Characteristics of Past Terrorists: Securing U.S. Government Facilities

Characteristics of Past Terrorists: Securing U.S. Government Facilities

Prepared by: Josh Valdez

 

INTRODUCTION

            Ideology of globalization has subsided since the ending of the Cold War. However, terrorist networks have adopted the same tactics and command foundation behind global control and the organized process of destruction within government relations. Within terrorist organizations, sub departments are formed to specialize in recruiting, funding, retaining membership, and logistics. Terrorist organization target critical infrastructure facilities are selected which are most commonly government facilities (physical or virtual) with symbolic value that are central to a community, state, or country (Bordei, 2015).  In the years following the attack on the World Trade Centers, national security has shifted their focus on “lone-wolf” terrorism due to the increase presence of single issue attacks performed by clash groups of small numbers. The more these “lone-wolf” terrorists have become more present, the easier it is for large group organizations to plan and carry forth attacks under the disguise of those single man terrorist attacks (Marshall et al. 2007).

            Terrorism has become a growing concern for many governments around the world, but largely has been targeted toward those nations who have conflicting ideology such as religion, culture, and political views. The terrorist attacks present in these countries are based off of primarily two components which consist of opportunity of mass individuals being affected and prime press and media coverage (Kteily et al. 2014; Marques, Yzerbyt, and Leyens 1988). These terrorism groups have targeted individuals to perform the attack who are ideologically indoctrinated, corrupt, blackmailed, and easily shaken. In recent attacks, those who carry out the act aren’t motivated by money or political positioning, but rather, incentivized by religious blessings or vengeance for a loved one killed as a result of the cause (Miller, Maner, and Becker 2010). Women have been more effectively used by terrorist organizations due to cultural differences between the presumed duties of men and women within these terrorist sub-cultures, groups have found that women are less likely to be detained by law enforcement thus avoiding body searches, and women’s cultural clothing is easier to conceal weapons, ammunition, and explosives (Dalton and Asal 2011).

            There are many types of terrorist attacks that must be taken into consideration when analyzing the potential for terrorism attacks. Terrorism can be manifested in tragic events resulting in a death count, virtual or cyber-terrorism, financial terrorism, and fear tactics to manipulate or control a population (Lizardo and Bergesen 2003). Collecting knowledge on structural characteristics can help us better understand these terrorist networks and those who are involved. Three aspects need to be taken into consideration when analyzing group characteristics of a potentially lethal terrorist network (Lindelauf, Borm, and Hamers 2009). First, we must consider if the network is structured hierarchically by perhaps a criminal network driven by a common ideology. Second, are there members who play brokerage roles between groups or subgroups, perhaps sharing a common subgroup such as military or religion? Third, are these networks based from a relationship base, like family or acquaintances through a recognizable structure (Ozgul, 2016)?

            Amongst some of the most heavily targeted facilities by such groups are United States government chemical facilities. In a report released in 2006, The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was given authority to require these facilities to meet Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS). These plans include security vulnerability and potential risk assessments. US congress has reported that 68% of the 3,900 the regulated facilities still lack an approved safety plan (Kosal, 2006). The purpose of this report is to help identify those individual and group characteristics of past known terrorists to help analyze current anti-terrorism procedures to ensure that measures are being taken to track and identify potential terrorist organizations before they strike. In this report, sociodemographic characteristics such as race, age, gender, education, and marital status will be analyzed from past known terrorists to help us better understand risk groups and individuals. This report will also analyze recruitment, roles, membership, and nationality and type of listed terrorists to help further understand if both group and individual characteristics are associated with U.S. Government facilities as the primary intended target.

METHODS

For our analysis, the data used is the American Terrorism Study, 1980-2002 (ICPSR 4639). The goal of the study was to create a database where criminological theories and governmental policies could be challenged and evaluated. The American Terrorism Study began in 1989 with the help of Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Terrorist Research and Analytical Center released a list of persons indicted as a result of investigation under the FBI's Counterterrorism Program. This database consists of approximately 80 variables ranging from demographic information, data on terrorist groups and the type of intended target, prosecution and defense data, and count/case outcome. Because this dataset includes all known convicted terrorists it does not reflect as a sample, therefore no sample weight was applied.

Dependent Variable

Data which was obtained from the United States District Court case records from years 1980 through 2002, included information about terrorist preferred intended target and actual targets of the group. The ICPSR dataset has masked the names of the respondent’s names, companies, and organizations in an effort to maintain confidentiality of such individuals. For this report the “intended target-primary” variable has been recoded to indicate U.S. government facilities (recruiting stations, U.S. Monuments, U.S. agencies) and non-U.S. government targets (airliners, museums, facilities from other countries, and individuals).

