Despite considerable advances in many areas of social life, progress toward gender equality cannot be taken for granted due to conservative backlash. One striking example of this concerning trend worldwide is the recently imposed restrictions on reproductive rights in countries such as Poland, the US, and Nicaragua. For instance, on October 22, 2020, the Polish Constitutional Tribunal (PCT) banned medical abortion, which functionally made almost all types of abortion illegal in Poland. This decision led to the largest street protests in post-communist Poland, with 430 thousand people estimated to have participated in multiple events staged across the country in the week following the decision (Kuźniar, 2020; Tilles, 2022). A comparable sequence of events unfolded in the United States in June 2022 after the Supreme Court decided to overturn Roe v. Wade (1973), which guaranteed the constitutional right to abortion, with large-scale demonstrations throughout the US (Almasy & Alonso, 2022). Given the scale of these protests, it is important to examine what prompted so many people to take to the streets. Identifying factors that motivate individuals to participate in abortion-ban protests can provide valuable insights on how to engage citizens on issues related to their legal rights and freedoms.

More specifically, previous research on the motivational factors related to individuals’ engagement in collective action for women’s rights has predominantly focused on the role of gender and feminist identification among women (Burn et al., 2000; Duncan, 1999; Radke et al., 2016; Yoder et al., 2011). Few studies, however, have investigated actual participation in pro-choice demonstrations by women and men. To obtain a more comprehensive understanding of pro-choice protest involvement, we aimed to investigate how gender and feminist identification may be related to participation in pro-choice demonstrations among women and men. Drawing from prior research on reactance as a key motivating factor for participation in a pro-choice protest (Drążkowski & Trepanowski, 2024a, b), we examine the concept of reactance as a potential mediating variable linking gender and feminist identification to participation in pro-choice protests.

Engagement in Pro-Choice Protests

Collective action has been used to advocate for women’s rights, including the right to elective abortion (Szczepańska et al., 2022). Although we refer to women’s rights in this article, we acknowledge that pro-choice rights also extend to transgender, non-binary, transsexual, and other people with a uterus who may experience pregnancy (Moseson et al., 2021). The history of pro-choice movements provides ample examples of their effectiveness in the fight for women’s freedom to decide on pregnancy termination (Staggenborg, 1991). Despite numerous studies addressing the determinants of motivation to participate in protests for women’s rights, only a few have focused on identifying motivations for participating in pro-choice protests specifically. Evidence from the Polish context suggests that collective action against the abortion ban is driven by perceived group efficacy, feelings of injustice, and group identification (Besta et al., 2019). These factors align with the broader motivations for collective action as represented in the Social Identity Model of Collective Action (SIMCA; van Zomeren et al., 2008). Additionally, collective action against the abortion ban is positively associated with membership in multiple opinion-based groups and perception of group threat (Besta et al., 2019; Szóstakowski & Besta, 2024).

According to the SIMCA (van Zomeren et al., 2008), collective action is more likely to occur when individuals strongly identify with a disadvantaged group. Numerous studies conducted using this model have demonstrated that politicized social identity predicts collective action more effectively than non-politicized identification with a disadvantaged group (van Breen et al., 2017; Mikołajczak et al., 2022; van Zomeren et al., 2008). We begin by discussing the non-political identity (i.e., gender identity) before delving into the political identity relevant to protesting for women’s rights (i.e., feminist identification).

Previous theorizing and research suggest that advantaged group members may act on behalf of a disadvantaged group (Radke et al., 2020). Although men, as members of the advantaged group by the status quo, engage in collective action for women’s rights (Subašić et al., 2018), they generally exhibit lower levels of activity in advocating for women’s rights compared to women (Stake, 2007; White, 2006). Stewart (2017) found that men who favor equality between groups tend to resist aggressive sexism and feel both effective as a group and angry about gender inequality. This combination of feelings motivates them to take collective action for women’s rights. In turn, Ochoa et al. (2019) found that moral convictions about the importance of women’s discrimination and group efficacy predicted men’s willingness to engage in collective action to fight for women’s rights.

However, there is limited research on gender differences in participating in pro-choice protests, contrasting with extensive studies exploring gender differences in abortion attitudes. Despite mixed and inconsistent findings, some studies (Bilewicz et al., 2017; Mikołajczak & Bilewicz, 2015; Ruppanner et al., 2019; Szczepańska et al., 2022, Study 1) indicate that women generally exhibit stronger support for abortion compared to men. However, other research (Huang et al., 2014; Osborne et al., 2022) suggests that men, in certain conditions, may be more supportive of women’s abortion rights than women. Some studies find no gender differences in support for legal abortion (Newport, 2018; Szczepańska et al., 2022, Study 2). Therefore, it cannot definitively be stated that one gender is more inclined to oppose the tightening of abortion rights over the other.

