Terror attacks have been linked in part to online extremist content. Online conversations are cloaked in religious ambiguity, with deceptive intentions, often twisted from mainstream meaning to serve a malevolent ideology. Although tens of thousands of Islamist extremism supporters consume such content, they are a small fraction relative to peaceful Muslims. The efforts to contain the ever-evolving extremism on social media platforms have remained inadequate and mostly ineffective. Divergent extremist and mainstream contexts challenge machine interpretation, with a particular threat to the precision of classification algorithms. Radicalization is a subtle long-running persuasive process that occurs over time. Our context-aware computational approach to the analysis of extremist content on Twitter breaks down this persuasion process into building blocks that acknowledge inherent ambiguity and sparsity that likely challenge both manual and automated classification. Based on prior empirical and qualitative research in social sciences, particularly political science, we model this process using a combination of three contextual dimensions -- religion, ideology, and hate -- each elucidating a degree of radicalization and highlighting independent features to render them computationally accessible. We utilize domain-specific knowledge resources for each of these contextual dimensions such as Qur'an for religion, the books of extremist ideologues and preachers for political ideology and a social media hate speech corpus for hate. The significant sensitivity of the Islamist extremist ideology and its local and global security implications require reliable algorithms for modelling such communications on Twitter. Our study makes three contributions to reliable analysis: (i) Development of a computational approach rooted in the contextual dimensions of religion, ideology, and hate, which reflects strategies employed by online Islamist extremist groups, (ii) An in-depth analysis of relevant tweet datasets with respect to these dimensions to exclude likely mislabeled users, and (iii) A framework for understanding online radicalization as a process to assist counter-programming. Given the potentially significant social impact, we evaluate the performance of our algorithms to minimize mislabeling, where our context-aware approach outperforms a competitive baseline by 10.2% in precision, thereby enhancing the potential of such tools for use in human review.

Is making an explicit distinction between politically moderate devout Muslims and political radicals empirically valid? If yes, in what ways do political moderates differ from political radicals? By systematically examining cross-national Muslim attitudes, this article scrutinizes the distinctiveness of politically moderate and politically radical Islam against the weight of empirical evidence. By drawing from extant theoretical linkages, we conduct a confirmatory factor analysis of cross-national survey data from 13 Muslim-majority states to test the fit of two widely theorized factors-moderate and radical Islamism. The findings suggest that support for politically moderate Islam is distinctively different from support for politically radical Islam. This article makes two key contributions. First, this study introduces a systematic empirical operationalization of Political Islam, and a more nuanced measurement thereof for empirical research. Second, the findings help advance our understanding of the variation in politically divergent religious attitudes in the Islamic world.

Objective This study (1) introduces a new framework to conceptualize and measure political Islam, and (2) examines the empirical nexus among Islamic religiosity, ideological support for political Islam (ISPI), and collective protests in the Arab Middle East. Methods Analyzing cross‐national attitudes in five Arab states, I conduct a principal component analysis to construct a new index to account for a variation in ISPI, and examine the effects thereof on participation in collective protests. Results The evidence shows that Islamic religiosity matters in challenging political elites via collective action. While politically moderate Muslims appear more likely to engage in nonviolent, collective political protests, political radicals seem less likely to do so. Conclusion The findings suggest that political ideology plays a central role in moderating the intricate relationship between Islam and collective political activism. The evidence also supports the resource mobilization thesis, among other factors, to explain the dynamics of collective action in the Arab world.

No abstract

No abstract