Mc Adam- Biographical Consequences Activism- 1989

7/30/2019 Mc Adam- Biographical Consequences Activism- 1989

1/18

The Biographical Consequences of ActivismAuthor(s): Doug McAdamSource: American Sociological Review, Vol. 54, No. 5 (Oct., 1989), pp. 744-760Published by: American Sociological AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2117751 .

Accessed: 22/05/2013 14:49

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

American Sociological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

American Sociological Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 143.107.252.140 on Wed, 22 May 2013 14:49:58 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asahttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2117751?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2117751?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asa


2/18

THE BIOGRAPHICAL CONSEQUENCES OF ACTIVISMDOUGMCADAMUniversityf Arizona

Using survey data collected in 1983-84 on 212 participants in the 1964Mississippi Freedom Summerproject and 118 individuals who applied, wereaccepted, but did not takepart in theproject, the author seeks to assess the short-and long-termpolitical and personal consequences of high-risk activism. Usingboth descriptiveand inferential statistics, the author demonstratesa strong effectof participation on the subsequent lives of the volunteers and "no-shows." Thevolunteers were morepolitically active throughoutthe sixties than the no-showsand remainso today. In addition,the volunteersare much less likelyto be marriedand to have significantly ower incomesat present thanare the no-shows. Besidesreporting these basic findings, the author seeks throughpath analysis to explorethe specific factors and processes that mediate the impact of participation inFreedom Summeron the later lives of the volunteers.

INTRODUCTIONHistorically, two principalresearchquestionshave dominated the sociological study ofsocial movements. The first concerns theorigins of collective action and constitutesthelongest and most coherent research traditionin the field (see, e.g., Gurr 1970; McAdam1982; Skocpol 1979; Smelser 1962; Tilly1978). Recently, however, the "micro ques-tion" of recruitmento activismhas beguntocommand as much attention as the issue ofmovement emergence. The former questionfocuses on psychological, attitudinal, orsocial-structural actors that account for theentranceof the individualinto activism (see,e.g., Klandermans 1984; McAdam 1986;Oliver 1984; Snow, Zurcher, and Ekland-Olson 1980).

Although differentin emphasis, these twoquestions share a common focus on theearliest stages of collective action. Regretta-bly, scholars have paidmuch less attention othe later stages of a social movement at both* I would like to thankRon Aminzade, GerhardArminger, James Fendrich, Roberto Fernandez,Neil Fligstein, John McCarthy, Susan Olzak,David Snow, and Verta Taylor for theirextremelyhelpful comments and suggestions on various

draftsof this paper. I am very grateful to KellyMoore and Ronnelle Paulsen for their help withvarious analyses reported in the paper. Theresearch was supported n part by a GuggenheimFellowship, a grant from the National ScienceFoundation SES-8309988), and various forms ofsupport hrough he University of Arizona's Socialand Behavioral Sciences Research Institute.

the macro- and microlevels of analysis.At themacrolevelwe are only beginningto exploresuch topics as movement-countermovementinteraction (see, e.g., McAdam 1983; Zaldand Useem 1987), movement outcomes (see,e.g., Gamson 1975; SnyderandKelly 1979),and state-movement relations (see, e.g.,Burstein 1985; Gale 1986). At the microlevelwe know a great deal about the factors thatmake for individualactivism, but much lessabout how movement participationebbs andflows over time or the political and personalconsequencesof movementparticipation.Thelatter is the subject of this paper. Usingsurvey data collected in 1983-84 on 212participantsn the 1964 Mississippi FreedomSummer project and 118 individuals whoapplied, were accepted, but did not take partin the project ("no-shows"), I assess theshort- and long-term political and personalconsequences of high-risk activism (seeMcAdam 1986). Specifically, I examine theactivist, occupational,andmaritalhistoriesofboth groups and seek to determine whateffect, if any, participationin the summerproject had on the subsequent lives of thevolunteersand"no-shows.>" efore turning othese analyses, however, I address thetheoretical issue of the biographicalconse-quences of activism.

THE CONSEQUENCESOF ACTIVISM:ACONCEPTUALOVERVIEWAlthough only a few scholars' studies havefocused on the biographical mpact of activ-

744 AmericanSociological Review, 1989, Vol. 54 (October:744-760)

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/18

BIOGRAPHICALCONSEQUENCESOF ACTIVISM 745ism, the media have paid considerableattention to the contemporarylives of 60sactivists. Based on countless newspaper,newsmagazine, and television news stories,many in the general public feel certain they"know" what happened to the 60s activists.And in knowing what happened to the 60sactivists, they presume to know somethingmore general about the consequences ofmovement participation.What they "know"can be gleaned from popularmedia portraitsof former activists.What emerges from these stories is theimage of the former activist as opportunisticYuppie. The contemporary ives of formeractivist "stars" such as Jerry Rubin andEldridge Cleaver are routinely offered as"evidence" to support his view. Rubin, nowa stockbroker, and Cleaver, the born-againclothier, represent reassuring symbols of akindof moral andpoliticalmaturationlaimedto be typicalof many60s "radicals."So oftenhave stories on these two appearedin thepopular press that their lives now serve as ageneralaccount of the contemporarybiogra-phies of yesterday's activists. Thus thecollapse of the Movement in the early 70sallegedly triggered a period of wholesalegenerational ellout thatfoundthe lion's shareof former radicals embracingthe politics andlifestyles of the "Me Decade."Given thatRubin and Cleaver are virtuallytheonly formeractivists that thepopularpresspublicize, why do these images of genera-tional sellout persist?The answermay lie inthe larger depoliticizing function of theaccount. If most of the 60s radicalsgrew upto become Yuppies, then theirearlierradical-ism can be attributed to immaturity orfaddishness. By growing up to espousemainstream values and hold conventionaljobs, figures like Rubinand Cleaver reassurethe public that it need not take their earlierradical politics seriously. The "kids" werejust sowing a few wild oats beforethey settleddown. Properly chastened, the 60s radicalsare now finding fulfillment in commodityfutures and gentrified urbanhousing. Fromthis perspective, the long-term biographicalconsequences of 60s activism appear to bemodest.Despite the popular appeal of the contem-porary media account, there are severalreasons for doubting its generalizability.First, after Rubin and Cleaver, it is hard toidentify any other prominent 60s activists

who fit the account. Second, the accountrestson a dubious interpretationof the shiftingpatterns of cultural and political allegiancewithin the baby boom generation. Probablyno more than 2 to 4 percent of the generationtook. an active part in any of the movementsof the mid-to-late 60s. It, therefore, seemslikely that today's Yuppies are drawn, notfrom the activist subculture, but from theother 96-98 percentof the generation. Third,the popularaccount is inconsistent with thegrowingnumberof studies of formeractivistsand the theoretical iteraturedealing with theprocessesof conversion and alteration.Conversion, Alternation,andHigh-RiskActivismConversion s defined as a radicaltransforma-tion of a person's life, including theirself-conception, network of associations andlarger worldview. The most common exam-ples of conversiontend to focus on entranceinto cults or insular religious groups (cf.Lofland and Stark 1965; Richardson andStewart 1978; Seggar and Kunz 1972; Snowand Phillips 1980). These studies clearlyhighlightthepotential or long-termbiograph-ical effects as a result of the conversionprocess. While some "converts" "lapse" or"stray from the flock," many others arepermanently ransformed.Distinct from conversion are forms ofpersonal change that Travisaro(1981) callsalternation. These are identity changes thatare not as drastic as conversions, but"relatively easily accomplished changes oflife . . . which are a partof or grow out ofexisting programs of behavior" (p. 243).Travisaro cites such examples as a highschool student becoming a college studentanda husbandbecominga father. The crucialdifferencebetweenconversionandalternationcenters on the degree to which the change iscontinuouswith the individual'spreviouslifeand conception of self. Unlike conversion,alternationdoes not entaila radicalbreakwiththe past or the constructionof anentirelynewself. This does not suggest that alternation san insignificant social process. On thecontrary,it is associated with most of life'skey turningpoints. While the transition romhigh school to college studentmay entail noradicalbreak with the past, it has profoundandenduring mplicationsfor the individual'sfuture. All aspects of a person's life are