Gender Collective Self-Esteem

According to social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), social identity encompasses an individual’s self-concept derived from their membership in one or more groups, including gender groups. Stronger identification with and valuing of the ingroup is associated with more positive their collective self-esteem derived from these group memberships (Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992). Luhtanen and Crocker distinguished four domains of collective self-esteem, including membership, public, private, and importance to identity (cf. Leach et al., 2008), and has been applied to gender as a collective identity (Carpenter & Johnson, 2001). In the context of gender as a collective identity, membership refers to an individual’s perceived value as a member of their gender group; public refers to how an individual thinks their gender group is respected and valued by others; private refers to an individual’s evaluation of their gender group; identity refers to the significance of one’s gender to one’s self-concept, and is also known as gender identification (Anderson, 2018) or gender centrality (Leach et al., 2008). Gender collective self-esteem, then, is defined as a component of an individual’s self-concept derived from gender identity (Burn et al., 2000) and is considered one of the most crucial aspects of identity.

Despite being relatively underexplored, research suggests that gender collective self-esteem may be crucial for understanding the motivation to engage in collective action concerning women’s reproductive rights. Gender identification among women positively correlates with collective action for women’s rights (Becker & Wagner, 2009; Iyer & Ryan, 2009; Renger et al., 2020). Conversely, previous studies suggest that men who strongly identify with their gender are less inclined to participate in collective action for women’s rights (Ochoa et al., 2019; Stewart, 2017). The associations among other domains of collective self-esteem and engagement in collective action for women’s rights have not yet been studied.

Feminist Identification

Feminist self-identification can also directly enhance individuals’ attitudes toward and participation in protests for women’s rights among both women and men (e.g., van Breen et al., 2017; Duncan, 1999; Liss et al., 2004; Redford et al., 2018; Yoder et al., 2011). Feminist identification is directly related to attending talks on women’s rights (Nelson et al., 2008), signing online petitions on gender issues (Liss et al., 2004), and supporting feminist organizations (Redford et al., 2018). Among both women and men, feminism as a politicized group identity is positively related to activism supporting women’s rights, including reproductive freedoms (van Breen et al., 2017; Conlin & Heesacker, 2018; Duncan et al., 2021; Mikołajczak et al., 2022; Wiley et al., 2013).

Moreover, gender collective self-esteem is positively associated with feminist self-identification. Prior findings show that the associations among different domains of collective self-esteem and feminist identity may vary depending on gender (Burn et al., 2000; Brassel & Anderson, 2020; Smith, 1999). Studies have indicated that women’s gender identity is associated with their feminist identification (Burn et al., 2000; Leaper & Arias, 2011; Smith, 1999). Burn et al. (2000) found that women with higher collective self-esteem in the membership domain reported stronger feminist identification. Support for feminism (but not feminist identification) was associated with higher collective self-esteem in the identity domain and lower collective self-esteem in the public domain.

In another study, women who identified as feminists reported significantly higher collective self-esteem in the private domain compared to other women, whereas women who identified as antifeminists reported significantly higher collective self-esteem in the public domain compared to other women (Smith, 1999). Conversely, higher collective self-esteem in the membership domain was associated with weaker feminist identification among men (Burn et al., 2000; cf., Lemaster et al., 2015). Additionally, higher collective self-esteem in the public domain (i.e., the perception that men are socially valued) was associated with less support for feminist policies, but not with feminist identification). However, to our knowledge, no study has investigated how different domains of gender collective self-esteem may be related to feminist identification for women and men in the context of their collective activism for women’s rights to abortion. There is also relatively little evidence in general on what motivates men to engage in abortion rights protests.

Psychological Reactance

Reactance theory elucidates the psychological mechanisms governing how individuals experiencing reactance strive to restore threatened freedom (Brehm & Brehm, 1981). When freedom is threatened, individuals experience psychological reactance, an aversive state of motivational arousal that drives efforts to restore freedom. The components of the reactance state include negative cognitions (i.e., expressing disagreement with restrictions on freedom), anger (Dillard & Shen, 2005), and perceived threats to freedom (Hall et al., 2017). The collective action of the pro-choice movement serves as an example of how to manage reactance by motivating individuals to join protests for women’s rights.

In a prior study, the severe restriction of women’s abortion rights in Poland affected the psychological reactance state of individuals. Those prone to experience reactance (high in the reactance trait) showed greater state reactance in response to the abortion rights restrictions, which motivated them to restore their freedom by engaging in pro-choice protests (Drążkowski & Trepanowski, 2024a). According to reactance theory, the impact of a threat to freedom intensifies with the importance of the threatened activity for an individual and the severity of the threat (Brehm & Brehm, 1981; Rosenberg & Siegel, 2018). A pivotal issue for comprehending these processes is identifying determinants of reactance feelings against the abortion ban, which, in turn, drive engagement in collective action to restore these rights. Restrictions on abortion rights constitute a severe limitation of freedom for women more than men as they affect women more directly. Furthermore, individuals advocating for equal rights and freedoms for all genders, such as feminists, might perceive the abortion ban as more severe than non-feminists, given its importance for gender equality. Together, this implies that women and feminists (regardless of their gender) would be expected to experience stronger reactance, motivating them to engage more actively in pro-choice protests aimed at buffering against the threat to their freedom brought about by threats to abortion rights compared to men and non-feminists.

