Don't tread on me: masculine honor ideology in the U.S. and militant responses to terrorism

Using both college students and a national sample of adults, the authors report evidence linking the ideology of masculine honor in the U.S. with militant responses to terrorism. In Study 1, individuals' honor ideology endorsement predicted, among other outcomes, open-ended hostile responses to a fictitious attack on the Statue of Liberty and support for the use of extreme counterterrorism measures (e.g., severe interrogations), controlling for right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and other covariates. In Study 2, the authors used a regional classification to distinguish honor state respondents from nonhonor state respondents, as has traditionally been done in the literature, and showed that students attending a southwestern university desired the death of the terrorists responsible for 9/11 more than did their northern counterparts. These studies are the first to show that masculine honor ideology in the U.S. has implications for the intergroup phenomenon of people's responses to terrorism.     

Americans respond politically to 9/11: understanding the impact of the terrorist attacks and their aftermath

The 9/11 terrorist attacks have had profound effect on U.S. domestic and foreign security policy, leading to several expensive wars and the erosion of civil liberties (under the USA PATRIOT Act). We review evidence on political reactions to the 9/11 attacks and conclude that subjective reactions to terrorism played an important role in shaping support for national security policy in the wake of 9/11. Support for a strong national security policy was most pronounced among Americans who perceived the nation as at threat from terrorism and felt angry at terrorists. In contrast, Americans who were personally affected by the attacks were more likely to feel anxious about terrorism, and this anxiety translated into less support for overseas military action. In addition, Americans who felt insecure after the 9/11 attacks and perceived a high future threat of terrorism were more likely than others to support strong foreign and domestic national security policies. Overall, research on American political reactions to 9/11 suggests that support for a strong government response to terrorism is most likely when members of a population perceive a high risk of future terrorism and feel angry at terrorists.     

Reasons for Conflict: Political Implications of a Definition of Terrorism

This essay analyzes the U.S. political situation before the 2003 invasion of Iraq and ties this conflict to the events of 9/11. The guiding thread of the discussion is the definition of “terrorism” that has led to George W. Bush's declared “war on terrorism.” By means of Hegel's dialectic logic, the essay exposes the problem offered by the category of causality involved in the definition of terrorism: Is terrorism the original “cause” of the war declared on it by the United States (as the Bush administration claims) or is terrorism rather the very “consequence” of that war?     

Effects of viewing 9/11 footage on distress and Islamophobia: a temporally expanded approach

We investigated whether viewing September 11 footage affected peoples’ perceived distress spanning past, present, and anticipated future. Participants (n = 174) were randomly assigned to a 9/11, fear, or neutral condition and completed measures of temporal perceived distress, distress of future terrorism, Islamophobia, and restriction of civil liberties attitudes. Participants in the neutral and fear conditions perceived their 9/11‐related distress as declining over time. Those in the 9/11 condition perceived their distress as higher at present and declining from present (vs. past ratings). Those viewing 9/11 (vs. neutral or fear) footage reported greater future terrorism distress, more prejudice, and greater restriction of civil liberties. These differences were explained by higher 9/11‐related distress ratings for past 5 years, present, and future.     

Terrorism in the Age of the Internet: The Case of Muslim Arab Foreign Terrorist Organizations

This study focuses on Muslim Arab extremism online. It specifically looks at the case of Muslim Arab organizations identified by the U.S. Department of State as Foreign Terrorist Organizations. The use of the Internet to communicate extremist rhetoric is not a new phenomenon nor is it one that is particular to Muslims or Arabs. This study simply focuses on this specific subgroup, partially due to the increased scholarly attention to the topic of terrorism and to the public's heightened interest in the Muslim and the Arab world since 9/11.     

