Scientia et Securitas
Volume/Issue:
Volume 4: Issue 1
Erőszakos radikalizmus kockázatbecslése – elméleti háttér és kutatási eredmények
Author:
József Haller Nemzeti Közszolgálati Egyetem, Kriminálpszichológia Tanszék Budapest Magyarország; University of Public Service, Department of Criminal Psychology Budapest Hungary

Search for other papers by József Haller in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
Pages:
59–68
Online Publication Date:
31 Aug 2023
Publication Date:
31 Aug 2023
Article Category:
Research Article
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1556/112.2023.00135
Keywords:
database; radicals; terrorism; risk assessment; artificial intelligence;
Keywords (Hungarian):
adatbázis; radikálisok; terrorizmus; kockázatbecslés; mesterséges intelligencia;
Open access

Összefoglalás.

A tanulmány a terrorveszély felismerésének és kezelésének elméleti és technikai összefoglalását nyújtja. Kiemelten foglalkozik a kockázatbecslés technikájával, és bemutat egy új, mesterséges intelligencián alapuló eljárást, amelynek segítségével 90%-os sikereséllyel lehet azonosítani azokat, akik terrortámadásokat hajthatnak végre. E mellett, az eljárás által szolgáltatott adatok felhasználásával sikerült leírni a radikálisok két típusát, amelyeket megközelítőleg az „alárendelt/erőszakos” és a „vezető/nem-erőszakos” szavakkal jellemezhetnénk. A két csoport között jelentős különbségek voltak a családi háttér, iskolázottság, radikalizálódási folyamat, állampolgársági múlt, bűnözői előélet, és szerepvállalási jellegzetességek tekintetében.

Summary.

Although Hungary is in a privileged position regarding the threat of terrorism, the history of other countries suggests that similar good positions can be temporary. The threat of terrorism can be investigated by several scientific approaches. After reviewing these, we analyze the theoretical and technical background of risk assessment, and present the results of our recently concluded research. In this we examined the US database PIRUS, which contained 112 types of personal data of 2,148 radicals. About half of them did carry out terrorist attacks the other half did not. Based on the individual characteristics of the radicals, the XGBoost machine learning algorithm correctly identified the perpetrators of the terrorist attacks with a probability of 87%. By using the data provided by the software, it was also possible to describe two types of radicals, which could be roughly characterized by the words “subordinate/violent” and “leader/non-violent”. The former usually had a criminal but not a radical background. They converted late in life (if their radicalization was of a religious nature) and adopted radical ideas as adults (if their radicalization was nonreligious in nature). They played a subordinate role in terrorist groups, required training and were largely influenced by social media. They also belonged to low social classes and had many personal problems. In contrast, non-violent extremists were characterized by a family tradition of radicalism, mostly had no criminal past, belonged to higher social strata, and played leading roles in terrorist organizations. Instead of committing attacks, they engaged in illegal activity by supporting terrorist organizations. The two main types probably consist of subtypes. Compared to violent extremists who were radicalized in prison, for example, those who were not radicalized in prison were mostly foreigners, were often unemployed despite their higher education, and compared to those radicalized in prison, they committed lesser crimes before radicalization. Similar subgroups occurred in both main groups, but their detailed characterization requires further research. Our findings suggest that artificial intelligence can become a good tool for the risk assessment of radicals concerning their proneness to perform terrorist attacks. Moreover, the risk assessment tool employed here may be useful in typifying radicals, and studying their radicalization routes.

  • 1

    Abrahms, M. (2012) The political effectiveness of terrorism revisited. Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 45. pp. 366–393. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414011433104

  • 2

    Al-Zewairi, M., Naymat, G. (2017) Spotting the Islamist radical within: religious extremists profiling in the United States. Procedia Computer Science, Vol. 113. pp. 162–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.08.336

  • 3

    Basuchoudhary, A., Bang, J. T. (2018) Predicting terrorism with machine learning: lessons from “predicting terrorism: a machine learning approach”. Peace Economics, Peace Science and Public Policy, Vol. 24. pp. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2018-0040

  • 4

    Becker, M. H. (2019) When extremists become violent: examining the association between social control, social learning, and engagement in violent extremism. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, Vol. 44. Issue 12. pp. 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610X.2019.1626093

  • 5

    Borum, R. (2011) Radicalization into violent extremism I: a review of social science theories. Journal of Strategic Security, Vol. 4. No. 4. pp. 7–36. https://doi.org/10.5038/1944-0472.4.4.1

  • 6

    Bowie, N. G. (2018) 30 Terrorism databases and data sets: a new inventory. Perspectives on Terrorism, Vol. 12. No. 5. pp. 51–61. https://www.universiteitleiden.nl/binaries/content/assets/customsites/perspectives-on-terrorism/2018/issue-5/bowie.pdf. Accessed on 17 July 2023.