Current Study

In the current study, we aim to explore the interplay between gender collective self-esteem, feminist identification, reactance against abortion bans, and engagement in pro-choice protests among women and men during the pro-choice protests in Poland following the enactment of restrictive abortion laws by the Polish Constitutional Tribunal in 2020. Drawing from prior research (e.g., Burn et al., 2000; Smith, 1999), we hypothesized that some specific pathways for these associations would vary between women and men. Based on the available evidence, we formulated the following main research hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1

For both women and men, feminist identification will be positively linked to participation in pro-choice protests directly (H1a) and indirectly through reactance against the abortion ban (H1b).

Hypothesis 2

Women would report stronger feminist identification (H2a), feel stronger reactance against the abortion ban (H2b), and be more involved in pro-choice protests (H2c) than men.

Hypothesis 3

Among women, identity (H3a), membership (H3b), and private collective self-esteem (H3c) would be positively linked to, and public collective self-esteem (H3d) would be negatively linked to feminist identification.

Hypothesis 4

Among women, identity (H4a), membership (H4b), and private CSE (H4c) would be positively linked to, and public collective self-esteem (H3d) would be negatively linked to reactance against the abortion ban.

Hypothesis 5

Among women, identity (H5a), membership (H5b), and private collective self-esteem (H5c) would be positively linked to, and public collective self-esteem (H5d) would be negatively linked to participation in pro-choice protests.

Hypothesis 6

Among men, membership (H6a) and public collective self-esteem (H6b) would be negatively linked to feminist identification.

Hypothesis 7

Among men, membership (H7a) and public collective self-esteem (H7b) would be negatively linked to reactance against the abortion ban.

Hypothesis 8

Among men, membership (H8a) and public collective self-esteem (H8b) would be negatively linked to feminist identification.

Method

Participants and Procedure

To recruit participants, we circulated a survey link through Facebook groups and enlisted the assistance of colleagues to further distribute the link within their online social circles. This study took place in late October 2020 in Poland, following the 22 October decision of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal strengthening restrictions on the legal access to abortion. Due to our theoretical focus on the differences between women and men, the study was advertised specifically for women and men; thus, no data from non-binary and gender-minoritized individuals was collected. Those participants who indicated they identified as women or men were able to proceed to the next part of the study, which was adapted to their gender.

The final sample included 939 participants (519 self-identified women and 420 self-identified men, with a mean age of 31.06 (SD = 12.32, range = 17–75). We aimed to have at least 10 people per parameter (28 parameters) as per prior recommendations (e.g., Kline, 2023), so at least 280 participants of each gender, resulting in a minimum sample of 560. We managed to achieve ~ 33 people per parameter in the whole sample, ~ 15 in the case of men and ~ 18 in the case of women, thus achieving our goal. The full dataset can be accessed via the Open Science Framework at the following link: https://osf.io/wf2jk/?view_only=9bc51a177534434a9b1c4813f33e6f6b. Table 1 details the sample demographic information and descriptive statistics for feminist identification and protest engagement items.

Table 1 Sample demographics, protest participation, and feminist identification data
Full size table

The survey was hosted on the University servers using Microsoft Forms. Each participant was presented with an initial message containing a description of the study, its aims, data administration policies, as well as the rights of the participants. After providing consent, participants were asked to indicate their gender, allowing to assign them to a gender-specific version of the questionnaire. The measures were presented in the following fixed order: Collective Self-Esteem; Feminist Identification; Psychological Reactance; and Participation in Pro-Choice Protests. Finally, participants were asked to provide us with a unique code of their choice in case they wanted to remove their results from the database. The study obtained approval number Z3/12/2021 of the institutional ethical committee at the Faculty of Psychology and Cognitive Science, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poland.

Measures

Collective Self-Esteem

Collective self-esteem was measured with the Polish version of the Collective Self-Esteem Scale (Bazińska, 2015; Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992). The scale consists of four subscales (each measured with four items; see Table 4): membership (e.g., I think I am a valuable woman; no α as the subscale was shortened to a single-item one, which is explained in the Results section), private (e.g., Overall, I am satisfied with being a woman; α for men = 0.84; α for women = 0.87), public (e.g., In our society, women are considered valuable; α for men = 0.60; α for women = 0.82), and identity (e.g., Being a woman largely defines who I am; α for men = 0.75.; α for women = 0.67). All items were rated on a 9-point scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 9 (completely agree). Each subscale score was calculated by averaging the items, with higher scores on a specific subscale indicating greater importance of a given element of collective self-esteem for an individual.

Feminist Identification

Feminist identification was measured with a single item from Morgan (1996): “To what extent do you consider yourself a feminist?” Participants selected from eight possible response options that reflect varying degrees of feminist identification, ranging from 1 (A committed feminist currently active in the women’s movement) to 8 (I do not consider myself to be a feminist at all and believe that feminists are harmful to family life and undermine relations between men and women). See Table 1 for all response options. Responses on this item were reverse scored so that higher scores indicate a stronger feminist identification.

