Pride and prejudice: Exploring how identity processes shape public attitudes towards Australian counter-terrorism measures

Abstract

Counter-terrorism measures are often described as pre-emptive, punitive, and afford authorities exclusive and expanded powers. Yet they continue to attract public support (Huddy, Feldman, Taber, & Lahav, 2005; Welch, 2016). Why is this the case? A consistent finding in traditional crime control research shows a link between perceived threat from racial or ethnic minority groups and their perceived involvement in crime. This perceived relationship results in public support for punitive crime control measures for such groups. Similar connections can be made between terrorism and Muslims. It is thus possible that perceiving Muslims to be threatening may help explain enhanced public support towards harsh counter-terrorism measures. This study draws on survey data of a national sample Australian residents (N=1,199) to test this hypothesis. Findings show the importance of both identity processes and perceptions of Muslims as threatening in shaping support for punitive counter-terrorism strategies. Results also demonstrate how social identity can moderate the effect of perceived threat on support for such strategies. Theoretical and policy implications of this study are outlined.

Animus toward Muslims and its association with public support for punitive counter-terrorism policies: did the Christchurch terrorist attack mitigate this association?

“…Terrorism laws are therefore applied more frequently to Muslim defendants in Australia. Additionally, the media and governments in Australia and elsewhere continue to state that there is a persistent threat of Islamic extremism to global security (Williamson et al, 2019). This notion is reinforced by governmental responses such as the proscription regime, whereby to date only terrorist organizations with an Islamic ideology have been proscribed as terrorist organizations by the Australian Government (Lynch, et al, 2015).…”

“…However, scant research exists in the counter-terrorism context (for exceptions see Piazza, 2015;Welch, 2016;Williamson, 2019). We are aware of only two published studies that have directly identified a positive relationship between perceiving Muslims as a threat and subsequent support for punitive counter-terrorism policies.…”

“…More recently, Williamson (2019) utilized survey data from a sample of 1,199 non-Muslim Australians. Williamson (2019) showed that participants who perceived Muslims as a greater threat were more likely to support punitive counter-terrorism policies.…”

“…More recently, Williamson (2019) utilized survey data from a sample of 1,199 non-Muslim Australians. Williamson (2019) showed that participants who perceived Muslims as a greater threat were more likely to support punitive counter-terrorism policies. While not directly linking threat attitudes to support for punitive counter-terrorism policies, Piazza (2015) drew on a sample of 1,135 individuals in the United States to compare the public's views of a Muslim or non-Muslim hypothetical terror suspect.…”

What makes a terrorist? Muslims’ and non-Muslims’ lay perceptions of risk factors and their consequences for counter-terrorism policy support

“…Previous studies have shown that majority-group members, who perceive Muslims as a threat, as being religious and as supporting or being associated with terrorism, are more supportive of institutional WHAT MAKES A TERRORIST? 25 discrimination, anti-immigration policies or extraordinary detention practices among others (Doosje et al, 2009;Piazza, 2015;Welch, 2016;Williamson, 2019;Williamson & Murphy, 2020). Our research extends this work by comparatively testing the influence on both punitive and social policy support.…”