Mental Disorders, Personality Traits, and Grievance-Fueled Targeted Violence: The Evidence Base and Implications for Research and Practice

Abstract

This article aims to move away from intuitive appeals that link mental disorder with violence such as terrorism, mass murder, and other targeted violence. The article synthesizes the existing evidence base regarding the relationship between mental disorders and personality traits and (a) attitudinal affinities with violent causes, and (b) a number of violent behaviors (including mass murder and terrorism). The evidence base is mixed and the research focus changed across time: from simple and unempirical assertions of causation to an almost complete rejection of their presence to a finer grained and disaggregated understanding. Empirical research examining mental disorder in crime and violence highlights that the commission of such events is a complex synthesis of psychopathology, personal circumstance, and environment. The article concludes with several suggestions regarding future research and practice.

Between vulnerability and risk? Mental health in UK counter-terrorism

“…A core objective from the start was to 'improve the understanding of both police and health professionals of the associations between mental health conditions and vulnerability to radicalisation'. This was initiated after a research programme had identified 'a broad range of mental health and psychological difficulties' in around half of 657 Prevent referrals (NPCC, Undated; see also Corner et al, 2018b).…”

Violent Attacks: What Do We Know? What Can We Do?

“…Because of this, psychologists researching, responding to, and trying to stop acts of mass violence often do not have access to perhaps the most important source of information, the attacker. Furthermore, as pointed out by Corner et al (2018), it might be difficult to obtain accurate information from sources who could be hostile, resistant, and distrustful, such as family members or individuals who share the goals and ideology of an attacker.…”

“…A thread running through the papers written by Archer (2018), Corner et al (2018), Lankford (2018), and Meloy (2018) is the distinction between attempts to predict mass violent behavior and attempts to identify factors that alone or in combination increase the risk of violence. This reflects a shift from viewing terrorist attacks and mass shootings as stemming from a specific form of psychopathology, such as psychopathy, to viewing mass violence as the end result of a dynamic process that might be provoked by specific issues, such as a sense of grievance, mistreatment, or victimization, but not be acted on unless other factors, such as a desire for attention and fame, are present.…”

“…Archer's (2018) articles reminds us of the limits of what psychologists can responsibly and ethically say and not say. Corner et al (2018), Lankford (2018), and Meloy (2018) inform us of psychosocial factors that signal increased risk of carrying out violent acts.…”

“…Among the variables associated with increased risk of violent action identified by Corner et al (2018), Lankford (2018), and Meloy (2018) are several that can be objectively examined during a psychological assessment. These include indications of psychosis, particularly a delusional disorder involving a fixation on a specific individual or cause; suicide potential and indifference to living; an exaggerated need for attention and desire for fame; and an identity organized around the perception of having been mistreated and victimized and the belief that retribution for these grievances is warranted and justified.…”