Psychological Reactance Against Anti-Abortion Bans

Psychological reactance was measured using a scale derived from research on state reactance by Dillard and Shen (2005) and Hall et al. (2017) and tailored to the context of anti-abortion bans (Drążkowski & Trepanowski, 2024a, b). The scale assessed negative thoughts, anger, and beliefs about the ban as a threat as indicators of psychological reactance. Negative thoughts was measured with three items (e.g., I believe that the decision of the Constitutional Tribunal is very wrong) on a 9-point scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 9 (completely agree). Anger was measured with four items (i.e., angry, irritated, enraged, annoyed) on a 9-point scale ranging from 1 (I do not feel like this at all) to 9 (I experience this emotion very strongly). Beliefs about the ban as a threat was measured with three items (e.g., The decision of the Constitutional Tribunal threatens the freedom of choice greatly) on 9-point scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 9 (completely agree). A confirmatory factor analysis found all items converged on a single reactance factor and this all items were averaged to produce an overall mean reactance score (α = 0.98). Ratings of negative thoughts and restriction of freedom were converted from a 9-point scale to a 7-point Likert scale for consistency with other measures included in the analyses.

Participation in Pro-Choice Protests

Participation in protests was measured using a five-item measure developed for the purpose of the study describing various protest engagement activities: (1) I participated in the street protests against the decision of the Constitutional Court; (2) I did not go to work/class to protest against the Constitutional Court’s decision; (3) I have signed a petition against the decision of the Constitutional Court or supporting persons challenging the decision of the Constitutional Court; (4) When going out I would wear the symbol of protest against the decision of the Constitutional Court; (5) I have expressed on my social media profile my disagreement with the decision of the Constitutional Court. Participants were asked to indicate if they undertook any of the listed actions in the last two weeks using a dichotomous Yes or No response format (coded as 1 or 0 for each item). Additionally, participants were asked to list other protest-related activities they had been involved in during that period. The final protest participation scores were calculated as a sum of responses to the closed-ended items and any additional activities listed by a participant (e.g., took part in a “car protest”, “lighted candles outside the party office”). Overall, participants listed up to four additional protest activities, with the final scores ranging from 0 to 9; M = 2.21, SD = 1.87).

Demographic Information

Limited demographic data were collected, including gender, age, and education level. While age and education were collected at the end of the questionnaire, we asked participants to indicate their gender at the beginning of the survey to assign them to gender-relevant versions of the key measures. For the study, gender was operationalised as a binary variable, with women coded as 0 and men as 1. Age was treated as a continuous variable, and education as an ordinal variable with six levels (see Table 1).

Data Analysis Strategy

Prior to the main analyses, we checked the dataset for missing data, outliers, and normality assumptions in the key variables. We also conducted reliability analyses, factor analyses, and examined bivariate correlation and tested for multicollinearity between the key constructs. We then examined gender differences by using independent sample t-tests. Further, prior to the SEM analyses, we explored the divergent validity of the measures to test whether the variables that should be theoretically distinct, are, in fact, unrelated. The initial SEM model was specified using a robust estimation method (WLSM) due to the non-normal and ordinal nature of the data. To test gender differences in the predicted paths, we specified a multi-group SEM model and tested it for measurement invariance to ensure that the observed gender differences can be meaningfully compared. All analyses were conducted in R version 4.3.1 using the lavaan package (R Core Team, 2023; Rosseel, 2012).

Results

Preliminary Analyses

Prior to the main analyses, we checked the dataset for duplicates and outliers. There were three duplicate responses which were removed from the analyses. All variables used in the main analyses followed non-normal distributions (one sample K-S test, p < .05) and had missing data, as all key questions in the survey were mandatory.

We then conducted a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for all latent variables: Private, Public, Identity, Membership Collective Self-Esteem, and Psychological Reactance. Five items (items 1 and 3 from the Membership Collective Self-Esteem; items 3, 2, and 4 from the Private, Public, and Identity Collective Self-Esteem, respectively) had very weak factor loadings (based on a cutoff < 0.04; tested for both genders), both in the model with women and men (initial model) and in separate models for each gender and were removed from further analysis. After these changes, the Membership Collective Self-Esteem still had unsatisfactory reliability (as indicated by alphas below 0.6) and was consequently reduced to a single representative item, which was closest in content to the definition of Membership Collective Self-Esteem (“I think I am a valuable woman/man”). Table 2 presents a summary of the factor loadings for the full and shortened set of items. We conducted bivariate correlations and tested for multicollinearity separately for men and women. Despite some of the correlations being quite high (see Table 3), VIF did not exceed values of concern (VIF < 5).

Table 2 Factor loadings before and after shortening the scales
Full size table
Table 3 Bivariate correlations between the study variables
Full size table

We then used independent sample t-tests to examine gender differences across the four collective self-esteem domains (membership, private, public, identity), feminist identification, psychological reactance, and participation in pro-choice protests (see Table 4). In line with Hypothesis 2, women identified more strongly with feminist identification (H2a), reported stronger reactance against the abortion ban (H2b), and were more involved in pro-choice protests (H2c), compared to men. They also reported higher identity and membership collective self-esteem and lower private and public collective self-esteem than men.