Independent Variables

The independent variables are primarily data gathered by the FBI investigators on known convicted terrorists. The included persons on this dataset must have been indicted under a federal “domestic security/terrorism investigation” between 1980 and 2002. The data reported is a result of the FBI release of lists to principle investigators. We recognize that the dataset is approximately 98% complete, with a few exceptions due to defendants who remained fugitive.

The variables used to measure sociodemographic characteristics will consist of the variable race (white, black, white Hispanic, and other), age (25 or younger, ages 26-35, ages 36-45, ages 46 or older), education (high school/GED or less, some college or associates degree, bachelor’s degree or more, and unknown), sex, marital status (married, single, divorced/other, and not known). I chose to include some of the unknown or not known variables due to the high level of participants that fell into these categories on other variables where the not known or other category had less participating cases, the variable was excluded.

Individual level characteristics include how each participant was recruited which was categorized into three organized groups (organization, personal, and not known). The group organization consists of recruitments such as in prison, college, church, a law group, a visit from an active member, or through an association with another group. Personal factors include through a newsletter, self-start, founder of a group, volunteer, and through a personal friend or marriage. Other variables that are present in individual level characteristics are classifying participants by their role in the organization (leader and subordinate). Also taken into consideration is the length of the individual’s membership (less than 2 years, 3-8 years, 8 or more years, and not known). The last variable looked at within this category was if the individual was labeled as a domestic or international terrorist. Group characteristics that will be included is if military training/experience is present are type of terrorism organization the group identifies with, such as political, international, or situational (environmental or single issue).

RESULTS

In Table 1, demonstrates the basic layout of our sample size as different personal, group and sociodemographic factors affect the intended target of known terrorists analyzing against two groups US government facilities and non-US government facilities. In this table we can see that the white race report to be the highest race to target US government facilities (64%) and non-US government facilities (76%) compared to the other three ethnic groups. While we do see amongst black, white Hispanic, and other race terrorists demonstrate a higher frequency of targeting US government facilities as opposed to non-US government facilities.

Those 25 years or younger report attacking US government facilities more as opposed to non-US Facilities (31% vs 13%), while those 46 and older report less attacks on US facilities as opposed to attacking non-US government facilities (9% vs 21 %). These descriptive statistics show that majority of the terrorists included in this study are male (96%). Those married or divorced/other reported selecting a non-US government facility as their intended target, while those single and with a marital status unknown chose an intended target that was a US government facility. Some key characteristics when analyzing the group and individual characteristic statistics are shows that a large portion of international origin and international type terrorist groups selected their intended target to be a US government facility (90%).  Also, when taking into account the low frequency count of the variable, those without military experience show a significant report of US government facilities being the intended target (99%).

 

Table 1: Cross-tabulation of Sociodemographic, Individual, and Group Characteristics with Intended Target

American Terrorism Study, 1980-2002 (ICPSR 4639)

 

 

Government Facility

 

Non-Government Facility

 

Total

Characteristics

n

%

n

%

n

%

Race:

 

 

 

 

 

 

White

2735

64.29

1663

76.21

4398

68.33

Black

1032

24.26

432

19.80

1464

22.75

White Hispanic

201

4.72

60

2.75

261

4.06

Other

286

6.72

27

1.24

313

4.86

Age:

 

 

 

 

 

 

25 or younger

1196

30.53

259

12.90

1455

24.55

26-35

1004

25.63

652

32.47

1656

27.94

36-45

1352

34.51

670

33.37

2022

34.12

46 and older

366

9.34

427

21.26

793

13.38

Sex:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Female

98

2.30

151

6.72

249

3.83

Male

4161

97.70

2095

93.28

6256

96.17

Education:

 

 

 

 

 

 

High School/GED or less

16

.38

644

41.34

660

11.47

Some College or Associates

393

9.37

487

31.26

880

15.30

Bachelor or Higher

1108

26.42

306

19.64

1414

24.58

Unknown

2677

63.83

121

7.77

2798

48.64

Marital Status:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Married

2050

48.86

1029

60.18

3079

52.13

Single

934

22.26

344

20.12

1278

21.64

Divorced/Other

49

1.17

314

18.36

363

6.15

Not Known

1163

27.72

23

1.35

1186

20.08

Recruitment:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Organization

1780

42.06

255

19.23

2035

36.61

Personal

863

20.39

179

13.50

1042

18.75

Not Known

1589

37.55

892

67.27

2481

44.64

Role:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leader

1610

38.47

914

48.11

2524

41.48

Subordinate

2575

61.53

986

51.89

3561

58.42

Terrorist Label:

 

 

 

 

 

 

International

3848

90.48

986

43.84

4834

74.35

Domestic

405

9.52

1263

56.16

1668

25.65

Group Type:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Political

426

10.00

1209

54.71

1635

25.27

International

3833

90.00

938

42.44

4771

73.75

Situational

0

.00

63

2.85

63

.97

Military Experience:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

5

.57

 

175

46.05

 

180

14.24

No

879

99.43

 

205

53.95

 

1084

85.76

 

Represented in Table 2 it shows descriptive statistics for the organization type and length of membership in months across the terrorist labels identified. Domestic terrorists report have longest membership in their terrorist organizations compared to international terrorists. The table does show that the average terrorist has been a member of their organization no matter what type, an average of about 66 months (5 ½ years) before being indicted.

Table 2: ANOVA – Type of Terrorism and Length of Membership

American Terrorism Study, 1980-2002 (ICPSR 4639)

 

 

 

 

95% Confidence Interval for Mean

Between Groups

 

 

Length of Membership

Type of Terrorism

Mean

N

Std. Deviation

Lower Bound

Upper Bound

F

Sig.

Domestic

79.54

1318

32.94

77.76

81.32

138.88

.000

International

62.41

4365

34.50

61.39

63.43

 

 

Total

66.38

5683

34.90

65.48

67.29

 

 

.

Chart 1 shows a contrast between domestic (79.54 months) and international (62.41) terrorists showing a shorter membership time for international terrorists compared to domestic terrorists. The t-value (16.36) also manifests the level of significance (2 tailed) at p<.001 *** meaning that the relationship between the variables are considered to be statistically significant.

Length of Membership in Months

t

Sig. (2-tailed)

Equal Variances not Assumed

16.36

.000

Table 3: Cross-tabulation of Role in Terrorism and Military Experience

American Terrorism Study, 1980-2002 (ICPSR 4639)

 

 

Military Experience

Role in Terrorism

Leader

 

Subordinate

 

Total

n

%

n

%

n

%

Yes

111

15.02

105

20.19

216

17.16

No

628

84.98

415

79.81

1043

82.84

Total

739

100.00

520

100.00

1259

100.00

In Table 3, previous military experience was reported in two groups, yes and no. The table shows that identified leaders within terrorist organizations (15.02%) reported having prior military experience compared to those leaders who did not have previous military experience (84.98%).  Table 3 also shows us the importance that the Chi-Square report is considered still to be significant but at low levels suggesting that there is a slight correlation between military experience and roles within terrorism.

Chi-Square= 5.74, p=.017*

Note:  %= unweighted percent   n=unweighted sample

 

In Table 4, the information presented is the estimated adjusted odds ratio for the intended target being a US government facility while controlling for demographics, socioeconomic characteristics, individual, and group characteristics. Presented in model 1, I controlled for the differences in race, sex, age and marital status of those known past terrorists. When comparing black, white Hispanic, and other race all report greater odds of targeting a US facility compared to the white ethnicity, each race when compared to their white counterparts is considered to be statistically significant (p<.001). Males reported having a statistically significant greater odd when comparing against their female counterparts (p<.001). Within the age category, ages 26-35 report a 78% lesser odd of targeting a US government facility, ages 36-45 continued to follow the trend at 75% lesser odds, and those 46-older all reported having less of an adjusted odds ratios of 73% when compared to those of ages 25 years or younger. The listed age groups were also considered to be statistically significant (p<.001). Concerning marital status, when compared to married individuals, divorced/other reported having a statistically significant (p<.001) lesser odd of targeting a US government facility. Single participants reported only a 16% lesser odd of their intending start being a US government facility than their married counterparts which was almost statistically significant. Unknown marital statuses reported greater adjusted odds which are considered significant (p<.001) in comparison to married terrorists.

            In model 2, I accounted for all variables present in model one but also included socioeconomic characteristics when including the education variable. When analyzing the adjusted odds ratio across the model, it is noted that within race and ethnicity, black and white Hispanics continue to show the same trends as present in model 1 reporting greater statistically significant odds when comparing to the white race. However, the other race variable was no longer considered to be statistically significant and reported 34% greater odds than compared to the white race terrorists to target a US government facility. When controlling for education the male gender reported 63% greater odds to target a US facility when compared to their female counterparts which is considered to be almost significant. Age continues to remain almost the same with ages 26-35 reporting lesser odds at 78% than those 25 years or younger remaining significant. Ages 36-45 years old report a 47% lesser odd compared to ages 25 and younger to target a US government facility. This relationship is still significant (p<.05). When controlling for education those ages 46 and older increasing their odds of a US target by 26% greater odds than those 25 years and younger, however, this relationship is not considered to be statistically significant. Marital statuses continue to remain very similar from those present in model 1. Single terrorists report 31% lesser odds of targeting US facilities when compared to those who are married. An interesting change from model 1 to model 2 when controlling for education are the divorced/other status holding terrorists report having a significantly (p<.001) lesser odd when compared to married terrorists. Those unknown report an odds ratios greater than those married at 36% greater odd of targeting a US facility, but don’t not hold as statistically significant. When controlling for the socioeconomic characteristic such as education, those who attend some college or who have obtained an associate’s degree, possess a bachelor’s degree or higher education, or whose education status is unknown are found to report a significantly greater odd of targeting a US government facility than compared to those with only a high school/GED or less (p<.001).

