https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5630-9814
![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Utilizing a sample drawn to represent the general U.S. population, the present study experimentally tested whether a call-center’s disclaimer regarding limits to caller confidentiality (i.e., that operators would be required to refer calls to law enforcement if callers were to discuss anyone who was a danger to themselves or others) affected disclosures related to a third party’s involvement with terrorist groups, gangs, or such party’s commission of assault and/or non-violent crimes.
Disclaimer type did not significantly affect the number of terrorism-related disclosures. Furthermore, it did not significantly affect either the number of gang-related disclosures or reports of assault. However, the law enforcement referral disclaimer/condition reduced the number of disclosures of non-violent crimes that were not directly related to terrorism, gangs, or assault, though its effect accounted for less than one percent of the variance between conditions. Additionally, disclaimer type did not significantly affect willingness to recommend the call-center, nor did that effect vary significantly by age or sex. Implications for the call-center’s role in addressing ideologically motivated violence (terrorism, violent extremism), as a form of secondary/targeted prevention, are discussed.
Notes
1. Waleed Aly, “How to Stop a Lone-Wolf Terrorist? Australia Has a Plan,” New York Times (2017). https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/02/opinion/australia-lone-wolf-terrorists-waleed-aly.html; Jocelyn J. Bélanger, “The Rise and Fall of Violent Extremism: The Science behind Community-based Interventions,” in The Motivation-Cognition Interface (New York: Routledge, 2017), 170–95; see D. Koehler, “Structural Quality Standards for Work to Intervene with and Counter Violent Extremism,” Stuttgart: German Institute on Radicalization and De-Radicalization Studies (2017). http://www.kpebw.de/wp-content/uploads/Handbuch-KPEBW-engl.pdf; see Paul Thomas, Michele Grossman, Shamim Miah, and Kris Christmann, “Community Reporting Thresholds: Sharing Information with Authorities Concerning Violent Extremist Activity and Involvement in Foreign Conflict: A UK Replication Study,” CREST (2017). https://crestresearch.ac.uk/download/3530/
2. Scott Malone, “For Families of Radicalizing U.S. Youth, a Help Line,” Reuters (2017). https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-security-help-line/for-families-of-radicalizing-u-s-youth-a-help-line-idUSKBN17F160
3. See Koehler (see note 1); see Thomas et al. (see note 1).
4. “What Is Crimestoppers” (2018). Retrieved from https://crimestoppers-uk.org/about-us/.
5. Ibid.
6. Michael J. Williams, John G. Horgan, and William P. Evans, “The Critical Role of Friends in Networks for Countering Violent Extremism: Toward a Theory of Vicarious Help-Seeking,” Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression 8, no. 1 (2016): 45–65. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19434472.2015.1101147
7. Michael J. Williams, John G. Horgan, William P. Evans, and Jocelyn J. Bélanger, “Key Points and Principles: Text-Enabled CVE Gatekeeper Intervention Help-Line & Referral System.” Technical report furnished to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Contract: HSHQDC-16-C-B0028) (2017).
8. “Homegrown violent extremists are those who encourage, endorse, condone, justify, or support the commission of a violent criminal act to achieve political, ideological, religious, social, or economic goals by a citizen or long-term resident of a Western country who has rejected Western cultural values, beliefs, and norms. Homegrown violent extremists are a diverse group of individuals that can include U.S.-born citizens, naturalized citizens, green card holders or other long-term residents, foreign students, or illegal immigrants. Regardless of their citizenship status, these individuals intend to commit terrorist acts inside Western countries or against Western interests abroad.” U.S. Department of Justice, “Homegrown Violent Extremism,” Office of Community Oriented Policing Services Awareness Brief (2014). https://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-w0738-pub.pdf
9. Williams et al., “The Critical Role…” (see note 6).
10. p. 429, Paul Gill, John Horgan, and Paige Deckert, “Bombing Alone: Tracing the Motivations and Antecedent Behaviors of Lone-Actor Terrorists,” Journal of Forensic Sciences 59, no. 2 (2014): 425–35.