Order in Chaos: Security Culture as Anarchist Resistance to the Terrorist Label

To be a terrorist in the twenty-first century is to occupy an incomparable deviant status in the state's eyes.The United States government has labeled and treated anarchists as potential terrorists for over a century. Since 2001, the U.S.-led “War on Terror” officially sanctioned warrantless surveillance and confinement as a legitimate social control strategy to counter terrorism. This is a sociological study of resistance to the terrorist label in an anarchist community in a post-9/11 world. Security culture is a form of collective resistance that functions as a protective mechanism against the panoptic gaze that the terrorist label authorizes. This study suggests that the authority to wield the terrorist label in a post-9/11 context is a powerful form of social control, affecting members' consciousness, movements, and interactions in everyday life, but does not diminish their capacity for resistance. Rather, it amplifies antipathy toward the state.     

Misreading Islamist Terrorism: The "War Against Terrorism" and Just-War Theory

Abstract: The Bush administration's military war on terrorism is a blunt, ineffective, and unjust response to the threat posed to innocent civilians by terrorism. Decentralized terrorist networks can only be effectively fought by international cooperation among police and intelligence agencies representing diverse nation‐states, including ones with predominantly Islamic populations. The Bush administration's allegations of a global Islamist terrorist threat to the national interests of the United States misread the decentralized and complex nature of Islamist politics. Undoubtedly there exists a “combat fundamentalist” element within Islamism. But the threat posed to U.S. citizens by Islamist terrorism neither necessitates nor justifies as a response massive military invasions of other nations. Not only does the Bush administration's war on alleged “terrorist states” violate the doctrine of just war, but in addition these wars arise from a new, unilateral, imperial foreign‐policy doctrine of “preventive wars.” Such a doctrine will isolate the United States from international institutions and long‐standing allies. The weakening of these institutions and alliances will only weaken the ability of the international community to deter terrorism.     

The role of authoritarianism, perceived threat, and need for closure or structure in predicting post-9/11 attitudes and beliefs

The authors examined relationships among authoritarianism, personal need for closure or structure, perceived threat, and post-9/11 attitudes and beliefs. Participants were 159 undergraduate students in the Southeastern United States. The authors collected data 1 week before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003. Correlation and regression analyses revealed that right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation were significant predictors of support for restricting human rights during the U.S.-led War on Terror, support for U.S. President George W. Bush, and support for U.S. military involvement in Iraq. Right-wing authoritarianism and perceived threat emerged as the strongest predictors of the belief that Saddam Hussein supported terrorism.     

Terrorist Suspect Religious Identity and Public Support for Harsh Interrogation and Detention Practices

Does the U.S. public's support for the use of harsh interrogation and detention practices against terrorism suspects depend upon the religious identity of the alleged perpetrators? Some scholarly research indicates greater public acceptance for abridging the rights of Muslims after 9/11. This is consistent with literature suggesting that heightened perception of threat decreases popular tolerance for racial, ethnic, and religious outgroups. This study executes a survey experiment and finds respondents to be more permissive of the use of extraordinary detention practices, such as indefinite detention and denying suspects access to legal counsel and civilian criminal courts, against terror suspects identified as Muslims. Furthermore, the study reveals that respondents are significantly less likely to treat domestic, right‐wing terrorist suspects with extraordinary detention, suggesting ingroup leniency.     

Searching for and finding meaning in collective trauma: results from a national longitudinal study of the 9/11 terrorist attacks

The ability to make sense of events in one's life has held a central role in theories of adaptation to adversity. However, there are few rigorous studies on the role of meaning in adjustment, and those that have been conducted have focused predominantly on direct personal trauma. The authors examined the predictors and long-term consequences of Americans' searching for and finding meaning in a widespread cultural upheaval--the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001--among a national probability sample of U.S. adults (N=931). Searching for meaning at 2 months post-9/11 was predicted by demographics and high acute stress response. In contrast, finding meaning was predicted primarily by demographics and specific early coping strategies. Whereas searching for meaning predicted greater posttraumatic stress (PTS) symptoms across the following 2 years, finding meaning predicted lower PTS symptoms, even after controlling for pre-9/11 mental health, exposure to 9/11, and acute stress response. Mediation analyses suggest that finding meaning supported adjustment by reducing fears of future terrorism. Results highlight the role of meaning in adjustment following collective traumas that shatter people's fundamental assumptions about security and invulnerability.     

