Cross-Cutting Influences of Environmental Protest and Legislation
This research examines the influence of types of protest activities, Congressional hearings and political characteristics on environmental legislation enacted from 1961-1990. We find that rates of environmental protest rise with increases in the amount of previous institutional activities, but extra...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Social forces 2009-09, Vol.88 (1), p.201-225 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 225 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 201 |
| container_title | Social forces |
| container_volume | 88 |
| creator | Olzak, Susan Soule, Sarah A. |
| description | This research examines the influence of types of protest activities, Congressional hearings and political characteristics on environmental legislation enacted from 1961-1990. We find that rates of environmental protest rise with increases in the amount of previous institutional activities, but extra-institutional activities do not raise the overall rate of protest. Protest has no direct effect on the passage of legislation, but institutional protest activities significantly raise the rate of Congressional hearings on the environment. When comparing all environmental laws to those designated as having a major impact, we find both similarities and differences. For example, prior legislative activity decreases both rates, but increases in criteria air pollutants and partisan characteristics of Congress significantly affect only the rates of major environmental legislation. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1353/sof.0.0236 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60507310</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A211714796</galeid><ericid>EJ867755</ericid><jstor_id>40345044</jstor_id><oup_id>10.1353/sof.0.0236</oup_id><sourcerecordid>A211714796</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c782t-bdcc6de1018ffb6990be36549410465c29c4f9d928f00affe75056993f7aebf63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk12LEzEUhgdRsFZvvFYYFAWFqfmczFzWUncrdausyuJNSNOkpE6TmmRE_70ZW1oqZS25CCTPSc4573uy7DEEA4gpfhOcHoABQLi8k_UgxaRgJaB3sx4AmBWMYXQ_exDCCgAACal62XDkXQjFqI3R2GU-sbpplZUq5E7nY_vTeGfXykbR5B-9iyrEXNhFPlVLExoRjbMPs3taNEE92u397Mu78efRZTGdXUxGw2khWYViMV9IWS4UBLDSel7WNZgrXFJSEwhISSWqJdH1okaVBkBorRgFNGFYM6HmusT97OX23Y13P9qUCF-bIFXTCKtcG3iqEzAMwRkgxojV8L8gZiilmdraz579A65c622qliNUV5TSiiTo-RZaikZxY7WLXsjuRT5EEDJIWN1VUZyglsoqLxpnlTbp-IgfnODTWqi1kScDXh0FJCaqX3Ep2hD45PrqfHb29Wy2upjeVuSOla5p1FLxZIvR7Jh_veVlZ0avNN94sxb-N4eAd77mydcc8M7XCX6xE0MEKRrthZUm7CMQAhUq_-rxZMspb-T-evy-KhmjnaZkr-lKybhugzrImpxZIsavuxHqJgjUMI0Mg4ffXbu5PcunW24VovN7kgBMKCDk0CITUmv298J_5yXDjPLLm2_8Q41vrt5-qvgU_wEzXS51</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>229855584</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cross-Cutting Influences of Environmental Protest and Legislation</title><source>Education Source (EBSCOhost)</source><source>HeinOnline</source><source>Oxford Journals - Connect here FIRST to enable access</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Business Source Complete (EBSCOhost)</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>JSTOR</source><creator>Olzak, Susan ; Soule, Sarah A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Olzak, Susan ; Soule, Sarah A.</creatorcontrib><description>This research examines the influence of types of protest activities, Congressional hearings and political characteristics on environmental legislation enacted from 1961-1990. We find that rates of environmental protest rise with increases in the amount of previous institutional activities, but extra-institutional activities do not raise the overall rate of protest. Protest has no direct effect on the passage of legislation, but institutional protest activities significantly raise the rate of Congressional hearings on the environment. When comparing all environmental laws to those designated as having a major impact, we find both similarities and differences. For example, prior legislative activity decreases both rates, but increases in criteria air pollutants and partisan characteristics of Congress significantly affect only the rates of major environmental legislation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0037-7732</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1534-7605</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1353/sof.0.0236</identifier><identifier>CODEN: SOFOAP</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press</publisher><subject>Activism ; Agenda Setting ; Bill drafting ; Citizen Participation ; Colletive Action ; Company business management ; Congressional legislation ; Conservation (Environment) ; Context Effect ; Criteria ; Demonstrations & protests ; Demonstrations and protests ; Environmental institutions ; Environmental law ; Environmental legislation ; Environmental movement ; Environmental Movements ; Environmental policy ; Environmental problems ; Environmental protection ; Environmental regulation ; Environmentalism ; Evidence ; Federal Legislation ; Feedback (Response) ; Hearings ; Human ecology and demography ; Inferences ; Influence ; Legislation ; Legislative behaviour ; Legislatures ; Longitudinal studies ; Management ; Opportunities ; Partisanship ; Policy analysis ; Political Attitudes ; Political behaviour ; Political Factors ; Political influences ; Political protest ; Political protests ; Political sociology ; Politics ; Pollution ; Predictor Variables ; Protest Movements ; Public Opinion ; Public Policy ; Social activism ; Social aspects ; Social Change ; Social movements ; Social protest ; Sociology ; Sociology of law and criminology ; Sociology of law and justice ; Success ; U.S.A</subject><ispartof>Social forces, 2009-09, Vol.88 (1), p.201-225</ispartof><rights>Copyright The University of North Carolina Press</rights><rights>The University of North Carolina Press 2009</rights><rights>Copyright © 2008 The University of North Carolina Press.</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2009 Oxford University Press</rights><rights>Copyright University of North Carolina Press Sep 2009</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c782t-bdcc6de1018ffb6990be36549410465c29c4f9d928f00affe75056993f7aebf63</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/40345044$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/40345044$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,12845,27344,27924,27925,33774,33775,58017,58250</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ867755$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=22082684$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Olzak, Susan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soule, Sarah A.</creatorcontrib><title>Cross-Cutting Influences of Environmental Protest and Legislation</title><title>Social forces</title><addtitle>Social Forces</addtitle><addtitle>Social Forces</addtitle><description>This research examines the influence of types of protest activities, Congressional hearings and political characteristics on environmental legislation enacted from 1961-1990. We find that rates of environmental protest rise with increases in the amount of previous institutional activities, but extra-institutional activities do not raise the overall rate of protest. Protest has no direct effect on the passage of legislation, but institutional protest activities significantly raise the rate of Congressional hearings on the environment. When comparing all environmental laws to those designated as having a major impact, we find both similarities and differences. For example, prior legislative activity decreases both rates, but increases in criteria air pollutants and partisan characteristics of Congress significantly affect only the rates of major environmental legislation.</description><subject>Activism</subject><subject>Agenda Setting</subject><subject>Bill drafting</subject><subject>Citizen Participation</subject><subject>Colletive Action</subject><subject>Company business management</subject><subject>Congressional legislation</subject><subject>Conservation (Environment)</subject><subject>Context Effect</subject><subject>Criteria</subject><subject>Demonstrations & protests</subject><subject>Demonstrations and protests</subject><subject>Environmental institutions</subject><subject>Environmental law</subject><subject>Environmental legislation</subject><subject>Environmental movement</subject><subject>Environmental Movements</subject><subject>Environmental policy</subject><subject>Environmental problems</subject><subject>Environmental protection</subject><subject>Environmental regulation</subject><subject>Environmentalism</subject><subject>Evidence</subject><subject>Federal Legislation</subject><subject>Feedback (Response)</subject><subject>Hearings</subject><subject>Human ecology and demography</subject><subject>Inferences</subject><subject>Influence</subject><subject>Legislation</subject><subject>Legislative behaviour</subject><subject>Legislatures</subject><subject>Longitudinal studies</subject><subject>Management</subject><subject>Opportunities</subject><subject>Partisanship</subject><subject>Policy analysis</subject><subject>Political