Considering that some of the correlations between the measures were rather high, we tested for divergent validity. Such analysis indicates whether the measured constructs are unique compared to others. Should some of them not be unique, it would be necessary to remove them or treat them differently in the model to account for that. To do this, we employed two divergent validity measures: (1) Fornell and Larcker’s (1981) criterion and (2) heterotrait-monotrait ratio of correlations (HTMT; Henseler et al., 2015). The Fornell-Larcker criterion assumes that the average variance extracted (AVE) values for each construct should be higher than the squared correlations between constructs. According to Henseler et al. (2015), the heterotrait-monotrait ratio (HTMT) values should not exceed 0.85 when constructs are significantly different, or 0.90 if the constructs are similar. Given that the current constructs were rather dissimilar, we used the higher threshold of 0.85 for HTMT. Additionally, we opted to use the square root of AVE rather than squared correlation values, as it simplified the calculations. Both adapted measures demonstrated no validity issues.

Main Analyses

To test our main predictions, we conducted an SEM with three latent exogenous variables (private, public, identity CSE), one observed exogenous variable (membership collective self-esteem), two observed endogenous variables (feminist identification, participation in pro-choice protests), and one latent endogenous variable (psychological reactance; see Figs. 1 and 2). As the variables had non-normal distributions (one sample K-S test, p < .05) and were mostly ordinal (7-point, 9-point Likert scales), we chose a robust method of estimation (WLSM; e.g., Moshagen & Musch, 2014).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Significant paths in multi-group SEM for women. Note. Grayed-out lines indicate non-significant paths, whereas black lines with beta values indicate significant paths. CSE = Collective Self-Esteem

Full size image
Fig. 2
figure 2

Significant paths in multi-group SEM for men. Note. Grayed-out lines indicate non-significant paths, whereas black lines with beta values indicate significant paths. CSE = Collective Self-Esteem

Full size image

As indicated in Table 5, the obtained fit was well within the acceptable ranges (e.g., Lin et al., 2017; cutoff point: SRMR < = 0.05, RMSEA < = 0.05, TLI > = 0.95; CFI > = 0.95). Finally, we performed a multi-group SEM to test for gender differences. First, we tested whether the measurement model was equivalent among men and women by testing for configural, metric, scalar, and strict invariance. As presented in Table 5, the model met the configural and metric invariance (no significant difference in Δχ2) but not the scalar and strict invariance (partial invariance was not tested). However, for our current aim of comparison of structural paths, achieving metric invariance was sufficient (Putnick & Bornstein, 2016). Direct, indirect, and total effects for men and women are presented as a supplementary table on OSF (see Supplementary Table 1), whereas Figs. 1 and 2 show significant effects in a model for women and men, respectively.

Table 4 Summary of Means, SDs, and Gender Differences Across the Study Variables
Full size table

As can be seen in both figures, in line with Hypothesis 1, among both women and men, feminist identification was positively linked to participation in pro-choice protests directly (H1a) and indirectly through reactance against the abortion ban (H1b).

Aside from these similarities, two different models have emerged for men and women. Overall, by analysing direct effects, we found support for hypotheses H3b, H3d, H4d, H5b, but not for H3a, H3c, H3a, H3c1, H4a, H4b, H4b, H5a, H5c, and H5d. For women, membership collective self-esteem was positively linked to feminist identification, whereas public and identity collective self-esteem was linked negatively, and private collective self-esteem had no significant association. Women’s public collective self-esteem was negatively related to reactance against the abortion ban both directly and indirectly via feminist identification. Identity, membership, and private collective self-esteem had no direct association with reactance. Membership collective self-esteem was positively linked to participation in pro-choice protests directly and also indirectly via feminist identification and reactance, indicating double mediation. Private collective self-esteem was negatively related to participation in pro-choice protests only directly. Identity and public collective self-esteem were not significantly related directly to participation in pro-choice protests but had an indirect negative association with participation in pro-choice protests via feminist identification and reactance.

None of the predictions of Hypotheses 6, 7, and 8 were confirmed for men. As Fig. 2 shows, men were more likely to identify as feminists when they had higher public and lower identity and private collective self-esteem. Public collective self-esteem was positively and private collective self-esteem was negatively linked to participation in pro-choice protests, also indirectly via feminist identification and reactance (serial mediations). The negative relationship between identity collective self-esteem and participation in pro-choice protests was mediated by feminist identification. Membership collective self-esteem was not significantly related to any dependent variables.

Because feminist identification and psychological reactance were highly correlated, we created an additional model without feminist identification to test for suppression effects. The removal of feminist identification had no impact on other paths in the model for women. In the model for men, public collective self-esteem (β = 0.353) and identity collective self-esteem (β = -0.284) became significant predictors of reactance.

Finally, we explored gender differences in the strength of pathways between key variables (see Table 6). We identified significant gender differences in four pathways. First, the paths between public collective self-esteem and feminist identification and psychological reactance had significantly higher values for men than women, meaning that among men, both variables had a more positive impact on feminist identification. Second, the path between feminist identification and psychological reactance had significantly higher values for men compared to women, meaning that among men, feminist identification had a more positive impact on psychological reactance. Third, the path between private collective self-esteem and feminist identification had significantly lower values for men, indicating that for them, private collective self-esteem had a more negative impact on identifying as a feminist.

