994). French protest is salient because activity is

easier to view due to centralization.

Centralization explains the salience of RM theory protest. RM theory centers around

organization and mobilization to achieve a collective goal. Protests mobilize in Paris because that

is where policy making occurs. Protestors work rationally within their societal guidelines to

achieve their means. Breakdown protest centers around less social control, with protests more

likely to occur in isolated areas. Breakdown theorists describe protest as irrational and abnormal

outbursts (Khawaja, 1994). Breakdown theory cannot explain protests in centralized Paris

because it requires protestor organization and working within societal constructs. RM theory
FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 14

style protest would occur in centralized Paris because that is where groups can achieve their

goals and mobilize easier.

Historical precedence

France does not protest more than any other similar democracy. However, France’s

history of protest can be linked to protest salience. French protest behavior can be traced back to

early 1700s (Tilly, 1979). Historical precedence, on its own, is not enough to lead to salience.

However, when combined with centralization, French protest behavior becomes an important

phenomenon.

According to Tilly, the original French protest was the charivari, when French citizens

showed disapproval of their peers based on moral misdeeds, like adultery or stealing. Peers soon

translated to elected officials and governmental grievances. From there the French moved to

demonstrations. A demonstration takes charivari a step further with a symbolic place to convene,

an assembly called in advance, explicit affiliation, and broadcasting materials (placards, banners,

pamphlets). Since the tradition of protest began, France has had a history of civil uprisings

(Wilson, 1994; Friedman, 1988). According to Wilson, every 20 years or so the French

demonstrate in large collective movements that attack the existing regime. These large collective

movements would closely align with Useem’s explanation of breakdown theory (1998). French

citizens sought to fundamentally change their society and were no longer under societal control

(Useem, 1998).

French protest history is partially due to French exclusionary views on politics.

Ancelovici (2011) concludes that the French are so ‘contentious’ because the state and

employers exclude them from the decision-making process. French citizens have been driven to

protest because that is the only way to have their voices be heard. This gives insight into the
FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 15

historical rational of French protest behavior. Protest was an act born from necessity that has

become a cultural identity. The world views French protests with greater clarity due to

centralization. Their behavior appears established due to historical precedence.

Protest born from necessity describes RM theorists’ view of collective action. RM theory

views protest as a means to achieve political goals. Breakdown theorists would describe France’s

historical precedence of protest as outbursts brought on by social change, deprivation, and social

isolation. Because of France’s revolutionary culture, it is easy to misidentify their actions as

breakdown theory protests. Revolting and toppling an established regime is certainly breaking

social norms. However, France’s historical start with chivari and their current need for protest

due to exclusionary government, describe RM theory more than breakdown theory. France may

have displayed breakdown collective action in the past, but RM theory has remained a consistent

thread throughout their history,

Social structures can best explain the salience of French protest behavior. It approaches

the phenomenon with a deeper understanding of the country and the culture of protest and policy

making. The first variable, media reporting, does not acknowledge historical salience before

widespread media consumption. However, media as an explanation of protest salience is fitting

for modern day. Media sources disseminate information to the world. Without media coverage,

centralization and historical precedence would not cross the French border. For research in a

modern era of French protest, media reporting must be looked at for protest salience.

Theoretical Framework

My research will follow a cross-sectional design that tests French collective action location

against international media reporting. This method focuses on the importance of geographic and

political centralization for both variables of RM theory: media reporting and social structures.
FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 16

Centralization amplifies and focusses French protest efforts. French centralization also gathers

media attention towards newsworthy collective action in Paris. This paper will introduce a

method to view the relationship between French protest centralization and resulting protest

salience.

My hypothesis and null hypothesis are:

H1: There is a positive relationship between a collective action event’s proximity to Paris and

international news coverage by Associated Press.

Ho: There is no relationship between a collective action event’s proximity to Paris and

international news coverage by Associated Press.

The hypothesis contains two interval variables, political collective action location and news

coverage.