On the So-Called War on Terrorism

Abstract: Since the terrorist attacks on the United States in September 2001, the country has embarked on a so‐called war on terrorism. This essay argues that so‐called war on terrorism has used the pretext of responding to terrorist attacks in the U.S. in September 2001 to wage wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that have objectives other than stamping out terrorism. It further argues that war requires a moral justification that cannot be provided for either the war in Afghanistan or the war in Iraq.     

A Cross‐Cultural Comparison of U.S. and Japanese Trainees’ Emotion‐Recognition Ability

This study investigated the ability of non‐Hispanic White U.S. counseling psychology trainees and Japanese clinical psychology trainees to recognize facially expressed emotions. Researchers proposed that an in‐group advantage for emotion recognition would occur, women would have higher emotion‐recognition accuracy than men, and participants would vary in their emotion‐intensity ratings. Sixty White U.S. students and 60 Japanese students viewed photographs of non‐Hispanic White U.S. and Japanese individuals expressing emotions and completed a survey assessing emotion‐recognition ability and emotion‐intensity ratings. Two four‐way mixed‐factor analyses of variance were performed, examining effects of participant nationality/race, participant gender, poser nationality/race, and poser gender on emotion‐recognition accuracy scores and intensity ratings. Results did not support the in‐group advantage hypothesis, rather, U.S. participants had higher accuracy rates than Japanese trainees overall. No gender differences in accuracy were found. However, respondents varied in their intensity ratings across gender and nationality. Implications for training applied psychology students and for future research are presented.     

Authoritarian reactions to terrorist threat: Who is being threatened,the Me or the We?

Endorsement of authoritarian attitudes has been observed to increase under conditions of terrorist threat. However, it is not clear whether this effect is a genuine response to perceptions of personal or collective threat. We investigated this question in two experiments using German samples. In the first experiment (N = 144), both general and specific authoritarian tendencies increased after asking people to imagine that they were personally affected by terrorism. No such effect occurred when they were made to think about Germany as a whole being affected by terrorism. This finding was replicated and extended in a second experiment (N = 99), in which personal and collective threat were manipulated orthogonally. Authoritarian and ethnocentric (ingroup bias) reactions occurred only for people highly identified with their national ingroup under personal threat, indicating that authoritarian responses may operate as a group‐level coping strategy for a threat to the personal self. Again, we found no effects for collective threat. In both studies, authoritarianism mediated the effects of personal threat on more specific authoritarian and ethnocentric reactions. These results suggest that the effects of terrorist threat on authoritarianism can, at least in part, be attributed to a sense of personal insecurity, raised under conditions of terrorist threat. We discuss the present findings with regard to basic sociomotivational processes (e.g., group‐based control restoration, terror management) and how these may relate to recent models of authoritarianism.     

Assessing the Internal Validity of Image Theory in the Context of Turkey‐U.S. Relations

This research examines propositions of international image theory in the context of Turkey‐U.S. relations. Study 1 derives and tests hypotheses regarding the interrelationships among theory components—perceived strategic relations, images, and behavioral tendencies. In addition, it extends image theory research by examining (1) the role of emotions, as well as (2) how variations in the strength of ingroup identifications (national and religious identity) inform our understanding of international images. Study 2 extends the findings of Study 1 by considering different dimensions of cultural status (cultural heritage vs. modernity) and by differentiating two targets of emotion: the U.S. government versus American citizens. Evidence is provided regarding the need for incorporation of emotions and group identifications onto the image theory framework. The results point to the need for more investigation of images and their relationships with other components of the theory in various intergroup contexts.     

Sharing Values

In this paper, we consider one of the ways in which shared valuing is normatively significant. More specifically, we analyze the processes that can reliably provide normative grounding for the standing to rebuke others for their failures to treat something as valuable. Yet problems with grounding this normative standing quickly arise, as it is not immediately clear why shared valuing binds group members together in ways that can sustain the collective pursuit of shared ends. Responding to this difficulty is no easy task, since doing so requires demonstrating that the standing to call on one's fellow participants because of shared forms of valuing is not merely a side effect of members authority to call on their fellow participants to do their fair share in a collective endeavor. This is, to the best of our knowledge, a problem that the sparse literature on shared valuing has yet to consider. We argue that the best way to address this difficulty is to consider the real‐world complexity of how forms of valuing come to be shared within well‐structured collectives and how members internalize the evaluative tendencies that sustain shared valuing. To accomplish those ends, we examine two different ways that shared valuing is cultivated within well‐structured groups and the corresponding ways that members internalize forms of valuing; specifically, we examine differences between forms of valuing that are passed downward from the top of a group, as they are in the U.S. Military, and forms of valuing that bubble‐up through local patterns of interaction, as they do among the Zapatistas of Chiapas.     

MEMORY,INVISIBILITY, AND THE OAK CREEK GURDWARA MASSACRE

The racist terrorism experienced by Sikh, Muslim, Arab, and South Asian American communities after 9/11 has never abated, although it has disappeared from the nation's contemporary discourse and its memory of that traumatic time. The intensely stressful and personal violence still plaguing the Sikh American community makes farcical any discussion of a ‘post-racial’ society. The erasure of its experience during and since 9/11 is well illustrated and symbolized by the disappearance of Balbir Singh Sodhi from our national memory of the time. The national hate crime epidemic has been fed and sustained by white Christian Americans who demonize racialized non-Christians, sometimes in racialized terms. The hate crime wave against Sikh Americans has been largely ignored by the media since 9/11, preventing wider understanding of the ongoing problem, and ensuring Sikh Americans were still largely unknown to their fellow Americans when the Oak Creek massacre occurred. What images the media did offer of turbaned, bearded men after 9/11 exacerbated the situation, exemplifying the prototypical images of a terrorist already deeply embedded in the national psyche, as seen in the mistreatment of Sher Singh. The politics of racial division must end, and we must drive those who divide us from the public realm with demands for patriotic integrity.     

TEMPERAMENTAL ADAPTABILITY,PERSISTENCE, AND REGULARITY: PARENTAL RATINGS OF NORWEGIAN INFANTS AGED 6 TO 12 MONTHS,WITH SOME IMPLICATIONS FOR PREVENTIVE PRACTICE

There is a need for standardized measures of infant temperament to strengthen current practices in prevention and early intervention. The present study provides Norwegian data on the Cameron‐Rice Infant Temperament Questionnaire (CRITQ; J.R. Cameron & D.C. Rice, 1986a), which comprises 46 items and is used within a U.S. health maintenance organization. The CRITQ was filled out by mothers and fathers at 6 and again at 12 months as part of a longitudinal study of mental health during the first years of life (the “Little in Norway” study, N = 1,041 families enrolled; V. Moe & L. Smith, 2010). Results showed that internal consistencies were comparable with U.S. data. The temperament dimensions of persistence, adaptability, and regularity had acceptable or close‐to‐acceptable reliabilities in the U.S. study as well as in this study, and also were unifactorial in confirmatory factor analysis. These dimensions are the focus in this article. Findings concerning parents’ differential ratings of their infants on the three dimensions are reported, as is the stability of parents’ ratings of temperament from 6 to 12 months. In addition, results on the relation between temperament and parenting stress are presented. The study suggests that temperamental adaptability, persistence, and regularity may be relevant when assessing infant behavior, and may be applied in systematic prevention trials for families with infants. The inclusion of concepts related to individual differences in response tendencies and regulatory efforts may broaden the understanding of parent—infant transactions, and thus enrich prevention and sensitizing interventions with the aim of assisting infants’ development.