Table 5 Invariance testing and fit indices
Full size table
Table 6 Path comparison between the models for men and women
Full size table

Discussion

The present study is the first to examine how gender collective self-esteem and feminist identification are associated with reactance against the abortion ban and engagement in pro-choice protests among women and men. We examined Polish women and men during large-scale pro-choice protests responding to restrictive abortion laws enacted by the Polish Constitutional Tribunal in 2020. Our results revealed both similarities and differences between men and women in terms of what motivates them to engage in pro-choice protests. For men and women, identity collective self-esteem was negatively associated with feminist identification, as well as higher levels of reactance and participation in pro-choice protests. Our study provides important insights into how various dimensions of collective self-esteem influence activism. Women who perceived themselves as valued members of their gender (high membership collective self-esteem) but held negative personal views about their gender (low private collective self-esteem) or felt that their gender is undervalued by society (low public collective self-esteem) were more actively involved in pro-choice activism. For men, those who held negative personal views about their gender (low private collective self-esteem) or felt that their gender is valued by society (high public collective self-esteem) or were more likely to identify with feminism and be actively involved in pro-choice protests.

Our proposed model explaining the motivation to participate in pro-choice protests does not aim to contest classic models of collective action, such as the SIMCA model (van Zomeren et al., 2008). Instead, it focuses on the unique context of the mass protests ignited by the sudden abortion ban. Here, reactance theory (Brehm & Brehm, 1981) provides an useful perspective on the motivations for engaging in action to reclaim lost freedoms. Consequently, our findings contribute to the diversity of research in collective action as well as extending the range of social behaviors explained by the reactance theory. Our unique contribution, compared to other studies looking at collective action, lies in conducting this research during the critical period of the protests, which allowed us to capture the emotions and thoughts that constituted the reactance state and the participants’ involvement in ongoing pro-choice protests. This approach helped us link current experiences with recent behaviors. Further, our research contributes to the body of collective action literature by exploring the interplay between gender and feminist identities and participation in pro-choice protests among both women and men. By addressing this gap, our study provides a more comprehensive range of the factors related to protest involvement, opening new avenues for designing more effective advocacy strategies and interventions. Specifically, our findings can help tailor approaches to enhance feminist identification and the pro-choice movement by targeting different aspects of gender-related collective self-esteem for women and men. Our models explained up to 48% of the variance in women’s involvement in pro-choice protests and 43% in men’s involvement, which indicates that our choice of variables effectively captured important motivations driving participation in these protests.

In line with previous studies (e.g., van Breen et al., 2017; Radke et al., 2016), we found that feminist identification was related to greater participation in pro-choice protests among both women and men. Our novel contribution to the literature is the finding that the association between feminist identity and involvement in pro-choice protests is partly mediated by reactance against the abortion ban. This suggests that feminists, regardless of their gender, engage more actively in collective action to reclaim abortion rights, when they feel reactance against the restriction of freedom imposed by the abortion ban.

Our study results corroborate previous research indicating that women are more likely to identify as feminists than men (Burn et al., 2000) and more likely to participate in different forms of pro-choice protests (Stake, 2007; White, 2006). These results correspond with studies indicating that women hold stronger pro-choice attitudes than men (Bilewicz et al., 2017; Mikołajczak & Bilewicz, 2015; Ruppanner et al., 2019; Szczepańska et al., 2022, Study 1). Our studies contribute to this literature by showing that women and feminists (regardless of their gender) experience greater reactance against the restriction of abortion rights than men and non-feminists. We explain these differences based on the reactance theory, which posits that reactance is greater when the threatened activity has significant consequences and psychological importance for the individual (Brehm & Brehm, 1981; Rosenberg & Siegel, 2018). This likely happens because reproductive rights are more consequential for women than for men, and the abortion ban is perceived as a more severe limitation of freedom by women and feminists than by men and non-feminists. As a result, women and feminists experience stronger reactance, which motivates them to engage more actively in pro-choice protests aimed at restoring threatened freedoms.

Further, we identified that the strength of different motivations to participate in pro-choice protests differs between women and men. Our research enriches existing literature by showing that the association between feminist identification and reactance against abortion bans is weaker among women than men. This suggests that women perceive the abortion ban as a restriction of their freedom, largely independent of their feminist identification. This result suggests that for women, access to abortion is not just a matter of feminist beliefs but a fundamental right protecting their reproductive well-being. Conversely, men’s involvement in pro-choice protests appears to be more strongly motivated by their feminist identification, which is associated with a higher degree of reactance against abortion bans.

We also observed gender differences in the association between public collective self-esteem, feminist identification, and reactance. These relations were negative among women and positive among men. Women’s perception of group discrimination (low public collective self-esteem) was positively associated with their feminist identification, which aligns with the previous findings observed in the US samples (Burn et al., 2000; Smith, 1999). Women aware of the discrimination against their gender in society, as indicated by low public collective self-esteem, are more likely to be drawn to feminism, which, as a movement, actively addresses and challenges gender-based discrimination and inequality. However, we note that our results are correlational, so the reverse direction of this relation is also possible; feminist identification might increase women’s sensitivity to group disadvantage. Regardless of this directionality, participating in pro-choice protests and feminist activism more broadly can be empowering for women who perceive high levels of discrimination (Edwards & Cornwall, 2014). These actions allow them to assert control and agency when they feel powerless. Finally, we argue that seeing discrimination against women can increase perceptions of threat to women’s rights and autonomy, increasing feminist identification and participation in pro-choice protests as forms of reactance (although the causality of these propositions needs to be tested empirically).

