Radicalization and extremism: What makes ordinary people end up in extreme situations? Nazar Akrami 1, Milan Obaidi 1, & Robin Bergh 2 1 Uppsala University 2 Harvard University
What are we going to do in the coming years? Project 1: On radicalization and extremism: What brings ordinary people into extreme situations? Funded : Riksbankens Jubileumsfond Project 2: The personality signature of potential recruits to Islamic extremism. Funded: Marianne och Marcus Wallenbergs Stiftelse What are we doing now one paper to b presensted: Group-based deprivation explains radicalization of west-born Muslims
How did you end up at this meeting? Think about t for a minute. Are you here by random?
Charles Graner and Lynndie England
The impact of social context Abu Ghraib abuse was reveled in 2003. In 2005, one of the most prominent social psychologists published a paper in Science magazine stating: social context can make almost anyone aggress, oppress, conform, and obey and that the Abu Ghraib torture is the result of: ordinary social processes..
Shortcomings of the of social context explanation Social psychologists, along with historians, philosophers and political scientists, maintain that extreme behaviors such as torture are a matter of ordinary people under the influence of situational pressure of extreme magnitude (e.g., Atran, 2014; Fiske et al., 2004; Zimbardo, 2007). Putting this in perspective, consider the current state of the nature-nurture debate in biology or psychology in general. It would be hard to maintain today that only one type of influence matters, or to even describe the debate as an either-or issue.
Shortcomings of the of social context explanation Being personality psychologists, we disagre for many reasons and asked why did the social context leave Sergeant Joseph M. Darby unaffected Darby is person who triggered the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal by sending photos of the abuse to military investigators and media and later commented that the abuse "violated everything I personally believed in.
The personality explanation The Abu Ghraib case is one example of people ending up in an situation characterized by violence. Other examples are individuals seeking violent extremism online and yet another it thousands of combatants traveling from around the world to Syria, Iraq, and war zones elsewhere (e.g. Bunde, & Oroz, 2015). We agree that situational factors matter, but propose that personality matters too. Personality refers to individual differences in characteristic patterns of thinking, feeling and behaving. Specifically we argue that, personality niche-building processes could explain why some individual are attracted to situations characterized by violence and antisocial behaviors, while others are not.
Personality niche-building processes Niche-building refer to processes by which people end up in, seek out, and create situations matching their personality traits (e.g., Bouchard, 1994; Caspi, Roberts, & Shiner, 2005). From this perspective it is natural to ask why some individuals are, for example, determined to enter war zones and join extremist groups, while millions of others are desperate to leave them.
What are we going to do in the coming years? Project 1: Examine active effects experimental design and studies based on social media activities. Project 2: Examine active as well as reactive effects by longitudinal design combined with studies of social media activities.
Our present work Radicalization of west-born Muslims Due to the war in Syria, Libya, and Iraq, Western countries have been facing significant refugee crisis. While some counties have adopted a welcoming approach, others have invested much to secure their borders to prevent embedded jihadist entering their countries. Thus, conventional wisdom in some countries holds that the jihadist threat is foreign (e.g., Bergen, 2016). The Donald Trump executive order and the Hungarian border barrier are only two examples illustrating this conventional wisdom.
Radicalization of west-born Muslims However, reports show that many terror attacks in the West have been orchestrated by Muslims born and raised in Western societies. For example, nearly half of the Islamic terrorist attacks in the US since 9/11 were committed by US-born individuals (Bergen, Ford, Sims, & Sterman, 2017). This is also valid for Europe and several recent attacks show the involvement of Europe-born Muslims in terrorist plots (the British parliament attack is the most recent Mackintoch, 2017). What makes West-born Muslims susceptible to endorse radicalization?
Radicalization of west-born Muslims Muslim identity has increasingly becoming salient due public discourse dividing the population into us comprising ethnic Europeans and them referring to Muslims (e.g., Hervik, 2004). Terror attacks are normally followed by fingers pointing at the Muslim population where these attacks take place. Muslims face increasing expression discrimination in education, employment, and religious freedom (e.g., Amnesty International). A theme in the debate is if members of the Muslim population can ever be considered a European, Frenchman, German, or Dane etc. Thus, an exclusionary orientation toward Muslims can be observed.
