Executive summary/Abstract Background In the field of terrorism research, the violent radicalisation of individuals towards perpetrating acts of terror has been the subject of academic enquiry for some time. One core focus by social scientists has been the role of narratives in this process. Narratives have the ability to present a socially constructed version of reality which serves the interest of the narrator(s). In the context of terrorism, by depicting violence as a viable antidote to individual vulnerabilities, the narratives purported for propagandistic purposes have the potential to thwart perceptions of instrumentality (a key characteristic of violent radicalisation). In order to prevent this from happening, researchers and counter‐terrorism practitioners have increasingly sought to explore the potential for counter‐narratives; targeted interventions that challenge the rationalisation(s) of violence purported in dominant narratives which, in turn, reconstructs the story. However, there is overwhelming consensus in both government and academic spheres that the concept of the counter‐narrative is underdeveloped and, to date, there has been no synthesis of its effectiveness at targeting violent radicalisation‐related outcomes. Objectives The objective of this review was to provide a synthesis of the effectiveness of counter‐narratives in reducing the risk of violent radicalisation. Search Methods After a scoping exercise, the literature was identified through four search stages, including key‐word searches of 12 databases, hand searches of reference lists of conceptual papers or books on the topic of counter‐narratives, as well as direct contact with experts and professional agencies in the field. Selection Criteria Studies adopting an experimental or quasiexperimental design where at least one of the independent variables involved comparing a counter‐narrative to a control (or comparison exposure) were included in the review. Data Collection and Analysis Accounting for duplicates, a total of 2,063 records were identified across two searches. Nineteen studies across 15 publications met the inclusion criteria. These studies were largely of moderate quality and 12 used randomised control trial designs with varying types of controls. The publication years ranged from 2000 to 2018, with the majority of studies published after 2015. The studies represented a range of geographical locations, but the region most heavily represented was North America. In most cases, the dominant narrative(s) “to‐be‐countered” comprised of hostile social constructions of an adversary or “out‐group”. The majority of studies challenged these dominant narratives through the use of stereotype‐challenging, prosocial, or moral “exemplars”. Other techniques included the use of alternative accounts, inoculation and persuasion. Results In terms of risk factors for violent radicalisation, there was some disparity on intervention effectiveness. Overall, when pooling all outcomes, the intervention showed a small effect. However, the observed ef...

Background: The link between mental health difficulties and terrorist behaviour has been the subject of debate for the last 50 years. Studies that report prevalence rates of mental health difficulties in terrorist samples or compare rates for those involved and not involved in terrorism, can inform this debate and the work of those responsible for countering violent extremism.Objectives: To synthesise the prevalence rates of mental health difficulties in terrorist samples (Objective 1-Prevalence) and prevalence of mental health disorders pre-dating involvement in terrorism (Objective 2-Temporality). The review also synthesises the extent to which mental health difficulties are associated with terrorist involvement compared to non-terrorist samples (Objective 3-Risk Factor).Search Methods: Searches were conducted between April and June 2022, capturing research until December 2021. We contacted expert networks, hand-searched specialist journals, harvested records from published reviews, and examined references lists for included papers to identify additional studies.Selection Criteria: Studies needed to empirically examine mental health difficulties and terrorism. To be included under Objective 1 (Prevalence) and Objective 2 (Temporality), studies had to adopt cross-sectional, cohort, or case-control design and report prevalence rates of mental health difficulties in terrorist samples, with studies under Objective 2 also needing to report prevalence of difficulties before detection or involvement in terrorism. For Objective 3 (Risk Factor) studies where there was variability in terrorist behaviour (involved vs. not involved) were included.Data Collection and Analysis: Captured records were screened in DisillterSR by two authors. Risk of bias was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute checklists, and random-effects meta-analysis conducted in Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software.Results: Fifty-six papers reporting on 73 different terrorist samples (i.e., studies) (n = 13,648) were identified. All were eligible for Objective 1. Of the 73 studies, 10

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:To assess the effectiveness of pre-deployment programmes for building resilience in military and front-line emergency service personnel.1 Pre-deployment programmes for building resilience in military and frontline emergency service personnel (Protocol)

BackgroundSignal peptide peptidase (SPP), a member of the presenilin-like intra-membrane cleaving aspartyl protease family, migrates on Blue Native (BN) gels as 100 kDa, 200 kDa and 450 kDa species. SPP has recently been implicated in other non-proteolytic functions such as retro-translocation of MHC Class I molecules and binding of misfolded proteins in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). These high molecular weight SPP complexes might contain additional proteins that regulate the proteolytic activity of SPP or support its non-catalytic functions.ResultsIn this study, an unbiased iTRAQ-labeling mass spectrometry approach was used to identify SPP-interacting proteins. We found that vigilin, a ubiquitous multi-KH domain containing cytoplasmic protein involved in RNA binding and protein translation control, selectively enriched with SPP. Vigilin interacted with SPP and both proteins co-localized in restricted intracellular domains near the ER, biochemically co-fractionated and were part of the same 450 kDa complex on BN gels. However, vigilin does not alter the protease activity of SPP, suggesting that the SPP-vigilin interaction might be involved in the non-proteolytic functions of SPP.ConclusionsWe have identified and validated vigilin as a novel interacting partner of SPP that could play an important role in the non-proteolytic functions of SPP. This data adds further weight to the idea that intramembrane-cleaving aspartyl proteases, such as presenilin and SPPs, could have other functions besides the proteolysis of short membrane stubs.