CC BY
11
A COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION OF THE EFFICACY OF NARRATIVE CONSTRUCTS AS A COUNTERMEASURE AGAINST VIOLENT EXTREMISM
DR. AYAZ KHAN
Chief Coordination Officer, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Centre of Excellence on Countering Violent Extremism,
Pakistan
Email: drayazkhan53@gmail.com DR. MUHAMMAD QASIM Director General, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Centre of Excellence on Countering Violent Extremism, Pakistan
Email: qasimkhandaudzai@gmail.com MR. WAQAR ULLAH KHAN Director Administration, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Centre of Excellence on Countering Violent Extremism, Pakistan
Email: waqar@kpcve.gov.pk MR. MUHAMMAD WASIF Principal Research Officer Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Centre of Excellence on Countering Violent Extremism,
Pakistan Email: wasif@kpcve.gov.pk MR. KAMRAN KHAN
Principal Research Officer Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Centre of Excellence on Countering Violent Extremism,
Pakistan Email: kamran@kpcve.gov.pk
Abstract-The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of counter-narratives on reducing the likelihood of individuals becoming violently radicalised. It involved a randomized controlled trial, and the results of this trial are presented in the study. The primary objectives of the research were to contribute to the counter-narrative theory and demonstrate the significance of experimental methods in this field of study. There were two alternative approaches to narrating terrorist acts, diverging from the existing story. Before assigning each of the 150 participants to one of the three conditions, they underwent a cognitive reflection test to determine their level of cognitive reflection and their ability to perform it. The participants were presented with three different types of stories: one that provided a justification for terrorist violence, one of two counter-stories that presented alternative perspectives, and a control story. Instead of providing generic counter-narratives, it has been discovered that it is more effective to equip the target with the necessary tools to develop their own counter-narratives. The findings of the experiment indicate that narratives containing violence and terrorism have the potential to impact individuals in various manners. Although measuring constructs related to violent radicalization can be challenging and has its limitations, it remains an important task. Keywords: Counter-radicalization, counter-narrative, cognition, strategic communication, terrorism, violent extremism
THE FOOTPRINT
To gain a comprehensive understanding of the complexity of terrorism, it is crucial to conduct research on the factors that contribute to the emergence of violent extremism. This study should encompass a wide range of academic disciplines. Psychologists have developed a "cognitive perspective" on terrorism to aid in understanding the phenomenon. According to this perspective, individuals who perceive terrorism as a genuine threat may have distorted thought processes. These cognitive distortions can arise from various factors such as stigma, failure, loss, or humiliation. Now, we have a clearer understanding of the situation, which has helped us move away from the previous state of uncertainty and confusion. As a result of these changes, certain individuals may undergo a process of radicalization, leading them to adopt new beliefs and ideologies. When radicalization involves the use of physical violence or the threat of it, it is commonly referred to as "violent radicalization." However, several forward-thinking theorists have argued that violence as a
practical solution is unlikely to be accepted unless certain conditions are met. One issue is the repetitive dissemination of terrorist propaganda. In this discussion, the term "propaganda" is used to describe any type of communication that aims to persuade the audience to take actions that align with the goals of the person or group behind the communication. By employing this approach, you will be able to effectively capture the attention and support of your audience. There are numerous methods of utilizing language to make sweeping assertions without providing supporting evidence. Propaganda is a type of persuasive communication that is employed when promoting an idea or concept that may be challenging to convince others about. A propagandist is an individual who attempts to persuade others to adopt their perspective without providing logical or factual justifications for why that perspective is correct. To effectively convey the idea, it is important to refer to specific resources that provide comprehensive explanations, avoiding oversimplification or confusing explanations. Terrorist groups frequently employ fabricated narratives to justify and rationalize their actions.