Attitudes</subject><subject>Political behaviour</subject><subject>Political Factors</subject><subject>Political influences</subject><subject>Political protest</subject><subject>Political protests</subject><subject>Political sociology</subject><subject>Politics</subject><subject>Pollution</subject><subject>Predictor Variables</subject><subject>Protest Movements</subject><subject>Public Opinion</subject><subject>Public Policy</subject><subject>Social activism</subject><subject>Social aspects</subject><subject>Social Change</subject><subject>Social movements</subject><subject>Social protest</subject><subject>Sociology</subject><subject>Sociology of law and criminology</subject><subject>Sociology of law and justice</subject><subject>Success</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><issn>0037-7732</issn><issn>1534-7605</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AIMQZ</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk12LEzEUhgdRsFZvvFYYFAWFqfmczFzWUncrdausyuJNSNOkpE6TmmRE_70ZW1oqZS25CCTPSc4573uy7DEEA4gpfhOcHoABQLi8k_UgxaRgJaB3sx4AmBWMYXQ_exDCCgAACal62XDkXQjFqI3R2GU-sbpplZUq5E7nY_vTeGfXykbR5B-9iyrEXNhFPlVLExoRjbMPs3taNEE92u397Mu78efRZTGdXUxGw2khWYViMV9IWS4UBLDSel7WNZgrXFJSEwhISSWqJdH1okaVBkBorRgFNGFYM6HmusT97OX23Y13P9qUCF-bIFXTCKtcG3iqEzAMwRkgxojV8L8gZiilmdraz579A65c622qliNUV5TSiiTo-RZaikZxY7WLXsjuRT5EEDJIWN1VUZyglsoqLxpnlTbp-IgfnODTWqi1kScDXh0FJCaqX3Ep2hD45PrqfHb29Wy2upjeVuSOla5p1FLxZIvR7Jh_veVlZ0avNN94sxb-N4eAd77mydcc8M7XCX6xE0MEKRrthZUm7CMQAhUq_-rxZMspb-T-evy-KhmjnaZkr-lKybhugzrImpxZIsavuxHqJgjUMI0Mg4ffXbu5PcunW24VovN7kgBMKCDk0CITUmv298J_5yXDjPLLm2_8Q41vrt5-qvgU_wEzXS51</recordid><startdate>20090901</startdate><enddate>20090901</enddate><creator>Olzak, Susan</creator><creator>Soule, Sarah A.</creator><general>The University of North Carolina Press</general><general>University of North Carolina Press</general><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8GL</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISN</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88F</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AM</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGRYB</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>M0O</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M1Q</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090901</creationdate><title>Cross-Cutting Influences of Environmental Protest and Legislation</title><author>Olzak, Susan ; Soule, Sarah A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c782t-bdcc6de1018ffb6990be36549410465c29c4f9d928f00affe75056993f7aebf63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Activism</topic><topic>Agenda Setting</topic><topic>Bill drafting</topic><topic>Citizen Participation</topic><topic>Colletive Action</topic><topic>Company business management</topic><topic>Congressional legislation</topic><topic>Conservation (Environment)</topic><topic>Context Effect</topic><topic>Criteria</topic><topic>Demonstrations & protests</topic><topic>Demonstrations and protests</topic><topic>Environmental institutions</topic><topic>Environmental law</topic><topic>Environmental legislation</topic><topic>Environmental movement</topic><topic>Environmental Movements</topic><topic>Environmental policy</topic><topic>Environmental problems</topic><topic>Environmental protection</topic><topic>Environmental regulation</topic><topic>Environmentalism</topic><topic>Evidence</topic><topic>Federal Legislation</topic><topic>Feedback (Response)</topic><topic>Hearings</topic><topic>Human ecology and demography</topic><topic>Inferences</topic><topic>Influence</topic><topic>Legislation</topic><topic>Legislative behaviour</topic><topic>Legislatures</topic><topic>Longitudinal studies</topic><topic>Management</topic><topic>Opportunities</topic><topic>Partisanship</topic><topic>Policy analysis</topic><topic>Political Attitudes</topic><topic>Political behaviour</topic><topic>Political Factors</topic><topic>Political influences</topic><topic>Political protest</topic><topic>Political protests</topic><topic>Political sociology</topic><topic>Politics</topic><topic>Pollution</topic><topic>Predictor Variables</topic><topic>Protest Movements</topic><topic>Public Opinion</topic><topic>Public Policy</topic><topic>Social activism</topic><topic>Social aspects</topic><topic>Social Change</topic><topic>Social movements</topic><topic>Social protest</topic><topic>Sociology</topic><topic>Sociology of law and criminology</topic><topic>Sociology of law and justice</topic><topic>Success</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Olzak, Susan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soule, Sarah A.