Identifying distinct types of internet use that predict the likelihood of planning or committing a terrorist attack: Findings from an analysis of individuals convicted on terrorism(-related) charges in England and Wales

IF 9 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Sandy Schumann , Jonathan Kenyon , Jens Binder
{"title":"Identifying distinct types of internet use that predict the likelihood of planning or committing a terrorist attack: Findings from an analysis of individuals convicted on terrorism(-related) charges in England and Wales","authors":"Sandy Schumann ,&nbsp;Jonathan Kenyon ,&nbsp;Jens Binder","doi":"10.1016/j.chb.2025.108646","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Previous research has documented that the internet plays an increasingly important role in facilitating involvement in terrorism. However, the level of specificity of this literature is low. Advancing current insights, we examined how three concrete examples of active (i.e., generate/disseminate terrorist propaganda; interact with co-ideologues) and two examples of passive (i.e., learn about terrorist ideologies/actors; learn tactical information) internet use are related to distinct distal and proximal dynamics of radicalisation. Additionally, we assessed associations between the different types of internet use and the likelihood of having planned/committed a terrorist attack. We analysed a unique dataset based on closed-source risk assessment reports of individuals convicted of terrorism(-related) offences in England and Wales (<em>N</em> = 377). Results of this secondary data analysis pointed to three internet use repertoires: (1) learning about tactical information and terrorist ideologies/actors; (2) only learning about terrorist ideologies/actors; (3) active internet use and learning about terrorist ideologies/actors. Learning about tactical information and terrorist ideologies/actors was (compared to the other two repertoires) associated with a higher likelihood of having planned/committed an act of terrorism. Additionally, levels of capability were higher if individuals learnt both tactical and ideological information online compared to using the internet actively and browsing content about terrorist ideologies/actors. Individuals characterised by either internet use repertoire did, however, not vary significantly regarding their levels of engagement with extremist ideas and actors and the degree to which they had developed an extremist mindset. The results can inform terrorist/violent extremist risk assessment.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48471,"journal":{"name":"Computers in Human Behavior","volume":"168 ","pages":"Article 108646"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers in Human Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563225000937","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Previous research has documented that the internet plays an increasingly important role in facilitating involvement in terrorism. However, the level of specificity of this literature is low. Advancing current insights, we examined how three concrete examples of active (i.e., generate/disseminate terrorist propaganda; interact with co-ideologues) and two examples of passive (i.e., learn about terrorist ideologies/actors; learn tactical information) internet use are related to distinct distal and proximal dynamics of radicalisation. Additionally, we assessed associations between the different types of internet use and the likelihood of having planned/committed a terrorist attack. We analysed a unique dataset based on closed-source risk assessment reports of individuals convicted of terrorism(-related) offences in England and Wales (N = 377). Results of this secondary data analysis pointed to three internet use repertoires: (1) learning about tactical information and terrorist ideologies/actors; (2) only learning about terrorist ideologies/actors; (3) active internet use and learning about terrorist ideologies/actors. Learning about tactical information and terrorist ideologies/actors was (compared to the other two repertoires) associated with a higher likelihood of having planned/committed an act of terrorism. Additionally, levels of capability were higher if individuals learnt both tactical and ideological information online compared to using the internet actively and browsing content about terrorist ideologies/actors. Individuals characterised by either internet use repertoire did, however, not vary significantly regarding their levels of engagement with extremist ideas and actors and the degree to which they had developed an extremist mindset. The results can inform terrorist/violent extremist risk assessment.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
19.10
自引率
4.00%
发文量
381
审稿时长
40 days
期刊介绍: Computers in Human Behavior is a scholarly journal that explores the psychological aspects of computer use. It covers original theoretical works, research reports, literature reviews, and software and book reviews. The journal examines both the use of computers in psychology, psychiatry, and related fields, and the psychological impact of computer use on individuals, groups, and society. Articles discuss topics such as professional practice, training, research, human development, learning, cognition, personality, and social interactions. It focuses on human interactions with computers, considering the computer as a medium through which human behaviors are shaped and expressed. Professionals interested in the psychological aspects of computer use will find this journal valuable, even with limited knowledge of computers.
×
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