What's violent extremism without its history? The tale
The story is inspired by real events, but the author creates a fictional narrative. Considering the impact of a situation on both the reader and the main character is crucial. There are various methods of storytelling, but typically, the plot serves as the cohesive element that binds all the elements together. Every story consists of three essential parts: the beginning, the middle, and the end. The beginning introduces the setting, providing the context for the events that unfold. The middle section focuses on the development of the plot, where the story's main events and conflicts take place. Finally, the end brings the story to a conclusion, resolving any remaining conflicts and providing closure for the reader. Every story, regardless of its genre or length, requires a middle section to develop the plot and characters further. This middle portion is crucial for providing evaluation cues that help the audience understand and interpret the events unfolding in the story. According to theories of evidence-based narrative persuasion, utilizing a specific structure can potentially allow implausible claims to go unnoticed by a skeptical audience. This can ultimately result in the audience being persuaded and eventually adopting the proponent's perspective. While it is true that stories can still be interesting even without relying on heuristic processing, it does not negate the possibility of their appeal or captivation. Research has demonstrated that stories can engage individuals in various modes of thinking, ranging from rapid mental shortcuts to thorough and profound analyses. To reiterate, to fully appreciate a story, an individual must engage both their logical and emotional faculties within the brain. The individuals involved lack sufficient knowledge about the concealed message to make an accurate judgement. This aspect helps the audience establish a stronger connection between their own emotions and the narrator's commentary on society. Extremist groups tend to thrive in environments where adherence to social norms is overly simplified. According to the terrorists themselves, their reasons for resorting to violence may appear convincing, not necessarily because they are well-reasoned, but rather because they align with familiar narratives. Their reasons for being violent are understandable and logical, which is why they make sense. Political communication experts frequently engage in the practice of "spinning" ideas to advance a particular narrative. The story effectively portrays various types of misconduct in a manner that aligns with its narrative structure. The events that provide significance, also known as "signifiers," can vary from one situation to another. However, there is still an underlying structure present. For instance, this structure can be observed in events such as the death of a non-violent protestor, a hunger strike, or even unpopular governmental policies. Upon initial examination, the narrative appears plausible despite its lack of logical coherence. Extremist groups frequently exhibit a tendency to adhere to this pattern. According to Kundnani, Neo-Nazi propaganda has evolved to feature members of the English Defense League (EDL) and other "counter-jihadist" groups as its main characters and settings. The concept of "Doomsday" or the "End of Times" narrative is frequently employed to rationalize acts of terrorist violence, even in situations where the motives may appear unrelated. This is a matter that requires attention and resolution. Both ISIS and the Taliban, which are radical Islamic groups, hold a similar perspective on
the apocalypse. The Taliban publishes a magazine called Azan, in which they reinterpret global events to portray them as divine signs. This is the perspective through which they perceive the world. The perception of terrorism has gained a new level of acceptance due to the changing interpretation of historical events such as the Christian Crusades and more recent conflicts like World War II, which are now viewed as narratives of oppression and retaliation. Here are a few examples that illustrate this type of new meaning. There are numerous factors that contribute to the difficulty of handling this situation. Sharing personal stories plays a crucial role in the efforts to dismantle cultural barriers and foster improved international relationships. These performers can entertain the audience by making them laugh while also imparting knowledge or information. Additionally, individuals who radicalize others by sharing stories do not necessarily need to physically meet their targets to make them believe they are being oppressed or that the authorities are not legitimate. This is because individuals can communicate and discuss these ideas indirectly through storytelling, eliminating the need for direct conversation. This is an opportune moment and location to promote a harmful and aggressive belief system. Given its role in the process, it is not surprising that people have referred to this story as a "pillar" of violent radicalization that ultimately leads to terrorism. Maladaptive cognitive restructuring is a contributing factor that leads to the perception of violent actions being more acceptable than nonviolent actions.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
In their recent publication, Kruglanski, Fernandez, Factor, and Szumowska (2019) assert that a significant portion of human behaviour can be characterized as purposeful and comprehensible. The representation of consciousness commonly entails individuals possessing a general awareness of their actions and a subjective understanding, albeit potentially flawed, of the motivations behind those actions. The awareness of individuals is facilitated by cognitive processes, which play a central role in establishing the necessary conditions for action. The notion that not all actions possess equal significance has been a subject of scholarly inquiry. Various studies have explored the differential impact and consequences of different actions. This line of research has shed light on the nuanced nature of human behaviour, highlighting the variability in outcomes and implications associated with different actions. By recognising the inherent inequality among actions, scholars have contributed to a deeper The properties of actions are influenced, to some extent, by the way cognitive processes are employed in a specific context (Smith, 2010).
In his work, Horgan (2008) highlights the significance of conceptual clarity in understanding the factors contributing to an individual's engagement in terrorism. He emphasises the common tendency to view involvement in terrorism as a reflection of a particular state or condition. This observation underscores the potential pitfalls that arise from a lack of precision in conceptualizing the motivations behind terrorist behaviour. This perspective offers an alternative interpretation of the concept of involvement, suggesting it as a deliberate pursuit of engagement and action that individuals initially seek out for reasons that may diverge from the eventual outcomes associated with such involvement. Over time, individuals may endeavor to sustain their involvement, transitioning from a vague and peripheral state to a more concentrated, specific, and unequivocally linked to acts of terrorism.
In their publication, Mitchell D. Silber and Arvin Bhatt, esteemed Senior Intelligence Analysts, provide an insightful analysis on the characteristics of individuals involved in various plots. The authors assert that a significant portion of these individuals initially exhibited an unremarkable profile, characterized by ordinary employment, mundane lifestyles, and a lack of criminal records. Silber and Bhatt's findings shed light on the seemingly inconspicuous nature of these individuals prior to their involvement in such activities. The process of self-identification involves individuals undergoing a transformative experience as they delve into the realm of Salafi Islam. This exploration is influenced by a combination of internal and external factors, ultimately leading individuals to distance themselves from their previous identity and align with like-minded individuals who share this ideology. Through this gradual process, individuals gradually adopt Salafi
Islam as their own belief system. The phenomenon of "religious seeking" is often triggered by a cognitive opening or crisis, leading to a profound disruption of one's previously held beliefs and creating a state of receptivity towards alternative worldviews. The process of indoctrination involves the gradual strengthening of an individual's convictions, leading to the complete adoption of jihadi-Salafi ideology. During this phase, individuals unquestioningly believe that certain conditions and circumstances necessitate taking action to support and advance their cause. The action can be classified as an instance of militant jihad. The initiation of this phase is commonly facilitated and propelled by an individual who holds the role of a "spiritual sanctioner". Carthy and Sarma (2023) introduced a modified paradigm based on the work of Pyszczynski and colleagues, who indirectly assessed the level of attitudinal support for a similar outcome. The authors aimed to examine the internalization and prevalence of violence-legitimizing norms, drawing on Kruglanski and colleagues' Significance Quest Theory as a conceptual framework. The present theoretical framework proposes that radicalization can be conceptualized as a dynamic process wherein individuals progressively develop and maintain a perception that violence serves as an effective tool for attaining specific political objectives. The present study draws upon a theoretical framework that has significantly influenced the conceptualization and construction of latent variables. Additionally, Pyszczynski et al.'s paradigm has been utilized as a basis for formulating the way the research questions were posed, specifically by incorporating the notion of support for a proximal individual.
