Exploring the discrimination–radicalization nexus: empirical evidence from youth and young adults in Belgium

Youth involvement in serious physical violence and political violence: Similarities and differences in risk factors

INTRODUCTION

Youth involvement in violence and delinquency has received widespread attention in the literature. However, little is known about youth involvement in political violence, especially among youth who live in conflict areas. The current study examined the mechanisms that underlie youth involvement in serious physical and political violence. We explored the similarities and differences in the association between both individual factors (including religiosity and school commitment) and parental factors (including parental control and education), and the two types of violent behaviors.

METHOD

A large representative sample of 814 Arab male students from neighborhoods located in East Jerusalem, aged 12-18 years, completed a structured, anonymous, self-report questionnaire. The data was collected between February and May 2019.

RESULTS

Over half of the participants reported that they had been involved in political violence (55.1%) or serious physical violence (58.8%) during the previous year. Youth involvement in serious physical violence was positively associated with involvement in political violence. Furthermore, we found that greater parental control and lower impulsivity are associated with lower levels of political and physical violence. School commitment was associated negatively with serious physical violence but not with involvement in political violence. Youth work was positively correlated with involvement in political violence but not in serious physical violence.

CONCLUSION

The results of the current study show that Arab youth from East Jerusalem are highly involved in political and serious physical violence. The risk and protective factors identified here should inform the design of specific intervention strategies.

Perceived discrimination among Syrian refugees in Germany and its associations with mental health

Discrimination is a crucial post migratory stressor but there is little research on perceived discrimination by Syrian refugees. This study aims to assess self-reported discrimination by Syrian refugees with a residence permit in Germany, determine its forms, places, and predictors, and explore its possible relation with mental health. Sociodemographics, migration-specific characteristics, traumatic life events, quality of life, perceived discrimination, depression, generalised anxiety disorder, post-traumatic symptoms, and somatic distress were assessed among 116 participants. More than one-third of the participants perceived discrimination in low frequency, and in general, perceived discrimination was confined to treatment with less courtesy or respect. Unfair treatment was perceived mostly while searching for accommodation and in the neighbourhood. Refugees attributed their experiences to their lack of language skills prior to national, religious, and racial causes. Lower age, higher number of completed years of education, and symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder were significantly and substantially associated with perceived discrimination. Anxiety symptoms, number of traumatic experiences and gender may also be regarded as relevant predictors of perceived discrimination. Health care professionals must be aware of the links between discrimination and symptoms of mental disorders. Policymakers should address discrimination as a key refugee issue and risk to mental health.

Is radicalization a family issue? A systematic review of family-related risk and protective factors, consequences, and interventions against radicalization

BACKGROUND

Family-related risk and protective factors are crucial for different antisocial behaviors, but their role in radicalization requires synthesis. Radicalization is likely to have a negative impact on families, and well-designed and implemented family-focused intervention programs have the potential to decrease radicalization.

OBJECTIVES

Research questions were: (1) What are the family-related risk and protective factors for radicalization? (2) What is the impact of radicalization on families? (3) Are family-based interventions against radicalization effective?

SEARCH METHODS

Searches included 25 databases and hand searches of gray literature from April to July 2021. Leading researchers in the field were asked to provide published and unpublished studies on the topic. Reference lists of the included studies and previously published systematic reviews on risk and protective factors for radicalization were scanned.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published and unpublished quantitative studies on family-related risk and protective factors for radicalization, the impact of radicalization on families, and family-focused interventions were eligible with no restrictions regarding the study year, location, or any demographic characteristic. Studies were included if they measured the relation between a family-related factor and radicalization or if they included a family-focused intervention against radicalization. For family-related risk and protective factors, radicalized individuals needed to be compared to general population. Studies were included if they defined radicalization as support or commission of violence to defend a cause, including support for radical groups.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The systematic search identified 86,591 studies. After screening, 33 studies focused on family-related risk and protective factors were included, with 89 primary effect sizes and 48 variables grouped in 14 factors. For the factors that included two or more studies, meta-analyses with random effects were conducted. When possible, moderator analyses were performed together with sensitivity and publication bias analyses. No studies on the impact of radicalization on families or family-focused interventions were included.

