Muslim = Terrorist? Attribution of violent crimes to terrorism or mental health problems depend on perpetrators' religious background

The present work investigates whether the assumed religious background of a perpetrator in a carried out (Study 1) and attempted mass shooting (Study 2) influences attribution of the crime to mental health problems or terrorist motives as well as to evaluation of appropriate punishment. In two experimental studies (n =  113 and n =  340) participants were confronted with a scenario depicting an (attempted) mass shooting that was either carried out by a perpetrator with a German or an Arabic/Muslim name. Results indicate that compared to a perpetrator with a German name, a shooting carried out by a perpetrator with an Arabic/Muslim name led to increased attributions to a terrorist motive and fewer attributions to mental health problems. Moreover, in Study 2, this attribution pattern was accompanied by increased punitiveness. The findings are discussed against the background of previous work showing comparable results as well as practical implications.

Toward Parsimony in Bias Research: A Proposed Common Framework of Belief-Consistent Information Processing for a Set of Biases

One of the essential insights from psychological research is that people's information processing is often biased. By now, a number of different biases have been identified and empirically demonstrated. Unfortunately, however, these biases have often been examined in separate lines of research, thereby precluding the recognition of shared principles. Here we argue that several-so far mostly unrelated-biases (e.g., bias blind spot, hostile media bias, egocentric/ethnocentric bias, outcome bias) can be traced back to the combination of a fundamental prior belief and humans' tendency toward belief-consistent information processing. What varies between different biases is essentially the specific belief that guides information processing. More importantly, we propose that different biases even share the same underlying belief and differ only in the specific outcome of information processing that is assessed (i.e., the dependent variable), thus tapping into different manifestations of the same latent information processing. In other words, we propose for discussion a model that suffices to explain several different biases. We thereby suggest a more parsimonious approach compared with current theoretical explanations of these biases. We also generate novel hypotheses that follow directly from the integrative nature of our perspective.

They Saw a Hearing: Democrats' and Republicans' Perceptions of and Responses to the Ford-Kavanaugh Hearings

In several highly publicized hearings, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Judge Brett Kavanaugh presented two opposing accounts of an alleged sexual assault. In the wake of these proceedings, partisans appeared similarly divided in how they regarded this political event. Using a U.S. national sample (N = 2,474) and a mixed-methods design, we investigated partisans' perceptions of, and responses to, the Ford-Kavanaugh hearings. Respondents reported their views of the hearings soon after they occurred. We used topic modeling to analyze these open-ended responses and found uniquely partisan topics emerged, including judicial impartiality and due process. Acute stress (AS) responses to the hearings were also related to partisan identities and perceptions; both Republicans (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.78, 0.84]) and individuals who wrote more about Republican topics (IRR = 0.72, 95% CI = [0.56, 0.92]) reported lower AS than their Democratic counterparts. Results demonstrate different partisan perceptions with implications for mental health outcomes.

Mental disorder, psychological problems and terrorist behaviour: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The link between mental health difficulties and terrorist behaviour has been the subject of debate for the last 50 years. Studies that report prevalence rates of mental health difficulties in terrorist samples or compare rates for those involved and not involved in terrorism, can inform this debate and the work of those responsible for countering violent extremism.

Objectives

To synthesise the prevalence rates of mental health difficulties in terrorist samples (Objective 1-Prevalence) and prevalence of mental health disorders pre-dating involvement in terrorism (Objective 2-Temporality). The review also synthesises the extent to which mental health difficulties are associated with terrorist involvement compared to non-terrorist samples (Objective 3-Risk Factor).

Search Methods

Searches were conducted between April and June 2022, capturing research until December 2021. We contacted expert networks, hand-searched specialist journals, harvested records from published reviews, and examined references lists for included papers to identify additional studies.

Selection Criteria

Studies needed to empirically examine mental health difficulties and terrorism. To be included under Objective 1 (Prevalence) and Objective 2 (Temporality), studies had to adopt cross-sectional, cohort, or case-control design and report prevalence rates of mental health difficulties in terrorist samples, with studies under Objective 2 also needing to report prevalence of difficulties before detection or involvement in terrorism. For Objective 3 (Risk Factor) studies where there was variability in terrorist behaviour (involved vs. not involved) were included.

Data Collection and Analysis

Captured records were screened in DisillterSR by two authors. Risk of bias was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute checklists, and random-effects meta-analysis conducted in Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software.

Results

Fifty-six papers reporting on 73 different terrorist samples (i.e., studies) (n = 13,648) were identified. All were eligible for Objective 1. Of the 73 studies, 10 were eligible for Objective 2 (Temporality) and nine were eligible for Objective 3 (Risk Factor). For Objective 1, the life-time prevalence rate of diagnosed mental disorder in terrorist samples (k = 18) was 17.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 11.1%-26.3%]. When collapsing all studies reporting psychological problems, disorder, and suspected disorder into one meta-analyses (k = 37), the pooled prevalence rate was 25.5% (95% CI = 20.2%-31.6%). When isolating studies reporting data for any mental health difficulty that emerged before either engagement in terrorism or detection for terrorist offences (Objective 2: Temporality), the life-time prevalence rate was 27.8% (95% CI = 20.9%-35.9%). For Objective 3 (Risk Factor), it was not appropriate to calculate a pooled effect size due the differences in comparison samples. Odds ratios for these studies ranged from 0.68 (95% CI = 0.38-1.22) to 3.13 (95% CI = 1.87-5.23). All studies were assessed as having high-risk of bias which, in part, reflects challenges conducting terrorism research.