In their study, Frischlich, Rieger, Morten, and Bente (2018) present preliminary findings that suggest a potential correlation between the presence of narrativity in propaganda videos and the appeal of extremist groups.
In the scholarly work of Ebner (2017), a thought-provoking statement is made regarding the study of extremism and its connection to narratives. Ebner argues that neglecting the examination of narratives when studying extremism is akin to studying the brain without considering its fundamental components, the neurons. This analogy highlights the importance of understanding the role of narratives in the context of propaganda and Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) videos. Ebner further suggests that solely dissecting the figurative brain, without acknowledging the dynamic and fluid nature of narratives, fails to capture the essence of their power. By drawing attention to the significance of narrativity, Ebner encourages scholars to explore the intricate relationship between narratives and extremism.
In a publication, Apau (2018) highlights the imperative for nations to acknowledge the considerable challenge associated with regulating the Internet and social media platforms to effectively combat the dissemination of violent extremist ideology. The exponential growth of communication facilitated by the Internet and social media platforms has presented a formidable challenge in terms of monitoring and regulating these channels. The sheer magnitude of information flowing through these platforms has made it increasingly difficult to effectively monitor or impose restrictions on communication within these digital spaces. The task of establishing universally accepted standards for governing the Internet and social media in the twenty-first century is a formidable challenge. This study examines the variations in levels of public and societal tolerance for freedom of speech and unhindered communication between the United States and the United Kingdom, two countries that share common values. Despite their similarities, these nations exhibit notable differences in their attitudes towards these fundamental democratic principles. By exploring existing literature, this review aims to shed light on the factors contributing to these disparities and provide a comprehensive understanding of the variations in public and societal tolerance observed in these contexts. The Intervention Of Countering The Narrative
Researchers and policymakers are currently collaborating to develop strategies aimed at reducing the influence and impact of terrorism narratives. The objective is to prevent individuals from being drawn into violent radicalization. Another period of rapid change occurred in the 1950s. In recent years, there has been a noticeable change in focus towards creating strategies that provide
individuals with alternative methods to handle story-based propaganda. These strategies aim to reduce the likelihood of this propaganda distorting their perception of actual events. There is a new approach to addressing propaganda, which involves utilizing storytelling techniques and strategies. The term "counter-narrative" effectively captures and conveys the essence of this strategy, providing a comprehensive understanding of its purpose and nature. This tactic has been attempted previously, to put it differently. Over the past few years, there has been a rise in counternarratives addressing problematic speech in various areas such as autism, infertility, disability, and false historical accounts. One of the best countries to witness this phenomenon is the United States. "Counter-storying" refers to the practice of sharing narratives that challenge and oppose harmful dominant discourses. "It" refers to the word used to describe this thing. When considering the process of becoming radicalised through violence, the concept becomes more focused and strategic. Both the main story and the counter-story are presented in narrative form. The purpose of counter-stories is to demonstrate the inaccuracy of the prevailing narrative. Even after reading this summary, it is still unclear which specific aspects of this strategy are being implemented or put into action. Some argue that the counternarrative will not be effective unless it addresses the specific "needs" of individuals who are attracted to extremist ideologies. In 2017, the European Commission requested the International Centre for Counterterrorism (ICCT) to conduct a study on the effectiveness of counter-narratives in preventing individuals from becoming radicalised and resorting to violence. There have been multiple suggestions on how to overcome this difficult situation and move forward. Some of the concepts mentioned include randomization, control groups, and gaining a deeper understanding of how and why individuals respond to messages based on their actions and thoughts. The Campbell Collaboration recently completed a comprehensive evaluation known as a "systematic review" of 19 interventions. However, it was highlighted that solely conducting experiments would not suffice to progress the idea. It was also noted that uninformed counter-narratives could make it easier for people to oppose the idea. Acknowledging the presence of fear when confronted with an expanding counter-narrative is not something to be overly concerned about. Researchers and policymakers are in consensus that the term "counter-narrative" lacks clarity and specificity. Further research is required to determine whether it is effective in preventing the radicalization of violent extremists. Contesting The Reality
Problem-solving and hypothesis generation are closely interconnected. Experiments conducted in a laboratory setting possess a significant degree of internal validity, rendering them highly suitable for the purpose of testing hypotheses and theories. The consensus among most individuals is that it is not feasible to replicate violent radicalization in a laboratory setting due to numerous theoretical and practical challenges that need to be addressed. One of the concerns that this raises for me is the impact on the environment. The authors clarify that this study did not aim to examine all the various hypotheses or theories proposed to explain the subject matter under investigation. The purpose of the study was to serve as a blueprint for future laboratory studies that aim to analyze and differentiate various narratives. The significance of establishing reliability and internal validity was emphasized to ensure that the results could contribute to the development of existing theories and provide guidance for future research. Using the obtained results will enable researchers to provide guidance for future research endeavors. We examined the subsequent theories and strategies that aim to alter the narrative.
