Online Library

VOX-Pol Blog post.

Little is known about online behaviours of violent extremists generally or differences compared to non-violent extremists who share ideological beliefs. Even less is known about desistance from posting behaviour. A sample of 99 violent and non-violent right-wing extremists to compare their online patterns of desistance within a sub-forum of the largest white supremacy web-forum was analysed. A probabilistic model of desistance was tested to determine the validity of criteria set for users reaching posting desistance. Findings indicated that the criteria predicted “true” desistance, with 5% misidentification. Each consecutive month without posting in the sub-forum resulted in a 7.6% increase in odds of posting desistance. There were no significant differences in effects for violent versus non-violent users, though statistical power was low.

VOX-Pol Guest Lecture Series, Spring 2024: Data Collection in Online Terrorism and Extremism Research

There has been a growing interest among researchers, practitioners, and policymakers to analyze the online activities of extremists and terrorists. As studies in this research area have increased, various data collection techniques have emerged to address key research questions, ranging from manual extraction to computational tools to collect online information. This lecture examines the strengths and limitations of commonly used data collection methods in online terrorism and extremism research. We draw from our research experiences and highlight ethical dilemmas with collection methods in practice. We then set forth suggestions for progressing research in this space. For more information on data collection in online terrorism and extremism research, see our recent article in Studies in Conflict & Terrorism as part of a special issue on the strengths and struggles of different methods of research on radicalization, extremism, and terrorism: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1057610X.2024.2361957?src=exp-la

Ryan Scrivens is an Assistant Professor in the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. He is also an Associate Director at the International CyberCrime Research Centre at Simon Fraser University and a Research Fellow at the VOX-Pol Network of Excellence. He is the recipient of the 2022 Early Career Impact Award from the American Society of Criminology’s Division on Terrorism and Bias Crimes.

Steven Chermak is a Professor in the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. He is the co-creator of several databases including the Extremist Crime Database (ECDB), the Extremist Cybercrime Database (ECCD), and The American School Shooting Study (TASSS). He is the recipient of the 2021 Distinguished Scholar Award from the American Society of Criminology’s Division on Terrorism and Bias Crimes.

VOX-Pol Blog post.

VOX-Pol Blog post.

The online presence of incels, or involuntary celibates, has been an increasing security concern for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers in recent years, given that self-identified incels – including Alek Minassian and Elliot Rodger – used the Internet to disseminate incel ideology and manifestos prior to committing acts of violence. However, little is empirically known about the incel movement in general or their online communities in particular. The present study draws from a set of comments from r/Incels, a now defunct but once popular subreddit dedicated to the incel community, and compares the most highly-upvoted comments (n = 500) to a random set of other comments (n = 500) in the subreddit. This qualitative analysis focuses on identifying subcultural discourse that is widely supported and engaged with by members of the online community and the extent to which incels utilize this online space to reaffirm deviant behavior. Our study underscores the importance, as well as the difficulties, of drawing from online sources like web-forums to generate new knowledge on deviant communities and behaviors. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of this analysis, its limitations, and avenues for future research.