            In model 3, takes into account individual and group characteristics such as recruitment, individual roles, terrorist label, and group type. When looking at race/ethnicity, the statistically significant relationship (p<.001) remains when comparing black and white Hispanics against their white counterparts their odds are significantly greater that the intended primary target is a US government facility. The other race variable reports having a 37% lesser odds ratio compared to whites but remains statistically insignificant. Males report having statistically significant (p<.001) lesser odds that the intended target is a US government facility when compared to female terrorists. When looking at age, the groups that remained statistically significant across all three models were those ages 26-35 (p<.05) reporting 64% and those ages 34-45 (p<.001) report 77% lesser odds than those ages 25 or younger to target a US government facility. Those 46 and older report 57% lesser odds compared to their 25 or younger counterparts but remained statistically insignificant as seen also in model 2.

            When controlling for individual and group characteristics model 3 also demonstrates that those single (p<.05), divorced/other (p<.001), or whose marital status is unknown (p<.001) all report having a statistically significant relationship when compared to those who are married. Those who are reported as being single report a 62% less change of their intended target being a US government facility compared to those reported as being married. Those divorced/other reported showing a significantly lesser odd than those married. Those with an unknown marital status reported 89% lesser odds to target a US government facility compared to those married terrorists. Education in model 3 remains very similar to what was seen in model 2 showing greater odds (p<.001) for those with higher education when compared to those with just a high school/GED or less.

            Individual characteristics such as recruitment, those recruited by personal methods reports, which is considered to be almost significant, of 47% lesser odd to target a US government facility where as those reported to have an unknown method of recruitment demonstrates a 93% lesser odd to target a US government facility (p<.001) compared to those recruited to an organization. Also shown, are those who serve in a subordinate role are 59% lesser odds compared to those who serve in leadership roles within the terrorist organization. This analysis of subordinate roles holds a statistical significance with the compared variables (p<.01).

            Group characteristics such as the origin or label of the terrorist organization report that domestic labeled terrorists have a greater odd to target a US government facility when compared to the international terrorists, however, this relationship was not statically significant. When analyzing the group type of terrorists those who belonged to an international type terrorist group reported greater odds when compared to political type groups. Those situational type groups reported having a lesser odd of targeting a US government facility when also compared to those politically based.

 

TABLE 4. Results from Logistic Regression Models of  American Terrorism Study, 1980-2002 (ICPSR 4639)

 Characteristics

Model 1

 

Model 2

 

Model  3

AOR‡

95% CI‡

 

AOR

95% CI

 

AOR

95% CI

Race/ethnicity

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     White

1.00

 

 

1.00

 

 

1.00

 

     Black

2.52***

(2.03-3.12)

 

78.97***

(48.71->100)

 

>100***

(>100->800)

     White Hispanic

2.63***

(1.85-3.73)

 

63.28***

(28.28-141.58)

 

>100***

(>100->900)

     Other

2.32***

(1.48-3.63)

 

1.34

(.57-3.15)

 

.63

(.09-4.67)

Sex

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    Female

1.00

 

 

1.00

 

 

1.00

 

    Male

2.26***

(1.67-3.06)

 

1.63†

(.94-2.82)

 

.00***

(.00->.01)

Age

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     25 or younger

1.00

 

 

1.00

 

 

1.00

 

     26-35

.22***

(.17-.28)

 

.22***

(.14-.34)

 

.36*

(.13-.97)

     36-45

.25***

(.19-.32)

 

.53*

(.32-.88)

 

.23***

(.10-.48)

     46 and older

.27***

(.20-.36)

 

1.26

(.73-2.19)

 

.43

(.15-1.20)

Marital Status

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    Married

1.00

 

 

1.00

 

 

1.00

 

    Single

.84†

(.97-1.46)

 

.69†

(.47-1.01)

 

.38*

(1.15-5.94)