RESULTS

The current systematic review based on studies with 148,081 adults and adolescents from diverse geographic locations showed that parental ethnic socialization (z = 0.27), having extremist family members (z = 0.26), and family conflict (z = 0.11) were related to more radicalization, whereas high family socioeconomic status (z = -0.03), bigger family size (z = -0.05), and high family commitment (z = -0.06) were related to less radicalization. Separate analyses described family-factors for behavioral versus cognitive radicalization, and different radical ideologies including Islamist, right-wing and left-wing. It was not possible to distinguish risk and protective factors from correlates and the level of overall bias was mostly high. No results regarding the impact of radicalization on families or family-focused interventions were included.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although causal relations between family-related risk and protective factors could not be established, it is reasonable to suggest that policies and practice should aim at decreasing family-related risks and increasing protective factors for radicalization. Tailored interventions including these factors should be urgently designed, implemented and evaluated. Studies focused on the impact of radicalization on families and family-focused interventions are urgently needed together with longitudinal studies on family-related risk and protective factors.

Meaning in Life, Future Orientation and Support for Violent Radicalization Among Canadian College Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has increased levels of uncertainty and social polarization in our societies, compromising young people's capacity to envision a positive future and maintain a meaningful sense of purpose in life. Within a positive youth development framework, the present study investigates the associations of a positive future orientation, presence of and search for meaning in life, and support for violent radicalization (VR) in a diverse sample of Canadian college students. In addition, we investigate the moderating role of future orientation in the association between presence of and search for a meaning in life and support for VR. A total of 3,100 college students in Québec (Canada) (69% female; M _age = 18.57, SD _age = 1.76) completed an online survey during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results from linear mixed-effects models indicate that a positive future orientation and a higher presence of a meaning in life were negatively and independently associated with support for VR. Search for meaning in life was not associated with support for VR. The magnitude of the negative association between presence of a meaning in life and support for VR was greater among students with a more positive future orientation. Schools and colleges are in a privileged position to implement preventive interventions to support a positive future orientation and the presence of a meaning in life among young people during these challenging and uncertain times and reduce the risk of violence related to extreme ideologies in our rapidly changing society.

Cumulative and independent effects of experiences of social adversity on support for violent radicalization during the COVID-19 pandemic: the mediating role of depression

PURPOSE

Social adversity experiences have increased during the pandemic and are potential risk factors for both depression and support for violent radicalization (VR). However, the cumulative and independent effects of various social adversity experiences on support for VR have yet to be explored. This paper examines the cumulative and independent effects of COVID- and non-COVID-related discrimination, exposure to violence, traditional and cyberbullying victimization on support for VR. In addition, we investigate whether depression mediates the relationship between these forms of social adversity and support for VR.

METHODS

A total of 6003 young adults (M_age = 27, SD_age = 4.40, range 18-35) living in metropolitan areas in Canada responded to an online survey. We used multivariable regression models, controlling for socio-demographic characteristics, to infer covariate adjusted associations between social adversity measures and support for VR. Additionally, we conducted a formal mediation analysis to estimate the proportion mediated by depression.

RESULTS

There was a cumulative relationship between experiences of social adversity and support for VR (β = 1.52; 95% CI: 1.32, 1.72). COVID-related discrimination and cyberbullying victimization were independently associated with stronger support for VR. Depression partially mediated the effect of cumulative social adversity, COVID-related discrimination and cyberbullying on support for VR.

CONCLUSION

Prevention programs during the present pandemic should prioritize decreasing discrimination and providing psychosocial support to depressed young adults who experience social adversity. Practitioners should prioritize developing programs that foster digital literacy skills and critical thinking among young adults to address the concerning impact of cyberbullying on support for VR.

Risk and Protective Factors Associated With Support of Violent Radicalization: Variations by Geographic Location

Objectives: We examine the association between perceived discrimination, mental health, social support, and support for violent radicalization (VR) in young adults from three locations across two countries: Montréal and Toronto, Canada, and Boston, United States. A secondary goal is to test the moderating role of location.

Methods: A total of 791 young adults between the ages of 18 and 30, drawn from the Somali Youth longitudinal study and a Canada-based study of college students, participated in the study. We used multivariate linear regression to assess the association between scores on the Radical Intentions Scale (RIS) with demographic characteristics, anxiety, depression, social support, and discrimination.

Results: In the full sample, discrimination, age, and gender were associated with RIS scores. When we examined moderation effects by location, RIS scores were associated with depression only in Montréal, and with social support (negatively) and discrimination in Toronto. None of the variables were significant in Boston.

Conclusion: These findings suggest that an understanding of risk and protective factors for support of VR may be context-dependent. Further research should take into consideration local/regional differences.