Looking For The Best Of The Options
There are various perspectives on counter-narratives, which suggest that when it comes to combating terrorism, it is crucial to prioritize the "countering" aspect of counter-narratives. Based on the information available, the objective of this strategy is to encourage two-way communication among individuals rather than solely transmitting information in a single direction. Since experts discovered what was happening, researchers have achieved some success with this method. The primary objective of the initial strategy aimed at preventing violent radicalization was to debunk the false justifications provided for terrorist acts (ViolentN). According to the study's authors,
simply "correcting" false information may not always be sufficient to reduce its usefulness. Additionally, they noted that it is not always possible to predict or prevent boomerang effects, which occur when the original attitude or belief becomes stronger after being refuted. When an alternative is presented without considering its likelihood of success, it may not achieve the intended effect or be easily understood by the recipient. Both the arguments in favour of and against ViolentN appeared to be logical and reasonable. The objective of the plan was to effectively halt the activities of ViolentN without resorting to engaging in a "battle of narratives." The task involved replacing all instances of violence with nonviolent alternatives. The term "Generic Counter-Narrative" (GenCN) was coined to provide a clear explanation of how this thing operates. In the second plan, which was more theoretical in nature, they considered the potential actions that the enemy might take. There are individuals who may choose not to consider opposing arguments due to a lack of trust in the person presenting them or a lack of interest in the topic, which makes them less open to persuasion. Immunization is a method used to address or manage these reactions. The phrase "vaccinating against hate" was coined by Kurt Braddock as a way to describe the prevention of the escalation of negative behavior. Typically, individuals are less inclined to be swayed by various persuasive techniques when they have sufficient time to formulate a counterargument. Previous experiments have demonstrated that incorporating counternarratives can reduce the effectiveness of conspiratorial propaganda against the government. These experiments involved informing individuals in advance that they would be presented with a persuasive story followed by potential counterarguments. Individuals who were exposed to extremist propaganda from either the left or the right exhibited similar reactions when they encountered it without any accompanying narrative. To prevent individuals from becoming violently radicalised, it is important for individuals to develop their own counter-narratives as part of a comprehensive plan centered around immunization. While it may not always be feasible to provide explicit warnings, it is still reasonable for individuals to try to do so.
Based on the ideas mentioned, the intention of the second plan was to provide individuals with the necessary resources to independently combat the ViolentN. The individuals were taken by surprise at the sudden need to engage in discussions against the use of violence. Individuals were encouraged to reflect upon and acknowledge their personal motivations for refraining from engaging in violent behaviour, with the aim of motivating them to actively choose non-violence. To execute our plan, we created the TailCN condition. The conclusion provided supports the concept that we have been discussing. The credibility of reported acts of violence is expected to primarily increase due to ViolentN, followed by TailCN and GenCN. The results of post-hoc analyses indicate that individuals with TailCN or GenCN have a lower likelihood of being able to provide justifications for the use of force. To provide further clarity, we implemented a technique known as a "neutral narrative condition" to ensure the absence of any bias. Supremely Adaptable Method: Mental Processing
Individuals with more violent and extreme worldviews tend to exhibit a higher tendency to engage in daily thinking that is characterized as "confused and ambiguous." The reason for this is that when individuals adopt violent and extreme ideologies, they tend to perceive the world in simplistic terms, dividing it into clear-cut categories of right and wrong. A person who has a low level of cognitive complexity would not have the ability to think in this manner. The idea was evaluated based on the "knowledge acquisition" stage of the radicalization process. The experiment aimed to assess the effectiveness of two countermeasures, namely "Cognitive Reflection" and "Need for Cognition," in enhancing individuals' comprehension of a story called "ViolentN." This story justified terrorist violence and included elements from "TailCN" and "GenCN." Cognitive reflection refers to the capacity to consider and analyze a situation before acting or making decisions related to it. Ultimately, what is important is the ability to generate hypotheses that are logical and consistent with the available data. What distinguishes an individual who perceives the world in a balanced manner? During the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT), individuals were presented with a series of challenging mental puzzles and were asked how frequently they prioritize long-term thinking over
their initial gut reactions to arrive at the correct answer, rather than opting for the easier solution. The purpose of doing this was to determine if they could identify the correct method for solving the puzzles. A relatively recent concept suggests that an individual's needs are influenced by their knowledge or understanding. This is not a test to measure your intelligence. Instead, it is used to assess the level of interest a student has in learning. Individuals who possess a high Need for Cognition score place great importance on acquiring knowledge and gaining insights. They consistently seek out opportunities to expand their understanding and personal development. Additionally, the ability to think critically holds great significance for them. To assess the extent to which individuals actively contemplate the narratives they encounter, we developed a measurement tool known as the Need for Cognition Scale. As an alternative explanation, it was believed that these substances would have the following effects:
According to the second hypothesis, there is a relationship between the independent variable and the condition (CRT) through the scores on the Need for Cognition (NFC) and Cognitive Reflection Test. When individuals were questioned about the legitimacy of violence after being exposed to ViolentN and the counter-narratives (TailCN and GenCN), those who obtained higher scores indicated that they considered violence to be less legitimate. On the other hand, those who obtained lower scores expressed the belief that violence was the most legitimate. The participants were informed about ViolentN, as well as the other stories, TailCN and GenCN, by people. The Modes That Turn The Game Around
The project received approval from the Research Ethics Committee at the National University of Ireland in Galway in December. Although there were no apparent negative outcomes, precautions were implemented to ensure that the participants did not experience any distress. Before participating in the lab session, the participants were required to watch a movie that focused on the politics of the Middle East. During the research, the participants were informed that they had the option to discontinue their participation at any point if they found the questions or video content to be distressing or uncomfortable. The respondents' ability to review and remember this information doubled. If a similar event occurs in the future, it would be beneficial to establish a reliable method for seeking assistance. A debriefing process was established in response to the report's lack of truthfulness. The report contained numerous fabricated facts to create an appearance of objectivity. A detailed explanation of the study's goals was provided to all participants via email. When the individuals became aware that they were making decisions without sufficient knowledge, they were provided with a card that allowed them to escape the consequences of their actions.