Moreover, women’s private collective self-esteem had a direct negative relation with involvement in pro-choice protests, but no significant associations were found with feminist identification or reactance. The observed phenomenon, where women with a more negative evaluation of their in-group are more actively involved in pro-choice protests, can be interpreted through the lens of social identity theory and intragroup differentiation. Social identity theory posits that individuals derive part of their identity from the social groups to which they belong (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). However, when individuals perceive negative attributes within their group, they may try to redefine or change these attributes. In this context, women who view their in-group negatively may still recognize the shared challenges and systemic inequalities faced by their gender. Their involvement in pro-choice protests, thus, might not stem from a sense of solidarity with other women but rather from a desire to reshape or challenge the perceived negative evaluation of their in-group. This involvement can also be seen as a form of intragroup differentiation, where individuals strive to distinguish themselves from certain members of their in-group that they view negatively (Jackson et al., 1996). By actively participating in pro-choice protests, women with low private collective self-esteem may attempt to align themselves with a more positively viewed subgroup, such as pro-choice activists.

Furthermore, among women, stronger gender identification (identity collective self-esteem) was negatively associated with feminist identification, which, in turn, predicted lower levels of reactance to the abortion ban and reduced participation in pro-choice protests (serial mediation). These results are contrary to previous studies on engagement in collective action for women’s rights (Becker & Wagner, 2009; Iyer & Ryan, 2009; Renger et al., 2020) and the SIMCA model (van Zomeren et al., 2008), which assumes that one of the critical determinants of engaging in collective action is the extent of identification with one’s group. The positive correlation between women’s collective self-esteem identity and support for feminism was also found in Burn et al. (2000). Our unusual results may be explained by the fact that in conservative Poland, women who identify with the feminist movement are in the minority. A 2018 survey indicated that only 5% of Polish women consider themselves feminists (Pacewicz, 2018). Burn et al. (2000) examined a group of American female students where feminism was more widespread, and 16.1% of women considered themselves feminists. Thus, perceiving oneself as a feminist in Poland means being an atypical woman and could be reflected in the lower gender identification.

The negative association between gender identification and feminist identification can also be explained using the gender identity model (Becker & Wagner, 2009), which distinguishes between the strength of identification with women and its content, including progressive vs. traditional gender roles. Research shows that gender identification correlates positively with both progressive (feminist) and traditional gender roles, which in turn are negatively correlated (Mikołajczak et al., 2022). In this context, perhaps in our study, the measurement of gender identification (identity collective self-esteem) was closer to identification with the traditional gender role (due to the conservative model of women in Poland), which may explain the negative correlation of this variable with feminist identification.

In line with Burn et al. (2000) results, we found that women who viewed themselves as valued members of their gender group, as indicated by high membership collective self-esteem, were more likely to identify with feminism. Further, we found that higher membership collective self-esteem was related to greater involvement in pro-choice protests independent of feminist identification. This suggests that while feminist identification plays a role in motivating pro-choice activism, the feeling of being a valued member of one’s women’s group also significantly contributes to pro-choice involvement.

For men, higher public collective self-esteem and lower identity and private collective self-esteem were linked to stronger feminist identification, heightened reactance against the abortion ban, and increased participation in pro-choice protests (only indirectly for private collective self-esteem). What is more, public collective self-esteem might be related to reactance even stronger than reported due to suppression effects caused by feminist identification. Burn et al. (2000) noted that higher men’s public collective self-esteem correlated with less support for feminism, contrasting our findings. When we compare our negative correlations between feminist identification with private and identity collective self-esteem and with the results of Burn et al. (2000), we see that their correlations were also negative but weaker and statistically insignificant. This may be due to the small sample of men surveyed in Burn’s work (fewer than 96 men) compared to our sample of 420 men. Our findings, suggesting that men who identify as feminists are more likely to participate in pro-choice protests, align with prior studies (e.g., Conlin & Heesacker, 2018; Wiley et al., 2013). We identified significant serial mediation pathways among men, showing that lower perceptions of discrimination against men in Poland and negative evaluation of men were associated with higher feminist identification, which in turn predicted greater reactance against the abortion ban and increased involvement in pro-choice protests. Conversely, men who strongly identified with their own gender were less likely to identify with feminism, and this lower feminist identification was linked to their reduced engagement in protests. This suggests that men who perceive less discrimination against their gender and feel less attached to traditional male group values are more likely to support feminist causes. Men’s involvement in pro-choice protests may thus represent a form of ‘genuine’ allyship behavior, transcending traditional male group norms and the boundaries of their gender identity to support women’s rights (e.g., Radke et al., 2020).

Limitations and Future Directions

A few limitations of the current findings deserve consideration. First, the study used a cross-sectional design, limiting our ability to make causal inferences. Future longitudinal or experimental studies should address these limitations and examine how changes in gender collective self-esteem affect willingness to engage in pro-choice protests and protests for women’s rights more broadly. For instance, future studies could experimentally increase feminist identification through exposure to different materials (e.g., scenarios, videos, news, or information about gender inequalities and women’s rights) and examine how it affects abortion attitudes and willingness to engage in pro-choice movements in more conservative societies.