Transnational evaluation of the Sympathy for Violent Radicalization Scale: Measuring population attitudes toward violent radicalization in two countries

Countering violent radicalization is a priority in many countries, prompting research that assesses attitudes and beliefs about violent radicalization in the general population. The majority of violent radicalization assessments have been developed among specific populations, with limited investigation into the generalizability and cross-cultural applicability of measurement tools. A transcultural investigation raises questions about the implicit assumptions and norms that inform instrument development. This research examined the psychometric properties of the Sympathy for Violent Radicalization Scale (SyfoR), a measure developed for use with Pakistani and Bangladeshi immigrant groups in the UK, in two convenience samples of youth and young adults in North America and Western Europe. We investigated the factor structure, reliability, and construct validity of adapted versions of the SyfoR among convenience samples of youth and young adults living in Belgium (N = 2014) and in Quebec, Canada (N = 1364) via online surveys administered to students engaged in secondary and post-secondary education. Results indicate that, in both samples, a reduced, 8-item version of the SyfoR has a 3-factor structure with good model fit statistics using confirmatory factor analysis and good internal consistency reliability. More studies are needed to assess the appropriateness of the SyfoR for use in diverse contexts and among diverse populations. The potential usefulness and harmfulness of measures of violent radicalization should balance the benefits of obtaining local data with the risks associated with pathologizing social dissent.

Cognitive and behavioral radicalization: A systematic review of the putative risk and protective factors

Background

Two of the most central questions in radicalization research are, (1) why do some individuals radicalize when most of those from the same groups or exposed to similar conditions do not? and (2) why do radicalized individuals turn to radical violence while the majority remain inert? It has been suggested that the answer to both questions lie in the cumulative and interactive effects of a range of risk factors. While risk assessment and counter-radicalization take a risk-protective factor approach, there is widespread debate as to what these factors are and which are most important.

Objectives

This review has two primary objectives.1) To identify what the putative risk and protective factors for different radicalization outcomes are, without any predeterminations.2) To synthesize the evidence and identify the relative magnitude of the effects of different factors.The review's secondary objectives are to:1) Identify consistencies in the estimates of factors across different radicalization outcomes.2) Identify whether any significant heterogeneity exists within factors between (a) geographic regions, and (b) strains of radicalizing ideologies.

Search Methods

Over 20 databases were searched for both published and gray literature. In order to provide a more comprehensive review, supplementary searches were conducted in two German and one Dutch database. Reference harvesting was conducted from previous reviews and contact was made with leading researchers to identify and acquire missing or unpublished studies.

Selection Criteria

The review included observational studies assessing the outcomes of radical attitudes, intentions, and/or radical behaviors in OECD countries and which provided sufficient data to calculate effect sizes for individual-level risk and protective factors.

Data Collection and Analysis

One-hundred and twenty-seven studies, containing 206 samples met the inclusion criteria and provided 1302 effect sizes pertaining to over 100 different factors. Random effects meta-analyses were carried out for each factor, and meta-regression and moderator analysis were used to explore differences across studies.

Results

Studies were primarily cross-sectional, with samples representing 20 countries OECD countries. Most studies examined no specific radicalizing ideology, while others focussed on specific ideologies (e.g., Islamist, right-wing, and left-wing ideologies). The studies generally demonstrated low risk of bias and utilized validated or widely acceptable measures for both indicators and outcomes. With some exceptions, sociodemographic factors tend to have the smallest estimates, with larger estimates for experiential and attitudinal factors, followed by traditional criminogenic and psychological factors.

Authors' Conclusions

While sociodemographic factors are the most commonly examined factors (selective availability), they also tend to have the smallest estimates. So too, attitudinal and even experiential factors, do not have effect sizes of the magnitude that could lead to significant reductions in risk through targeting by interventions. Conversely, traditional criminogenic factors, as well as psychological factors tend to display the largest estimates. These findings suggest the need to broaden the scope of factors considered in both risk assessment and intervention, and this review provides much needed evidence for guiding the selection of factors.

Youth Extremism as a Response to Global Threats?

Abstract. Violent extremism is rising across the globe as indicated by the growing number of attacks of terrorist organizations. It is known that violent extremism is carried out mainly by young people due to developmental and external factors. Furthermore, recent evidence suggests that ideologically motivated violence stems from threat-regulation processes aiming to restore significance, control, and certainty. Nevertheless, few studies from the threat-regulation literature have focused on youth samples and on the social-economic and political context in which radicalization processes occur. Here, we hypothesize that one driver of the surge in violent extremism might be globalization. To do so, we review the evidence that shows that globalization increases the perception of affiliative, economic, and existential threats. In return, some studies suggest that these kinds of threats promote violent extremism among youth samples. Therefore, we conclude that the threatening context generated by four decades of globalization might be a risk factor for youth extremism in the long run.