Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39645658›Full record

ArticleBehavioral sciences & the law

Risk of What and Why? Disaggregating Pathways to Extremist Behaviours in Individuals Susceptible to Violent Extremism.

Caitlin Clemmow, Nicola Fowler, Amber Seaward, Paul Gill

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavioral sciences & the law. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Caitlin ClemmowDepartment of Security & Crime Science, UCL, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5136-1565
Nicola FowlerPrevent In-Place Team, Birmingham & Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Amber SeawardDepartment of Security & Crime Science, UCL, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-2287-7025
Paul GillDepartment of Security & Crime Science, UCL, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9606-9197

Funding

Horizon 2020 Framework Programme 758834
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Best practice in violent extremist risk assessment and management recommends adopting a Structured Professional Judgement (SPJ) approach. The SPJ approach identifies relevant, evidence-based risk and protective factors and requires experts to articulate hypotheses about a) what the person might do (risk of what), and b) how they've come to engage in the concerning behaviour (and why) (Logan 2021) to inform who, needs to do what, and when. Whilst the field continues to move towards adopting an SPJ approach, there remains a gap between what is known empirically and what is needed in practice. We apply psychometric network modelling to a sample of 485 individuals entered into Channel, the UK's preventing and countering violent extremism (P/CVE) program. We model the system of interactions from which susceptibility to violent extremism emerges, providing data driven evidence which speaks to risk of what and why. Our research highlights a way to generate evidence which captures the multifactorial nature of susceptibility to violent extremism, to support professional decision making in the context of an SPJ approach.

Indexed as

TerrorismViolenceAdultAggressionFemaleHumansMalePsychometricsRisk AssessmentUnited Kingdomradicalisationrisk assesmentstructured professional judgementterrorismviolent extremism

Identifiers

PMID39645658
PMCPMC11961345

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.