4/18

746 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICALREVIEWsubject to significant change as a result ofbecoming a college student. Moreover, theeffect of these changes is expected to persistthroughoutife. Though less dramatic han atrue conversion experience, this examplehighlights the powerful and enduringchangesthat accompanyalternation.The relevanceof this literature or the studyof individualactivism comes from recogniz-ing certain similarities between conversionand alternationand the personalchanges thatoften accompany activism. The degree towhich activism is experienced either asconversion or alternationdependson the levelandforms of activism in which the individualengages. For most movement participants,nothing in their experiences even hints ofconversion or alternation.Quite simply, thefleeting low-cost, low-risk forms of activism(e.g., giving money, writing letters, signingpetitions) in which most individualsengagedo not requireongoing interactionwith otheractivists. This requirementand the gradualimmersion nto a new subculture et the stagefor either conversion or alternation. Whatdistinguishes conversion from alternation isthe degreeto whichthegroupor subculturenquestionis exclusive and organizedin oppo-sition to the rest of society. Conversiontendsto occur in groupsthat demand the exclusiveloyalties of its members and maintain ahostile stance toward mainstream society.Alternation generally takes place in thecontext of a group that is relatively moreinclusive and tolerantof the otherattachmentsof its members.Virtuallyall forms of high-risk/costactiv-ism are organized through and thereforeinvolve the individualactivist in one of thesetwo typesof groups.By necessity, revolution-arymovements tend to creategroups that areexclusive, highly insular, and hostile to thesociety they seek to change. Therefore,somethingakin to conversion would seem tobe a likely outcome of entrance into andabsorption nto such groups. Reform move-ments, on the other hand, tend to spawngroups that are more inclusive and tolerantof mainstream society than revolutionarymovements. Nonetheless, they can be verydemandingof a person's time, energy, andloyalties.' Such groups, then, constitute an

ideal setting within which alternation canoccur.Thus, theoretically, we should expect thatthose involved in high-risk/costactivism willbe very susceptible to either conversion oralternation and to the long-term behavioraland attitudinaleffects that accompany theseprocesses. Empirically, there is even anemergingliterature hatsuggests as much.Follow-Up Studies of ActivistsThough far less developedthan the literatureon individual recruitmentto activism, theredoes exist a small body of studies on thepersonal consequences of movement partici-pation (see Table 1 for references). Thesestudies are hamperedby a host of methodo-logical problems, which I examine later.Nonetheless, they have consistently yieldedresults strongly at odds with the popularaccount reviewed above. Taken together,these studiessuggest a powerfulandenduringeffect of participation n the laterlives of theactivists. Unlike Rubin and Cleaver, thesubjects in these studies display markedcontinuity n their values andpolitics over thepast 10-20 years. Specifically, the formeractivists were found to have:

-continued to espouse leftists political attitudes(Demerath,Marwell, and Aiken 1971, p. 184;Fendrichand Tarleau1973, p. 250; Marwell,Aiken, and Demerath 1987; Whalen andFlacks 1980, p. 222);-remained active in contemporarymovementsor other forms of political activity (Fendrichand Krauss 1978; Fendrichand Lovoy 1988;Jenningsand Niemi 1981);-concentrated in the teachingor other "helpingprofessions" (Fendrich1974, p. 116;Maiden-burgand Meyer 1970); and-continued to define themselves as "liberal"or"radical" in political orientation (Fendrichand Tarleau1973, p. 250).

Taken together, it is hard to reconcile thesefindings with the image of the activists asdepictedin the contemporarymedia account.However, before we embrace these studies asthe final word on the subject, it is necessaryto amplify the note of caution touched onearlier.The works cited earlierare beset by anumber of methodological shortcomings(seeTable 1).

1 In her autobiographicalaccount of participa-tion in a local chapter of the Congress of RacialEquality (CORE), Inge Powell Bell (1968) pro-vides a striking example of the potential forabsorptionwithin just such a group.



5/18

BIOGRAPHICALCONSEQUENCESOF ACTIVISM 747Table 1. Follow-Up Studies of MovementParticipantsa

Year of Year of Activists Control Before and ResultingInvestigator(s) Participation Follow-up in Sample (N) Group? After Data? PublicationsDemerath,Marwell, 1965 1969 40 No Yes Demerath

and Aiken et al. 1971.Fendrich 1960-1963 1971 28b Yes No Fendrich1974, 1977;FendrichandKrauss1978;FendrichandTarleau1973.Fendrichand Lovoy 1960-1963 1986 23 Yes No FendrichandLovoy 1988.Jennings and Niemi 1964-1972 1973 216 Yes Yes Jennings andNiemi 1981;Jennings 1987.MaidenbergandMeyer 1967 1969 230 No No MaidenbergandMeyer 1970.Marwell, Aiken, and 1965 1984 145 No Yes MarwelletDemerath al. 1987.Nassi andAbramowitz 1967 1977 15/30C No No AbramowitzandNassi 1981;Nassi andAbramowitz1979.Whalenand Flacks 1970 1980 11 No No WhalenandFlacks 1980.

a Table was adapted rom Table 1 in DeMartini1983, p. 198.b Fendrich's1977 article is based on comparativedata on 28 white and72 black activists.c Nassi and Abramowitzrelied on 15 subjects;AbramowtizandNassi, on 30.The first problem concerns the timing ofthe studies.Only four of the studies(Fendrichand Lovoy 1988; Marwellet al. 1987; Nassiand Abramowitz 1979; and Whalen andFlacks 1980) were conducted after the closeof what is popularly conceived of as therecent activists era (see Table 1). For theotherstudies, it is hardto know whetherthereportedcontinuitiesin political thought andaction were an effect of an era in which thefollow-up studies were conducted or anenduringconsequence of the subjects' earlieractivism. For instance, Maidenberg andMeyer (1970) reported that a sample offormerFreeSpeech Movementdemonstratorsliving in the Bay Area in 1969 remainedactive in leftist politics. Given the high levelof activism in the Bay Area in that era, thefindingmay be a simple function of time and

place, rather than the impact of the FreeSpeechMovement.A second timing issue centers on the basicquestion of whether sufficient time hadelapsed to allow for an adequateassessmentof the impact of movement participation.Inhalf of the studies, no more than five yearshad passed between activism and follow-upinvestigation.Moreover,only a smallnumber

of subjectsare involved in these studies. Onlythe Jennings and Niemi (1981), MaidenbergandMeyer(1970), andMarwell et al. (1987),studiesinvolved more than 40 subjects.2Andthe first two of these studies share the timingdeficiencies touched on earlier. Both wereconducted while popular protest was stillwidespreadn theUnitedStates, no more thanfive years after the subjects' initialactivism.Third, most of the studies draw subjectsfrom only a narrowgeographicarea, some-times a single city (cf. Whalen and Flacks1980). This makes it difficult to generalizethe results especially when the geographicareas are as atypical as the Bay Area (cf.Maidenberg and Mayer 1970; Nassi andAbramowitz 1979) or Santa Barbara (cf.WhalenandFlacks 1980).Another weakness of these studies is theirfailure to make use of nonactivist controlgroups. Without such groups, one cannot

2 Most of James Fendrich's research has beenbased on data gathered on 28 white activistsinvolved in civil rights activity while students atFlorida State University. In his 1977 article,Fendrichemploys comparativedata on 100 activ-ists, 72 of them black.