Second, this study was limited by a non-probability sample, which might affect the generalizability of findings to the larger population. For example, less than 10% of the sample was older than 50 years. As age is related to feminist identification, our results should be extrapolated to younger age groups. When designing an intervention to strengthen feminism and support women’s rights, it is essential to consider that different media (e.g., social media) conveying feminist content reach different age groups and that the persuasiveness of the content depends to a large degree on one’s ideology (Nelson & Garst, 2005).

Third, we did not include non-binary people in the sample, thus likely omitting valuable insights regarding protest participation among minoritized genders. Relatedly, many important variables explaining the motivation to participate in pro-choice protests were not included in this study, including religiosity, political ideology, gender role ideologies (e.g., Cassese & Holman, 2016), and different content of gender identities (e.g., Becker & Wagner, 2009; Mikołajczak et al., 2022). Further, previous studies have shown that several variables mediate the associations we examined, which can create alternative explanatory mechanisms of collective action, such as group efficacy or perceived injustice (van Zomeren et al., 2008). Future studies could include these variables in the model we examined to confirm the robustness of the effects we found. Moreover, our results might be somewhat limited due to suppression effects caused by feminist identification. As shown in our analyses, those suppression effects influence the association between men’s public and identity collective self-esteem with reactance, meaning that those two variables likely have a stronger effect on reactance and, thus, protest participation in the case of men.

Finally, our measure of feminist identification had some limitations despite being previously used in research on this topic (Burn et al., 2000; Liss et al., 2004). To measure feminist identification, we used a single question that represents just one component of this variable: self-labeling as a feminist. Research indicates that not all women and men who espouse feminist values endorse the feminist label (Yoder et al., 2011). Future research could consider more robust tools for measuring feminist identification derived from recent feminist and gender literature (Siegel & Calogero, 2021) or in-group identification research conducted in social psychology (Leach et al., 2008; van Breen et al., 2017).

Practice Implications

Our results indicate that participation in pro-choice protests may act as a psychological buffer against the violation of women’s rights for both women and men. Considering that women who terminate pregnancies and receive social support are less likely to experience feelings of shame (Kumar et al., 2009), pro-choice protests can be perceived as a means of supporting such women (as well as supporting women who might need an abortion at some point in their lives and their families). Identifying the motivations of individuals involved in pro-choice protests can aid in shaping effective educational and informational campaigns to increase collective action for women’s rights. With a better grasp of why individuals engage in pro-choice protests, protest organizers can tailor messages and strategies to reach a broader audience and garner greater support. For example, our results suggest that applying the reactance theory to encourage people to engage in protests is possible. This means that, for example, using the phrase ‘abortion ban’ to describe the abortion restrictions or pointing to the infringement of women’s personal freedoms should intensify the state of reactance against the restriction of abortion rights and lead to greater involvement in pro-choice protests. Our results also point to the importance of strengthening feminist identification as a way of increasing protest participation for abortion rights and support for women’s rights more generally (e.g., Radke et al., 2016), particularly for men. Given that men are less likely to participate in abortion rights protests and score lower on feminist identification in general and that feminist identification is a stronger predictor of protest engagement among them, feminist outreach and education efforts might be more effective if they focused on them to a larger extent.

In addition, these results may have implications for enhancing feminist identification by influencing various aspects of collective self-esteem in a conservative society like Poland. A key role may be played by impacting public collective self-esteem through educational initiatives. In a conservative society, not all women’s rights (or their infringements) are known to everyone nor widely accepted, such as is the case with the right to abortion. Education about infringements on women’s rights could strengthen feminist identification by reducing the belief that women have equal rights as men in a conservative society, i.e., by lowering public collective self-esteem, as suggested by our study results. These efforts should be effective for both women and men, whose belief in the favoritism of their own gender in society is associated with feminist identification. Thus, increasing awareness of male privilege can enhance both reactance against abortion bans and engagement in pro-choice protests. However, caution should be exercised in terms of potential backlash to abortion education, particularly among conservative individuals or parents of children participating in sexual education, who might see it as a threat to the values they espouse. Therefore, various strategies to enhance the image of feminism and feminists, such as combating stereotypes and fake news about feminism, raising awareness about violence against feminists, and fostering empathy towards them, can be effective tools in sexual education to increase pro-choice attitudes.

Conclusion

This study sheds light on the intricate dynamics surrounding engagement in pro-choice protests and the key role of psychological reactance in that process among both women and men. Our findings contribute to the literature by showing how different aspects of gender self-esteem (e.g., low public collective self-esteem among women, high public collective self-esteem among men) and feminist identification amplify reactance against the abortion ban and participation in pro-choice protests. Crucially, our findings suggest that feminist identification could be a particularly strong predictor of reactance against the abortion ban and protest participation among men. Given that men are generally less likely to participate in pro-choice protests and tend to have lower levels of feminist identification, education and outreach efforts focusing specifically on men could be more effective in increasing broader engagement in such protests. Our results indicate that, for women, access to abortion is not solely a matter of feminist beliefs but a fundamental right protecting their reproductive well-being and choice—an issue important not only to feminists but to all women.