Cargando…

Terrorism, Radicalisation, Extremism, Authoritarianism and Fundamentalism: A Systematic Review of the Quality and Psychometric Properties of Assessments

BACKGROUND: Currently, terrorism and suicide bombing are global psychosocial processes that attracts a growing number of psychological and psychiatric contributions to enhance practical counter-terrorism measures. The present study is a systematic review that explores the methodological quality repo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Scarcella, Akimi, Page, Ruairi, Furtado, Vivek
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5176288/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28002457
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166947
_version_ 1782484794385367040
author Scarcella, Akimi
Page, Ruairi
Furtado, Vivek
author_facet Scarcella, Akimi
Page, Ruairi
Furtado, Vivek
author_sort Scarcella, Akimi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Currently, terrorism and suicide bombing are global psychosocial processes that attracts a growing number of psychological and psychiatric contributions to enhance practical counter-terrorism measures. The present study is a systematic review that explores the methodological quality reporting and the psychometric soundness of the instruments developed to identify risk factors of terrorism, extremism, radicalisation, authoritarianism and fundamentalism. METHOD: A systematic search strategy was established to identify instruments and studies developed to screen individuals at risk of committing extremist or terrorist offences using 20 different databases across the fields of law, medicine, psychology, sociology and politics. Information extracted was consolidated into two different tables and a 26-item checklist, reporting respectively background information, the psychometric properties of each tool, and the methodological quality markers of these tools. 37 articles met our criteria, which included a total of 4 instruments to be used operationally by professionals, 17 tools developed as research measures, and 9 inventories that have not been generated from a study. RESULTS: Just over half of the methodological quality markers required for a transparent methodological description of the instruments were reported. The amount of reported psychological properties was even fewer, with only a third of them available across the different studies. The category presenting the least satisfactory results was that containing the 4 instruments to be used operationally by professionals, which can be explained by the fact that half of them refrained from publishing the major part of their findings and relevant guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: A great number of flaws have been identified through this systematic review. The authors encourage future researchers to be more thorough, comprehensive and transparent in their methodology. They also recommend the creation of a multi-disciplinary joint working group in order to best tackle this growing contemporary problem.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5176288
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51762882017-01-04 Terrorism, Radicalisation, Extremism, Authoritarianism and Fundamentalism: A Systematic Review of the Quality and Psychometric Properties of Assessments Scarcella, Akimi Page, Ruairi Furtado, Vivek PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Currently, terrorism and suicide bombing are global psychosocial processes that attracts a growing number of psychological and psychiatric contributions to enhance practical counter-terrorism measures. The present study is a systematic review that explores the methodological quality reporting and the psychometric soundness of the instruments developed to identify risk factors of terrorism, extremism, radicalisation, authoritarianism and fundamentalism. METHOD: A systematic search strategy was established to identify instruments and studies developed to screen individuals at risk of committing extremist or terrorist offences using 20 different databases across the fields of law, medicine, psychology, sociology and politics. Information extracted was consolidated into two different tables and a 26-item checklist, reporting respectively background information, the psychometric properties of each tool, and the methodological quality markers of these tools. 37 articles met our criteria, which included a total of 4 instruments to be used operationally by professionals, 17 tools developed as research measures, and 9 inventories that have not been generated from a study. RESULTS: Just over half of the methodological quality markers required for a transparent methodological description of the instruments were reported. The amount of reported psychological properties was even fewer, with only a third of them available across the different studies. The category presenting the least satisfactory results was that containing the 4 instruments to be used operationally by professionals, which can be explained by the fact that half of them refrained from publishing the major part of their findings and relevant guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: A great number of flaws have been identified through this systematic review. The authors encourage future researchers to be more thorough, comprehensive and transparent in their methodology. They also recommend the creation of a multi-disciplinary joint working group in order to best tackle this growing contemporary problem. Public Library of Science 2016-12-21 /pmc/articles/PMC5176288/ /pubmed/28002457 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166947 Text en © 2016 Scarcella et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Scarcella, Akimi
Page, Ruairi
Furtado, Vivek
Terrorism, Radicalisation, Extremism, Authoritarianism and Fundamentalism: A Systematic Review of the Quality and Psychometric Properties of Assessments
title Terrorism, Radicalisation, Extremism, Authoritarianism and Fundamentalism: A Systematic Review of the Quality and Psychometric Properties of Assessments
title_full Terrorism, Radicalisation, Extremism, Authoritarianism and Fundamentalism: A Systematic Review of the Quality and Psychometric Properties of Assessments
title_fullStr Terrorism, Radicalisation, Extremism, Authoritarianism and Fundamentalism: A Systematic Review of the Quality and Psychometric Properties of Assessments
title_full_unstemmed Terrorism, Radicalisation, Extremism, Authoritarianism and Fundamentalism: A Systematic Review of the Quality and Psychometric Properties of Assessments
title_short Terrorism, Radicalisation, Extremism, Authoritarianism and Fundamentalism: A Systematic Review of the Quality and Psychometric Properties of Assessments
title_sort terrorism, radicalisation, extremism, authoritarianism and fundamentalism: a systematic review of the quality and psychometric properties of assessments
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5176288/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28002457
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166947
work_keys_str_mv AT scarcellaakimi terrorismradicalisationextremismauthoritarianismandfundamentalismasystematicreviewofthequalityandpsychometricpropertiesofassessments
AT pageruairi terrorismradicalisationextremismauthoritarianismandfundamentalismasystematicreviewofthequalityandpsychometricpropertiesofassessments
AT furtadovivek terrorismradicalisationextremismauthoritarianismandfundamentalismasystematicreviewofthequalityandpsychometricpropertiesofassessments