6/18

748 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICALREVIEWestablish a behavioral or attitudinalbaselineto judge the effects of activism. Four of theseven studies in Table 1 failed to employ acontrol group. Even when control groupswere used, the characteristics on whichactivists and nonactivists were matched oftenleft the issue of consequencesunresolved.Forexample, Fendrich matched his subjects onthe basis of college attendanceatFloridaStatebetween 1960 and 1963. While clearly anadvance over the other studies, even thisresearch design fails to allow for a clearexplication of the impactof activism. Whatisat issue is the salienceof the characteristic nwhich the subjectswere matched.Matching sdone to hold constant variables that mightotherwise confound the interpretation ofcausal effects. Fendrich held constant theeffects of time andplace but left unexaminedthe influence of priorattitudinaldifferences.It may be that these differences account forboth the activists' involvement in the move-ment as well as the laterdifferencesbetweenactivists and nonactivists turnedup by thesestudies.Finally, the earlier studies also lack "be-fore" and "after"data on the activists. Theusualprocedurehas been to gathercontempo-rary nformationon the formeractivistsandtothen infer the effects of participationrom thedatacollected. But withoutpriorinformationon the subject, it is hard to determine theextent and significance that changes inparticipationmay have boughtabout.Correcting all of the deficiencies notedaboveyields a prescriptionor a very differenttype of study than has been completed todate. It would be national n scope, involve amuch larger sample of activists, employ"before"and "after" on activists and nonac-tivists alike, and be conductedwell after theactivists episode in question. The researchreported here generally approximates thisideal.THE STUDYThis paper reportsthe results of a follow-upstudy of 330 applicantsto the 1964 Missis-sippi FreedomSummerproject. That projectbroughthundredsof primarilywhite, northerncollege studentsto Mississippifor all, or partof, the summerof 1964 to help staff freedomschools, register black voters and dramatizethe continueddenialof civil rightsthroughoutthe South. As instances of activism go, the

summer project was time-consuming, physi-cally demanding,andhighly newsworthy.The project began in early June with thefirst contingent of volunteers arriving inMississippi fresh from a week of training atOxford, Ohio. Within ten days, threeprojectmembers, Mickey Schwerner,JamesChaney,and Andrew Goodman, had been kidnappedand beaten to deathby a groupof segregation-ists led by Mississippi law enforcementofficers. That event set the tone for thesummeras the remainingvolunteers enduredbeatings, bombings, and arrests. Moreover,most did so while sharing the grindingpoverty and unrelievedtension that was thedaily lot of the black families that housedthem.Prior to their participationn the campaign,all prospective volunteerswere asked to fillout detailed applicationsproviding informa-tion on, among other topics, their organiza-tional affiliations, college activities, reasonsfor volunteering, and record of previousarrests. On the basis of these applications(and, on occasion, subsequent interviews),the prospective volunteer was accepted orrejected. Acceptancedid not necessarilymeanparticipation n the campaign, however. Inadvance of the summer,manyof the acceptedapplicants informed campaign staffers thatthey would not be taking partin the summereffort after all. Completedapplications or allthree groups-rejects, participants,and with-drawals-were copied from the originals,which are now housed in the archivesof theMartinLutherKing, Jr. Centerfor the Studyof Nonviolence in Atlanta and the NewMississippi Foundationin Jackson, Missis-Sippi.3 In all, 1068 applicationswere copied,with the breakdownas follows: 720 partici-pants, 239 withdrawals,55 rejections,and 54applicantswhose statusin the summerprojectwas unclear. The applications were thencoded and the data used as the basis for anearlier study of recruitment to high-riskactivism(see McAdam 1986).The applications were also used as the

3 My deep appreciationgoes to Louise Cook,the former head librarianand archivist at the KingCenter, and to Jan Hillegas-herself a FreedomSummervolunteer-of the New Mississippi Foun-dation for all their help in locating and copying theapplicationmaterialsused in this project. Withouttheir help, this researchwould have been impossi-ble.



7/18

BIOGRAPHICALCONSEQUENCESOF ACTIVISM 749methodologicalstartingpoint for the presentstudy. Specifically, several application tems(alma mater, parents' address, major inschool) functioned as crucial leads in myeffortsto obtaincurrentaddresses or as manyof the applicantsas possible. The informationon alma materallowed me to contact alumniassociations for help in tracking the appli-cants. Failing that, phone directories weresearched to ascertain whether their parentswere still living at the addresseslisted on theapplications. Their help was then enlisted incontactingthe subject. Using the informationon college major as a guide, academicdirectorieswere scanned orpossible matches.Finally, once contacted, the applicantswereoften helpful in locatingothersubjects.The result of these efforts yielded currentaddressesfor 556 of the 959 participantsandwithdrawals or whom I had applications.Ofthese, 382 (of a total of 720) had beenparticipantsn the project, while another174(of 239) had withdrawnin advance of thesummer. Separatequestionnaireswere thenpreparedand sent to the participantsand tothe "no-shows." Participantswere questionedabout their experiences during FreedomSummer, their activist histories, and thebroadcontoursof theirlives, personalas wellas political, post-Freedom Summer. Thequestionnaire ent to the no-shows dealt withthese latter two topics as well as the reasonswhy they withdrew from the project. In all,212 (or 56 percent) of the participantsand118 (or 68 percent)of the no-shows returnedcompletedquestionnaires.In turn, the com-pleted questionnaires yielded the data onwhich the findingsreportedhere are based.This study closely approximatesthe idealresearchdesign describedearlier. It involvesa largenumberof subjects(330) drawnfromall over the country.The researchitself wasconductednearly 20 years after the instanceof activism in question and employs datagatheredprior to the summer project as abaseline against which to judge any subse-quentchangesin the subjects'lives. Perhaps,most importantly,subjects were drawn notonly from a group of former activists, butfrom the perfect comparison group: otherapplicants o the sameproject.This featureofthe study allows for an unambiguousresolu-tion of the troublesome ssue of priorvalues.The earlier study of recruitment showedclearly that the no-shows did not differsignificantly from the participants in the

values they brought to the project (McAdam1986, pp. 72-76). That analysis also indi-cated that "the volunteers and no-showsappear as essentially alike on a list ofvariables:race, social class, type of neighbor-hood (urban, suburban,rural), home region,type of school, and major in school"(McAdam 1988). Holding so many importantvariables constant increases confidence inattributing subsequent differences betweenthe no-shows andparticipants o the effects ofparticipation in the summer project. Thesubjects in both groups looked very similargoing into the project.The key question is, towhatextent do theirbiographiesdiverge afterthe summer?To what extent can we speak ofFreedom Summer as having constituted aninstance of alternationin the lives of thevolunteers?RESULTSOne of the most distinctiveaspectsof the 60swas the twin emphaseson personalliberationand social action. While it remained forradical feminists to give explicit voice to thenotion that "the personal is political," theidea had, in fact, informed New Left politicsalmost from the outset. Accordingly, anyassessment of the consequencesof participa-tion in the summer project must focus notonly on the applicants' aterpoliticalactivitiesbut on theirpersonallives as well.Political ConsequencesThe original project applications includedseveral questions that provided informationabout prior political activities. Not surpris-ingly, both participantsand no-shows appearto have been reasonably active politicallybefore the summer. This was especially truein regardto the civil rights movement. Fiftypercentof the participantsand 40 percentofthe no-shows were alreadymembers of civilrights organizations. Seventy-nine percentofthe participants and 65 percent of theno-shows reportedsome form of prior civilrights involvement on their applications.Similar differenceswere also found in regardto other forms of political activity. Thus,while both groups were politically activebefore the summer, participantswere slightlymore so.Did this patternhold following FreedomSummeror did the summermarka significant



