评估针对激进罪犯的干预结果:测试支持融合的极端主义脱离接触模式作为评估工具

Q1 Social Sciences
Adrian Cherney, E. Belton
{"title":"评估针对激进罪犯的干预结果:测试支持融合的极端主义脱离接触模式作为评估工具","authors":"Adrian Cherney, E. Belton","doi":"10.1080/17467586.2019.1680854","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The evaluation of interventions aimed at countering violent extremism (CVE) remains an underdeveloped field. While various evaluation frameworks and metrics have been proposed in the literature, few have been tested against actual program data. The same observation applies to theories of disengagement, which can provide guidance on the types of changes CVE program evaluations should aim to measure. In this paper, we use one theory of extremist disengagement – Barrelle’s pro-integration model (PIM) – to examine outcomes for clients who have participated in an Australian intervention targeting convicted terrorists and prison inmates identified as at risk of radicalization, the Proactive Integrated Support Model (PRISM) intervention. PRISM has been operated by Corrective Services New South Wales since 2016. The PIM looks at extremist disengagement across five domains – “Social Relations”, “Coping”, “Identity”, “Ideology” and “Action Orientation” – with each constituted by a series of sub-domains. We undertake an exploratory case study across three PRISM clients and code different data sources for observations related to these five PIM domains. The aim is to inform CVE evaluation design and decisions about the types of metrics that can be used to assess programs targeting individuals at risk of radicalization or convicted of terrorism. We acknowledge limitations in the study’s design.","PeriodicalId":38896,"journal":{"name":"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17467586.2019.1680854","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing intervention outcomes targeting radicalised offenders: Testing the pro integration model of extremist disengagement as an evaluation tool\",\"authors\":\"Adrian Cherney, E. Belton\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17467586.2019.1680854\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The evaluation of interventions aimed at countering violent extremism (CVE) remains an underdeveloped field. While various evaluation frameworks and metrics have been proposed in the literature, few have been tested against actual program data. The same observation applies to theories of disengagement, which can provide guidance on the types of changes CVE program evaluations should aim to measure. In this paper, we use one theory of extremist disengagement – Barrelle’s pro-integration model (PIM) – to examine outcomes for clients who have participated in an Australian intervention targeting convicted terrorists and prison inmates identified as at risk of radicalization, the Proactive Integrated Support Model (PRISM) intervention. PRISM has been operated by Corrective Services New South Wales since 2016. The PIM looks at extremist disengagement across five domains – “Social Relations”, “Coping”, “Identity”, “Ideology” and “Action Orientation” – with each constituted by a series of sub-domains. We undertake an exploratory case study across three PRISM clients and code different data sources for observations related to these five PIM domains. The aim is to inform CVE evaluation design and decisions about the types of metrics that can be used to assess programs targeting individuals at risk of radicalization or convicted of terrorism. We acknowledge limitations in the study’s design.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38896,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17467586.2019.1680854\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2019.1680854\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2019.1680854","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

摘要:对旨在打击暴力极端主义的干预措施的评估仍然是一个不发达的领域。虽然文献中提出了各种评估框架和指标,但很少有人根据实际的项目数据进行测试。同样的观察结果也适用于脱离理论,它可以为CVE项目评估应该衡量的变化类型提供指导。在本文中,我们使用了一种极端主义脱离理论——巴雷尔的支持融合模型(PIM)——来检验参与澳大利亚针对被定罪的恐怖分子和被认定有激进化风险的监狱囚犯的干预的客户的结果,即积极的综合支持模型(PRISM)干预。PRISM自2016年起由新南威尔士州矫正服务中心运营。PIM着眼于五个领域的极端主义脱离——“社会关系”、“应对”、“身份”、“意识形态”和“行动取向”——每个领域都由一系列子域组成。我们对三个PRISM客户进行了探索性案例研究,并为与这五个PIM域相关的观测编码了不同的数据源。其目的是为CVE评估设计和决策提供有关可用于评估针对有激进化风险或被判犯有恐怖主义罪的个人的项目的指标类型的信息。我们承认研究设计的局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing intervention outcomes targeting radicalised offenders: Testing the pro integration model of extremist disengagement as an evaluation tool
ABSTRACT The evaluation of interventions aimed at countering violent extremism (CVE) remains an underdeveloped field. While various evaluation frameworks and metrics have been proposed in the literature, few have been tested against actual program data. The same observation applies to theories of disengagement, which can provide guidance on the types of changes CVE program evaluations should aim to measure. In this paper, we use one theory of extremist disengagement – Barrelle’s pro-integration model (PIM) – to examine outcomes for clients who have participated in an Australian intervention targeting convicted terrorists and prison inmates identified as at risk of radicalization, the Proactive Integrated Support Model (PRISM) intervention. PRISM has been operated by Corrective Services New South Wales since 2016. The PIM looks at extremist disengagement across five domains – “Social Relations”, “Coping”, “Identity”, “Ideology” and “Action Orientation” – with each constituted by a series of sub-domains. We undertake an exploratory case study across three PRISM clients and code different data sources for observations related to these five PIM domains. The aim is to inform CVE evaluation design and decisions about the types of metrics that can be used to assess programs targeting individuals at risk of radicalization or convicted of terrorism. We acknowledge limitations in the study’s design.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
×
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