On radicalization and extremism: What brings ordinary people into extreme situations?
In many areas of psychology the so-called person-situation debate has been resolved like the nature-nurture one - by recognizing both intrinsic and external influences on behaviors. Social psychology is an exception though. After the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, prominent social psychologists sought to explain "why ordinary people torture enemy prisoners". The answer was a familiar one, the "social context can make almost anyone aggress, oppress, conform, and obey" - leaving little to be explained by personality. The war in Syria and terrorist attacks around the world fueled the person-situation debate like never before. Still, the conclusions hyperbolize effects of social factors, focus on the situation as a snapshot, alternatively search for extraordinary evils within psychopathology. This project poses a fundamentally different question: What brought the person into the situation? As implied by personality niche-building processes, people tend to end up, seek out, and create situations that match their personality. The aim is to theoretically and empirically examine the extent to which niche-building processes are involved in extremism and radicalization. Rather than looking for pathology, this project examines if non-clinical personality differences can tell why some people, but not others, engage in radical and extreme behavior. While examining a basic assumption in personality psychology the project could also provide a better understanding of the psychology of extremism.
Final report
The project's aim and development
The main aim of the project was to investigate whether personality and niche-building processes are linked to extremism and radicalization. Rather than looking for signs of mental illness, the project aimed to investigate whether non-clinical personality can answer the question of why some, but not others, become radicalized, turn to extremism, or choose to resort to violence. Researchers and laypeople normally point to social factors and mental illness as explanations for extremism and radicalization.
The project's primary aim remained the same during the project period. However, minor changes concerning the method were made due to certain challenges in planned experimental investigations and tests based on the Campbell paradigm. Another factor that affected the project's development was that the schedule could not be followed due to personal circumstances and other duties. This led to some extended exploration of the primary aim. The extended time frame also led to something positive in the form of more publications than what was expected in the initial project description.
Implementation and key results
The project began with work that aimed to produce an overview of the state of knowledge and link personality and other causes of violent extremism. This work focused on both clinical and non-clinical personality but evolved to deal with a model that integrates different explanations for violent extremism (hence the delayed publication; Obaidi, Bergh, Ozer, Sindermann, & Akrami, 2024; Akrami, Bergh, & Obaidi, 2024). Parallel to the work above, an article consisting of seven studies was published, which showed that Muslims who were born and raised in the Western world support extremism to a greater extent than Muslims who were born and raised elsewhere and who emigrated to Western countries. These differences are explained (mediated) by the so-called "group-based relative deprivation" – a feeling of being disadvantaged and marginalized due to one's group membership (Obaidi, Bergh, Akrami, & Anjum, 2019). This was followed by an article based on three studies (from different populations) examining social and personality-based factors behind the motivation to use violence for the sake of one's group. The results of these studies show that not only the feeling of being disadvantaged and marginalized but also personality (humility/honesty-humility) explains why some people support the use of violence for the sake of their group (Lindström, Bergh, Akrami, Obaidi, & Lindholm Öymyr, 2024). In a further article, we showed that personality largely explains the feeling of being disadvantaged and marginalized among traditionally advantaged groups (but not disadvantaged groups; see Lindström, Bergh, & Akrami, 2023). The most central article concerning the main purpose of the project is the one that shows that it is, among different groups, the same personality characteristics (low Openness, low emotionality [read low fear/worry], and low altruism) explain why certain individuals are interested in using violence. What is most interesting is that the results are similar for, for example, Muslims living in the West, Asia, and the Middle East, and Mujahedin fighters in Afghanistan (Obaidi, Bergh, Akrami, & Dovidio, 2023).
Other results
The extended time frame for the project and parallel service made it possible to delve into issues not directly stated in the project description but which the principal investigator and colleagues worked on during the project period. However, all work can be considered close to the project's aim and deals with, for example, method development, testing of related hypotheses, or further investigation of the project's results.
New research questions
The results were in line with the main aim of the project, but a question that has become increasingly interesting concerns method. Specifically, a recurring question is whether the instruments we used to measure personality (the Five Factor Model and the HEXACO) are sufficient to explain the full breadth of the propensity for violence. This is a question worth investigating further, both theoretically and empirically. Another question that we have discussed is, based on our results, whether the relation between personality and extremism, radicalization, and the tendency to use violence varies depending on what the violence is used for, for example, different political motives (right, left, Islamist). It is difficult to answer these questions with the results from the project and some support for common denominators regardless of motivation (political or otherwise), but there are some differences, too. These results show that this issue also needs closer investigation. More knowledge about similarities and differences in what leads individuals with different motives (e.g., political) into extremism and radicalization is crucial to identify individuals with radicalized mindsets and develop individualized measures against extremism and radicalization.
