Spiritual over physical formidability determines willingness to fight and sacrifice through loyalty in cross-cultural populations

Abstract

Across 11 studies involving six countries from four continents (n = 3,285), we extend insights from field investigations in conflict zones to offline and online surveys to show that personal spiritual formidability—the conviction and immaterial resources (values, strengths of beliefs, character) of a person to fight—is positively associated with the will to fight and sacrifice for others. The physical formidability of groups in conflict has long been promoted as the primary factor in human decisions to fight or flee in times of conflict. Here, studies in Spain, Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine, and Morocco reveal that personal spiritual formidability, a construct distinct from religiosity, is more strongly associated with the willingness to fight and make costly self-sacrifices for the group than physical formidability. A follow-on study among cadets of the US Air Force Academy further indicates that this effect is mediated by a stronger loyalty to the group, a finding replicated in a separate study with a European sample. The results demonstrate that personal spiritual formidability is a primary determinant of the will to fight across cultures, and this individual-level factor, propelled by loyal bonds made with others, disposes citizens and combatants to fight at great personal risk.

New insights into the psychology of individuals and large groups in a world of changing conflicts

“…Further research shows that a perception of spiritual strength is more strongly associated with willingness to fight and sacrifice, than physical strength. This spiritual strength is mediated through group bonds where trust between group members is maximized (Tossell et al, 2022).…”

Does the union always make the force? Group status and recategorization influence the perceived physical formidability of potential coalition groups

“…Our research was inspired by the theory and findings of Fessler and colleagues (e.g., Fessler et al, 2012, 2023; Fessler & Holbrook, 2013, 2016) on formidability, but our primary goal was not further substantiation of their results or approach. Rather, the current work followed the recent direction of Gómez et al (2017, 2023) and Tossell et al (2022) that highlighted distinctions with respect to formidability. Our research, in its conceptualization and method, focused on physical formidability.…”

“…Although the present research drew heavily on the theory and method developed by Fessler and colleagues, our work was further guided by the approach of Gómez et al (2017Gómez et al ( , 2023 and Tossell et al (2022). The particular focus of the three current studies was on the physical facet of formidability, also extending research on interpersonal coalitions to intergroup allies.…”

“…Fessler and colleagues (Fessler et al, 2012, 2023; Fessler & Holbrook, 2013, 2016; Holbrook et al, 2016) have conducted important, pioneering work over the past decade on the formidability representation hypothesis, which states that formidability encompasses multiple assets and liabilities that contribute to fighting ability and that are cognitively encapsulated in a single representation with two conceptual dimensions: size (stature) and strength (muscularity). While recognizing the theoretical position and empirical support that cognitive representations of size and strength (i.e., envisioned physical formidability), through evolutionary processes, generally are affected by factors other than physicality, Gómez et al (2017, 2023) and Tossell et al (2022) distinguished between two facets of formidability – physical and spiritual.…”

Why Is It so Difficult to Investigate Violent Radicalization?

“…Our previous experience conducting field work with individuals at different levels of radicalization and with people who combat violent extremists provides a solid background for identifying barriers and potential solutions to the problems entailed by the research on terrorism. In particular, we conducted studies with individuals under risk of violent radicalization in Casablanca and Tetouan (Sheikh et al, 2016); supporters of militant global jihadism (Hamid et al, 2019); Islamist Pakistanis supporting the Kashmiri cause (Pretus et al, 2019); incarcerated individuals accused of jihadist terrorism (Gómez et al, 2022; Gómez, Bélanger, et al, 2021, Gómez, Chiclana, et al, 2022); the Islamic State of/in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) fighters captured in Iraq (Gómez et al, 2017); former members of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and Islamist radical groups (Gómez, Martínez, et al, 2021); and combatants fighting against the Islamic State, including Peshmerga (Kurdish Regional Government Forces), Iraqi Army Kurds, and Arab Sunni militia (Gómez et al, 2017); as well as cadets of the US Force Academy (Tossell et al, 2022). Our aim with this brief report is that the lessons we have learned through the study of the underlying mechanisms of violent extremism might be helpful to those interested in empirically meeting the challenge of investigating terrorism in the future.…”