Radicalization of west-born Muslims A possible consequence of this exclusionary orientation for some native-born, compared to foreign-born, Muslims is an amplified susceptibility to endorse radicalization. While exclusionary orientation might amplify the susceptibility of Europe-born Muslims to endorse radicalization, perception of discriminatory orientation (group relative deprivation) is a potential mediator individuals might differ in their perception of exclusion. Notably, west-born Muslims, compared to foreign-born Muslims, may see themselves as real /more Europeans because of their attachment to the European societies, while nonetheless having experiences of exclusion and group-based inequality.
Radicalization of west-born Muslims We examined the relation between birthplace and endorsement of radicalization, and whether this relation is mediated by group relative deprivation. We conducted 4 studies (one pilot) assesseding: Dependent Variable: Birthplace Dependent Variables: Muslim identification, Perceived injustice, Group-based anger, & Violent behavioral intentions Mediator: Group relative deprivation Table S1. Background in terms of birthplace and gender. Sample N % Foreign born % Native born % Male % Female 1 59 56 44 61 39 2 225 68 32 59 41 3 257 55 45 69 31 4 237 52 48 52 48
Radicalization of west-born Muslims Results Group-based relative deprivation Muslims Born (Outside Denmark vs. In Denmark) X Violent Intentions Group-based anger Perceived injustice Muslim Identification Table 3. Weighted Mean Indirect Effect of Birthplace on Respective Outcome Variable Variable Weighted Standard Mean error Effect Size 95% CI Z-value p-value Muslim identification 0.24 0.11 [ 0.03, 0.44] 2.27.023 Perceived injustice 0.33 0.13 [ 0.07, 0.58] 2.49.013 Group-based anger 0.36 0.11 [ 0.14, 0.58] 3.25.001 Violent behavioral Intentions 0.15 0.08 [ 0.01, 0.30] 2.02.044
Radicalization of west-born Muslims Summary /implications In four studies we demonstrated that native-born Muslim Danes scored higher on key determinants of extremism, compared to foreign-born Muslim Danes and that group relative deprivation fully accounted for these differences. The findings provide some tentative explanations why so second and third generation get drawn to extremism. European Muslims is not a single global category and recognizing subgroups seems important in explaining radical ideas and intentions. West-born Muslims may be particularly vulnerable to extremist ideologies.
Thank you for your attention!
Table S2. Measures and items included in the study Muslim identification 1. Being a Muslim is important to me. 2. I feel strongly connected to other Muslims. 3. I strongly identify with other Muslims. 4. I feel very connected to my religious community. Perceived injustice 1. Muslims in Muslim countries suffer because of the foreign policy of Western countries. 2. The foreign policy of Western countries towards Muslim nations cannot be justified. 3. The foreign policy of Western countries harms Muslims worldwide. 4. The foreign policy of Western countries is anti-islamic worldwide. 5. Western military interventions in Muslim countries are immoral. Group-based anger 1. I feel angry when I think of Western countries foreign policies towards Muslim countries 2. I feel outrage when I think of Western countries foreign policy towards Muslim countries. 3. I feel furious when I think of Western countries foreign policy towards Muslim countries. Violent behavioural Intentions 1. I am ready to use violence against other people in order to achieve something I consider very important. 2. I am ready to do everything in my power to change Western countries foreign policy towards Muslim countries. Group-based relative deprivation 1. Muslims should have the same opportunities to improve their lives as non-muslim westerners have. 2. Muslims will always be at the bottom and non-muslim westerners at the top of the social ladder. 3. I feel furious about Muslim limited opportunities to get ahead in their lives. 4. I think Muslims are disadvantaged because the West oppresses them. 5. Muslims are disadvantaged because the West keeps them down. 6. I feel angry because Non-Muslim westerners discriminate against Muslim.