ABSTRACT
We present a psychological model of extremism based on the concept of motivational imbalance whereby a given need gains dominance and overrides other basic concerns. In contrast, moderation results from a motivational balance wherein individuals' different needs are equitably attended to. Importantly, under moderation the different needs constrain individuals' behaviors in prohibiting actions that serve some needs yet undermine others. Those constraints are relaxed under motivational imbalance where the dominant need crowds out alternative needs. As a consequence, the constraints that the latter needs exercise upon behavior are relaxed, permitting previously avoided activities to take place. Because enactment of these behaviors sacrifices common concerns, most people avoid them, hence their designation as extreme. The state of need imbalance has motivational, cognitive, behavioral, affective and social consequences. These pertain to a variety of different extremisms that share the same psychological core: extreme diets, extreme sports, extreme infatuations, diverse addictions, as well as violent extremism. Evidence for the present model cuts across different domains of psychological phenomena, levels of behavioral analysis and phylogeny. We consider the model's implications for further research and explore the tradeoffs between extremism and moderation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
