Feeling understood fosters identity fusion.

If the consequences of identity fusion are well established, its psychological antecedents are not. To address this shortcoming, eight studies tested the hypothesis that self-verification (receiving evaluations that confirm one's self-views) increases fusion (a synergistic union with a group, individual, or cause), which, in turn, increases behavioral support for the target of fusion. Correlational studies showed that perceived self-verification was positively associated with fusion, which was positively associated with willingness to fight and die for a group (Study 1a), a value (Study 1b), and a leader (Study 1c). Study 2 revealed that increasing perceived self-verification fostered greater willingness to fight and die for the group but only indirectly through increases in fusion. Study 3 showed that 4 months after indicating the degree of fusion with a group, increasing perceived self-verification augmented endorsement of fighting and dying for the group indirectly through elevations in fusion. In Study 4, relational ties mediated the relationship between perceived self-verification and fusion. Finally, face-to-face interviews with incarcerated members of street gangs and organized crime gangs (Studies 5a-5b) showed that perceived self-verification was positively associated with fusion, which was positively associated with sacrifices for the gang (replicating Studies 1a-1c). No evidence emerged supporting a rival causal path in which fusion caused willingness to fight and die through perceived self-verification. Implications for related theoretical approaches and for conceptualizing the relationship between personal identities, social identities, and group processes are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Why Is It so Difficult to Investigate Violent Radicalization?

Imagine that you are a researcher interested in disentangling the underlying mechanisms that motivate certain individuals to self-sacrifice for a group or an ideology. Now, visualize that you are one of a few privileged that have the possibility of interviewing people who have been involved in some of the most dramatic terrorist attacks in history. What should you do? Most investigations focused on terrorism do not include empirical data and just a handful of fortunate have made face-to-face interviews with these individuals. Therefore, we might conclude that most experts in the field have not directly met the challenge of experiencing studying violent radicalization in person. As members of a research team who have talked with individuals under risk of radicalization, current, and former terrorists, our main goal with this manuscript is to synopsize a series of ten potential barriers that those interested in the subject might find when making fieldwork, and alternatives to solve them. If all the efforts made by investigators could save the life of a potential victim, prevent an individual from becoming radicalized, or make him/her decide to abandon the violence associated with terrorism, all our work will have been worthwhile.

The distinct associations of ingroup attachment and glorification with responses to the coronavirus pandemic: Evidence from a multilevel investigation in 21 countries.

While public health crises such as the coronavirus pandemic transcend national borders, practical efforts to combat them are often instantiated at the national level. Thus, national group identities may play key roles in shaping compliance with and support for preventative measures (e.g., hygiene and lockdowns). Using data from 25,159 participants across representative samples from 21 nations, we investigated how different modalities of ingroup identification (attachment and glorification) are linked with reactions to the coronavirus pandemic (compliance and support for lockdown restrictions). We also examined the extent to which the associations of attachment and glorification with responses to the coronavirus pandemic are mediated through trust in information about the coronavirus pandemic from scientific and government sources. Multilevel models suggested that attachment, but not glorification, was associated with increased trust in science and compliance with federal COVID-19 guidelines. However, while both attachment and glorification were associated with trust in government and support for lockdown restrictions, glorification was more strongly associated with trust in government information than attachment. These results suggest that both attachment and glorification can be useful for promoting public health, although glorification's role, while potentially stronger, is restricted to pathways through trust in government information.

Trust in scientific information mediates associations between conservatism and coronavirus responses in the U.S., but few other nations.

