Abstract
The purpose of this research is to experimentally test whether counter-narratives are effective to reduce people’s support and willingness to join Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Integrating psychological reactance theory (Brehm, 1966) and need for closure (NFC; Kruglanski, 2004), we predicted that exposing people to counter-narratives when they are at greater risk of radicalization (high NFC individuals) would be counterproductive and enhance their support for ISIS. Participants (N = 886 American Muslims) were randomly assigned to a 3 × 3 factorial experimental design varying the source (United States Government, Imam, ISIS defector), and the content (social, political, and religious) of the counter-narrative while comparing these groups to a control message. Results show an overall small positive effect of counter-narratives (β = −0.107, p = 0.043), but also evidence for greater support for ISIS in individuals at greater risk of radicalization (β = 0.154, p = 0.005). Results also show that the content was more important than the source: A political narrative was the most effective, and this result is consistent across different sources although an ISIS defector is the most effective messenger. These findings challenge the widespread assumption that counter-narratives are effective against violent extremism. In fact, they accelerate the very phenomenon that governments and policy makers are trying to undermine. Therefore, policy makers should avoid including them in their armamentarium to tackle violent extremism.
Highlights
Despite its recent territorial loss, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) remains one of the deadliest, most active terrorist groups of our time (Institute for Economics and Peace, 2018)
The purpose of this research was to test the effect of counter-narratives to reduce support for ISIS using a 3 × 3 factorial experimental design varying the source of the narrative (United States Government, ISIS defector, and Imam) and the content of the narrative while comparing these groups to a control message
Integrating psychological reactance theory and need for closure (NFC), the purpose of this research was to answer two fundamental questions related to counter-narratives: (1) Can they reduce the appeal of ISIS among American Muslims, and (2) are they effective with atrisk individuals? counter-narratives have been part of virtually all counterterrorism strategies around the globe, the present research is the only study testing whether they are effective to mitigate support for a terrorist organization
Summary
Despite its recent territorial loss, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) remains one of the deadliest, most active terrorist groups of our time (Institute for Economics and Peace, 2018). Counter-Narratives Against ISIS by radical Islam: since 9/11, of the 476 individuals arrested domestically for being connected to jihadist terrorism, the overwhelming majority (75%) has been United States citizens (Williams et al, 2018). Beyond flagging and taking down ISIS’ online content, counterterrorism strategies have relied primarily on reducing the appeal of ISIS’ ideology using counter-narratives, defined as an “intentional and direct communication strategy, within a political, policy, or military context, to discredit messaging of a violent extremist nature” Some are state-sponsored messages (e.g., United States State Department “Run—do not walk to ISIS land”); others include appeals from religious clerics or ISIS defectors as they are both perceived to be credible voices to challenge ISIS’ narrative
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