  • 7

    Cook, A. N. (2014) Risk Assessment and Management of Group-Based Violence. Ph.D. thesis. Burnaby, BC: Simon Fraser University

  • 8

    Ding, F., Ge, Q., Jiang, D., Fu, J., Hao, M. (2017) Understanding the dynamics of terrorism events with multiple-discipline datasets and machine learning approach. PLoS ONE, Vol. 12. No. 6. e0179057. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179057

  • 9

    Guarrieri, T. R., Meisel, C. J. (2019) Extremists and unconventional weapons: examining the pursuit of chemical and biological agents. Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression, Vol. 13. pp. 23–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/19434472.2019.1698633

  • 10

    Ivaskevics, K., Haller, J. (2022) Risk Matrix for Violent Radicalization: A Machine Learning Approach. Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 13. Art No. 745608. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.745608

  • 11

    Jasko, K., LaFree, G., & Kruglanski, A. (2017) Quest for significance and violent extremism: the case of domestic radicalization. Political Psychology, Vol. 38. Issue 5. pp. 815–831. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12376

  • 12

    Jensen, M., James, P., Tinsley, H. (2015) Profiles of Individual Radicalization in the United States: Preliminary Findings. START Research Brief. https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/PIRUS%20Research%20Brief_Jan%202015.pdf [Letöltve: 2023. 01. 30.]

  • 13

    Jensen, M., LaFree, G. (2016) Empirical Assessment of Domestic Radicalization (EADR). Final Report of the PIRUS Project, National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), College Park, MD. https://www.ncjrs.Gov/Pdffiles1/Nij/Grants/250481.Pdf [Letöltve: 2023. 01. 30.]

  • 14

    LaFree, G., Jensen, M. A., James, P. A., Safer-Lichtenstein, A. (2018) Correlates of violent political extremism in the United States. Criminology, Vol. 56. Issue 2. pp. 233–268. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12169

  • 15

    LaFree, G., Jiang, B., & Porter, L. C. (2020) Prison and violent political extremism in the United States. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, Vol. 36. pp. 473–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-019-09412-1

  • 16

    Ligon, G., Windisch, S., Braun, C. L., Logan, M. K., Derrick, D. C., & Armstrong, G. (2019) Salafi Jihadist Inspired Profiles and Radicalization Clusters (SPARC). In: Armstrong, G., Derrick, D., Hienz, J., Ligon, G., & Southers, E. (eds) Characteristics of Homegrown Violent Extremist Radicalization. Final Report to the United States Department of Homeland Security. Los Angeles, CA: University of Southern California. pp. 32–64. https://sci.usc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/CREATE-Characteristics-of-Homegrown-Violent-Extremist-Radicalization.pdf [Letöltve: 2023. 02. 02.]

  • 17

    Lloyd, M., Dean, C. (2015) The development of structured guidelines for assessing risk in extremist offenders. Journal of Threat Assessment and Management, Vol. 2. No. 1. pp. 40–52. https://doi.org/10.1037/tam0000035

  • 18

    McCauley, C., Moskalenko, S. (2008) Mechanisms of political radicalization: pathways toward terrorism. Terrorism and Political Violence, Vol. 20. Issue 3. pp. 415–433. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546550802073367

  • 19

    Meloy, J. R. (2018) The operational development and empirical testing of the terrorist radicalization assessment protocol (TRAP–18). Journal of Personality Assessment, Vol. 100. Issue 5. pp. 483–492. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2018.1481077

  • 20

    Moghaddam, F. M. (2005) The staircase to terrorism: a psychological exploration. American Psychologist, Vol. 60. No. 2. pp. 161–169. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.2.161

  • 21

    Monahan, J. (2012) The individual risk assessment of terrorism. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, Vol. 18. No. 2. pp. 167–205.

  • 22

    Pelzer, R. (2018) Policing of terrorism using data from social media. European Journal of Security Research, Vol. 3. pp. 163–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41125-018-0029-9

  • 23

    Pressman, D. E., Flockton, J. (2012) Calibrating risk for violent political extremists and terrorists: the VERA 2 structured assessment. The British Journal of Forensic Practice, Vol. 14. Issue 4. pp. 237–251. https://doi.org/10.1108/14636641211283057

  • 24

    Pyrooz, D. C., LaFree, G., Decker, S. H., James, P. A. (2017) Cut from the same cloth? A comparative study of domestic extremists and gang members in the United States. Justice Quarterly, Vol. 35. Issue 1. pp. 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2017.1311357

  • 25

    Sarma, K. M. (2017) Risk assessment and the prevention of radicalization from nonviolence into terrorism. American Psychologist, Vol. 72. No. 3. pp. 278–288. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000121

  • 26

    Skeem, J. L., & Monahan, J. (2011) Current directions in violence risk assessment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, Vol. 20. Issue 1. pp. 38–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721410397271

  • 27

    Talreja, D., Nagaraj, J., Varsha, N. J., & Mahesh, K. (2017) Terrorism analytics: learning to predict the perpetrator. In: Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communications and Informatics. Piscataway, IEEE. pp. 1723–1726. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACCI.2017.8126092

  • 28

    Tolan, G. M., Soliman, O. S. (2015) An experimental study of classification algorithms for terrorism prediction. International Journal of Knowledge Engineering, Vol. 1. No. 2. pp. 107–112. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJKE.2015.V1.18