U.S.-based research suggests conservatism is linked with less concern about contracting coronavirus and less preventative behaviors to avoid infection. Here, we investigate whether these tendencies are partly attributable to distrust in scientific information, and evaluate whether they generalize outside the U.S., using public data and recruited representative samples across three studies (Ntotal = 34,710). In Studies 1 and 2, we examine these relationships in the U.S., yielding converging evidence for a sequential indirect effect of conservatism on compliance through scientific (dis)trust and infection concern. In Study 3, we compare these relationships across 19 distinct countries. Although the relationships between trust in scientific information about the coronavirus, concern about coronavirus infection, and compliance are consistent cross-nationally, the relationships between conservatism and trust in scientific information are not. These relationships are strongest in North America. Consequently, the indirect effects observed in Studies 1-2 only replicate in North America (the U.S. and Canada) and in Indonesia. Study 3 also found parallel direct and indirect effects on support for lockdown restrictions. These associations suggest not only that relationships between conservatism and compliance are not universal, but localized to particular countries where conservatism is more strongly related to trust in scientific information about the coronavirus pandemic.

Strongly fused individuals feel viscerally responsible to self-sacrifice.

Identity fusion is a visceral feeling of oneness that predicts extreme behaviour on behalf of the target of fusion. We propose that strongly fused individuals are characterized by feelings of visceral responsibility towards such target - unconditional, instinctive, and impulsive drive to care, protect and promote its well-being and interests - that motivates them to self-sacrifice. Two studies offered initial support when the target of fusion is an individual or a group (Studies 1a-1b). A final study added causal evidence that strongly fused learning that most ingroup members did not feel visceral responsibility towards the group expressed less willingness to self-sacrifice than those learning that ingroup members display high levels of visceral responsibility (Study 2). These findings offer novel evidence for the mechanisms underlying the effects of fusion on extreme behaviour on behalf of the target of fusion and the attenuation of its consequences.

Willingness to sacrifice among convicted Islamist terrorists versus violent gang members and other criminals.

Is terrorism just another form of criminal activity, as many nations' justice systems assume? We offer an initial answer using face-to-face interviews and structured surveys in thirty-five Spanish prisons. Recent theories of extreme sacrifice inform this direct observational and comparative study. Islamist terrorists display levels of self-sacrifice for their primary reference group similar to that of Latino gangs, but greater willingness to sacrifice for primary values than other inmates (non-radical Muslims, Latino gangs, and delinquent bands). This disposition is motivated by stronger perceived injustice, discrimination, and a visceral commitment to such values (risk/radicalization factors). Nevertheless, state authorities, prison staff, and families are (protective/de-radicalization) factors apt to reduce willingness to sacrifice and keep foreign fighters, now being released in large numbers, from returning to terrorism.

Identity fusion predicts violent pro-group behavior when it is morally justifiable.

Identity fusion is a visceral feeling of oneness with a group that predicts extreme pro-group behaviors. However, the effects of fusion depending on the nature of such behaviors -violent versus nonviolent- and the factors that may incline strongly fused individuals to display them still remain unexplored. To fill this gap, we performed two correlational studies in which we examined whether moral beliefs regarding the justifiability of violence moderate the relationship between fusion with the family (Study 1), or with the country (Study 2), and willingness to engage in violent and nonviolent pro-group acts. Results showed that strongly fused participants were more willing to act violently than weakly fused participants, but only when their beliefs in the moral justifiability of violence were high. In contrast, their willingness to engage in nonviolent acts was not influenced by moral beliefs.

Why People Enter and Embrace Violent Groups.

We distinguish two pathways people may follow when they join violent groups: compliance and internalization. Compliance occurs when individuals are coerced to join by powerful influence agents. Internalization occurs when individuals join due to a perceived convergence between the self and the group. We searched for evidence of each of these pathways in field investigations of former members of two renowned terrorist organizations: the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) (Study 1) and Islamist radical groups (Study 2). Results indicated that ex-fighters joined LTTE for reasons associated with both compliance and internalization but that ex-fighters joined Islamist radical groups primarily for reasons associated with internalization. When compliance occurred, it often took the form of coercion within LTTE but involved charismatic persuasion agents within Islamist groups. This evidence of systematic differences in the reasons why fighters enter violent groups suggests that strategies for preventing radicalization and fostering de-radicalization should be tailored to particular groups.