Political collective action location requires two separate definitions in order to clarify

collective action and location. According to Piven and Cloward (1991), collective action is

categorized by strikes, demonstrations, rallies, public meetings, marches, planned insurrections,

social movements, invasion of official assembly, and elector campaigns. To fit in the RM theory

of collective action, the event must be rational and organized (Buechler, 1993; Useem 1998). In

looking at the Codebook for European Protest and Coercion Data, 1980 through 1995, Francisco

(2000) has categorized many forms of political action. Ten terms (Table 1) can be separated due

to an aspect of organization, premeditation, and politics by other means: Boycott, civil

disobedience, demonstration, general strike, march, mobilization, obstruction, occupation, rally,

strike.
FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 17

Table 1

1. boycott politically based refusal to act, buy, or cooperate

2. civil disobedience non-violent purposeful violation of state laws

3. demonstration protest gathering that generally moves short

distances or focuses on a specific target

4. general strike strike across a city, region, industry or country,

5. march group movement from one point to another for a

political reason

6. mobilization activity designed to increase support of a

movement

7. obstruction blocking space, e.g., roadblocks

8. occupation occupying state buildings or workplaces

9. rally stationary protest gathering

10. strike withholding labor for economic or political

reasons

In this research, the ten terms from Francisco will be used as a collective action event. The

second aspect of the first variable is location. Location is determined in proximity to Paris. Each

event location will be measured in miles from Paris to determine its level of centralization.

The second variable of the hypothesis is Associated Press news coverage. This is the

existence and frequency of written news sources from AP archives about individual collective

action events. This variable will be used to demonstrate issue salience. If an event receives more

AP coverage, it is more salient (Epstein & Segal, 2000).

FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 18

The correlational hypothesis would propose that as collective events move closer to Paris, AP

news coverage of the event would increase in frequency. To test this one must disprove that there

is no relationship between a collective action event’s proximity to Paris and international new

coverage by Associated Press. For this research, the levels of analysis are both interval,

proximity to Paris by miles and news Coverage instances. The unit of analysis is the collective

action event.

The research method must be replicable and valid. Replicability is clear. The same

research can be repeated using Francisco’s Protest and Coercion Data. Data could change based

on news sources used. However, as long as archive availability remains consistent from

Associated Press, other news sources would not be needed. This method is replicable with the

two variables outlined. Next, one must look at validity. Epstein and Segal (2000) offer a

comparable model to emulate. They used media coverage by the New York Times to determine

issue salience in the United States. The same approach can be done to explain international

French protest salience. In place of New York Times, this method would use Associated Press.

Associated Press offers an additional layer to this research. If an event in France can receive

coverage from this US based news source, it demonstrates issue salience that spans borders

(Epstein & Segal, 2000). One may wonder if Francisco’s European Protest and Coercion Data

from 1990 1995 can accurately explain protest salience if the data is only from 1990 to 1995. By

using data in this time period, protest salience can be tested without interacting with smartphones

and personal reporting. To view the relationship between the two variables, a bivariate linear

regression and Pearson’s R will be used.

Each protest event’s location (outlined by the 10 terms in Francisco’s European Protest

and Coercion Data) will be tested against AP media coverage frequency. With the resulting data,
FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 19

one can map the relationship between event proximity to Paris and available coverage within AP

archives. A linear regression or scatter plot would be the best tool to view this relationship. As

stated before, Pearson’s R will be used to gauge statistical significance.

Data from this research would demonstrate the relationship between protest centralization

and protest salience. Going forward with this research, it would be interesting to view

Francisco’s data compared to other media sources. Associated Press is a relatively neutral

international news source. Further research could test the effects of media biases and media

location on French protest salience.

FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 20

References

Ambler, J. (1994). Why French Education Policy Is So Often Made On The Streets. French

Politics and Society, 12(2/3), 41-64. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/42844409

Ancelovici, M. (2011). In Search of Lost Radicalism: The Hot Autumn of 2010 and the

Transformation of Labor Contention in France. French Politics, Culture & Society, 29(3),

121-140. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/42843726

Berger, B. (2009). Political Theory, Political Science, and the End of Civic Engagement.

Perspectives on Politics, 7(2), 335-350. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org.drury.idm.oclc.org/stable/40406934

Baumgartner, F. (1994). The Politics of Protest and Mass Mobilization in France. French

Politics and Society, 12(2/3), 84-96. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org.drury.idm.oclc.org/stable/42844411

Buechler, S. (2007). The Strange Career of Strain and Breakdown Theories of Collective Action.

In The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements (eds D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule and H.