  • 29

    Torlay, L., Perrone-Bertolotti, M., Thomas, E., & Baciu, M. (2017) Machine learning–XGBoost analysis of language networks to classify patients with epilepsy. Brain Infection, Vol. 4. pp. 159–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40708-017-0065-7

  • 30

    van Buuren, S., Groothuis-Oudshoorn, K. (2011) Multivariate imputation by chained equations in R. Journal of Statistical Software, Vol. 45. pp. 1–68. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v045.i03

  • 31

    Varaine, S. (2019) Revisiting the economics and terrorism nexus: collective deprivation, ideology and domestic radicalization in the US (1948–2016). Journal of Quantitative Criminology, Vol. 36. pp. 667–699. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-019-09422-z

  • 32

    Verma, C., Malhotra, S., & Verma, V. (2018) Predictive modeling of terrorist attacks using machine learning. International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics, Vol. 119. No. 15. pp. 49–61.

  • 33

    Youngblood, M. (2020) Extremist ideology as a complex contagion: the spread of far-right radicalization in the United States between 2005-2017. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Vol. 7. Art. No. 49. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00546-3

  • 34

    URL1: National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (USA): Global Terrorism Database. https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/ [Letöltve: 2023. 01. 30.]

  • 35

    URL2: National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (USA): Profiles of Individual Radicalization in the United States (PIRUS). https://www.start.umd.edu/data-tools/profiles-individual-radicalization-united-states-pirus [Letöltve: 2023. 01. 31.]

  • Collapse
  • Expand
Cover Scientia et Securitas
Scientia et Securitas
Online ISSN:
2732-2688

Editor-in-Chief:

Founding Editor-in-Chief:

  • Tamás NÉMETH

Managing Editor:

  • István SABJANICS (Ministry of Interior, Budapest, Hungary)

Editorial Board:

  • Attila ASZÓDI (Budapest University of Technology and Economics)
  • Zoltán BIRKNER (University of Pannonia)
  • Valéria CSÉPE (Research Centre for Natural Sciences, Brain Imaging Centre)
  • Gergely DELI (University of Public Service)
  • Tamás DEZSŐ (Migration Research Institute)
  • Imre DOBÁK (University of Public Service)
  • Marcell Gyula GÁSPÁR (University of Miskolc)
  • József HALLER (University of Public Service)
  • Charaf HASSAN (Budapest University of Technology and Economics)
  • Zoltán GYŐRI (Hungaricum Committee)
  • János JÓZSA (Budapest University of Technology and Economics)
  • András KOLTAY (National Media and Infocommunications Authority)
  • Gábor KOVÁCS (University of Public Service)
  • Levente KOVÁCS (Óbuda University)
  • Melinda KOVÁCS (Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences (MATE))
  • Miklós MARÓTH (Avicenna Institue of Middle Eastern Studies )
  • Judit MÓGOR (Ministry of Interior National Directorate General for Disaster Management)
  • József PALLO (University of Public Service)
  • István SABJANICS (Ministry of Interior)
  • Péter SZABÓ (Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences (MATE))
  • Miklós SZÓCSKA (Semmelweis University)

Ministry of Interior
Science Strategy and Coordination Department
Address: H-2090 Remeteszőlős, Nagykovácsi út 3.
Phone: (+36 26) 795 906
E-mail: scietsec@bm.gov.hu

DOAJ

2023  
CrossRef Documents 32
CrossRef Cites 15
Days from submission to acceptance 59
Days from acceptance to publication 104
Acceptance Rate 81%

2022  
CrossRef Documents 38
CrossRef Cites 10
Days from submission to acceptance 54
Days from acceptance to publication 78
Acceptance Rate 84%

2021  
CrossRef Documents 46
CrossRef Cites 0
Days from submission to acceptance 33
Days from acceptance to publication 85
Acceptance Rate 93%

2020  
CrossRef Documents 13
CrossRef Cites 0
Days from submission to acceptance 30
Days from acceptance to publication 62
Acceptance Rate 93%

Publication Model Gold Open Access
Submission Fee none
Article Processing Charge none

Scientia et Securitas
Language Hungarian
English
Size A4
Year of
Foundation		 2020
Volumes
per Year		 1
Issues
per Year		 4
Founder Academic Council of Home Affairs and
Association of Hungarian PhD and DLA Candidates
Founder's
Address		 H-2090 Remeteszőlős, Hungary, Nagykovácsi út 3.
H-1055 Budapest, Hungary Falk Miksa utca 1.
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Publisher's
Address		 H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Responsible
Publisher		 Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
Applied
Licenses		 CC-BY 4.0
CC-BY-NC 4.0
ISSN ISSN 2732-2688 (online), 3057-9759 (print)
   

Monthly Content Usage

Abstract Views Full Text Views PDF Downloads
Oct 2024 0 182 10
Nov 2024 0 98 7
Dec 2024 0 24 8
Jan 2025 0 54 5
Feb 2025 0 93 5
Mar 2025 0 66 6
Apr 2025 0 0 0