Is radicalization a family issue? A systematic review of family‐related risk and protective factors, consequences, and interventions against radicalization

Abstract

Background Family‐related risk and protective factors are crucial for different antisocial behaviors, but their role in radicalization requires synthesis. Radicalization is likely to have a negative impact on families, and well‐designed and implemented family‐focused intervention programs have the potential to decrease radicalization. Objectives Research questions were: (1) What are the family‐related risk and protective factors for radicalization? (2) What is the impact of radicalization on families? (3) Are family‐based interventions against radicalization effective? Search Methods Searches included 25 databases and hand searches of gray literature from April to July 2021. Leading researchers in the field were asked to provide published and unpublished studies on the topic. Reference lists of the included studies and previously published systematic reviews on risk and protective factors for radicalization were scanned. Selection Criteria Published and unpublished quantitative studies on family‐related risk and protective factors for radicalization, the impact of radicalization on families, and family‐focused interventions were eligible with no restrictions regarding the study year, location, or any demographic characteristic. Studies were included if they measured the relation between a family‐related factor and radicalization or if they included a family‐focused intervention against radicalization. For family‐related risk and protective factors, radicalized individuals needed to be compared to general population. Studies were included if they defined radicalization as support or commission of violence to defend a cause, including support for radical groups. Data Collection and Analysis The systematic search identified 86,591 studies. After screening, 33 studies focused on family‐related risk and protective factors were included, with 89 primary effect sizes and 48 variables grouped in 14 factors. For the factors that included two or more studies, meta‐analyses with random effects were conducted. When possible, moderator analyses were performed together with sensitivity and publication bias analyses. No studies on the impact of radicalization on families or family‐focused interventions were included. Results The current systematic review based on studies with 148,081 adults and adolescents from diverse geographic locations showed that parental ethnic socialization (z = 0.27), having extremist family members (z = 0.26), and family conflict (z = 0.11) were related to more radicalization, whereas high family socioeconomic status (z = −0.03), bigger family size (z = −0.05), and high family commitment (z = −0.06) were related to less radicalization. Separate analyses described family‐factors for behavioral versus cognitive radicalization, and different radical ideologies including Islamist, right‐wing and left‐wing. It was not possible to distinguish risk and protective factors from correlates and the level of overall bias was mostly high. No results regarding the impact of radicalization on families or fam...

A Meta-Analysis on the Link Between Young People’s Social Environment, Socioeconomic Status, and Political Violence Outcomes

“…Beyond that, it is also studied in the context of sectarian struggles, like the Northern Ireland conflict, or specific political concerns like animal protection (Lösel & Bliesener, 2021). Similar to other recent literature reviews in this field (Jahnke et al, 2022;Lösel et al, 2018;Wolfowicz et al, 2020;Zych & Nasaescu, 2022), the present article focuses on political violence at the level of attitudes, willingness, and behaviors. These will be subsumed under the term political violence outcomes.…”

“…Personal and individual risk factors included male sex and (in the case of Islamist violence) migration, personality traits like thrill seeking (Emmelkamp et al, 2020;Wolfowicz et al, 2020), experiences of discrimination, relative and symbolic deprivation (Jahnke et al, 2022), a criminal past, and overall negative life experiences (Vergani et al, 2018;Wolfowicz et al, 2020). While prior research on factors associated with political violence outcomes is mostly focused on the individual level (Desmarais et al, 2017), Zych and Nasaescu (2022) found evidence for political violence outcomes being a "family issue," with the highest effect sizes for parental ethnic socialization, extremist family members, and family conflicts. On the other hand, good school performance, as well as non-deviant peers and good relationships to others in their social environment may act as protective factors (Lösel et al, 2018).…”

“…In recent years, several literature reviews on political violence outcomes or radicalization processes have been published with (Emmelkamp et al, 2020;Jahnke et al, 2022;Wolfowicz et al, 2020;Zych & Nasaescu, 2022) and without meta-analyses (e.g., Hassan et al, 2018;Lösel et al, 2018;Vergani et al, 2018). These papers summarize studies on factors that are associated with (risk factors) or protect against (protective factors) such outcomes.…”

“…While these previous reviews detected some potential risk and protective factors, the evidence base for people's social environment was not always consistent. For instance, there was no significant effect for negative parenting in one systematic review (Emmelkamp et al, 2020), while another finds a protective effect for parental involvement (Wolfowicz et al, 2020), and a third reports a protective effect for family commitment and parental control, but no effect for familial violence (Zych & Nasaescu, 2022). All previous meta-analyses faced the challenge of having a restricted evidence base.…”

Significance Quest: A Meta-Analysis on the Association Between the Variables of the 3N Model and Violent Extremism

“…Although various meta-analyses focusing on risk factors for radicalization and violent extremism have been released in the last few years (e.g., Wolfowicz et al, 2020Wolfowicz et al, , 2021Wolfowicz et al, , 2022Zych & Nasaescu, 2022), the purpose of the present meta-analysis is to put into test the SQT and its 3N model by systematically retrieving all relevant quantitative (un)published studies, based on primary data, mobilizing the SQT framework and its 3N model. Precisely, it aims to examine the strength of the association between need, narrative, network, and violent extremism.…”