The study involved 150 participants, with a mean age of 21.4 and a standard deviation of 5.4. The participants in the study had an average age of 20.5 years, with a standard deviation of 2.43. Additionally, 65.0% of the participants were women. On average, men were 23.1% older than women. If respondents participated in the event, they would be eligible to receive credit for the course. Methodology In this study, a randomized experimental design was employed to examine the outcomes of various interventions. Participants in a study were presented with an argument that supported India's use of terrorism in the conflict between India and Pakistan over the disputed region of Jammu & Kashmir. After that, they were randomly assigned to receive either a generic counter-narrative or a tailored counter-narrative to challenge the initial argument. The study included 40 participants in the generic counter-narrative group and 34 participants in the tailored counter-narrative group. The study involved participants who were exposed to two different stories. One story depicted a violent terrorist and was heard by 37 people, while the other story had no bias and was heard by 38 participants. The second group was tasked with creating rules for the business.
The researchers utilized the Cognitive Reflection Test, making a few modifications, to assess individuals' level of reflectiveness. Following the initial three brain teasers, everyone was subsequently presented with an additional set of four questions to ponder. The final score was determined by summing up the number of correct answers provided by everyone. The Need for
Cognition Scale was used to measure individuals' motivation to learn. Participants were requested to provide ratings on a scale ranging from 1 to 5, indicating their level of agreement or disagreement with a set of 18 self-report statements. The value of the asset increases by an equal amount as the NFC. The scale demonstrated a high level of internal consistency, with a reliability coefficient of 0.86. The variable(s) being examined will be the most crucial aspect of this study. The researchers conducting this study aimed to investigate the relationship between internalizing norms that condone violence and exposure to such norms, and their potential role in predicting violent radicalization. Using trait-based scales in experiments can pose challenges, particularly when careful consideration has been given to the exposure(s) and other variables. While there are multiple scales available for measuring radicalization towards violence, they can often pose challenges when it comes to their practical application. When individuals are asked direct questions about terrorism, there is a higher likelihood of experiencing ceiling effects due to performance bias. The Significance Quest Theory, developed by Kruglanski and colleagues, builds upon a modified paradigm created by Pyszczynski and colleagues. This theory provides us with a framework to understand the process through which norms that condone violence are internalized and disseminated. This idea was derived from Kruglanski and his colleagues, who indirectly measured support for a similar result. According to this theory, an individual undergoes the process of radicalization when they gradually develop a preference for employing violence to accomplish their political objectives. Pyszczynski and his colleagues developed a paradigm that provided a suitable theoretical foundation for understanding latent variables, specifically by emphasizing the importance of support for an individual in proximity.
The participants were provided with a statement that they believed came from a student group whose leaders endorse the use of violence by India. After listening to the viewpoints expressed by the university society and spokesperson on various matters, the participants were provided with a 7-point Likert scale. This scale was used to gauge the extent to which they agreed with the statements made. The Likert scale consisted of two subscales, each containing 9 items. The purpose of the study was to determine the frequency at which violent reasons are cited. The participants were also requested to provide ratings on a scale of 0 to 4 to indicate the extent to which they agreed with the points mentioned in the statement and their intention to support the campus group. Having knowledge of how to measure a variable allows for improved predictions and decision-making regarding its management. Even if we eliminate confusing variables that could potentially lead to incorrect conclusions in an experiment, there is still a persistent issue with consistently measuring the desired quantities. Researchers studying radicalization face challenges in accurately measuring the phenomenon they are investigating, as they strive to ensure that their measurement aligns with the concept they are attempting to study in a meaningful manner. The objective of this study was to gain a deeper understanding of the topic by developing measures that were grounded in theory. The researchers aimed to assess the construct validity and reproducibility of these measurements across various experimental settings.
