This new article discusses the need to treat distinct theoretical interpretations of personal involvement in terrorism and violent extremism as complementary, rather than in competition. The authors focus on three theoretical frameworks – the rational choice perspective (RCP), the social identity perspective (SIP), and the ideological perspective (IP) – and argue that they are mutually dependent, even though they are often considered antagonistic. The authors suggest that scholars should recognize that individuals are driven to involvement in this violence by both personal rewards and collective objectives, making both the RCP and SIP frameworks indispensable. They also conclude that SIP interpretations are incomplete without the IP, as ideologies play a pivotal role in constructing and amplifying ingroup and outgroup identities. The RCP is also deficient in the absence of the IP as many rewards that motivate involvement can only be understood through reference to the ideational context in which they are conferred.
The authors introduce the Attitudes-Behaviors Corrective (ABC) Model as a useful heuristic device for facilitating integrative theoretical work. The ABC Model emphasizes the distinction between sympathy for violence and actual participation in its creation and encourages the systematic consideration of the presence and interplay of structural drivers, individual incentives, and enabling factors in the motivations of individuals under consideration. The model brings the macro, meso, and micro levels of analysis into view, allowing researchers to consider these as appropriate in any given context. It also emphasizes the importance of multifinality and equifinality, recognizing that particular explanatory factors or combinations of these can contribute to a multitude of outcomes, and particular outcomes may be driven by many different factors or combinations of these. The ABC Model is dynamic, recognizing that the extent to which individuals sympathize with and participate in violence changes over time, in response to events and evolving contexts.
Overall, the article argues for a more integrative approach to understanding why individuals become involved in terrorism and violent extremism. The authors suggest that scholars should recognize the complementary nature of different theoretical frameworks and use heuristic devices like the ABC Model to facilitate this integrative work.