Introduction to the special issue of the Journal of Criminological Research, Policy, and Practice: terrorism and political violence
| Date | 18 September 2017 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JCRPP-06-2017-0021 |
| Published date | 18 September 2017 |
| Pages | 153-157 |
| Author | Kurt Braddock |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Criminology & forensic psychology |
Kurt Braddock
Introduction to the special issue of the Journal of Criminological Research, Policy,
and Practice: terrorism and political violence
Readers unfamiliar with issues related to terrorism and political violence may be surprised to find
that empirical research on these topics began nearly 50 years ago. In its early years, this research
was performed by relatively few scholars in political science and sociology. Research from other
fields was largely non-existent, and of the studies that do exist from those other fields, few have
stood the test of time as seminal works in terrorism studies. Given this, one could be forgiven for
assuming that academic interest in terrorism –particularly from researchers other than political
scientists and sociologists –is a wholly contemporary phenomenon.
In the years since the September 11 attacks, however, research on terrorism has been produced
at a seemingly exponential rate. To be sure, political scientists and sociologists remain stalwart
figures in the study of terrorism, but researchers from other fields have also joined the fray.
Psychologists have explored how individuals come to adopt ideologies that advocate the use of
violence against civilians (e.g. Horgan, 2014). Communication researchers have investigated
how strategic messaging supports the use of terrorism and efforts to counter violent extremism
(e.g. Braddock, 2015; Braddock and Horgan, 2016; Glazzard, 2017). Anthropologists have
demonstrated how ethnographic methods can contribute to our understanding of terrorism
(e.g. Sluka, 2009). Even economists have gotten involved, producing models that inform
policymaking regarding transnational terrorism (Enders and Sandler, 2002). These examples
represent only a small fraction of the studies from the variety of disciplines that are now engaged
in systematic research on terrorism.
Included in the growing group of social scientists engaging in research on terrorism are
criminologists. Criminal justice scholars at the University of Maryland’s National Consortium for
the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism have been at the center of the study of
terrorism for the last decade, engaging in research on a wide variety of issues, including (but not
limited to) violent incidents against military targets (Parkin et al., 2016), charismatic leadership in
terrorist groups (Hofmann ( featured in this issue), 2005), criminal case processing of terrorists
( Johnson, 2012), and the role of identity in the development of terrorists (Simi et al., 2013).
The John Jay College of Criminal Justice at the City University of New York (CUNY) has also
produced a substantial amount of research on terrorism and political violence. Researchers at
John Jay have explored the effects of terrorist events on willingness to cooperate with security
forces (LaFree and Adamczyk, 2017), hate groups (Adamczyk et al., 2014), and how criminal
networks operate in areas rife with political violence (Arias, 2010). Other research at the nexus of
criminology and terrorism has been performed independent of official affiliation with criminal
justice-based departments. Altier et al. (2014) utilized criminological theory to explore the
reasons why individuals abandon their terrorist activities. Silke (2001) analyzed papers published
in criminology journals to evaluate the trajectory of terrorism studies in the early 2000s. Mythen
and Walklate (2006) advocated for a criminological perspective in approaching the study of
terrorism after the September 11 attacks. As this small sample of studies illustrates, criminology
has clearly had an impact on the empirical study of terrorism, particularly since the year 2000.
The addition of criminologists to the pool of researchers performing research on terrorism has
been crucial for several reasons. First, criminological theories can teach us much about the
performance of and desistance from terrorism, as well as how we should approach the treatment
of terrorist prisoners. Some researchers have performed work to this effect, as strain theory
(e.g. Agnew, 2010), anomie theory (e.g. Blazak, 2001), differential association theory
(e.g. Armstrong and Matusitz, 2013), and other theoretical perspectives have already made
Kurt Braddock is a Lecturer at
the Department of
Communication Arts &
Sciences, Pennsylvania State
University, University Park,
Pennsylvania, USA.
DOI 10.1108/JCRPP-06-2017-0021 VOL. 3 NO. 3 2017, pp.153-157, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 2056-3841
j
JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGICAL RESEARCH, POLICY AND PRACTICE
j
PAGE153
Guest editorial
To continue reading
Request your trial