The primary objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of counter-narratives in reducing the likelihood of individuals who are exposed to extremist narratives from becoming violent radicals. In response to the story that seemed to provide terrorists with a motive to harm a group of college respondents, two distinct actions were taken. The terrorists propagated this myth to convince people that achieving India's political objectives could be more effectively accomplished through violent means rather than non-violent methods. The significance of this point cannot be overstated as it is crucial to the focus of this paper. It is important to clarify that this viewpoint should not be applied universally to encompass all the various ways individuals can be radicalised. There is a common belief that radicalization does not necessarily result in violent extremism, primarily due to the lack of a strong correlation between an individual's beliefs and their actions. Instead, they explored the fundamental concept shared by all terrorist narratives, which is the belief that violence is the most effective means to achieve their objectives. Terrorists advance their agenda by promoting a narrative that advocates violence as an effective means to
achieve their objectives. By making these decisions, individuals are faced with difficult choices between two alternatives. The experimental counter-narratives drew inspiration for their writing topics from skepticism and cynicism. Before these hypotheses can be tested, it is necessary to develop precise methods for measuring them. The problem mentioned is the initial issue identified through real-world research. Although the specific reasons for the significant difference between the two dependent variables were unclear, the measurement models for each dependent variable demonstrated an acceptable level of reliability in terms of construct validity. The reason for this was that the reliability of the models had reached a satisfactory level. When evaluating mental processes based on specific criteria, it is important to exercise caution when utilizing the final models to establish causal connections between moderators and the endogenous variable(s). Studying the process of radicalization is an essential aspect that cannot be overlooked. We will delve deeper into this topic when discussing the limitations of the study. Despite the challenges, it is important for researchers to persist in their efforts to measure radicalization. Instead, it is important for them to recognize that the stability of a concept is influenced more by its position in the research process rather than its inherent stability. To clarify, the concept is considered stable not due to its inherent stability, but rather because of its position within the research process. According to Braddock, various challenges, including the ones mentioned, can be effectively addressed by fostering collaboration and promoting education. Additionally, Braddock emphasizes the significance of continuing essential experimental studies in the field of radicalization. Another potential issue that may arise is insufficient funding for the research. The method involved the use of endogenous variables to test two hypotheses. To assess the outcomes of various counter-narrative approaches and the impact of knowledge, we rely on evidence and theoretical frameworks.
Contrasting Two Approaches To Strategy: Standardization And Customization
One effective strategy to counter the narrative being presented was to provide an alternative account that emphasized the logical aspects of the story while challenging its violent justifications, prompting people to question its credibility. Completing this task was the initial priority. Individuals who were exposed to a narrative about terrorism displayed a significantly lower acceptance of violent norms compared to those who were exposed to a generic counterstory. There was little disparity between the two groups in terms of their willingness to accept violent norms (ViolentN). The levels reported by the GenCN group were significantly higher compared to the levels reported by the TailCN group. Although it can be challenging to quantify variables that are interconnected, the findings indicate that providing generic counter-narratives as a response to widespread terrorist propaganda may not be more effective than solely relying on propaganda. It is indeed true that measuring things that are dependent on other factors can be challenging. Here are several potential explanations for why this situation may be occurring.
Arguing against false information by providing evidence to refute its validity is not a novel concept. However, as mentioned earlier, this strategy carries the possibility of failing. It is possible that GenCN's extended period of control over this situation resulted in unintended consequences. One such consequence is the occurrence of a phenomenon where the withdrawal of information reinforces the acceptance of the initial belief, despite the clear indication of an error. One common belief is that vaccines are responsible for causing autism, while another common belief is that Iraq possesses hidden weapons capable of causing mass destruction. Both myths have been proven false on multiple occasions. The fallacies used in the violent justifications may have appeared more believable compared to the alternatives presented in the GenCN. The presentation of more convincing alternatives could have prevented them from losing power. By providing better alternatives, you have the ability to prevent this situation from occurring. The comprehensive nature of the generic method proved beneficial for the participants involved in the study. This strategy is highly likely to be effective because it is supported by both theoretical and practical reasoning, as well as real-world evidence. Alternatively, it is possible that the individuals who received the study's results were assumed to be unaware of its existence. This is a matter that
requires careful consideration. According to research conducted by Van Eerten and colleagues, it has been found that two-way communications, specifically in the GenCN condition, are more effective when the recipient already possesses prior knowledge about the subject. As previously mentioned, the individuals who were studied identified as agnostics prior to their involvement in the conflict. While ViolentN assisted the participants in gaining a better understanding of the conflict, it is possible that GenCN did not receive sufficient information from ViolentN to function effectively as a two-way network. Schmid and other researchers have explored counternarratives and discovered that false narratives, which present a biased perspective, tend to specifically target individuals who are considered "vulnerable" and may have lower levels of intelligence. The implementation of the two-pronged approach becomes more challenging with the introduction of these new pieces of evidence. This is particularly true for counter-narrative strategies aimed at preventing the dissemination of false stories. The second plan involved a strategy to change the situation by encouraging individuals to create their own narratives about their origins, known as TailCN. The Inoculation Theory was recommended as a strategy for countering the pragmatic perspective on violence. The objective of this strategy was to change people's negative perception of ViolentN by having the system counter their arguments in a manner that made it appear as if the claims reflected their genuine beliefs and reasoning. Individuals who were exposed to the TailCN condition experienced significantly lower levels of "Group Support" and "Attitude Adoption" compared to individuals who were exposed to the GenCN condition, regardless of the specific conditions involved.
