Legitimacy Concerns in Animal Advocacy Organizations during the Michael Vick Dogfighting Scandal

Bibliographic Data

ID12418784
AuthorsSolange E Badano (Fordham University, corresponding author), Steven J Burgermeister (Fordham University), Sidney Henne (Fordham University), Sean T Murphy (0000-0001-8886-787X, Fordham University), Benjamin M Cole (0000-0002-7405-7654, 1 [email protected])
Year2014
Volume22
Issue2
Pages111-134
Publication date2014-02-18
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueSociety and Animals (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1063-1119 • E-ISSN: 1568-5306
PublisherBrill (PUBLISHER • NL)
DOI10.1163/15685306-12341243
OpenAlexW2076795213
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited50

Using the quasi-experimental setting of the Michael Vick dogfighting case, the researchers employed rich interview content to explore the question, “When a critical event occurs in the animal advocacy field, what motivates advocacy groups to respond?” The investigation reveals that what was thought to be one critical event was in actuality three unique yet interrelated critical events—(1) the revelation of the transgressions; (2) the punishment of the perpetrator; and (3) the decision about whether to ally with the perpetrator in advocacy. The study shows that legitimacy concerns, occasionally paired with reflections on organizational identity, influenced the decision-making of advocacy organizations across all three critical events, as each held the potential either to legitimize or to delegitimize the advocacy organizations and/or the perpetrator (i.e., Vick)

Criminology · Event (particle physics · Identity (music · Interpretation (philosophy · Legitimacy · Organizational field · Political science · Punishment (psychology · Revelation · Social science · Sociology · Law · Management and Organizational Studies · Nonprofit Sector and Volunteering · Philosophy · Psychology · Rhetoric and Communication Studies · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub