This study analyses the role played by emotions in protest. In the current explanatory models, anger is the sole emotion associated with these actions. But is anger the only motive capable of mobilising citizens to defend a cause? We believe not. Hence, we postulate that anger, along with other emotions of positive valence, must act jointly to facilitate protest. To test this hypothesis, a questionnaire was applied to 316 university students in a setting of cut-backs in education. The results highlight several interesting aspects. Firstly, anger correlated significantly and positively with the positive emotions. Secondly, the mediation analysis performed showed: a) the relevance of positive emotions for explaining the intention to participate; and b) the influence of anger on the intention to participate is fundamentally through positive emotions. We will also discuss the role of emotions and the need to extend the motives involved in political actions.

Recently, many mobilisations have emerged all around the world and their impact on social change has been noteworthy. In this paper we shall review the evolution of the latest models of collective action in order to better understand current challenges in the field of political protest. Scholars have suggested that identity, grievances, efficacy, and anger are the relevant motives for prompting action. Nonetheless, there is still some room for improvement. In addition to previous variables, there is enough argumentation to include others which have been overlooked by the hegemony of instrumental logic; we are talking about moral obligation and positive emotions. There is a deontological logic in collective protest that can explain why individuals do not simply participate to obtain some kind of benefit; they may also feel morally obligated to do so. Moreover, positive emotions, such as hope, pride or optimism, can reinforce motivation. Another important aspect is the role of context. The specific characteristics of the political and the mobilising context may differently activate some motives or others. All these new contributions question the hegemony of the instrumental logic and demand an update of the theoretical approaches. The authors discuss the implications for theory and future research on collective action.