11. John G. Horgan, Paul Gill, Noemie Bouhana, James Silver, and Emily Corner, “Across the Universe?: A Comparative Analysis of Violent Behavior and Radicalization across Three Offender Types with Implications for Criminal Justice Training and Education,” U.S. Department of Justice, National Criminal Justice Reference Service (2016). https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/249937.pdf
12. In contrast, primary prevention focuses on protecting the general population from developing a given problem, and tertiary prevention focuses on the remediation/rehabilitation of a problem among those who have concretely manifested it (in the present case, those who already have perpetrated an illegal act associated with terrorism or violent extremism). Michael J. Williams, John G. Horgan, and William P. Evans, “Evaluation of a Multi-Faceted, U.S. Community-Based, Muslim-Led CVE Program” (2016). https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/249936.pdf
13. For example, see Australia New Zealand Counter-Terrorism Committee, National Counter-Terrorism Plan, 4th ed. Commonwealth of Australia (2017). https://www.nationalsecurity.gov.au/Media-and-publications/Publications/Documents/ANZCTC-National-Counter-Terrorism-Plan.PDF; HM Government, “Contest the United Kingdom’s Strategy for Countering Terrorism” (2011). https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/97995/strategy-contest.pdf; HM Government, “Channel Duty Guidance: Protecting Vulnerable People from Being Drawn into Terrorism” (2015). https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/425189/Channel_Duty_Guidance_April_2015.pdf; The White House, “Strategic Implementation Plan for Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States” (2016). https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/2016_strategic_implementation_plan_empowering_local_partners_prev.pdf
14. Gill et al. (see note 10); Williams et al., “The Critical Role…” (see note 6).
15. e.g., Florida Mental Health Act, Florida Mental Health Act, Fl. Stat. 394.451-394.47891 (2013).
16. Koehler (see note 1).
17. Ibid., personal communication, August 22, 2017.
18. Thomas et al. (see note 1).
19. Franz Faul, Edgar Erdfelder, Axel Buchner, and Albert-Georg Lang, “Statistical Power Analyses Using G* Power 3.1: Tests for Correlation and Regression Analyses,” Behavior Research Methods 41, no. 4 (2009): 1149–60.
20. Daniel M. Oppenheimer, Tom Meyvis, and Nicolas Davidenko, “Instructional Manipulation Checks: Detecting Satisficing to Increase Statistical Power,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 45, no. 4 (2009): 867–72. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.03.009.
21. Michael R. Maniaci and Ronald D. Rogge, “Caring about Carelessness: Participant Inattention and Its Effects on Research,” Journal of Research in Personality 48 (2014): 61–83. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2013.09.008.
22. Oppenheimer et al. (see note 20).
23. Katrina McCoy, William Fremouw, Elizabeth Tyner, Carl Clegg, Jill Johansson-Love, and Julia Strunk, “Criminal-Thinking Styles and Illegal Behavior among College Students: Validation of the PICTS,” Journal of Forensic Sciences 51, no. 5 (2006): 1174–77. doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00216.
24. e.g., see Stephanie Madon, Max Guyll, Kyle C. Scherr, Sarah Greathouse, and Gary L. Wells. “Temporal Discounting: The Differential Effect of Proximal and Distal Consequences on Confession Decisions,” Law and Human Behavior 36, no. 1 (2012): 13. doi:10.1007/s10979-011-9267-3.; Ibid.; Laurie L. Ragatz, Ryan J. Anderson, William Fremouw, and Rebecca Schwartz, “Criminal Thinking Patterns, Aggression Styles, and the Psychopathic Traits of Late High School Bullies and Bully-Victims,” Aggressive Behavior 37, no. 2 (2011): 145–60. doi:10.1002/ab.20377.
25. Demand characteristics are features of a situation that inadvertently suggest to participants how they are expected to respond/answer/behave: in contrast to how they might otherwise, naturally do so. Andrew M. Colman, A Dictionary of Psychology (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2015).
