How does terrorism affect citizens’ political attitudes? Over the years, many scholars have tried to answer this question. This article performs a meta‐analysis on this literature, reviewing about 325 studies conducted between 1985 and 2020 on more than 400,000 respondents. The findings confirm that terrorism is associated—to a small but significant extent—with outgroup hostility, political conservatism and rally‐‘round‐the‐flag effects. At the same time, the effects of terrorism vary widely, with studies on Islamist violence, conducted in the United States or Israel, and using cross‐sectional data yielding stronger results on average. Finally, the review reveals remaining gaps in this field of study, including a lack of research on non‐Islamist violence or conducted in non‐Western contexts. Taken together, this meta‐analysis consolidates existing evidence, determines which results hold across contexts, and identifies key gaps in our current knowledge. Its data can also be accessed interactively via a Shiny App.

This study explores how researchers’ analytical choices affect the reliability of scientific findings. Most discussions of reliability problems in science focus on systematic biases. We broaden the lens to emphasize the idiosyncrasy of conscious and unconscious decisions that researchers make during data analysis. We coordinated 161 researchers in 73 research teams and observed their research decisions as they used the same data to independently test the same prominent social science hypothesis: that greater immigration reduces support for social policies among the public. In this typical case of social science research, research teams reported both widely diverging numerical findings and substantive conclusions despite identical start conditions. Researchers’ expertise, prior beliefs, and expectations barely predict the wide variation in research outcomes. More than 95% of the total variance in numerical results remains unexplained even after qualitative coding of all identifiable decisions in each team’s workflow. This reveals a universe of uncertainty that remains hidden when considering a single study in isolation. The idiosyncratic nature of how researchers’ results and conclusions varied is a previously underappreciated explanation for why many scientific hypotheses remain contested. These results call for greater epistemic humility and clarity in reporting scientific findings.

Drawing on the agenda-setting and framing literature, this quantitative content analysis examines how le Figaro, the Daily Telegraph, the New York Times, and the Moscow Times the Syrian war before and after the chemical weapon attack of 21 August 2013. Overall, the nationalization frame was most frequent, followed by the responsibility and conflict frames. Despite the large impact of the conflict, the morality, human interest, and economic impact frames were hardly present. Although all newspapers followed a similar pattern, the Daily Telegraph was the most heavily framed. Moreover, the stories barely provided any context while discussing several solutions largely in keeping with the suggestions of the governments. These findings raise questions about the neutrality of the newspapers and their impact on public opinion.

No abstract

Psychological research suggests that politically motivated violence (e.g., terrorism) partially stems from existential motives, and more specifically from individuals’ need to achieve significance in life (Significance Quest Theory [SQT]; Kruglanski et al., 2014). Interestingly, sociological research has established similar findings linking anomia—a syndrome including feelings of meaninglessness, powerlessness, isolation, self-estrangement and normlessness—with violent behavior. In line with SQT, the present contribution aimed to test for the first time if anomia could be linked with political violence. Results from a study conducted in four countries (Brazil, Turkey, Belgium, and France; N = 1,240) supported this hypothesis by revealing a consistent, small-to-medium-sized positive correlation between anomia and intentions to display political violence (r = .21, 95% CI [.14, .28]) among undergraduate samples. This link held across countries, independently of political ideology. These results highlight the theoretical and practical usefulness of considering the role of anomia in explaining violent political behavior.