8/18

750 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICALREVIEWdivergence in the political lives of the twogroups? In answering this question, we willwant to distinguish the short- and long-termpolitical consequences of participants n thesummer project. Short-term refers to thesubject's political involvements between thefall of 1964 and the National Guardshootingsat Kent State University in May of 1970.These dates were selectedbecause they definethe peak years of New Left activism in theUnited States. The long-termconsequences ofinvolvement n FreedomSummerrefers to thecontemporarypoliticalattitudesand activitiesof the participantsand no-shows.Short-term political consequences. Theevidence from the follow-up questionnaireswould appear to support two conclusions.First, the FreedomSummer volunteers werefar more politically active than the no-showsbetween 1964 and 1970. More importantly,the differences in the activity levels betweenthe two groups appear o be directlyrelatedtothe participants' nvolvement in the summerproject. Evidence for the first conclusion issummarizedn Table 2.By a margin of 90 to 74 percent, thevolunteers were significantly more likely tohave remained active in the civil rightsmovement following the summer. Just asimportant, the forms of civil rights activismthe participants ngagedin tendedto be muchmore intensive than those of the no-shows.Thus the ratio of participantsto no-showsTable 2. PercentDifferences n Political Activism 1964-1970, by Status on the Summer Project(Percents)

Volunteers No-ShowsType of Activism (n = 212) (n = 118)Active in the civil rights 90** 74movementfollowingFreedom Summer"Very"active in the 46** 28antiwarmovementReturningstudentswho report 40* 28being "very"active n thestudentmovementFemales who report 66** 45being "very" activein the women's movementFull-timepaid activist 36* 24employmentMean numberof member- 3.1** 1.5ships in political organi-zations, 1964 1970a

a Mean rather hanpercent.* = p < .05.** = p < .01.

involved in southernvoter registrationactivi-ties was eight to one. Three times as manyparticipantsas nonparticipantshelped orga-nize civil right-related boycotts of northernschools. Twice as many returned o the Southin connection with later civil rights cam-paigns. In contrast, the proportion of no-shows listing "on campus civil rights activi-ties" as their principal form of activism wastriple the comparable igure for participants.Withthe rise of "blackpower," the role ofwhites in the movement grew ever moreproblematic. Consequently, the focus ofactivism for the white New Left shifted toothertargets.The threemovements to benefitmost from this displacement of activistenergies were the student, antiwar, andwomen's liberation movements. Not surpris-ingly, both groups of applicants report highlevels of involvementin all three movements.As shownin Table2, however, the volunteerswere more active in each than were theno-shows.This characterizationholds for one finalcomparison between the two groups. Thefollow-up questionnaireasked all subjectstoprovide a detailed employment history sineFreedom Summer. What was surprisingwasthe number of subjects who had worked asfull-time paid activists at some point duringthe 60s. Thirty-six percent of the volunteersincluded such a job on theirquestionnairesascomparedto 24 percentof the no-shows.Altogether, these findings support twoconclusions.First, the volunteerswere signif-icantly more active throughoutthe 60s thanwere the no-shows. Second, the gap in theactivity levels of the two groups was morepronounced than before the summer. Thissuggests that the participants' higher post-summer activity levels were a function oftheirexperiencesin Mississippi. Fortunately,more systematicdata are available to test thisimplicit proposition.Using information from the follow-upquestionnaire,a measure of the applicant'slevel of movement activism between 1964and 1970 was constructed.4The continuous

4 The activism scale was constructedusing threequestionnaire tems. The first asked respondents oreport the forms of civil rights activism, if any,they were involved in following the summer. Anumeric value was then assigned to each of theseforms of activity based on its intensity relative toall others. Forexample, joining the staff of one of



9/18

BIOGRAPHICALCONSEQUENCESOF ACTIVISM 751variable ranges from zero to 59. Notsurprisingly, the volunteers' mean score(21.3) was significantly higher than that ofthe no-shows (13.6).5 The real interesthere,however, is in identifyingthose independentvariables that best predict variation in 60sactivism. A simple ordinary least squaresregression was preformed regressing 15independentvariables on the dependent vari-able of 60s activism (see Table 3). Theresulting equation produced a multiple r of.64 and an r2 of .35.As shown in Table 3, only five of thevariables in the model were significantlyrelated to the dependent variable. Three ofthese supportthe causal importanceimpliedby the simple bivariaterelationshipsreviewedearlier.However, the single strongestpredic-tor of high levels of subsequentactivism wasparticipationin the summer project. Whatmakes this finding all the more importanttheoreticallyis the presence in the model offour variables(age, gender, level of activismpriorto the summer,and numberof organiza-tion affiliations prior to the summer) whichwere earlier shown to bear a strongrelation-ship to participation n the summer project(McAdam 1986, p. 88). However, with oneexception, the significanceof these variablesdisappearedwhen entered into the presentequation. Clearly, the subjects' later activismcannot be attributed to the same mix ofbackgroundactorsthat led to theirparticipa-tion in the summerproject.The suggestionisthat the summer served as an instance ofalternationn the lives of the volunteers andwas largely responsiblefor the shapeof theirsubsequentactivist histories.What was it about Freedom Summer thatencouraged the subjects' later movement

Table 3. Results of Regression Analysis Assessing theEffect of Various Independent Variables onLevel of Activism 1964-1970Independentvariable b SE(b)Ties to other volunteersin 1966 .201 .212in 1970 1.476** .632Political orientationprior toFreedomSummer -.935 .683Changein orientationpre- andpost-FreedomSummer .534* .223Participationn FreedomSummer?(yes/no) 5.008** 1.848Gender 1.787 1.885Age .139 .238Family income prior to Freedom

Summer .0002 .0003Level of activism prior toFreedomSummer .213 .136Organizational ffiliationspriorto Freedom Summer(N) 1.306* .575Years marriedduring the 60s - .106 .403Years as parentduring the 60s -.326** .606Yearsemployed full-timeduring the 60s - 1.136** .440Years in college during the 60s -.708 .448Attendcollege post-FreedomSummer?(yes/no) 2.452 1.965Constant 10.263 8.431

N = 189.*p < .05.**p < .01.

involvements? Two variables in Table 3suggest some answersto this question. One isthe subject's own estimate of the change inhis or her "political stance" pre- andpost-Freedom Summer. Political stance wasmeasured by means of a ten-point scalerangingfrom "1" for radical left to "10" forradical right. Table 3 indicates that a sharpleftward shift in the subject's political orien-tationfollowing Freedom Summeris signifi-cantly relatedto levels of 60s activism. Thissuggests that participation in the summerproject radicalized he volunteersandencour-aged higher levels of activism.A second independentvariablethatbears astrongrelationship o the activism measureisthe subject's estimate of the number ofFreedom Summer volunteers he or sheremained n contactwith in 1970. The greaterthe numberof ties, the higher the level ofactivism in the postproject period. Thisfinding adds a structuralcomponent to theattitudinal interpretation advanced above.Freedom Summer did more than radicalize

the majorcivil rights organizationswas assignedanumeric value of 5. Participating n civil rightsfund-raisingwas accordeda value of 1. Second, allsubjects were asked to indicate their level ofinvolvement n the majormovementsof the period:the antiwar, student, and women's liberationmovements, among others. Defining oneself as"very involved" in any of these movements wasassigned a point value of 3; "moderately" or"somewhat nvolved," 2 and 1 point, respectively.Finally, all instances of full-time paid activistemployment were assigned a value of 5. Theindividual's activism score was the sum of thepointson these three items.5 Using a standard F-test, the difference ofmeans is significantat the .01 level.



