Measuring extremist archetypes: Scale development and validation

Abstract

Previous work has often disregarded the psychological heterogeneity of violent extremists. This research aimed to contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the psychological diversity of violent extremists. Based on qualitative work, we developed and validated the Extremist Archetypes Scale, identifying five distinct archetype dimensions: “adventurer,” “fellow traveler,” “leader,” “drifter” and “misfit.” Study 1 identified five dimensions among White majority members (N = 307), four of which were related to extremist violent intentions and which dissociated in terms of sociopolitical ideologies and intergroup attitudes. Preregistered Study 2 (N = 308) confirmed the scale’s five-factor solution in another sample of White majority members, replicated relationships with violent intentions, and demonstrated the dimensions’ distinct personality correlates. As in Study 1, the archetype dimensions had positive associations with extremist violent intentions and tapped onto different psychological profiles in terms of major personality traits. Study 3 (N = 317) replicated these results in a sample of Muslim minority members. Measurement equivalence was established across gender, age, political orientation, and ethnicity (majority and minority).

The age of extremism: a crime script analysis of violent and nonviolent extremists according to age of first extremist act

“…For example, various components of the scenes found here reflect elements described in Obaidi’s archetypes (and those of Nesser, 2015; Bjørgo, 2016). Future research could use the extremist archetype scale (Obaidi et al , 2022) to examine whether archetypes differ across different age groups. Obaidi et al (2022) stressed that archetypes should be understood on continuous dimensions; therefore, individuals do not necessarily sit in one archetype; some individuals may score high on more than one dimension.…”

“…Future research could use the extremist archetype scale (Obaidi et al , 2022) to examine whether archetypes differ across different age groups. Obaidi et al (2022) stressed that archetypes should be understood on continuous dimensions; therefore, individuals do not necessarily sit in one archetype; some individuals may score high on more than one dimension. It might be that younger people are motivated more by excitement, a need for status and a sense of belonging and are seeking involvement in violent activities, whereas older people might be more attracted to leadership roles that involve influencing others rather than participating in extremist-related violence.…”

“…Nesser (2015) identified four archetypes that were not dissimilar to those proposed by Bjørgo (2016). Obaidi et al (2022) built on these findings, identifying four archetypes associated with extremist violent intentions that demonstrated different psychological profiles, in terms of personal characteristics, including personality traits.…”

“…Researchers have taken a variety of approaches to explore and understand terrorism, extremism and radicalisation, and literature has emerged from a range of disciplines; these include economics, political science, psychology and sociology (Borum, 2011). There is no unique “terrorist personality” (Kruglanski and Fishman, 2006; McCauley, 2002; Horgan, 2003; Victoroff, 2005); characteristics underlying terrorism vary for different individuals (Horgan, 2008; Obaidi et al , 2022; Reidy, 2019), and can include both behavioural and motivational factors, such as the choice to use violence or refrain from violence to achieve extremist goals; the existence or absence of religious beliefs; and an ideology that drives their behaviour. A sense of belonging and identity can be a protective factor against extremist influences and can have positive effects on psychological well-being, but may also facilitate polarisation of views, dehumanisation of and criminal and extremist-related violence towards outgroup members (Boduszek et al , 2021; Moskalenko, 2021).…”

“…Moreover, others have examined whether a typology of extremists exists, regarding, for example, lone actors (e.g. Pantucci, 2011), the extreme right wing (Bjørgo, 2016), European jihadists (Nesser, 2015) and extremist “archetypes” (Obaidi et al , 2022). Nesser (2015) identified four archetypes that were not dissimilar to those proposed by Bjørgo (2016).…”