Understanding (non)involvement in terrorist violence: What sets extremists who use terrorist violence apart from those who do not?

Check out this fantastic article by Bart Schuurman and Sarah Carthy.

By analyzing 103 cases of individuals involved in terrorist violence and 103 cases where this outcome did not occur, the study identifies both risk and protective factors that shape the radicalization process.

The findings of the article suggest that involvement in terrorist violence is not solely determined by the presence of risk factors but also by the absence of protective factors. Temporality plays a crucial role, as the study emphasizes the importance of considering whether these factors were present before or after radicalization onset. The most significant risk factors identified were alignment with a violent group or movement and access to weapons. On the other hand, protective factors such as parenting children during radicalization, self-control, and participation in extremist groups with non-exclusively violent strategic logics were associated with noninvolvement in terrorist violence.

The policy implications of this research highlight the need for tailored approaches in radicalization prevention efforts. One-size-fits-all programs may be less effective than interventions that address specific outcomes. It is also important to recognize that even when terrorist violence is prevented, individuals are likely to remain radicalized. Preventative measures should be carefully assessed to ensure they do not inadvertently contribute to longer-term societal threats.

The study collected primary data through semistructured interviews, autobiographical materials, and case files. Regression analyses and bivariate analyses were conducted to identify significant associations between predictor variables and the outcome of involvement in terrorist violence. The findings revealed that factors at the structural, group and movement, and individual levels all played a role in determining this outcome.

Risk factors included alignment with violent groups, low self-control, criminal history, access to weapons, and adverse childhood experiences. Protective factors included participation in extremist groups, parenting children, being in a relationship, and prosocial support systems. The study found that extremist group membership was associated with noninvolvement in terrorist violence, potentially due to the socialization of members to operate within legal boundaries.

The research also emphasized the importance of social context and interpersonal relationships in the radicalization process. The presence of prosocial ties and exposure to diverse viewpoints within social networks were associated with noninvolvement in terrorist violence. In contrast, intent to commit violence and access to firearms or explosives were indicators of involvement in terrorist violence.

The logistic regression model developed by the study demonstrated that risk and protective factors together explained a significant proportion of the variance in involvement in terrorist violence. The model highlighted the salience of factors such as alignment with violent groups, access to weapons, parenting children, self-control, and gender.

Overall, the study provides valuable insights into the complex dynamics of radicalization and involvement in terrorism. It underscores the need for nuanced and tailored approaches to prevention efforts. By understanding the specific risk and protective factors associated with different outcomes, policymakers and practitioners can develop more effective strategies to address radicalization and mitigate the risk of terrorist violence.