Dissemination of the results and collaboration
All results from the project have been published or are in the process of being published in international peer-reviewed journals with the possibility of open access. Some results have been disseminated through participation in conferences such as the International Society of Political Psychology (ISPP, 2016), the Association of European Threat Assessment Professionals (AETAP, 2019), or through presentations (invited) at the European Counter Terrorism Center (ECTC, Europol, 2018/2019), the Swedish Center for Preventing Violent Extremism (CVE, 2018/2019) and the Swedish Defence Research Agency (FOI, 2017/2019). The project has also provided the foundation for collaboration with the Center for Research on Extremism (C:REX at Oslo University via Dr. Milan Obaidi and Dr. Joanna Lundström), Professor John F. Dovidio (Yale University), and Docent Lisa Kaati (Stockholm University).
The main aim of the project was to investigate whether personality and niche-building processes are linked to extremism and radicalization. Rather than looking for signs of mental illness, the project aimed to investigate whether non-clinical personality can answer the question of why some, but not others, become radicalized, turn to extremism, or choose to resort to violence. Researchers and laypeople normally point to social factors and mental illness as explanations for extremism and radicalization.
The project's primary aim remained the same during the project period. However, minor changes concerning the method were made due to certain challenges in planned experimental investigations and tests based on the Campbell paradigm. Another factor that affected the project's development was that the schedule could not be followed due to personal circumstances and other duties. This led to some extended exploration of the primary aim. The extended time frame also led to something positive in the form of more publications than what was expected in the initial project description.
Implementation and key results
The project began with work that aimed to produce an overview of the state of knowledge and link personality and other causes of violent extremism. This work focused on both clinical and non-clinical personality but evolved to deal with a model that integrates different explanations for violent extremism (hence the delayed publication; Obaidi, Bergh, Ozer, Sindermann, & Akrami, 2024; Akrami, Bergh, & Obaidi, 2024). Parallel to the work above, an article consisting of seven studies was published, which showed that Muslims who were born and raised in the Western world support extremism to a greater extent than Muslims who were born and raised elsewhere and who emigrated to Western countries. These differences are explained (mediated) by the so-called "group-based relative deprivation" – a feeling of being disadvantaged and marginalized due to one's group membership (Obaidi, Bergh, Akrami, & Anjum, 2019). This was followed by an article based on three studies (from different populations) examining social and personality-based factors behind the motivation to use violence for the sake of one's group. The results of these studies show that not only the feeling of being disadvantaged and marginalized but also personality (humility/honesty-humility) explains why some people support the use of violence for the sake of their group (Lindström, Bergh, Akrami, Obaidi, & Lindholm Öymyr, 2024). In a further article, we showed that personality largely explains the feeling of being disadvantaged and marginalized among traditionally advantaged groups (but not disadvantaged groups; see Lindström, Bergh, & Akrami, 2023). The most central article concerning the main purpose of the project is the one that shows that it is, among different groups, the same personality characteristics (low Openness, low emotionality [read low fear/worry], and low altruism) explain why certain individuals are interested in using violence. What is most interesting is that the results are similar for, for example, Muslims living in the West, Asia, and the Middle East, and Mujahedin fighters in Afghanistan (Obaidi, Bergh, Akrami, & Dovidio, 2023).
Other results
The extended time frame for the project and parallel service made it possible to delve into issues not directly stated in the project description but which the principal investigator and colleagues worked on during the project period. However, all work can be considered close to the project's aim and deals with, for example, method development, testing of related hypotheses, or further investigation of the project's results.
New research questions
The results were in line with the main aim of the project, but a question that has become increasingly interesting concerns method. Specifically, a recurring question is whether the instruments we used to measure personality (the Five Factor Model and the HEXACO) are sufficient to explain the full breadth of the propensity for violence. This is a question worth investigating further, both theoretically and empirically. Another question that we have discussed is, based on our results, whether the relation between personality and extremism, radicalization, and the tendency to use violence varies depending on what the violence is used for, for example, different political motives (right, left, Islamist). It is difficult to answer these questions with the results from the project and some support for common denominators regardless of motivation (political or otherwise), but there are some differences, too. These results show that this issue also needs closer investigation. More knowledge about similarities and differences in what leads individuals with different motives (e.g., political) into extremism and radicalization is crucial to identify individuals with radicalized mindsets and develop individualized measures against extremism and radicalization.
Dissemination of the results and collaboration
All results from the project have been published or are in the process of being published in international peer-reviewed journals with the possibility of open access. Some results have been disseminated through participation in conferences such as the International Society of Political Psychology (ISPP, 2016), the Association of European Threat Assessment Professionals (AETAP, 2019), or through presentations (invited) at the European Counter Terrorism Center (ECTC, Europol, 2018/2019), the Swedish Center for Preventing Violent Extremism (CVE, 2018/2019) and the Swedish Defence Research Agency (FOI, 2017/2019). The project has also provided the foundation for collaboration with the Center for Research on Extremism (C:REX at Oslo University via Dr. Milan Obaidi and Dr. Joanna Lundström), Professor John F. Dovidio (Yale University), and Docent Lisa Kaati (Stockholm University).