10/18

752 AMERICANSOCIOLOGICALREVIEWthe volunteers. It also put them in contactwith like-mindedpeople. Thus the volunteersleft Mississippi not only more attitudinallydisposedtowardactivism, but embeddedin aset of relationshipsand an emerging activistsubculture ideally suited to reinforce theprocess of personalchange begun in Missis-sippi.Long-termpolitical consequences:the vol-unteers today. Have the volunteers remainedpolitically active? How do the no-shows andvolunteers compare on various measures ofcontemporaryactivism?Have the volunteersremainedsignificantlymore active or has thegap between the two groups narrowed?Letme take up the first of these questions.One item on the follow-up questionnaireasked the volunteers whether they were"currentlyactive in any social movements."Nearly half of the volunteers reported theywere, while a quarter said they remained"very active" in at least one current socialmovement.How do the volunteers' current rates ofactivism and political attitudes compare tothose of the no-shows? The data in Table 4show that the volunteersremainsignificantlymore active and more leftist in politicalorientation han the no-shows.Table 4. PercentDifferences in Rates of ContemporaryActivism and CurrentPolitical Attitudes byStatuson the SummerProject

Volunteers No-Shows(n = 212) (n = 118)

Currentlyactive in any so- 48** 33cial movement"Very"involved in antinu- 11 6clear movement"Very"involved in the nu- 10 5clear freeze movement"Very"involved in the envi- 11* 3ronmentalmovementMean numberof member- 2.1** 1.4ships in political organiza-tions"Leftist"in currentpolitical 60** 41stanceaAgreeingthat "tax structure 56** 40shouldbe modified to re-

duce the income disparitybetweenthe rich and thepoor"a The designation "leftist" was reserved for thosesubjects who used the numbers 1, 2, or 3 to designatetheir current "political stance" on a 10-point scaleranging from 1 for "radical left" to 10 for "radicalright."

*p < .05.**p < .01.

What are the causal dynamics that mayaccount for the differences between activistsand no-shows. To get at these dynamics, asummary measure of contemporaryactivismwas constructedcombining three items fromthe follow-up questionnaire.6Comparable othe summary measure of 60s activism, thecontemporaryactivism variable is continuousand ranges from zero to 37. The volunteersalso tend to score higheron the variable ustas they did on the measure of 60s activism.7The ultimate value of the measure, however,stems from its role as the dependentvariablein a path analysis (see Figure 1) designed toshed light on the causal dynamics that shapecontemporary ctivism. The model consists ofvariablesdrawn from four time periods.TimeI represents he period immediatelyprecedingFreedomSummer;Time II, the summer tself;Time III, 1964-1970; and Time IV, 1983-1984.The goal of the analysis is to assess thestrength of the relationships between thevariables at these four points in time. Adetailed analysis of the relationshipof thevariables at Time I and participation inFreedom Summer has been reported else-where (McAdam 1986, p. 88). Three of thefour Time I variables (gender, # of orgs.presummmer,and level of activism presum-mer) were among the strongest predictorsofparticipationn that earlieranalysis.The four presummer variables were in-cluded in the model to assess the strengthofassociationbetween them and level of activ-ism, the principaldependentvariableat TimeIII. If participationn FreedomSummerwasas personallytransforming, hen the subjects'level of 60s activism should be more a

6 The applicants' current level of politicalactivism was measuredby a scale constructed romtheir responses to three items on the follow-upquestionnaire. First, they received one point foranswering "yes" to a question asking themwhether hey were currently nvolved in any socialmovement. For all those movements they reportedbeing "actively involved in," in response to asecond question, they received three additionalpoints. Finally, if they were currently employedfull-time in an activist capacity, they received fivemore points. The person's score on the contempo-rary activism scale was the sum of these pointtotals.7 The mean scoreson the contemporary ctivismmeasure are 7.4 for the no-shows and 9.5 for thevolunteers.



11/18

BIOGRAPHICALCONSEQUENCESOF ACTIVISM 753function of their summer status than of theircharacteristicsprior to the summer. Specifi-cally, I anticipatea significantdirecteffect ofparticipation on the subject's level of 60sactivism, as well as indirect effects mediatedthrough he other Time III variables:politicalstance postsummer, # of orgs. 1964-1970,andties in 1966. I hypothesizethatparticipa-tionin FreedomSummerencouragedater60sactivism both by radicalizing the volunteers(political stancepostsummer)andby increas-ing their integrationinto political organiza-tions (# of orgs. 1964-1970) and activistnetworks (ties in 1966) that supportedtheirlatter involvements.

A similar set of dynamics is expected tolink variables at Times III and IV. Inparticular, he level of the subjects' activismduring the 60s is expected to bear a strongdirectrelationship o their level of contempo-rary activism. We should also see indirecteffects of level of 60s activism on currentactivism as mediatedthroughthe other TimeIV variables.Thatis, a high level of activismduring the 60s is expected to have laid astrongfoundation or activismtoday, bothbycementingthe subject'slinks to other activists(current ies) andmovementorganizations #of currentorgs.) and by reinforcinga set of

leftist political values thathave persisted intothe present (currentpolitical stance).For the most part, the findingsreported nFigure 1 areconsistent with these hypotheses.Takentogether, they provide strongevidenceof an enduring political impact of participa-tion in the Freedom Summer project. Formany volunteers, the project seems to haveinitiated an importantprocess of personalchange and political resocialization and thebeginnings of a kind of activist career. Theimportanceof FreedomSummer to this altercareer is reflectedin the strengthof the pathsleading to level of 60s activism. Whileparticipationin Freedom Summer does notbear a significantdirect relationshipto levelof 60s activism, it is linked indirectlyto thelatter variable by several intervening vari-ables. Participation n the summerproject ispositively related to both the number ofpolitical organizations and ties to othervolunteers the subjectwas involved in duringtheperiod1964-1970. In turn,these variableswere significant predictors of the subject'slevel of activismduringthese same years. Inaddition, a strong association exists betweenthe subject's participation n Freedom Sum-mer and his or her political orientationat theclose of the project.Thatorientation, n turn,

# of orgs. .190 #of orgs. .187 # ofpre-summer 1964-1970 current orgs.

* -.068*levelof **144** .550**activism ties in 1966 -* ties in 1970 P.current tiespre-summer

participate .273 level of .220** level ofProject (y/n) 60ssactivism

political 443** political .428** currentstance stance politicalpre-summer post-summer stance

gender P.37Fg 1 p < .01Fig. 1. Results of PathAnalysis of Long-TermPolitical Consequencesof Participationn Freedom Summer



12/18

754 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICALREVIEWis a strong predictorof the subject's activismbetween 1964 and 1970.The level of a subject's activism duringthe60s standsin a similar relationship o currentactivism as participation in the summerprojectdid to it. The one differenceis that thelevel of a subject's activism during the 60sseemsto haveexerteddirectas well as severalindirecteffects on level of currentactivism.The direct path between 60s and currentactivismconstitutesthe single best predictorof variation n the dependentvariable. But inaddition,the two interveningvariables, num-ber of current organizations and currentpolitical stance, provide strong indirectlinksbetweenthe two variables. This suggests thatactivism duringthe 60s is related to presentorganizationalaffiliations and currentpoliti-cal orientation and that, in turn, thesevariables bear a significant relationship tolevel of currentactivism.8The picture that emerges is one ofpersistent differences in level of activismbetween the volunteersand no-shows. Thesedifferences are evident prior to FreedomSummer (McAdam 1986) and continue toexercise some independentnfluence over thevolunteers'lateractivist careers.At the sametime, it is clear thatparticipationn FreedomSummerplays a particularlydecisive role inshaping the applicants'later political valuesand involvements. In addition, these dataconfirma certainself-perpetuatingqualitytoindividual activism. Activism, by its verynature, broadens the base of the activists'links to movement organizationsand otheractivists. In turn, these links make it morelikely that the activist will be drawn intosubsequentactivistepisodes, therebydeepen-ing his or her commitmentto activist valuesand perpetuating the process of personalchange that initial forays into activism haveset in motion.

