Lone‐Actor Terrorist Target Choice

Abstract

Lone-actor terrorist attacks have risen to the forefront of the public's consciousness in the past few years. Some of these attacks were conducted against public officials. The rise of hard-to-detect, low-tech attacks may lead to more public officials being targeted. This paper explores whether different behavioral traits are apparent within a sample of lone-actor terrorists who plotted against high-value targets (including public officials) than within a sample of lone actors who plotted against members of the public. Utilizing a unique dataset of 111 lone-actor terrorists, we test a series of hypotheses related to attack capability and operational security. The results indicate that very little differentiates those who attack high-value targets from those who attack members of the public. We conclude with a series of illustrations to theorize why this may be the case. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Lone Actor Terrorist Attack Planning and Preparation: A Data‐Driven Analysis,

“…Some recent publications have focused specifically on lone actors’ target selection preferences . But, “[t]here is not yet a distinct theme within the literature on lone actor terrorism that focuses specifically on attack preparation” . This does not mean, however, that previous work has not generated any insights into this aspect of the lone actor phenomenon.…”

“…Data‐driven studies have provided substantive insights into the background and characteristics of lone actor extremists . Some recent publications have focused specifically on lone actors’ target selection preferences . But, “[t]here is not yet a distinct theme within the literature on lone actor terrorism that focuses specifically on attack preparation” .…”

“…People are the most commonly selected target, with civilians or the general public much more likely to be attacked than government officials or politicians, who are generally better protected . Lone actors appear to select targets early in the pre‐attack process, shortly after grievance formation . The lower rate of attack completion and lethality of lone actor attacks compared to group‐based attacks (0.62 deaths per incident vs. circa 1.60 deaths per incident, respectively) may be another indicator of the former's general tendency to execute simple, straightforward operations .…”

Analyzing person‐exposure patterns in lone‐actor terrorism

“…Likewise, the prevalence of leakage behaviors has been reported extensively throughout the literature (Gill & Corner, ; Gill et al., ; Schuurman et al., ) and is central to threat assessment (Meloy & Gill, ; Meloy, Mohandie, Knoll, & Hoffmann, ). The solitary PEP demonstrates much lower frequencies of these indicators, and therefore it may be necessary for practitioners to consider a trajectory of warning behaviors absent of any leakage indicators as still posing a credible threat.…”

Radicalization patterns and modes of attack planning and preparation among lone-actor terrorists: an exploratory analysis

“…Some of these have looked at elements of their pre-attack behavior, such as targeting preferences (Gartenstein-Ross, 2014;Gill & Corner, 2016;Gill, Silver, Horgan, & Corner, 2017). These studies have pointed out that loneactor violence tends not to be spontaneous, but results from at least some measure of planning and preparation (Gill et al, 2014;Spaaij, 2010Spaaij, , 2012.…”