Risk of What and Why? Disaggregating Pathways to Extremist Behaviours in Individuals Susceptible to Violent Extremism.

IF 1 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW
Caitlin Clemmow, Nicola Fowler, Amber Seaward, Paul Gill
{"title":"Risk of What and Why? Disaggregating Pathways to Extremist Behaviours in Individuals Susceptible to Violent Extremism.","authors":"Caitlin Clemmow, Nicola Fowler, Amber Seaward, Paul Gill","doi":"10.1002/bsl.2710","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Best practice in violent extremist risk assessment and management recommends adopting a Structured Professional Judgement (SPJ) approach. The SPJ approach identifies relevant, evidence-based risk and protective factors and requires experts to articulate hypotheses about a) what the person might do (risk of what), and b) how they've come to engage in the concerning behaviour (and why) (Logan 2021) to inform who, needs to do what, and when. Whilst the field continues to move towards adopting an SPJ approach, there remains a gap between what is known empirically and what is needed in practice. We apply psychometric network modelling to a sample of 485 individuals entered into Channel, the UK's preventing and countering violent extremism (P/CVE) program. We model the system of interactions from which susceptibility to violent extremism emerges, providing data driven evidence which speaks to risk of what and why. Our research highlights a way to generate evidence which captures the multifactorial nature of susceptibility to violent extremism, to support professional decision making in the context of an SPJ approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":47926,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Sciences & the Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral Sciences & the Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2710","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Best practice in violent extremist risk assessment and management recommends adopting a Structured Professional Judgement (SPJ) approach. The SPJ approach identifies relevant, evidence-based risk and protective factors and requires experts to articulate hypotheses about a) what the person might do (risk of what), and b) how they've come to engage in the concerning behaviour (and why) (Logan 2021) to inform who, needs to do what, and when. Whilst the field continues to move towards adopting an SPJ approach, there remains a gap between what is known empirically and what is needed in practice. We apply psychometric network modelling to a sample of 485 individuals entered into Channel, the UK's preventing and countering violent extremism (P/CVE) program. We model the system of interactions from which susceptibility to violent extremism emerges, providing data driven evidence which speaks to risk of what and why. Our research highlights a way to generate evidence which captures the multifactorial nature of susceptibility to violent extremism, to support professional decision making in the context of an SPJ approach.

风险是什么?为什么?易受暴力极端主义影响的个体走向极端主义行为的途径。
暴力极端主义风险评估和管理的最佳做法建议采用结构化专业判断方法。SPJ方法确定了相关的、基于证据的风险和保护因素,并要求专家阐明以下假设:a)人们可能会做什么(什么风险),b)他们是如何参与相关行为的(以及为什么)(Logan 2021),以告知谁、需要做什么、何时做什么。虽然该领域继续朝着采用SPJ方法的方向发展,但在经验知识和实践需要之间仍然存在差距。我们将心理测量网络模型应用于485名进入英国预防和打击暴力极端主义(P/CVE)计划的个人样本。我们对产生暴力极端主义易感性的互动系统进行建模,提供数据驱动的证据,说明风险的内容和原因。我们的研究强调了一种产生证据的方法,这种证据抓住了对暴力极端主义易感性的多因素性质,以支持SPJ方法背景下的专业决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
50
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信