Pathway to terrorist behaviors: The role of childhood experiences, personality traits, and ideological motivations in a sample of Iraqi prisoners.

Radicalization to terrorism is a multifaceted process with no single theory or approach to explain it. Although research has focused on understanding the process, there is still a dearth of studies that examine an empirically driven pathway to terrorism behavior. This study examines a cross-sectional sample of incarcerated men convicted of terrorism in Iraq (N = 160). A questionnaire-guided interview included adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), conduct disorder (CD), antisocial personality disorder (ASPD), religious and political ideology, views about causes of terrorism, and the severity of terrorist acts. Path analysis was employed to examine the relationships between these factors and to identify the model with the best fit. After adjusting for age, employment, and location, results indicated that ACEs positively impacted CD, ASPD, religious guidance, and terrorism attitudes. ASPD positively affected political commitment and terrorism attitudes, but inversely affected current religious commitment. Political commitment inversely influenced terrorism attitudes. Religious commitment positively influenced the prioritization of religion in life, which subsequently impacted terrorism attitudes and behavior severity. Additionally, attitudes toward terrorism directly affected the severity of terrorism behavior. All paths in the final model were statistically significant at p < 0.05. Although these findings may be limited in generalizability due to the unique sample, results support the complex and interdependent nature of childhood and adult experiences on the development of both terrorism attitudes and the severity of terrorism behavior.

Distinguishing lone from group actor terrorists: A comparison of attitudes, ideologies, motivations, and risks.

The increasing recognition of the risks posed by lone-actor terrorists provides the impetus for understanding the psychosocial and ideological characteristics that distinguish lone from group actors. This study examines differences between lone and group actor terrorists in two domains: (i) attitudes toward terrorism, ideology, and motivation for terrorist acts; and (ii) empirically derived risk factors for terrorism. Using a cross-sectional research design and primary source data from 160 men convicted of terrorism in Iraq, this study applied bivariate and logistic regression analyses to assess group differences. It tested the hypothesis that there are no statistically significant differences between the groups. Bivariate analyses revealed that lone actors were less likely than group actors, to be unemployed, to cite personal or group benefit as the main motives for terrorist activity, and to believe that acts of terrorism achieved their goals. Regression analysis indicated that having an authoritarian father was the only factor that significantly predicted group membership, with group actors three times more likely to report this trait. Lone actors and group actors are almost indistinguishable except for certain differences in attitudes, motives, employment, and having an authoritarian father.