Check out this new article by Teja Pammi, Caterina Ceccarelli, Sam Hibbs, Jemima Chase, Nafees Hamid and Fiona S. McEwen, which examines what we know about the relationship between adverse childhood experiences and violent extremism.
Adverse childhood experiences, or ACEs, include potentially traumatic experiences before adulthood, such as physical, sexual or emotional abuse, neglect, exposure to domestic violence, parental separation, household substance abuse, poverty and other forms of household dysfunction. The study asks whether these experiences are more common among people involved in violent extremism and what role, if any, they might play in pathways towards extremism.
The researchers conducted a scoping review, systematically searching research across psychology, political science, behavioural science and the social sciences. They screened 847 records and identified 23 relevant studies involving 4,946 people. The studies covered people associated with different forms of extremism, including right wing, left wing, white supremacist and Islamist groups. The researchers also assessed the methodological quality of each study.
The review found that childhood adversity was common across many of the extremist samples. Household dysfunction, including caregiver loss, imprisonment and substance abuse, was the most commonly reported type, followed by experiences of maltreatment. In some samples, the prevalence was high. For example, 70% of one sample of US right wing extremists reported four or more adverse childhood experiences.
However, the findings do not show that childhood adversity causes violent extremism. Although ACEs were often more common among extremist samples than in the general population, comparisons with other high risk groups produced mixed results. Political extremists, for example, were no more likely to come from broken homes than gang members in one study. Another found that non radicalised Muslim prisoners reported more violent childhood punishment than radicalised Muslim prisoners. Only four studies directly tested the relationship between ACEs and violent extremism, and their findings were inconsistent.
The evidence instead points towards more complex pathways. Childhood adversity may contribute to problems such as anger, social isolation, difficulties forming relationships or behavioural problems. Under some circumstances, extremist groups may then provide belonging, identity or social support. Education may also have a protective role, with one study finding that remaining in education reduced the relationship between childhood adversity and subsequent involvement in terrorist violence.
For policy and prevention, the key implication is to avoid treating childhood trauma as a warning sign for violent extremism. ACEs are common and can lead to many different outcomes. Instead, the findings support prevention approaches that address childhood adversity, strengthen social and educational connections, and consider trauma as one part of a much broader set of individual and social factors shaping pathways towards violent extremism.