Loners, Colleagues, or Peers? Assessing the Social Organization of Radicalization

Holt, Thomas J.; Freilich, Joshua D.; Chermak, Steven M.; Mills, Colleen E.; Silva, Jason R.

doi:10.1007/s12103-018-9439-5

Cited by 30 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3 Who is More Violent in Extremist Groups? A Comparison of Leaders and Followers Although research on extremist groups has increased dramatically in recent years (Freilich & LaFree, 2017) much of it has been limited to comparisons of organizational characteristics (Asal & Rethemeyer, 2008;Shapiro, 2013), or case studies of one or two terrorist groups (Holt, Freilich, Chermak, Mills, & Silva, 2018;LaFree, Dugan, & Korte, 2009;LaFree & Miller, 2008).…”

Section: Leaders Followers and Violence In Extremist Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who is more violent in extremist groups? A comparison of leaders and followers

Jaśko

LaFree

2019

Aggressive Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Few prior studies have examined the extent to which the behavior and characteristics of political extremists are related to their position within radical groups. In this paper we concentrate on one of the most fundamental distinctions in groups: that between leaders and followers. Our main goal is to investigate the comparative propensity of leaders and followers to engage in political violence. In a sample of individuals who have committed ideologically motivated political crimes in the United States (N = 1,331) we found that even though leaders were more ideologically committed to the group's goals and ideologies, they were at the same time less likely to engage in violent acts. Moreover, we found that leaders in radical criminal organizations shared many characteristics with leaders in noncriminal organizations. Specifically, in comparison to followers, they were more often male, older, and they were more likely to belong to an ethnic majority. We consider implications for future research and policy of the fundamental conclusion that compared to leaders, followers in terrorist organizations are more likely to engage in violent acts.

show abstract

Section: Leaders Followers and Violence In Extremist Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who is more violent in extremist groups? A comparison of leaders and followers

Jaśko

LaFree

2019

Aggressive Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Prior studies (Gruenewald, Chermak, & Freilich, 2013a; Gruenewald et al, 2013b; Spaaij, 2010) have distinguished between loners (e.g., The Unabomber), lone wolves (e.g., Fort Hood Shooter) and lone-wolf packs (e.g., San Bernardino shooters). Given the contentious nature of defining lone-wolf terrorism (see, e.g., Holt, Freilich, Chermak, Mills, & Silva, 2019; Spaaij, 2010), this study provides a conservative approach to the phenomenon that only considers an incident a lone-wolf attack if it was committed by one or two actors (i.e., dyads such as the San Bernardino perpetrators) with no direct ties to any formal organization. In other words, incidents committed by single actors with direct ties to a formal organization and incidents committed by three or more actors, regardless of group affiliation, were considered organized group attacks.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Addressing the Myths of Terrorism in America

Silva

Duran

Freilich

et al. 2019

International Criminal Justice Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the aftermath of 9/11, the intersection of sensational media coverage, public fears, and political motivations has contributed to misconceptions about the nature of terrorism and the perpetrators of extremist violence. The current study uses data from the Extremist Crime Database and Global Terrorism Database to address the myths of terrorism in the United States. We examine jihadist-inspired, far-right, and far-left incidents to provide an empirical critique of turn of the century popular discourse that suggests terrorism (1) incidents are increasing, (2) fatalities and injuries are increasing, and is committed by (3) internationally based, (4) jihadist-inspired extremists, (5) of Arab decent, (6) working in organized groups. The results highlight the reality of the terrorism problem finding incidents are decreasing and often involve no deaths or injuries. Additionally, terrorists are more often domestic-based, White, far-right extremists, acting alone. We conclude with a discussion of findings and implications for public knowledge and policy responses to terrorism and extremist violence.

show abstract

“…The final component, network, refers to ties to other extremists, groups, or wider movements. The question “how alone are lone‐actors?” has been empirically examined, with findings mainly indicating that they are not as “lone” as is often believed (Borum, ; Borum et al., ; Bouhana et al., ; Hamm & Spaaij, ; Hofmann, ; Holt, Freilich, Chermak, Mills & Silva, ; Schuurman et al., ; Smith, Gruenewald, Roberts, & Damphousse, ). Some actors, however, do seem to act in relative isolation even if they do not make up the majority of cases.…”

Section: Analytical Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In general, the lone‐actor terrorist population has been shown to be extremely heterogeneous, which poses a unique challenge in itself. A typology, such as the PEP typology, can be useful to policy makers when dealing with heterogeneous populations as it can provide a framework for developing tailored responses as opposed to broad, generalized policies (Holt et al., ). For instance, the susceptible PEP demonstrates a style of interaction that may benefit from an intervention designed to address an offender's mental health needs.…”

Section: Policy Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analyzing person‐exposure patterns in lone‐actor terrorism

Clemmow

Marchment

Gill

2019

Criminology & Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research Summary:The lone-actor terrorist population can be extremely heterogeneous and difficult to detect. Intelligence is vital to countering this threat. We devise a typology of person-exposure patterns (PEPs) that could serve as a framework for intelligence gathering and threat assessment. We use cluster analysis and a risk analysis framework (RAF) to identify relations among three components: propensity, situation, and network.The results of the analysis reveal four PEPs: solitary, susceptible, situational, and selection. The solitary PEP lacks common indicators of a propensity to pursue terrorist action. The susceptible PEP reveals cognitive susceptibility, manifesting as mental illness, to be a key factor in the emergence of a terrorist propensity. The situational PEP demonstrates how situational stressors may act as warnings of acceleration toward violent action. Lastly, the selection PEP demonstrates higher frequencies of leakage and antecedent violent behaviors.Policy Implications: Our findings have two key policy implications. First, given the multifinality of terrorism risk indicators, we suggest a move toward a structuredprofessional judgement approach to the risk analysis of lone-actor terrorists. Second, we present the PEP typology as a framework for intelligence gathering. Existing frameworks are predominantly focused on mobilization 452 CLEMMOW ET AL.indicators. We suggest expanding data collection to include propensity and situational indicators, as operationalized here, and using the PEP typology to inform decisions about the emergence of the motivation to commit an attack. To do so, it is necessary to pursue a multiagency approach to intelligence gathering.

show abstract

Loners, Colleagues, or Peers? Assessing the Social Organization of Radicalization

Cited by 30 publications

References 48 publications

Who is more violent in extremist groups? A comparison of leaders and followers

Who is more violent in extremist groups? A comparison of leaders and followers

Addressing the Myths of Terrorism in America

Analyzing person‐exposure patterns in lone‐actor terrorism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About