Religiosity and perceived religious discrimination as predictors of support for suicide attacks among Muslim Americans.

Abstract

Some argue that religiosity is one of the main causes of religious extremist violence, such as suicide attacks, while others propose that adverse circumstances associated with religiosity like perceived religious discrimination are responsible. Directly comparing these two perspectives, we investigated how religiosity (personal importance of religion, prayer frequency, religious service attendance, religious fundamentalism) and perceived religious discrimination predict support for suicide attacks in 2 samples of Muslim Americans (N 1 ϭ 1,050; N 2 ϭ 1,033). We found that most participants did not support religious extremist violence. Perceived religious discrimination, but no aspect of religiosity, was associated with increased support for suicide attacks. Therefore, support for suicide attacks among Muslim Americans does not seem to be predicted by religiosity but, rather, by perceived religious discrimination, which might be experienced at a greater rate by religious minorities. Reducing discrimination might be an effective general strategy to prevent religious radicalization. Public Significance StatementThere has been a huge public debate about religious extremism, but this phenomenon is not well understood scientifically. To help close this gap, the current study analyzed possible predictors of support for suicide attacks among Muslim Americans and found that perceived religious discrimination, but no aspect of religiosity, was associated with increased support for suicide attacks. Therefore, this study suggests that efforts to prevent religious extremism should not include the condemnation of whole religions; rather, prevention efforts should focus on reducing overall discrimination and prejudice.

Islam and suicide: An interdisciplinary scoping review.

“…To mention one example of a remarkable multidisciplinary limitation, a search of Google Scholar using the keywords “Islam,” “Muslim,” or “Muslim American” resulted in academic literature mentioning extremism, terrorism, or suicide bombings. This was true for “psychology,” “psychiatry” (Aysha, 2017; Beller & Kröger, 2020; Ginges et al, 2011; Victoroff et al, 2012), “sociology” (Ali, 2014; Brym & Hamlin, 2009; Tosini, 2009), and “anthropology” (Aggarwal, 2010; Andriolo, 2002; Asad, 2007; Caldararo, 2006; Post et al, 2009; Stack, 2004). These results indicate the strong influence of a biased academic algorithm, selective publishing, and political interest.…”

Discover Your Inner Strength: A Positive Psychological Approach to Bolster Resilience and Address Radicalization

“…Also, with the emphasis on counternarratives, the suggestion has been that religion is a basis for extremism (Choudhury, 2017;De Koning, 2020). As efforts specifically focused on Jihadist published: 14 July 2021 inspired forms of radicalizations in P/CVE efforts, resentment increased among a significant share of Muslims that Islamic schools of thought are equated with hostility, violence, and terrorism, and these schools of thought are considered subject of countering and replacement with alternative worldviews (Rashid, 2014;Beller and Kröger, 2020). Not just specific individuals or organizations but communities and religion as a whole have thereby become subjected to security scrutiny (Ragazzi, 2017;Spalek and Weeks, 2017).…”