Online Library

Drawing from interviews with 39 online extremism and terrorism researchers, this article provides an empirical analysis of these researchers’ experiences with institutional ethics processes. Discussed are the harms that these researchers face in the course of their work, including trolling, doxing, and mental and emotional trauma arising from exposure to terrorist content, which highlight the need for an emphasis on researcher welfare. We find that researcher welfare is a neglected aspect of ethics review processes however, with most interviewees not required to gain ethics approval for their research resulting in very little attention to researcher welfare issues. Interviewees were frustrated with ethics processes, indicating that committees oftentimes lacked the requisite knowledge to make informed ethical decisions. Highlighted by interviewees too was a concern that greater emphasis on researcher welfare could result in blockages to their ‘risky’ research, creating a ‘Catch 22’: interviewees would like more emphasis on their (and colleagues’) welfare and provision of concomitant supports, but feel that increased oversight would make gaining ethics approval for their research more difficult, or even impossible. We offer suggestions for breaking the impasse, including more interactions between ethics committees and researchers; development of tailored guidelines; and more case studies reflecting on ethics processes.

VOX-Pol Blog post.

VOX-Pol Blog post.

Incels are a sub-culture community of men who forge a sense of identity around their perceived inability to form sexual or romantic relationships. In recent years, there has been a small, but growing, number of violent attacks that have been attributed to individuals who identify as incels. The purpose of this study was to use a large sample of incels from the UK and US to establish (a) their demographic make-up; (b) the consistency of their attitudes and beliefs; (c) their adherence to a common world view, (d) how they network with other incels; (e) whether there are cross-cultural differences between incels from the UK and US in the above; and finally, whether there is a predictive relationship between incel mental health, networking and ideology and the extent of their harmful attitudes and beliefs.

The report begins by outlining some of the broad knowledge around the idea of mass persuasion, before focusing specifically on lessons that have been learned in the field of P/CVE. This is followed by a synthesis of existing “How To” guides for the creation of strategic communications from a range of policy and practitioner stakeholders. Then, we discuss specific knowledge of audiovisual content, particularly considerations for short-form video content. The report concludes by outlining how stakeholders, including social media platforms, can monitor, measure, and evaluate the impact of this type of content.

This guide is intended to help creators producing or thinking about making shortform video content seeking to counter extremism. Our goal is not to tell you what to create; your original content is what makes your channel creative and organic. Instead, we hope to provide you with tools and tips to create stronger content that harnesses evidence from decades of academic research. Creating short-form video content (with expected video length to be 15-60 seconds) that counters extremism (both violent and nonviolent) and promotes positive values is a powerful way to engage with your audience. To help you succeed in this mission, we have compiled a guide that not only inspires creativity but also provides practical tips for further success.