Table 5. Short-TermDifferences in Occupational His-tory by Staus on the SummerProjectVolunteers No-Shows

Working full-timebefore age 39%** 59%25 (%)Meannumberof full-time 3.9** 2.0jobs held 1964-1970(means)Mean years of full-timeem- 2.2* 3.0ployment 1964-1970(means)Employedas full-time paid 33%** 19%activists sometimebe-tween 1964-1970 (%)"Strongagreement"with 46%** 34%statement:"My participa-tion in social movementsstrongly affected mychoices aboutwork" (%)

p < .05.* < .01.

Personal ConsequencesThe ideological imperativeof the 60s calledfor activists to recognize the political signifi-cance of their personal lives and to makechoices aboutwork, family, andrelationshipsthat reflected their politics. Any completeaccountingof the impact of participation nFreedomSummer, then, must examine theseostensibly nonpolitical aspects of a person'slife.Short-termpersonal consequences. In as-sessing the effects of activist participation,Iwill again distinguish short- from long-termconsequences. The period 1964-1970 seemsespecially appropriatefor examining short-termdifferencesin work and maritalhistoriesbecauseit demarcates he spanof yearswithinwhich most applicants would have beenexpected to begin careersand/ormarriages.9Did they fulfill these traditionalexpectationsand, if not, can we see the imprint ofFreedom Summer on their personal andprofessionallives?Work histories. Based on the data pre-sented in Table 5, it seems clear that thevolunteers and no-shows were as differentintheirwork as their activist historiesduring helate 60s. The volunteers entered full-timeemployment later, changed jobs more fre-

8 The only remaining variable that is signifi-cantly related o level of currentactivism is gender,with female applicantsmore likely to be active. Ihave refrained rom discussingthis relationshiporthe general ssue of genderbecausethe topic meritssystematicattention n its own right. I am currentlyat work on an empiricalpaperfocusingexclusivelyon "Gender Differences in the Causes andConsequences of Activism" using the data setemployedin this paper.

9 The mean age of the two groups on the eve ofthe summer project was 23.6 years for thevolunteersand21.8 for the no-shows. By 1970 theaveragevolunteerwas in his late 20s or early 30swith the no-shows only slightly younger.



13/18

BIOGRAPHICALCONSEQUENCESOF ACTIVISM 755quently, and worked fewer years during thelater 60s than the no-shows. The onlywork-relatedmeasureon which the volunteersscored higher than the no-shows is percentengaged in full-time activist employment.This finding suggests that the roots of theoccupational differences between volunteersand no-shows lie in the different politicalvalues and commitments motivating eachgroup. On the questionnaires, all subjectswere asked to respond to the followingstatement:"My participationn social move-ments affected my choices about work."Nearly half of the volunteers (46 percent)expressed "strong" agreementwith the state-ment as compared o 34 percentof those whowithdrew from the project. A chi-squaretestshows this percentage difference to besignificant at the .05 level.Marital histories. Between 1964 and 1970the volunteers were just as likely to wed,were married ust as long, and got marriedatalmost the same age as the no-shows.0 But itis possible that the volunteers' criteria forselecting a mate were more often influencedby their politics than was true for theno-shows? On the questionnaires, the appli-cants were asked to express their level ofagreementwith the following statement:"Myparticipationn social movementsaffectedmychoice of mate(s)." Nearly two-thirds of thevolunteersbut not quite half of the no-showsagreed with the statement. This percentagedifference is statisticallysignificantat the .05level. It must be remembered that thevolunteersaveragednearly24 yearsof age atthebeginningof the summer.That meant thatthe majorityof them had grown up in the1950s and early 1960s, during one of themore romanticizedand conservative eras ofdomestic life in this country's history. Evenas they were challenging much of thissocialization,the volunteerscouldn'thelp butbe affected by it as well. They were no lessinterested n gettingmarried han theirpeers,but their vision of the ideal mate appearstohave been politicized by their experiences in

Mississippi. They were now looking for apartnerwho sharedtheir commitment to thestruggle.Current occupation/income. One of themost consistent findings from the previousfollow-up studies is the concentration offormer activists in the teaching or other"helping professions" (cf. Fendrich 1974, p.116; Maidenburgand Meyer 1970). Data inTable 6 confirm the applicability of thisoccupational profile to the volunteers. How-ever, the table also shows that, relative to thecomparison group, there are few significantdifferences between the volunteers and no-shows in terms of their distribution nto broadoccupational categories, suggesting that par-ticipation in the summer project had littleimpact on the fields in which the volunteershave chosen to work.However, one work-relateddifference be-tween the volunteersandno-shows appears obear the imprint of Freedom Summer. Theno-shows have significantly higher incomesthan the volunteers. The modal incomecategoryfor the no-shows is $40,000, while itis $20-29,999 for the volunteers.At the otherend of the income scale, nearly 50 percentmore volunteers than no-shows earn under$10,000. This disparity would appear toderive from the differentpolitical historiesofthe two groups. Perhapsthe income gap hasits roots in the volunteer's later entrance ntofull-timeemployment,a difference thatprevi-ously has been linked to their greaterwillingness to subordinatework to politics.Excludingthose who were employed priortoFreedom Summer, the modal years of en-trance into full-time employment was 1969for the no-shows and 1972 for the volunteers.Ineffect, the volunteerspostponedthe startoftheir careers, thereby sacrificing the marketadvantagethey could have enjoyed as babiesborn during World War II or the earlypostwaryears. Hadthe volunteersenteredthework force on schedulein the mid-to-late60s,they would have benefited not only from aboom economy, but from the relativepaucityof competitorsfor an expanding numberofjobs. Instead, by waiting until the early 70s,they confrontedthe same stagnant, competi-tive job market as theiryoungerbrothersandsisters.But this remains mere speculation. Whilethe differentwork histories of the volunteersand no-shows may explain the disparity intheirincomes, it remainsfor me to link those

10The proportion of each group to marrybetween 1964 and 1970 was 59 percent for thevolunteers and 56 percent for the no-shows.During these years, the volunteers averaged 2.3years of marriage, and the no-shows, 2.1. Meanage at first marriagewas 26.9 for the volunteersand 25.9 for the no-shows. None of thesedifferenceswas statisticallysignificant.



