Investigating What and Why

Abstract

<jats:p>This article critically examines the literature on terrorism, identifying a distinction between the research methods that were common before and after the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001. We argue that pre-9/11 methods were more concerned with understanding individual and group motivations for participating in terrorism. This approach is still visible in the fields of political psychology and gender and sexuality studies on terrorism. In contrast, post-9/11 research methods are more concerned with identifying country-level variables associated with terrorism using regression analysis and econometrics. Post-9/11 research on terrorism has often been focused on two debates: the role of democracy in fostering or preventing terrorism, and the relationship between development and terrorism. This shift in methodology reflects a more positivist ontology, and is also undoubtedly intended to meet the needs of policy-makers pursuing the War on Terror. We argue that a well-informed approach to addressing the threat of terrorism must draw from both perspectives; otherwise, there is a strong risk of ignoring crucial variables at different levels of analysis.</jats:p>