People talk as though terrorists are ‘other’ than us, and while their actions are certainly ‘other’, experts on terrorists have discovered their backgrounds are often very normal. Terrorists are only human — too human — and that can be even more frightening.
Attempts to create a profile of an average terrorist have proved extremely difficult – as difficult as creating a profile of an average ‘normal’ person. Research into the personality traits of terrorists reveals they have nothing particular in common. Terrorists share the same range of personality traits as might be found in any average office.
The stereotype that terrorists are psychopaths, or are mentally unstable in some way, is a controversial point. The psychologist Jerrold Post has suggested that terrorists are impelled to commit these acts by deep psychological problems. The weight of evidence, however supports the view that terrorists, while they often have very strong religious or ideological beliefs, are generally quite sane.
Heskin (1984) has studied members of the Irish Repulican Army (the IRA), Rasch (1979) a group of West Germany terrorists and Becker (1984), members of the Baader-Meinhoff Gang. All of these found little evidence of psychopathology.
Apart from that it makes sense for terrorist leaders to avoid recruiting psychopaths to their cause: the mentally unstable would prove themselves liabilities to the organisation.
If anything, then, terrorists are notable for their normality, for their ability to blend into the background and remain unnoticed. Those recruited tend to be of average appearance, normal in behaviour in the situation they are in, fairly young – between 20 and 25 – and reasonably well educated, often to university level.
The sociology and psychology of terrorism: who becomes a terrorist and why? [Summary of research, PDF file]
More on London bombings: Psychology of Terrorism, Why We Are Glued To The TV and Guardian Journos Disorientated
Since the terrorist attacks in London yesterday, we have all been glued to the TV for the latest news. The images and stories of blood splattered survivors and long shots of those less fortunate have shocked and saddened us. And yet we can’t look away, despite the fact that research suggests that watching may cause Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Why do we seek out images and reports that are likely to be upsetting and perhaps disturbing?
As the dust settles on the
Psychology suffered a crushing blow yesterday as Tom Cruise announced he did not believe in it. Psychologists and psychiatrists across the world shrugged their shoulders, admitted defeat and packed their couches and salivating dogs away.
A team of researchers at University College London wanted to find out if hypnosis by any other name is still hypnosis. Two groups of people were put through the same hypnotic induction, but the first group were told it was ‘hypnosis’, while the second were told it was ‘relaxation’.
BBC News brings us the exciting headline that a brain scan can spot women faking orgasms. Unfortunately it provides no clue as to how to entice a woman to have sex inside a brain scanner. The best advice is to set your sights on beds or even sofas for the time being.
Oliver James, writing in The Guardian, draws attention to research that investigates the connection between achievement and thinness in women. Studies have shown that a female preference for smaller breasts and buttocks when viewing female silhouettes is associated with ‘masculine’ careers and greater academic achievement. Could this be partly because women with a curvy shape are perceived, on average, to be less competent and less intelligent?