Search

Few prior studies have examined the extent to which the behavior and characteristics of political extremists are related to their position within radical groups. In this paper we concentrate on one of the most fundamental distinctions in groups: That between leaders and followers. Our main goal is to investigate the comparative propensity of leaders and followers to engage in political violence. In a sample of individuals who have committed ideologically motivated political crimes in the United States (N = 1,331). we found that even though leaders were more ideologically committed to the group's goals and ideologies, they were at the same time less likely to engage in violent acts. Moreover, we found that leaders in radical criminal organizations shared many characteristics with leaders in noncriminal organizations. Specifically, in comparison to followers, they were more often male, older, and they were more likely to belong to an ethnic majority. We consider implications for future research and policy of the fundamental conclusion that compared to leaders, followers in terrorist organizations are more likely to engage in violent acts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Displaying markers of coalitional affiliation is a common feature of contemporary life. In situations in which interaction with members of rival coalitions is likely, signaling coalitional affiliation may simultaneously constitute an implicit challenge to opponents and an objective commitment device, binding signalers to their coalitions. Individuals who invite conflict, and who cannot readily back out of conflict, constitute a greater threat than those who avoid conflict and preserve the option of feigning neutrality. As a consequence, the former should be viewed as more formidable than the latter. Recent research indicates that relative formidability is summarized using the envisioned physical size and strength of a potential antagonist. Thus, individuals who display markers of coalitional affiliation should be conceptualized as more physically imposing than those who do not. We tested this prediction in two experiments. In Study 1, conducted with U.S. university students, participants inspected images of sports fans' faces. In Study 2, conducted with U.S. Mechanical Turk workers, participants read vignettes depicting political partisans. In both studies, participants estimated the physical formidability of the target individuals and reported their own ability to defend themselves; in Study 2, participants estimated the target's aggressiveness. Consonant with predictions, targets depicted as signaling coalitional affiliation in situations of potential conflict were envisioned to be more physically formidable and more aggressive than were those not depicted as signaling thusly. Underscoring that the calculations at issue concern the possibility of violent conflict, participants' estimates of the protagonist's features were inversely correlated with their ability to defend themselves. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two studies investigated retaliatory responses to actual honor threats among members of an honor culture (Turkey) and a dignity culture (northern United States). The honor threat in these studies was based on previous research which has shown that honesty is a key element of the conception of honor and that accusations of dishonesty are threatening to one's honor. In both studies, participants wrote an essay describing the role of honesty in their lives and received feedback on their essay accusing them of being dishonest (vs. neutral feedback). Turkish participants retaliated more strongly than did northern U.S. participants against the person who challenged their honesty by assigning him/her to solve more difficult tangrams over easy ones (Study 1) and by choosing sensory tasks of a higher level of intensity to complete (Study 2). Study 2 added a relational honor condition, in which participants wrote about honesty in their parents' lives and examined the role of individual differences in honor values in retaliation. Endorsement of honor values significantly predicted retaliation among Turkish participants in the relational honor attack condition, but not among northern U.S. participants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]