14/18

756 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICALREVIEWTable 6. Volunteers, No-Shows, and ComparisonGroupa n Selected OccupationalGroups(percents)

ComparisonVolunteers No-Shows Group% N % N % NSelected professionaloccs.College professors 17 (34) 18 (18) 3 (108)Lawyers or judges 8 (16) 12 (12) 2 (83)Teachers 7 (15) 5 (5) 11 (465)(except college)Healthpractitioners 3 (6) 0 (0) 0 (4)Social workers 2 (5) 4 (4) 1 (40)Clergy 2 (4) 2 (2) 1 (29)Physicians and dentists 2 (4) 1 (1) 2 (91)Nurses 1 (3) 2 (2) 2 (64)Psychologists 1 (2) 4 (4) 0 (13)Engineers 0 (0) 0 (0) 3 (115)Accountants 0 (0) 0 (0) 2 (78)Writers, artists, 11 (22) 7 (7) 2 (106)entertainers,athletesOtherprofessionals 10 (21) 5 (5) 7 (316)(including technicians)Executive, managerial 15 (30) 21 (21) 17 (723)and administrative ccs.Sales occupations 2 (4) 3 (3) 9 (395)Adminis. supportoccs., 1 (2) 4 (4) 7 (283)including clericalService occupations 1 (3) 0 (0) 5 (229)Farming, forestry and 0 (0) 1 (1) 2 (90)fishing occupationsPrecision production, 1 (3) 3 (3) 4 (178)craftand repairoccs.Operators,applicators, 1 (3) 1 (1) 8 (320)and laborersUnemployedor 12 (25) 8 (8) 13 (534)not employed 97 (202) 101 (101) 101 (4264)

a The comparison group is composed of all subjects from the Census Bureau's 1984 CurrentPopulation SurveyAnnualDemographicFile who share the same age and generaleducational evel as the volunteers.

different histories to their earlier patternsofactivism. I attempt to do this in a pathanalysis which featurescurrent ncome as theprincipal dependent variable (see Figure 2).Of particular nterest is the series of pathslinking participation n Freedom Summer tocurrent income. I expect that participationwill bear a strong indirect relationship toincome as mediated by the subjects' lateractivism and work history.The results provide strong support for alink between participation n Freedom Sum-mer and current income. Specifically, theanalysis documents two dynamics linkingthese variables. The first centers on thefamiliar positive relationships between theactivismvariablesand the significantnegativerelationship between current activism andincome. Participation n the summer projectclearly encouragedmany of the volunteers to

pursue "activist careers." In turn, the nega-tive relationshipbetween income and currentactivism suggests that the pursuit of such a"career"9 encouraged the subordinationofwork to politics, resulting in significantlylower incomes for the volunteers.Participationis also linked to lower in-comes through the mediating effect of thevarious workvariables. Data in Table 5 showthat the projectveteransstarted to work at alarger age, worked less during the 60s, andwere enrolledin college fewer years after theprojectthan were the no-shows. In turn, all ofthese variables were significantly related tothe total number of years the applicantshavebeen employed. Finally, the more years thesubject has worked, the higher his or herincome. These results, then, clearly confirmthepoliticalor activist rootsof thedisparity n



15/18

BIOGRAPHICALCONSEQUENCESOF ACTIVISM 757participate 7.659** level of *343** levelofin Summer PI'-*60sctivism 60s activismProject(yin)j\5

family~~~~~~~~iincome age of currentpre-summer lst l nco

#ofyearsJ16*years .644** currentemployed income1964-1970

incomeXpre-summer # of yearsyears ofcollege


16/18

758 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICALREVIEWTable 7. Logit Regrpssion Predicting Current MaritalStatus (Married/Unmarried) f the FreedomSummerApplicantsIndependent ariable b SE(b)Gender .241 .340Age - .031 .038Politicalstance prior to Free- - .177 .132dom SummerChoice of mate(s) affected - .114 .097by movement involve-ment?(yes/no)Currently mployed? (yes/ .033 .581no)Income .130 .127Participaten Freedom Sum- - 1.254** .328mer?(yes/no)Yearsof full-timeemploy- - .032 .038

mentCurrentpolitical stance -.071 .207Level of currentactivism -.015 .027# of currentpolitical affilia- .143 .096tions# of years college atten- .022 .061dancepost-FreedomSum-merLevel of activism, 1964-70 - .016 .017Family income prior to Free- -.00001 .00005dom SummerScale of currentpolitical .042 .097attitudesConstant 2.055 1.410N = 217.*p < .05.**p < .01.

remained aithfulto thatNew Left imperativeto treat the personalas political. Indeed, boththeir work and marital histories appear tohave been shaped,to a remarkabledegree, bytheirpolitics.The findings reported here confirm theresults of the earlier follow-up studies of the60s activists. What makes the consistency ofthese findings all the more significantis thesize of the sample involved and the span ofyears that have elapsed since the subject'sinitial activism. National in scope and con-ducted20 years after the instance of activismin question, this study provides strong andconsistent evidence of the enduring mpactofparticipationn activism.Theoretically, the results reported hereprovide a firm basis for two principalconclusions.Activism, at least of the durationand intensity of Freedom Summer, doesindeed have the potentialto triggera processof alternation hat can affect many aspects ofthe participants' ives. Secondly, the conse-quences of this process may be lifelong or at

least long-term.The results also shed light onthe specific social processes that appear toaccount for the transformativepotential ofhigh-risk activism. One effect is attitudinal,the other structural.Attitudinally, high-riskactivism is likely, as a consequence of theevents participantsare exposed to and theirimmersion into an activist subculture, toresult in a radical resocialization of thoseinvolved. Participantsare likely to emergefrom the experience more committed toactivism than ever before, thus laying theattitudinalfoundation for ongoing involve-ment. The significant positive effect of the"political stance" variable on the variousmeasuresof subsequentactivismatteststo thecredibilityof this interpretation.But the effects of high-riskactivismarenotmerely attitudinal.The activist "careers"ofthe FreedomSummervolunteersalso attesttothe mediating effects of certain structuralconsequences of the Summer Project. Thatproject left many of the volunteers tied tonetworks of organizational and personalrelationshipsthat helped sustain their activ-ism. The series of positive relationshipslinking organizational or personal ties tosubsequentactivism suggests the critical roleof structural embeddedness in sustainingactivistcareers.Future research might explore in moredetail the mediating effects of attitudinalchange and subcultural integration on sus-tained activism. For now it is enoughto alertresearchersto these processes and to docu-ment the role they appearto have played inaccountingfor the activist "careers"of manyof the Freedom Summerveterans. For thesevolunteers, the summermarkeda watershedin their lives, a point in time aroundwhichtheirbiographiescan be seen in "before" and"after"terms. The summer eft them attitudi-nally more disposed and structurallymoreavailablefor subsequentactivism. For many,New Left politics became the organizingprinciple of their lives, personal as well aspolitical. In effect, the summer set them oncourse for a kind of activist career that hascontinuedto shape all aspects of their livesdown to the present. Far from being thefleeting, faddishactivityoften depictedin thepopular press, activism-at least of thehigh-risk variety-would indeed seem tohighlight the potential for personal transfor-mation embodied in intense and sustainedsocial action mediated through integration



17/18

BIOGRAPHICALCONSEQUENCESOF ACTIVISM 759into organizationaland personal networks ofindividuals.DOUG MCADAM is Associate Professor ofSociology at the University of Arizona. Hisprevious work in the field of social move-ments and political sociology includes anumber of major journal articles as well astwo books: Political Process and the Devel-opmentof BlackInsurgency Chicago:Univer-sity of Chicago Press, 1982) and FreedomSummer (New York: Oxford UniversityPress, 1988). The latterhas been nominatedfor the SorokinAward, given everytwo yearsto the best book publishedin sociology. Hewas also awarded a GuggenheimFellowshipin supportof this work.

