ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2022
Protest movements involving limited violence can sometimes be effective: Evidence from the 2020 BlackLivesMatter protests.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.
- Structural interventions and policing in the United States: a scoping review of public health literature.BMC public health · 2026Article
- The effect of disruptive protests on public opinion.PNAS nexus · 2026Review
- The Effects of the 2020 BLM Protests on Racial Bias in the United States.Personality & social psychology bulletin · 2026Article
- The Black Lives Matter movement mitigates bias against racial minority actors.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- The Intergroup Value Protection Model: A Theoretically Integrative and Dynamic Approach to Intergroup Conflict Escalation in Democratic Societies.Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc · 2024Review
- Increase in concerns about climate change following climate strikes and civil disobedience in Germany.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Escalated police stops of Black men are linguistically and psychologically distinct in their earliest moments.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Protest movements involving limited violence can sometimes be effective: Evidence from the 2020 BlackLivesMatter protests.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- The experience of hate incidents across racial and ethnic groups during the COVID-19 pandemic.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
SignificanceThe effects of recent protests for racial equality, particularly when they included violence, are currently of public and academic interest. To better understand these effects, we combine a dataset of all 2020 BlackLivesMatter protests with survey data containing measures of prejudice and support for police reform. Protests were not associated with reductions in prejudice, but were associated with increases in support for police reform. Specifically, a mix of nonviolent and violent protests was associated with an increase in police-reform support among conservatives living in liberal areas. This study highlights the importance of considering multiple measures of protest effectiveness and suggests that mass protest (including when it mixes nonviolence and violence) can be effective at advancing the movement's goals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.