{"title":"谁认为恐怖主义是正当的?65个国家的机器学习分析","authors":"Mohsen Joshanloo","doi":"10.1002/ab.70049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>This study applied Random Forest analysis to analyze 360 potential predictors of terrorism justification using data from the World Values Survey across 65 countries. Contrary to narratives that focus exclusively on religious extremism, the findings indicate that terrorism justification is more strongly associated with a worldview characterized by moral flexibility, antisocial values, and anti-democratic sentiment. An analysis of the top predictors revealed three overarching domains: (1) Normalization of Violence, where support for terrorism is closely linked to broader acceptance of aggression in political, interpersonal, and domestic contexts; (2) Moral Flexibility and Rule Violation, where individuals who justify terrorism also endorse dishonest behaviors such as bribery, theft, and fraud; and (3) Religious and Political Authoritarianism, characterized by support for governance based on religious authority and skepticism toward democratic institutions. These findings underscore the need for counter-radicalization strategies that address moral disengagement, promote democratic values, and strengthen trust in democratic governance.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50842,"journal":{"name":"Aggressive Behavior","volume":"51 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Who Considers Terrorism Justifiable? A Machine Learning Analysis Across 65 Countries\",\"authors\":\"Mohsen Joshanloo\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ab.70049\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>This study applied Random Forest analysis to analyze 360 potential predictors of terrorism justification using data from the World Values Survey across 65 countries. Contrary to narratives that focus exclusively on religious extremism, the findings indicate that terrorism justification is more strongly associated with a worldview characterized by moral flexibility, antisocial values, and anti-democratic sentiment. An analysis of the top predictors revealed three overarching domains: (1) Normalization of Violence, where support for terrorism is closely linked to broader acceptance of aggression in political, interpersonal, and domestic contexts; (2) Moral Flexibility and Rule Violation, where individuals who justify terrorism also endorse dishonest behaviors such as bribery, theft, and fraud; and (3) Religious and Political Authoritarianism, characterized by support for governance based on religious authority and skepticism toward democratic institutions. These findings underscore the need for counter-radicalization strategies that address moral disengagement, promote democratic values, and strengthen trust in democratic governance.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50842,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aggressive Behavior\",\"volume\":\"51 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aggressive Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ab.70049\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aggressive Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ab.70049","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Who Considers Terrorism Justifiable? A Machine Learning Analysis Across 65 Countries
This study applied Random Forest analysis to analyze 360 potential predictors of terrorism justification using data from the World Values Survey across 65 countries. Contrary to narratives that focus exclusively on religious extremism, the findings indicate that terrorism justification is more strongly associated with a worldview characterized by moral flexibility, antisocial values, and anti-democratic sentiment. An analysis of the top predictors revealed three overarching domains: (1) Normalization of Violence, where support for terrorism is closely linked to broader acceptance of aggression in political, interpersonal, and domestic contexts; (2) Moral Flexibility and Rule Violation, where individuals who justify terrorism also endorse dishonest behaviors such as bribery, theft, and fraud; and (3) Religious and Political Authoritarianism, characterized by support for governance based on religious authority and skepticism toward democratic institutions. These findings underscore the need for counter-radicalization strategies that address moral disengagement, promote democratic values, and strengthen trust in democratic governance.
期刊介绍:
Aggressive Behavior will consider manuscripts in the English language concerning the fields of Animal Behavior, Anthropology, Ethology, Psychiatry, Psychobiology, Psychology, and Sociology which relate to either overt or implied conflict behaviors. Papers concerning mechanisms underlying or influencing behaviors generally regarded as aggressive and the physiological and/or behavioral consequences of being subject to such behaviors will fall within the scope of the journal. Review articles will be considered as well as empirical and theoretical articles.
Aggressive Behavior is the official journal of the International Society for Research on Aggression.