According to reactance theorists, the variations between competing narratives can be attributed to the distinct ways in which the creators of these narratives engaged with their intended audience. The situation, known as TailCN, fostered a sense of collaboration rather than competition among people. In the context of strategic narratives, it is important to consider the official plot and how it relates to the cohesion of different participant narratives. When individuals felt that their "freedom to make choices independently" was not at risk, they were less inclined to raise objections to the previous situation. Fewer people would have objected to the first option. To mitigate the negative consequences of causal fallacies, it was crucial for the participants to possess the ability to regulate their own thinking. This was necessary for the individualized approach to be effective, as it required engaging in "System Two" thinking rather than relying solely on "System One" thinking. Currently, there is limited research on the extent to which immunization can enhance individuals' resistance to certain messages. However, some experimental studies have suggested that immunization might indeed increase people's resistance to these messages. The findings presented here contribute significantly to the increasing evidence supporting the use of vaccines to prevent individuals from becoming radicalised. There is uncertainty regarding whether the ability to counter a terrorist story independently would remain effective outside of the lab. As a result, the ecological validity of this approach is being called into question. However, this discovery demonstrates the effectiveness of counter-narrative campaigns at a basic level. To debunk terrorist rhetoric, it is important for people to be more open-minded and less hostile towards alternative narratives. Additionally, it is crucial to restore freedom to the target of terrorism. The primary objective may be to reduce resistance, but its success will vary based on the extent to which the rhetoric has already been deeply embedded. There is a belief among some individuals that the two "tasks" of the alternative narrative have diverged significantly over the course of time. According to most experts, incorporating interactive elements into research studies designed to assess mental effort can enhance the reliability of these studies. The individuals in the GenCN condition, who were instructed to simply observe the experiment without recording any notes, may have displayed less interest compared to those in the TailCN condition. The participants in the TailCN condition were actively engaged in the experiment by taking notes. The reason for supporting this idea is that individuals in the GenCN condition were simply instructed to observe the experiment. It is crucial to consider this matter in relation to the existing policies and procedures established for handling stories related to terrorism. As academics, it is important for us to acknowledge that relying solely
on observation as a tool may not provide us with the necessary depth of understanding required to fully comprehend the complexities of narrative persuasion dynamics. To address this issue effectively, it is important to develop a well-thought-out strategy that involves actively involving the target audience without appearing overly direct or obvious. Cognitive Reflection As A Moderating Factor
As the field of critical thinking has expanded, it has encompassed various applications and areas of research, leading to a clearer distinction between "skills" and "attitude." The objective of this research was twofold. Firstly, it aimed to investigate whether there was a correlation between participants' Need for Cognition (NFC) and their performance on the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT). Secondly, it sought to identify strategies to mitigate the influence of participants' conditions on the variables that are influenced by them. Regarding the last point, the NFC (National Fiction Council) discovered that none of the story settings had any significant impacts or effects, whether they were primary effects or effects resulting from interactions. Although cognitive reflection and need for cognition (NFC) are closely related, their reactions to the stimulus were distinct from each other. Individuals who had high scores on the CRT (Cognitive Reflection Test) did not experience any significant effects or changes when exposed to ViolentN in relation to the variables that were being examined. The JustN condition was developed based on models of dual-process cognition. According to these models, individuals in the JustN condition are expected to have a higher level of cognitive awareness regarding their actions compared to individuals in the ViolentN condition. Research has indicated that individuals who perform well on the Cognitive Reflection Test also demonstrate a greater ability to identify and steer clear of logical fallacies. Having the ability to do this has been associated with having a higher IQ. There is no foolproof solution or method that can consistently persuade or influence people to behave according to your desires. The effectiveness of propaganda relies on the individuals who are the intended audience. While there has been significant focus on the impact of various factors on violent terrorist rhetoric, there has been comparatively less attention given to how these factors influence efforts to counter such rhetoric. This lack of attention has resulted in unforeseen outcomes. The study found that participants who were exposed to generic counter-narratives had varying levels of acceptance towards violence based on their cognitive reflection skills. Specifically, individuals with higher cognitive reflection skills tended to have more acceptance towards violence, while those with lower cognitive reflection skills had less acceptance towards violence. There are several potential factors that could explain the differences in the results. It is possible that GenCN's method, which primarily focused on the content of arguments supporting terrorist violence, did not consider the "metacognitive experience" of human reasoning. It can be challenging to let go of the belief that one's own beliefs and knowledge are correct, even when presented with evidence that contradicts them. It is possible that individuals who scored high on the CRT (Cognitive Reflection Test) had difficulty reconciling their own reasoning with the counterarguments presented to them, resulting in unintended outcomes. Contrary to popular belief, the purpose of cognitive reflection is not to dominate or control intuition, but rather to eliminate it entirely. Individuals who obtained high scores on the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) might have developed a misguided perception of confidence due to the General Cognitive Numeracy (GenCN). As a result, they began to allocate more attention towards ViolentN. These interactions demonstrate that our self-perception influences how we interpret stories and comprehend their meanings. One possible explanation for the ineffectiveness of traditional counter-narrative strategies in preventing radicalization is the ability to see through simplistic terrorist rhetoric.
