7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Militant Extremist Mindset and the Assessment of Radicalization in the General Population

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Abstract. This paper presents new data and reviews the available evidence pointing to the existence of three main ingredients of militant extremist mindset (MEM). Three different methods of item development identified factors that we have labeled Nastiness, Grudge, and Excuse. In other words, there are in our midst nasty people who are more prepared than others to accept, approve, or even advocate the use of violence. When such people feel a grudge, in that they see somebody as threatening to themselves (or to members of the group they belong to) or think that the world is not a hospitable place in which to live, they may resort to violence. This violence is often accompanied by an excuse or justification that refers to a higher authority or a “noble” principle such as religiosity or utopianism. Although all three ingredients may be open to intervention, Grudge might be the most amenable. Social policies related to immigration and procedures for dealing with protest counterculture may be effective in reducing MEM. The most important, however, is the need to espouse principles of diversity and tolerance.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Attitudes and the Prediction of Behavior: A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature

          S. Kraus (1995)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Forming attitudes that predict future behavior: a meta-analysis of the attitude-behavior relation.

            A meta-analysis (k of conditions = 128; N = 4,598) examined the influence of factors present at the time an attitude is formed on the degree to which this attitude guides future behavior. The findings indicated that attitudes correlated with a future behavior more strongly when they were easy to recall (accessible) and stable over time. Because of increased accessibility, attitudes more strongly predicted future behavior when participants had direct experience with the attitude object and reported their attitudes frequently. Because of the resulting attitude stability, the attitude-behavior association was strongest when attitudes were confident, when participants formed their attitude on the basis of behavior-relevant information, and when they received or were induced to think about one- rather than two-sided information about the attitude object.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              An other perspective on personality: meta-analytic integration of observers' accuracy and predictive validity.

              The bulk of personality research has been built from self-report measures of personality. However, collecting personality ratings from other-raters, such as family, friends, and even strangers, is a dramatically underutilized method that allows better explanation and prediction of personality's role in many domains of psychology. Drawing hypotheses from D. C. Funder's (1995) realistic accuracy model about trait and information moderators of accuracy, we offer 3 meta-analyses to help researchers and applied psychologists understand and interpret both consistencies and unique insights afforded by other-ratings of personality. These meta-analyses integrate findings based on 44,178 target individuals rated across 263 independent samples. Each meta-analysis assessed the accuracy of observer ratings, as indexed by interrater consensus/reliability (Study 1), self-other correlations (Study 2), and predictions of behavior (Study 3). The results show that although increased frequency of interacting with targets does improve accuracy in rating personality, informants' interpersonal intimacy with the target is necessary for substantial increases in other-rating accuracy. Interpersonal intimacy improved accuracy especially for traits low in visibility (e.g., Emotional Stability) but only minimally for traits high in evaluativeness (e.g., Agreeableness). In addition, observer ratings were strong predictors of behaviors. When the criterion was academic achievement or job performance, other-ratings yielded predictive validities substantially greater than and incremental to self-ratings. These findings indicate that extraordinary value can gained by using other-reports to measure personality, and these findings provide guidelines toward enriching personality theory. Various subfields of psychology in which personality variables are systematically assessed and utilized in research and practice can benefit tremendously from use of others' ratings to measure personality variables.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                jid
                Journal of Individual Differences
                Hogrefe Publishing
                1614-0001
                2151-2299
                April 4, 2018
                2018
                : 39
                : 2
                : 88-98
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ]School of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Australia
                [ 2 ]Department of Psychology, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Australia
                [ 3 ]Department of Psychology, University of Belgrade, Serbia
                [ 4 ]Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, USA
                Author notes
                Lazar Stankov, School of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2008, Australia, lazar.stankov@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                jid_39_2_88
                10.1027/1614-0001/a000253
                622c1626-8363-4f94-bd59-a63a76c7713f
                Copyright @ 2018
                History
                : December 9, 2016
                : June 6, 2017
                : July 29, 2017
                Categories
                Original Article

                Assessment, Evaluation & Research methods,Psychology,General behavioral science
                vile world,excuse,grudge,utopianism,pro-violence,nastiness

                Comments

                Comment on this article