Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
State, Society, and National Security: Challenges and Opportunities in the 21st Century
'Radicalisation': The Transformation of Modern Understanding of Terrorist Origins, Psychology and Motivation2016 •
Our understanding of how people become involved in terrorism and violent extremism has transformed since the turn of the century. That transformation occurred at the same time that ‘radicalisation’ took over as the dominant framework for considering questions around terrorist psychology, motivation and recruitment. Today, radicalisation is typically seen to refer to a complex and dynamic process which results in individuals coming to embrace a violent ideology in support of a political or religious cause. The concept of radicalisation has become an almost universal element in contemporary efforts to understand and combat terrorism. This chapter outlines the rise and development of theoretical models and research on radicalisation. It highlights some of the major research breakthroughs but also focuses on where very significant gaps remain in our understanding. The chapter cautions that we need to be careful in terms of how we think about the broader role of radicalisation. A subtle – and dangerously unquestioned - assumption has spread that ‘radicalisation’ as a phenomenon is the major root cause of terrorism. When different radicalisation models are used to design or justify a variety of counter-terrorism policies and programmes, care is needed to look beyond the headline banner of radicalisation and pay attention to the factors identified within those models as key drivers.
In this article, we review the literature and present a model of radicalization and de-radicalization. In this model, we distinguish three phases in radicalization: (1) a sensitivity phase, (2) a group membership phase and (3) an action phase. We describe the micro-level, meso-level and macro-level factors that influence the radicalization process in these three phases. However, not all people become increasingly radical — they may also de-radicalize. We specify the micro-level, meso-level and macro-level factors in de-radicalization. We highlight the importance of the role of group membership and intergroup relations in the radicalization process.
2008 •
This concise Report was prepared to outline the current state of academic research on violent radicalisation. Radicalisation to any form of violence, including terrorist violence, is a gradual or phased process. The Report finds that there are remarkable similarities between radicalisation to current Islamist or jihadist terrorism and radicalisation associated with left-wing, right-wing or ethno-nationalist terrorism in Western Europe since the 1960s. The Report also concludes that radicalisation leading to acts of terrorism is context-specific. Past and present waves of violent radicalisation which lead to terrorism among mainly young people share certain structural features. There is not any single root cause for radicalisation leading to terrorism but a number of factors may contribute to it. Precipitant (‘trigger’) factors vary according to individual experience and personal pathways to radicalisation. Personal experiences, kinship and bonds of friendship, as well as group dynamics are critical in triggering the actual process of radicalisation. Ideology appears as an important and constant factor in the radicalisation process towards terrorism, but the espousal of a particular ideology alone does not guarantee that radicalisation towards terrorist violence will ensue.
The 7th Annual INTERPA Conference
Why so Radical: The Psychology of Process of Radicalization2018 •
The examination of studies on radicalization reveals that international major events have shaped the related research and studies. For instance, prior to September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, terrorism studies had been rather marginal area of study in various disciplines such as sociology, social psychology, and political science but after the 9-11, terrorism researchers and experts became celebrities overnight (Maskaliunaite, 2015). London bombings in July 2005 is another example, after which “radicalization” became a new buzz word as officials and public were wondering how four seemingly ordinary British citizens turned into suicide bombers and targeted civilians. Given that there are many attacks around the World, it is not surprising that after each attack policy makers and security services have been turning to researchers and experts to understand why such events are taking place in order to explore the ways to prevent future incidents from happening. Public also seeking answer to the question of “why do they hate us?”. Terrorist attacks are mainly carried out by radical individuals and that many of these individuals act in terrorist groups, but there are some questions still remain unanswered such as “whether all radicals are terrorists?” and “how to deal with different type of radicalization?”. I argue that psychological perspective on process of radicalization may assist the policy makers and public answer some of the above questions. The objective of this paper is threefold. Firstly, examining the concept of radicalization, in order to provide operational definition of radicalization. Secondly, summarizing process of radicalization based on individual variables and group-level decision making strategies along with the wider political and social context in which radicalization occurs. Thirdly, reviewing the two pyramids model (McCauley & Moskalenko, 2017) in order to provide a practical framework for the examination of political radicalization. Keywords: psychology of radicalization, relative deprivation, terrorism, two pyramids model of political radicalization, terror management theory, social identity theory