Restrictions And Prospects
The ongoing investigation faced several methodological challenges and limitations as it aimed to conduct counter-narrative research on radicalization, marking the first of its kind. The participants were required to be skeptical due to the specific design of the experiment. However, it is important to note that the results cannot be generalized beyond the specific setting in which they were obtained. In this case, the study was conducted using a sample from a university and under
four specific conditions. In a previous section, we discussed and evaluated the methodology employed to create measurement models for dependent variables. When analysing the findings of this research, it is crucial to thoroughly consider the construct validity of the variable(s) under investigation. In a controlled laboratory setting, there are ways to reduce various threats to internal validity, including confounding, maturation, and attrition. However, the accuracy of the measurement tools used was compromised because the factors that influenced the accuracy of the results were not consistent. The reason for the impact on the construct validity of the results is that the variables being different played a role in it. The strength of the theoretical framework plays a crucial role in determining the validity of a construct. Researchers studying radicalization face numerous challenges, which could explain the persistently poor quality of measurement models for concepts related to terrorism. While conducting additional experiments may contribute to narrowing the gap and increasing the alignment between the two ideas, it is important to acknowledge that a fundamental theoretical barrier still exists. While the latent variables in this study were developed with a strong theoretical foundation on radicalization, it is important to note that a single theory may not be sufficient to fully explain all aspects of this complex phenomenon. The latent variables used in this study were derived from a theoretical framework. Experimental studies on radicalization's dependent variable can only achieve a limited level of construct validity, which is determined by the complexity and rigor of the guiding framework. The reason for this complexity is that radicalization involves various interconnected components. The size of the first one is increasing, while the second one is beginning to become noticeable. However, due to the complexity of the experimental setup, it was not possible to utilize more comprehensive outcome measures that encompassed additional latent variables. Increasing the effect sizes would have resulted in larger differences between groups, while reducing the concern for Type 1 error. In the context of testing the validity of the null hypothesis, it is possible to choose not to conduct a repeated-measures analysis of variance (MANOVA). The reason why a MANOVA was considered unsuitable is because two distinct models, namely "Argument Adoption" and "Group Support," were utilized to assess the extent to which violence-legitimizing norms were internalized and prevalent. This is the explanation of how the hypothesis was formed. It is crucial to keep in mind that conducting "unprotected" ANOVAs on individual analyses significantly increases the risk of making a Type 1 error.
The initial goodness-of-fit for the multigroup analysis was not satisfactory when examining the interaction between CRT scores on both dependent variables across conditions. Due to this reason, it is advised against conducting additional testing. When conducting moderation analyses, it is crucial to consider the adequacy of the initial model fit. This is because focusing on the goodness of fit of the initial model may lead to an increased risk of making a Type 1 error, even if it is discovered that all models adequately fit the dependent variables. The study involved conducting numerous experiments, which opens opportunities for further research in the future. Explanation models are being developed as part of research on terrorism to enhance our understanding of this complex phenomenon. One way to achieve this is by placing significant emphasis on empiricism and employing experimental methods. To advance their research, future researchers should consider building upon these designs by carefully considering the variables being measured and utilizing established theoretical frameworks. This marks the beginning of a promising era in scientific research, focusing on understanding the process of individuals becoming radicalised and engaging in violent behaviour. In this new era, researchers may have a desire to go beyond simply contributing to existing knowledge about the phenomenon.
REFERENCES
[ 1 ] Arie W. Kruglanski, Jessica R. Fernandez, Adam R. Factor, and Ewa Szumowska, "Cognitive
Mechanisms in Violent Extremism," Cognition 188 (2019): 116-123. [2] Arie W. Kruglanski, Michele J. Gelfand, Jocelyn J. Bélanger, Anna Sheveland, Malkanthi Hetiarachchi, and Rohan Gunaratna, "The Psychology of Radicalization and Deradicalization:
How Significance Quest Impacts Violent Extremism," Political Psychology 35 (2014): 79.
[3] Andrew J. Elliot and Patricia G. Devine, "On the Motivational Nature of Cognitive Dissonance: Dissonance as Psychological Discomfort," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67, no. 3 (1994): 382.
[4] John Horgan, "From Profiles to Pathways and Roots to Routes: Perspectives from Psychology on Radicalization into Terrorism," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 618, no. 1 (2008): 80-94.
[5] Mitchell D. Silber, Arvin Bhatt, and Senior Intelligence Analysts, Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat (New York: Police Department, 2007), 16.
[6] Carthy, S. L., & Sarma, K. M. (2023). Countering terrorist narratives: Assessing the efficacy and mechanisms of change in counter-narrative strategies. Terrorism and Political Violence, 35(3), 569-593.
[7] Frischlich, L., Rieger, D., Morten, A., & Bente, G. (2018). The power of a good story: Narrative persuasion in extremist propaganda and videos against violent extremism. International Journal of Conflict and Violence (IJCV), 12, a644-a644.
[8] Apau, R. (2018). Youth and violent extremism online: countering terrorists exploitation and use of the Internet. African Journal on Terrorism, 7(1), 16-23.
[9] Ilardo, M. (2020). Violent extremism in the Sahel Countering vulnerability to radical narratives: towards a more pragmatic approach.
[10] Makki, M. (2021). Community Resilience and Policy Effectiveness against Violent Extremism in Pakistan. Policy Perspectives on Countering Violent Extremism in Pakistan, 1.
