The Socio-Ideological Means Model of Radicalization

Abstract

The present dissertation posits a novel theory of radicalization expanded from and complementary to the 3N model of radicalization (Kruglanski, Bélanger, & Gunaratna, 2019), holding that narrative and network, while conceptually distinct, are, in reality, operationally inextricable. The socio-ideological means model argues that radicalization is a consequence of the process by which a socio-ideological means is selected to attain the ultimate goal of meeting the universal, fundamental, human need for significance (Kruglanski et al., 2022). The “socio-ideology” is defined as a narrative shared by the network of which the individual is member and to which the individual refers. Without a network, real or imagined; online or in-person; past, present, or future, a narrative will not be considered valid and adherence to it will not be considered valuable. Without a shared narrative, however, a network will not wield influence over its members, who will not feel bonded to one another. The socio-ideological means model holds that significance is the core social motivation underlying political movements and political action, including political violence. The stronger the need for significance, the more susceptible one will be to significance-granting socio-ideologies, including those which advocate violent extremism. Moreover, as the need for significance becomes more strongly activated, the set of socio-ideologies perceived as available to meet the need expands, to include even those which contradict one another or might otherwise be considered extreme. The present dissertation illustrates the socio-ideological means model using examples from past research on terrorism and radicalization, decades of social psychological literature, and empirical support from correlational and experimental research results. Finally, directions for future research based on the socio-ideological means model and its derived hypotheses are suggested.