REFERENCESAbramowitz, Stephen I. and Alberta J. Nassi.1981. "Keeping the Faith:Psychological Corre-lates of Activism Persistence into MiddleAdulthood." Journal of Youthand Adolescence10:507-23.Bell, Inge Powell. 1968. Core and the Strategy ofNon-violence.New York: Random House.Bennett, James T. and Thomas J. DiLorenzo.1985. DestroyingDemocracy: How GovernmentFunds Partisan Politics. Washington, DC: CatoInstitute.Block, Jeanne. 1972. "GenerationalDiscontinuityin the Understandingof Societal Rejection."Journal of Personality and Social Psychology22:333-45.Brinton,Crane. 1968. The Anatomy of a Revolu-tion. New York: Norton.Burstein, Paul. 1985. Discrimination, Jobs andPolitics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.DeMartini, Joseph R. 1983. "Social MovementParticipation: Political Socialization, Genera-tional Consciousness and Lasting Effects."Youthand Society 15:195-233.Demerath,N.J. III, GeraldMarwell, and MichaelAiken. 1971. Dynamics of Idealism. SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.Fendrich,James M. 1974. "Activists Ten YearsLater:A Test of GenerationalUnit Continuity."Journalof Social Issues 30:95-118.. 1977. "Keeping the Faith or Pursuing theGood Life: A Study of the Consequences ofParticipation n the Civil Rights Movement."AmericanSociological Review 42:144-57.Fendrich,JamesMax and Ellis M. Krauss. 1978."StudentActivismandAdultLeft-WingPolitics:A Causal Model of Political Socialization forBlack, White and Japanese Students of the1960s Generation." Pp. 231-56 in Social

Movements, Conflict and Change, edited byLouis Kriesberg. Greenwich, CT: JAI.Fendrich, James Max and Kenneth L. Lovoy,1988. "Back to the Future: Adult PoliticalBehavior of FormerPolitical Activists." Ameri-can Sociological Review 53:780-84.Fendrich, James M. and Alison T. Tarleau. 1973."Marching to a Different Drummer: Occupa-tional andPolitical Correlatesof FormerStudentActivists." Social Forces 52:245-53.Flacks, Richard. 1967. "TheLiberatedGeneration:An Explorationof the Roots of StudentProtest."Journal of Social Issues 23:52-75.Gale, Richard P. 1986. "Social Movements andthe State: The EnvironmentalMovement, Coun-termovement, and Governmental Agencies."Sociological Perspectives 29:202-40.Gamson, William. 1975. The Strategy of SocialProtest. Homewood, IL: Dorsey.Gurr,Ted. 1970. WhyMen Rebel. Princeton, NJ:PrincetonUniversity Press.Houseknecht, Sharon, Suzanne Vaughan, andAnne S. Macke. 1984. "Marital DisruptionAmong Professional Women: The Timing ofCareer and Family Events." Social Problems31:273-84.Jennings, M. Kent and Richard G. Niemi. 1981.Generations and Politics. Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress.. 1987. "Residues of a Movement: TheAging of the American Protest Generation."AmericanPolitical Science Review 81:367-82.Klandermans, Bert. 1984. "Mobilization andParticipation:Social Psychological Expansionsof Resource Mobilization Theory." AmericanSociological Review 49:583-600.Kornhauser,William. 1959. The Politics of MassSociety. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Lofland, John and Rodney Stark. 1965. "Becom-ing a World-Saver:A Theoryof Conversion o aDeviant Perspective." American SociologicalReview 30:862-74.Maidenburg, Michael and Philip Meyer. 1970."The Berkeley Rebels Five Years Later: HasAge Mellowed the Pioneer Radicals?" Seven-partseries, Detroit Free Press (February1-7).Marwell, Gerald, Michael Aiken, and N.J. Dem-erath. 1987. "The Persistence of PoliticalAttitudesAmong 1960s Civil Rights Activists."Public OpinionQuarterly51:359-75.McAdam, Doug. 1982. Political Process and theDevelopmentof Black Insurgency, 1930-1970.Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press.

_ . 1983. "Tactical Innovation and the Paceof Insurgency."AmericanSociological Review48:735-54._ . 1986. "Recruitment to High-Risk Activism:The Case of Freedom Summer." AmericanJournal of Sociology 92:64-90.. 1988. Freedom Summer. New York:OxfordUniversityPress.



18/18

760 AMERICANSOCIOLOGICALREVIEWMcCarthy,JohnD. andMayerN. Zald. 1973. TheTrendof Social Movements n America: Profes-sionalizationand Resource Mobilization. Mor-ristown, NJ: General LearningPress.. 1977. "Resource Mobilization and Social

Movements:A PartialTheory."AmericanJour-nal of Sociology 82:1212-41.Nassi, Alberta J. and Stephen I. Abramowitz.1979. "Transitionor Transformation?Personaland Political Development of Former BerkeleyFree Speech Movement Activists." Journal ofYouthand Adolescence 8:21-35.Oberschall,Anthony. 1973. Social Conflicts andSocial Movements.EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Pren-tice-Hall.Oliver, Pam. 1984. "If You Don't Do It, NobodyWill. Active and Token Contributions o LocalCollective Action." AmericanSociological Re-view 49:601-10.Richardson,James T. and Mary Stewart. 1978."Conversion Process Models and the JesusMovement." Pp. 24-42 in ConversionCareers,editedby James Richardson.BeverlyHills, CA:Sage.Rosenthal, Naomi, Meryl Fingrutd,Michele Eth-ier, Roberta Karant, and David McDonald.1985. "SocialMovementsand NetworkAnalysis:A Case Study of NineteenthCenturyWomen'sReformin New York State." AmericanJournalof Sociology 90:1022-55.Scanzoni, John. 1978. Sex Roles, Women's Workand Marital Conflict. Lexington, MA: Lexing-ton Books.Seggar,JohnandPhilipKunz. 1972. "Conversion:Evaluationof a Step-LikeProcess for ProblemSolving." Review of Religious Research 13:178-84.Skocpol, Theda. 1979. States and Social Revolu-tions. New York:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Smelser, Neil. 1962. Theory of Collective Behav-ior. New York: Free Press.Snow, David A. and Cynthia L. Phillips. 1980."The Lofland-StarkConversionModel: A Criti-cal Reassessment."Social Problems 27:430-47.Snow David A., Louis Zurcher, and SheldonEkland-Olson. 1980. "Social Networks andSocial Movements:A MicrostructuralApproachto Differential Recruitment."American Socio-logical Review45:787-801.Snyder, David and William R. Kelly. 1979."Strategiesfor InvestigatingViolence and So-cial Change: Illustrations from Analyses ofRacial Disordersand Implications or Mobiliza-tion Research."Pp. 212-37 in TheDynamics ofSocial Movements,editedby MayerN. Zald andJohn D. McCarthy.Cambridge,MA: Winthrop.Tilly, Charles. 1978. From Mobilization toRevolution.Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Touraine, Alain. 1981. The Voice and the Eye: AnAnalysis of Social Movements. New York:CambridgeUniversity Press.Travisaro, Richard V. 1981. "Alternation andConversionas QualitativelyDifferent Transfor-mations." Pp. 237-48 in Social PsychologyThroughSymbolic Interaction, edited by Greg-ory P. Stone andHarveyFarberman.New York:Wiley.Whalen,JackandRichardFlacks. 1980. "The IslaVista 'BankBurners'Ten Years Later:Notes onthe Fate of Student Activists." SociologicalFocus 13:215-36.Zald, Mayer N. and Bert Useem. 1987. "Move-ment and Countermovement nteraction:Mobili-zation, Tactics and State Involvement." Pp.247-72 in Social Movements in an Organiza-tional Society, edited by Mayer N. Zald andJohn D. McCarthy. New Brunswick, NJ:TransactionBooks.

Documents

Mc Adam- Biographical Consequences Activism- 1989