Revisiting constructive disruption: Protest tactics, resistant bystanders, and the limits of support in issue-based social movements

The constructive disruption hypothesis proposes that nonnormative-nonviolent protest tactics can persuade resistant advantaged groups to grant concessions by balancing disruption with constructive intentions. We extended this hypothesis from asymmetrical intergroup contexts to two issue-based domains ( N = 457), animal welfare activism (Study 1) and religious blasphemy protests (Study 2). Although protest tactics did not directly affect support among resistant participants, we revealed significant indirect pathways through constructive disruption. Constructive intentions consistently predicted increased support, while disruption enhanced support among resistant bystanders (Study 1) or all participants (Study 2), even for violent protests, but decreased support among those open to change (Study 1). Response surface analyses revealed that in animal rights protests, optimal support emerged from combining high constructive intentions with moderate disruption among resistant bystanders, while religious blasphemy protests showed predominantly additive effects. These findings suggest that constructive disruption’s effectiveness varies by context and audience characteristics.