(But first I would like to point out that I read your article more than 2 weeks ago so I probably forgot some information that might be relevant to my 2 questions)
1) Why do you think the MAP model and the description of the different activist profiles by B. Moyer are accurate enough to be relevant? I have not done much research on the MAP model, but at first glance, it seems to be a rather old and ambitious work in regarding the available data and the number of variables.
2) You talk about non-violent protest, you don't talk about violent protest. Why ? (is it because there is not enough data?) And do you have a precise vision on what delimits non-violence from violence?
Thank you for your article, very interesting!
I have 2 questions:
(But first I would like to point out that I read your article more than 2 weeks ago so I probably forgot some information that might be relevant to my 2 questions)
1) Why do you think the MAP model and the description of the different activist profiles by B. Moyer are accurate enough to be relevant?
I have not done much research on the MAP model, but at first glance, it seems to be a rather old and ambitious work in regarding the available data and the number of variables.
2) You talk about non-violent protest, you don't talk about violent protest. Why ? (is it because there is not enough data?)
And do you have a precise vision on what delimits non-violence from violence?