Kriesi). doi:10.1002/9780470999103.ch3

Buechler, S. (1993). Beyond Resource Mobilization? Emerging Trends in Social Movement

Theory. The Sociological Quarterly,34(2), 217-235. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4120699

Chabanet, D., & Lacheret, A. (2016). The Occupy Movement in France: Why Protests Have Not

Taken Off. In Ancelovici M., Dufour P., & Nez H. (Eds.), Street Politics in the Age of

Austerity: From the Indignados to Occupy (pp. 279-294). Amsterdam: Amsterdam

University Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1d8hb8t.14

FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 21

Dalton, R., Van Sickle, A., & Weldon, S. (2010). The Individual-Institutional Nexus of Protest

Behaviour. British Journal of Political Science, 40(1), 51-73. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40649423

Dubrow, J., Slomczynski, K., & Tomescu-Dubrow, I. (2008). Effects of Democracy and

Inequality on Soft Political Protest in Europe: Exploring the European Social Survey

Data. International Journal of Sociology, 38(3), 36-51. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20628336

Epstein, L., and Jeffrey S. (2000). Measuring Issue Salience. American Journal of Political

Science 44 ð1Þ: 66–83.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2669293

Francisco, R. A. (2000). Codebook for European Protest and Coercion Data, 1980 through 1995.

University of Kansas.

Friedman, G. (1988). Strike Success and Union Ideology: The United States and France, 1880-

1914. The Journal of Economic History, 48(1), 1-25. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2122326

Grasso, Maria T., & Giugni, M. (2016). Protest Participation and Economic Crisis: The

Conditioning Role of Political Opportunities. European Journal of Political Research 55

(4):663–680.

Jenkins, J. (1983). Resource Mobilization Theory and the Study of Social Movements. Annual

Review of Sociology, 9, 527-553. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2946077

Jenkins, J., & Schock, K. (2003). Political Process, International Dependence, and Mass Political

Conflict: A Global Analysis of Protest and Rebellion, 1973-1978. International Journal

of Sociology, 33(4), 41-63. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20628694

FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 22

Jenkins, J., Wallace, M., & Fullerton, A. (2008). A Social Movement Society? A Cross-National

Analysis of Protest Potential. International Journal of Sociology, 38(3)

Khawaja, M. (1994). Resource Mobilization, Hardship, and Popular Collective Action in the

West Bank. Social Forces, 73(1), 191-220. doi:10.2307/2579923, 12-35. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org.drury.idm.oclc.org/stable/20628335

Kornhauser, William. 1959. The Politics of Mass Society. New York: Free Press.

Murphy, J. (2011). Protest or Riot?: Interpreting Collective Action in Contemporary France.

Anthropological Quarterly, 84(4), 977-1009. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org.drury.idm.oclc.org/stable/41427076

Oberschall, A. (1978). Theories of Social Conflict. Annual Review of Sociology 4:291-315.

Retrieved from

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2945973

Oliver, P., & Maney, G. (2000). Political Processes and Local Newspaper Coverage of Protest

Events: From Selection Bias to Triadic Interactions. American Journal of Sociology,

106(2), 463-505. doi:10.1086/316964

Parsons, N. (2012). Worker Reactions to Crisis: Explaining "Bossnappings". French Politics,

Culture & Society, 30(1), 111-130. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/42843740

Pierce, R., & Converse, P. (1990). Attitudinal Sources of Protest Behavior in France: Differences

Between Before and After Measurement. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 54(3), 295-316.

Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.drury.idm.oclc.org/stable/2749369

Piven, F., & Cloward, R. (1991). Collective Protest: A Critique of Resource Mobilization

Theory. International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, 4(4), 435-458. Retrieved

from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20007011
FRENCH COLLECTIVE ACTION SALIENCE 23

Rochon, T., & Mazmanian, D. (1993). Social Movements and the Policy Process. The Annals of

the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 528, 75-87. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1047792

Tilly, C. (1979). The Routinization of Protest in Nineteenth-Century France. Center for Research

on Socia Organization, University of Michigan. Working Paper No. 181

Useem, B. (1998). Breakdown Theories of Collective Action. Annual Review of Sociology, 24,

215-238. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/223480

Useem, B. (1980). Solidarity Model, Breakdown Model, and the Boston Anti-Busing Movement.

American Sociological Review,45(3), 357-369. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2095171

William B. (1990). The culture of protest in seventeenth‐century French towns, Social History,

15:1, 1-23, DOI: 10.1080/03071029008567754

Wilson, F. (1994). Political Demonstrations in France: Protest Politics Or Politics of Ritual?

French Politics and Society, 12(2/3), 23-40. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/42844408