Author's Conclusions

This review does not support the assertion that terrorist samples are characterised by higher rates of mental health difficulties than would be expected in the general population. Findings have implications for future research in terms of design and reporting. There are also implications for practice with regards the inclusion of mental health difficulties as indicators of risk.

The effect on judgment of attributing religious affiliation to a terrorist suspect

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects and correlations of the perceived religious affiliation on a fictitious terrorism case. Participants were 402 French adults who completed a questionnaire after reading a scenario involving the arrest of a person (French vs. North African; man vs. woman) wearing an explosive belt. They indicated the level of the perpetrator's religious affiliation and judged her/him and the act. The participants' level of social dominance orientation (SDO) was measured and studied along in its two dimensions. The results showed an effect of ethnicity on perceived religious affiliation, which was correlated with judgment and mediated the effect of social dominance on judgment. The implications of this study are discussed in terms of intergroup interactions and religious prejudice.

Biased hate crime perceptions can reveal supremacist sympathies

People may be sympathetic to violent extremism when it serves their own interests. Such support may manifest itself via biased recognition of hate crimes. Psychological surveys were conducted in the wakes of mass shootings in the United States, New Zealand, and the Netherlands (total n = 2,332), to test whether factors that typically predict endorsement of violent extremism also predict biased hate crime perceptions. Path analyses indicated a consistent pattern of motivated judgment: hate crime perceptions were directly biased by prejudicial attitudes and indirectly biased by an aggrieved sense of disempowerment and White/Christian nationalism. After the shooting at a synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, disempowerment-fueled anti-Semitism predicted lower perceptions that the gunman was motivated by hatred and prejudice (study 1). After the shootings that occurred at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, disempowerment-fueled Islamoprejudice similarly predicted lower hate crime perceptions (study 2a). Conversely, after the tram shooting in Utrecht, Netherlands (which was perpetrated by a Turkish-born immigrant), disempowerment-fueled Islamoprejudice predicted higher hate crime perceptions (study 2b). Finally, after the Walmart shooting in El Paso, Texas, hate crime perceptions were specifically biased by an ethnonationalist view of Hispanic immigrants as a symbolic (rather than realistic) threat to America; that is, disempowered individuals deemphasized likely hate crimes due to symbolic concerns about cultural supremacy rather than material concerns about jobs or crime (study 3). Altogether, biased hate crime perceptions can be purposive and reveal supremacist sympathies.

Psychological Antecedents of Refugee Integration (PARI)

The successful management of refugee immigration, including refugee integration in host societies, requires a sound understanding of underlying psychological processes. We propose the psychological antecedents of refugee integration (PARI) model, highlighting perceived forcedness (i.e., coercion and loss of control from “push” factors) and ensuing perils (risks and potential suffering during migration) as distinctive factors of refugee (vs. voluntary) migration. According to our model, perceptions and subjective representations of forcedness and associated perils activate specific psychological processes relevant to refugee integration and thus moderate responses to the demands and stressors of the immigration situation. We conceptualize these distinctive influences for integration-relevant processes in both refugees and in residents. By pinpointing the unique features of refugee migration, PARI generates novel and specific hypotheses about psychological processes predicting refugee integration. For instance, refugees’ memories of forcedness and associated perils should lead to a high level of preoccupation with the restoration of basic needs after arrival in a receiving country that interferes with integration-related activities. Conversely, residents’ perceptions of forcedness and related perils may enhance empathy with refugees but may also magnify feelings of anxiety and threat. Implications for refugee integration are discussed for the domains of occupational work, education, and mental health.

Perpetrator Religion and Perceiver’s Political Ideology Affect Processing and Communication of Media Reports of Violence

Abstract. People’s interpretations of media reports about crimes may be biased by their motivations to construct and protect their worldviews and, relatedly, by criminals’ group membership. Two large-scale experiments ( Ns = 248 and 1,115) investigated how American adults interpret reports of crimes committed by either a Christian or Muslim, and how these interpretations depend on political ideology. Results show liberals attributing crimes more to religion for Christian rather than Muslim offenders, with the opposite effect for conservatives. Importantly, these biases also influenced how people communicated the news report to others. Additionally, evidence suggests that attitudes toward Islam and not toward Muslims may explain these effects. Implications for how political ideology affects interpretation and communication of media portrayals of Muslims are discussed.

Which group to credit (and blame)? Whites make attributions about White-minority biracials’ successes and failures based on their own (anti-)egalitarianism and ethnic identification

Individuals’ perceptions of biracials can vary based on the motives of the perceiver. Here, we examine how two factors—perceivers’ group-level identification motives and their system-level beliefs about the desirability of hierarchy (i.e., social dominance orientation)—predict the degree to which they attribute a biracial target’s successes or failures to that target’s White versus minority background. Across three studies examining different contexts, more anti-egalitarian White participants and more highly identified White participants rated a half-White, half-minority target as being shaped more by his minority (vs. White) background when he was disreputable (vs. reputable)—patterns broadly consistent with prior theorizing on the motivations to maintain social stratification and protect ingroup standing, respectively. In direct contrast, however, egalitarian White participants and White participants low on ethnic identification credited a target’s outgroup minority background when he was reputable (vs. disreputable), consistent with a desire to promote social equality and forgoing the opportunity to “bask in reflected glory” on behalf of the ingroup. Our results extend extant theorizing by underlining the benefits of jointly considering both group- and system-level motives when analyzing perceptions and attributions of individuals and groups, and by shedding new light on the understudied psychology of social egalitarians.