This article conceptualizes political radicalization as a dimension of increasing extrernity ofbeliefs, feelings, and behaviors in support 0.( intergroup conflict and violence Aeros's individuals, groups, and J11aSS publics, twelve mechanisms of radicalir~: zation are distinguished. For ten of these mechanisms, radiculization occurs in a context of group identification and reaction to perceived threat to the ingroup. The variety and strength of reactive mechanisms point to the need to understand rudicalization-s-including the extremes 0.1 terrOriSJ11--0S emerging more [rom the dvnamics of intergroup conflict than from the vicissitudes n.1' individual psychology
Perspectives on Terrorism
Twenty Important Articles and Reports on Terrorist Radicalization (2012)2012 •
Bilgi Prime Youth ERC Blog
Extremism and Radicalization: What makes the difference?2020 •
There are two terms extremism and radicalism, which are nowadays often being interchangeably used in everyday life as well as in the scientific literature (Moskalenko and McCauley, 2009). This is not a surprise in an age dominated by the populist Zeitgeist (Mudde, 2004) in which a dualist understanding prevails over in conceptualizing and understanding social, economic and political phenomena. Scientific thinking is not also free from this myopic and reductionist inclination. Recent evidence suggests that, beyond the realm of scientific investigations, policy makers, journalists and the general public also use these terms quite flexibly and interchangeably to label various social and psychological phenomena. For instance, research suggests that individuals tend to attribute psychological pathologies to perpetrators of violent actions to deny them any similarity with themselves and protect their distinctiveness (Noor et al., 2019). Such processes may explain the popularity of the term ‘radicalization’ to designate terrorists (i.e. ‘radicalized’ individuals) in the public sphere, thereby emphasizing a hypothesized psychopathological root to their political action (Mandel, 2009).
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol 618, 1, 80-94
From Profiles to Pathways and Roots to Routes: Perspectives from Psychology on Radicalization into Terrorism2008 •
Attempts to profile terrorists have failed resoundingly, leaving behind a poor (and unfair) impression of the potential for a sound psychological contribution to understanding the terrorist. However, recent work in the area has delivered promising and exciting starting points for a conceptual development in understanding the psychological process across all levels of terrorist involvement. Involvement in terrorism is a complex psychosocial process that comprises at least three seemingly distinct phases: becoming involved, being involved—synonymous with engaging in unambiguous terrorist activity—and disengaging (which may or may not result in subsequent de-radicalization). A critical implication of these distinctions is the recognition that each of them may contain unique, or phase-specific, implications for counterterrorism. An argument is made for greater consideration of the disengagement phase with a clearer role for psychological research to inform and enhance practical counterterrorism operations.
Workshop: The Narrative of Islamic violence in History. Creation, artifice and reality
Violent Radicalization: Beyond Ideology or Religion2018 •
Narratives that consider Islam as a violent religion have been reinforced in recent times by the rise of jihadism, i.e. those radical Islamist movements that advocate the use of violence through a distorted concept of jihad. At present, jihadism represents a global movement with a considerable popular base of followers even in secular Western societies. One of the characteristics of jihadist organizations is their ability to commit attacks in these Western societies, either directly and deliberately or through inspiring and encouraging the creation of autonomous cells. This fact, on the one hand, has led the respective governments to declare jihadist terrorism as one of the main threats to security. But, on the other hand, it has also contributed to the association between Islam and violence, a tendency that, although clearly erroneous and unjust, often becomes inevitable. However, recent research suggests that the process of violent radicalization of jihadist nature that some individuals experience in Western societies does not differ essentially from other processes based on political or nationalist ideologies. If this hypothesis is confirmed, the different political, religious, etc. contexts where the process of radicalization takes root would lose relevance in favor of the individual and the interpretation he makes of each of them. In other words, the arguments that support the consideration of Islam as a violent religion would lose weight in favor of the misuse, intentional or not, that some individuals make of religion to satisfy their own ends.
Revista El Agora USB
Creencias Sociales sobre la paz: entre deseos imposibles, una paz imperfecta y obstáculos ciudadanos a la paz negociada en Colombiai2023 •
Nanotoxicology
Antibacterial efficacy of silver nanoparticles of different sizes, surface conditions and synthesis methods2010 •
2004 •
arXiv (Cornell University)
zkFi: Privacy-Preserving and Regulation Compliant Transactions using Zero Knowledge Proofs2023 •
Journal of Industrial Engineering
Recycling of Aircraft: State of the Art in 20112013 •
1987 •
2024 •
2010 •