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: High School</collection><collection>Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Canada</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection【Remote access available】</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Proquest)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Military Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Criminology Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature - U.S. Customers Only</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Military Collection</collection><collection>Political Science Database (Proquest)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Social forces</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Olzak, Susan</au><au>Soule, Sarah A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ867755</ericid><atitle>Cross-Cutting Influences of Environmental Protest and Legislation</atitle><jtitle>Social forces</jtitle><stitle>Social Forces</stitle><addtitle>Social Forces</addtitle><date>2009-09-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>88</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>201</spage><epage>225</epage><pages>201-225</pages><issn>0037-7732</issn><eissn>1534-7605</eissn><coden>SOFOAP</coden><abstract>This research examines the influence of types of protest activities, Congressional hearings and political characteristics on environmental legislation enacted from 1961-1990. We find that rates of environmental protest rise with increases in the amount of previous institutional activities, but extra-institutional activities do not raise the overall rate of protest. Protest has no direct effect on the passage of legislation, but institutional protest activities significantly raise the rate of Congressional hearings on the environment. When comparing all environmental laws to those designated as having a major impact, we find both similarities and differences. For example, prior legislative activity decreases both rates, but increases in criteria air pollutants and partisan characteristics of Congress significantly affect only the rates of major environmental legislation.</abstract><cop>Chapel Hill, NC</cop><pub>The University of North Carolina Press</pub><doi>10.1353/sof.0.0236</doi><tpages>25</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0037-7732 |
| ispartof | Social forces, 2009-09, Vol.88 (1), p.201-225 |
| issn | 0037-7732 1534-7605 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60507310 |
| source | Education Source (EBSCOhost); HeinOnline; Oxford Journals - Connect here FIRST to enable access; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Business Source Complete (EBSCOhost); Sociological Abstracts; JSTOR |
| subjects | Activism Agenda Setting Bill drafting Citizen Participation Colletive Action Company business management Congressional legislation Conservation (Environment) Context Effect Criteria Demonstrations & protests Demonstrations and protests Environmental institutions Environmental law Environmental legislation Environmental movement Environmental Movements Environmental policy Environmental problems Environmental protection Environmental regulation Environmentalism Evidence Federal Legislation Feedback (Response) Hearings Human ecology and demography Inferences Influence Legislation Legislative behaviour Legislatures Longitudinal studies Management Opportunities Partisanship Policy analysis Political Attitudes Political behaviour Political Factors Political influences Political protest Political protests Political sociology Politics Pollution Predictor Variables Protest Movements Public Opinion Public Policy Social activism Social aspects Social Change Social movements Social protest Sociology Sociology of law and criminology Sociology of law and justice Success U.S.A |
| title | Cross-Cutting Influences of Environmental Protest and Legislation |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T06%3A44%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cross-Cutting%20Influences%20of%20Environmental%20Protest%20and%20Legislation&rft.jtitle=Social%20forces&rft.au=Olzak,%20Susan&rft.date=2009-09-01&rft.volume=88&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=201&rft.epage=225&rft.pages=201-225&rft.issn=0037-7732&rft.eissn=1534-7605&rft.coden=SOFOAP&rft_id=info:doi/10.1353/sof.0.0236&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA211714796%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=229855584&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A211714796&rft_ericid=EJ867755&rft_jstor_id=40345044&rft_oup_id=10.1353/sof.0.0236&rfr_iscdi=true |