26. Social desirable responding is the tendency of respondents to provide answers that they deem more socially acceptable than might be their genuine answers. Paul J. Lavrakas, Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2008). doi:10.4135/9781412963947.
27. Acquiescence bias is the tendency for respondents to agree with a questionnaire’s statements. Ibid.
28. Maniaci and Rogge (see note 21).
29. Koehler (see note 1).
30. See Tom R. Tyler, “Restorative Justice and Procedural Justice: Dealing with Rule Breaking,” Journal of Social Issues 62, no. 2 (2006): 307–26. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2006.00452.x.
31. For example, see Australia New Zealand Counter-Terrorism Committee; HM Government (2011 and 2015); and The White House (see note 13).
32. Williams et al., “Evaluation of a…” (see note 12).
33. Ibid.
34. Gill et al. (see note 10).
35. Horgan et al. (see note 11).
36. Gill et al. (see note 10); Williams et al., “Evaluation of a…” (see note 12).
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Michael J. Williams
Michael J. Williams (Georgia State University) has co-led evaluations of programs designed to counter violent extremism: including one in collaboration with the LAPD, and the first evaluation of a U.S. domestic CVE program (funded by the National Institute of Justice, to evaluate components of the “Montgomery County Model” of metro Washington, D.C.). A former National Science Foundation graduate research fellow, and former Senior Advisor to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), his background includes training, led by the American Evaluation Association, on sustainability evaluation, evaluating coalitions, systems evaluation, and developmental evaluation.
In addition to DHS, Dr. Williams has consulted with White House staff, the U.S. Attorneys’ Office, the Australian Attorney-General’s Department, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and Public Safety Canada regarding design and evaluation of both local and national CVE frameworks. He serves on the editorial board of the journal Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict, and his own publications include “A utilization-focused guide for conducting terrorism risk reduction program evaluations,” and “A social psychological critique of the Saudi terrorism risk reduction initiative.” His forthcoming publications include the first college textbook of its kind: “Countering violent extremism: Designing and evaluating evidence-based programs” (Routledge publishers).
Jocelyn J. Bélanger
Jocelyn J. Bélanger is a professor of psychology at New York University Abu Dhabi. He earned his master's degree and doctorate in Social Psychology from the University of Maryland, College Park. His research focuses on human judgment, self-regulation, and the psychology of terrorism. This interdisciplinary topic has led him to collaborate on several international large-scale projects with the National Consortium for Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), examining the motivational underpinnings of radicalization and deradicalization among terrorists located in the Middle-East and South-East Asia. In March 2015, he was appointed by the City of Montreal to establish the first deradicalization center in North America to tackle homegrown terrorism (CPRLV). Dr Bélanger is the recipient of several awards such as the APA Dissertation Research Award and the Guy Bégin Award for the Best Research Paper in Social Psychology. He is also the author of numerous scientific articles published in top-tier journals of his discipline including American Psychologist, Psychological Review, and the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. His research is funded by the Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada as well as the US Department of Homeland Security.
John Horgan
John Horgan is Distinguished University Professor at Georgia State University where he is a faculty member in the Department of Psychology and Global Studies Institute. His books include The Psychology of Terrorism 2nd Edition, published in over a dozen languages worldwide. He serves on the editorial boards of several academic journals, including American Psychologist, Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, and Terrorism and Political Violence. He is a member of the Research Working Group of the FBI’s National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime.
William P. Evans
William Evans is a Professor in the Human Development and Family Studies program at the University of Nevada, Reno, and holds joint appointments with Cooperative Extension and with the Interdisciplinary Doctoral Program in Social Psychology. As a developmental scientist and evaluation specialist, he has received over six million in extramural funding to support his research activities, and has authored over 75 peer-reviewed journal articles. He has served on numerous national advisory committees, including the Federal Interagency Working Group on Youth, the Land Grant University National Evaluation Outcome Committee, and the National Advisory Committee of the CDC Suicide Prevention Center. Dr. Evans has provided leadership to several national evaluation studies, including cluster evaluation projects with randomized multi-level designs.