Patterns of Disengagement from Violent Extremism: A Stocktaking of Current Knowledge and Implications for Counterterrorism

Dalgaard‐Nielsen, Anja

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-65566-6_10

Cited by 9 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This can be the return to a prior state (e.g., by disengaging with a group) or the discarding of problematic attitudes (deradicalization). Research on Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) offers insight to improve tertiary prevention efforts (Altier et al, 2017;Bubolz & Simi, 2015;Cherney et al, 2021;Dalgaard-Nielsen, 2018;Horgan et al, 2017a;Windisch et al, 2016). All three areas of prevention can potentially benefit from our findings, as we identified unique characteristics such as male gender, as well as high levels of relative disadvantage and social deprivation within the group of "the extremists" that can inform the development of primary prevention programs (e.g., include educational resources on social deprivation), secondary prevention (e.g., focus on males), and tertiary prevention (e.g., address the identified risk factors when planning measures of deradicalization).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radicalization in Adolescence: the Identification of Vulnerable Groups

Schröder

Bruns

Lehmann

et al. 2022

Eur J Crim Policy Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given that the normative search for identity and belonging, as well as political socialization, plays an important role during adolescence, this life stage is characterized by high vulnerability to radicalization processes. When investigating the influence of different factors on radicalization processes, latent profile analysis can identify and analyze groups of adolescents with different vulnerabilities. Based on a sample of 6,715 ninth-graders from Germany, we identified six latent classes with specific vulnerabilities to right-wing attitudes as one possible outcome of radicalization. The results show that the class with the highest approval of right-wing statements mainly consists of male adolescents with a high sense of relative disadvantage and social deprivation. Specific family ties constitute a unique feature among those who are indifferent in their attitudes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radicalization in Adolescence: the Identification of Vulnerable Groups

Schröder

Bruns

Lehmann

et al. 2022

Eur J Crim Policy Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Coid et al (2016) found that while depression and anxiety were not correlated with radical attitudes, clinical antisocial personality disorder was. As such, while clinical mental illness may not be especially important risk factors for radicalization, other types of psychological or personality traits may be (Dalgaard‐Nielsen, 2008). Indeed, in Simi et al's (2016) study, 73% of the sample reported having a history of a range of conduct problems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive and behavioral radicalization: A systematic review of the putative risk and protective factors

Wolfowicz

Litmanovitz

Weisburd

et al. 2021

Campbell Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Two of the most central questions in radicalization research are, (1) why do some individuals radicalize when most of those from the same groups or exposed to similar conditions do not? and (2) why do radicalized individuals turn to radical violence while the majority remain inert? It has been suggested that the answer to both questions lie in the cumulative and interactive effects of a range of risk factors. While risk assessment and counter‐radicalization take a risk‐protective factor approach, there is widespread debate as to what these factors are and which are most important. Objectives This review has two primary objectives. 1) To identify what the putative risk and protective factors for different radicalization outcomes are, without any predeterminations. 2) To synthesize the evidence and identify the relative magnitude of the effects of different factors. The review's secondary objectives are to: 1) Identify consistencies in the estimates of factors across different radicalization outcomes. 2) Identify whether any significant heterogeneity exists within factors between (a) geographic regions, and (b) strains of radicalizing ideologies. Search Methods Over 20 databases were searched for both published and gray literature. In order to provide a more comprehensive review, supplementary searches were conducted in two German and one Dutch database. Reference harvesting was conducted from previous reviews and contact was made with leading researchers to identify and acquire missing or unpublished studies. Selection Criteria The review included observational studies assessing the outcomes of radical attitudes, intentions, and/or radical behaviors in OECD countries and which provided sufficient data to calculate effect sizes for individual‐level risk and protective factors. Data Collection and Analysis One‐hundred and twenty‐seven studies, containing 206 samples met the inclusion criteria and provided 1302 effect sizes pertaining to over 100 different factors. Random effects meta‐analyses were carried out for each factor, and meta‐regression and moderator analysis were used to explore differences across studies. Results Studies were primarily cross‐sectional, with samples representing 20 countries OECD countries. Most studies examined no specific radicalizing ideology, while others focussed on specific ideologies (e.g., Islamist, right‐wing, and left‐wing ideologies). The studies generally demonstrated low risk of bias and utilized validated or widely acceptable measures for both indicators and outcomes. With some exceptions, sociodemographic factors tend to have the smallest estimates, with larger estimates for experiential and attitudinal factors, followed by traditional criminogenic and psychological factors. Authors' Conclusions While sociodemographic factors are the most commonly examined factors (selective availability), they also tend to have the smallest estimates. So too, attitudinal and even experiential factors, do not have effect sizes of the magnitude that could lead to significa...

show abstract

“…Some observe that there is a great deal of heterogeneity in the risk factors and triggers for radicalisation (Dalgaard‐Nielsen, 2010 , 2018 ; Horgan 2009 ). This means there is a variety of risk and background factors that may lead an individual (or a group of individuals) to radicalise to violent extremism (Campelo et al, 2018 ; Carlsson et al, 2020 ; Vergani, Iqbal, Ilbahar, & Barton, 2018 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research also demonstrates the complex nature of different progression pathways from radicalisation to violence (Horgan, 2008 ; Kruglanski et al, 2019 ; Kruglanski, Webber, & Koehler, 2020 ). The literature is, therefore, in agreement that the complex nature of radicalisation risk and pathway processes to violence makes it impossible for any single agency, organisation or entity to address the problem alone (Dalgaard‐Nielsen, 2018 ). As such, interventions to address the problem of radicalisation to violence are often characterised by multiagency partnerships, working across different service delivery sectors (see e.g., Cherney & Belton, 2019 ; Crawford, 1999 ; Innes et al, 2011 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%