    Divorced/Other

.06***

(.04-.09)

 

.00***

(.00-.01)

 

.00***

(.00-.01)

    Unknown

23.95***

(15.63-36.70)

 

1.36

(.78-2.36)

 

.11***

(.05-.27)

Education

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    High School/GED or         less

 

 

 

1.00

 

 

1.00

 

    Some College or      Associates

 

 

 

>100***

(83.19->300)

 

>100***

(>300->800)

    Bachelor or Higher

 

 

 

>100***

(>100->300)

 

>100***

(>300->800)

    Unknown

 

 

 

>100***

(>100->700)

 

>100***

(>300->800)

Recruitment

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    Organization

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.00

 

    Personal

 

 

 

 

 

 

.53†

(.26-1.08)

    Not Known

 

 

 

 

 

 

.07***

(.04-.15)

Role

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     Leader

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.00

 

     Subordinate

 

 

 

 

 

 

.41**

(.23-.73)

Terrorist Label

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     International

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.00

 

     Domestic

 

 

 

 

 

 

>100

(.00-+)

Group Type

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     Political

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.00

 

     International

 

 

 

 

 

 

>100

(.00-+)

     Situational

 

 

 

 

 

 

.00

(.00-+)

Valid n    

 

5,535

 

 

5,253

 

 

4,794

Note:  p <0.1; *p <0.05; **p <0.01; ***p <0.001; +=Infinity

‡ adjusted odds ratio (AOR) and confidence interval (CI) estimates account for the ICPSR unique sampling design

Valid n=unweighted sample size

 

DISCUSSION

            After completing the investigation of the ICPSR terrorist dataset, the analysis perform have some notable similarities and differences that support and allow for further research to assist in securing US government facilities across our nation. When looking at the presented descriptive statistics of the American Terrorism Study, 1980-2002 (ICPSR 4639) we can see characteristics of past terrorists that help us understand the literature put forth by other researchers.  

Trends in the data support the findings that international terrorist organizations are reverting to a younger generations 25 years or younger to target US government facilities. This claim was manifested as well in the logistic regression that demonstrated a vast odds difference between the other age groups analyzed. These terrorist organizations are reverting to organization based recruitment tactics where they can find individuals who share a lot of the emotionally vulnerable stages such as while in prison, at college, radical churches, or courts of extremist law. These organizations can hold individuals who are easily shaken or seeking revenge for the injustices that they feel like they have experienced.

            Once found in these extreme organizations, criminal networks are made and indoctrination begins. Alarmingly found in this report was the fact that on average domestic terrorists are a member of their organization about a year and a half (17 months) longer than those who are international terrorists. These differences in domestic and international based terrorists on average are a member of their organization for five and a half years before being indicted for conspiracies or attacks on either US government facilities or non-US facilities.  Such organizations that provide Military experience have little correlation to the role that the individuals hold within the terrorist group. Recognizing the limited frequency of analyzed terrorists, research shows that those who have military experience does not mean that they are a leader within their organization, in fact those with military experience showed slightly more prone to be in a subordinate role. The majority of the cases show no military experience within both leadership and subordinate roles.

            Within the logistic regression some of the supported evidenced found throughout the literature was the fact that when controlling for demographic, socioeconomic, individual and group characteristics those organization based recruits who are domestically labeled but support an international type based terrorist organization, educated, married, black or white Hispanic females, 25 years or younger are those who have statistically greater odds to target a US government facility. Due to cultural differences present in international societies and like mentioned in the literature, women have the task to bring honor to their family and are heavily targeted by terrorist organization due to the presumed duties of men and women.

            An important finding from analyzing the descriptive table present in this study are trends of past terrorists who were investigated and indicted by the FBI. Profoundly present throughout this data set are individual characteristics such as dominantly those of the white race, who are 36-45 years of age, male, predominately married, with an unknown level of education or who have a bachelor’s degree or higher. The group characteristics include those recruited by an organization, who serve as subordinates, labeled as and belong to an international organization, with no military experience. When looking at those investigated and indicted past terrorists and comparing it and controlling for all external factors during logistic regression and other statistical tests. We must ask ourselves if we are investigating and capturing the right individuals or should shift toward those who have characteristics that statistically hold higher odd ratios to target a US government facility.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

With many of the United States government chemical facilities struggling to meet the requirements of the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) and given the urgent response of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) working to secure vulnerabilities and potential risks within these facilities which can begin to prevent further attacks on US government facilities. When doing this research report, I would begin to analyze and further research the inconsistences present between the dataset and past literature to begin building a statistically based potential risk profile for terrorists who target US government facilities. With the resent increase of “lone wolf” terrorists, individual characteristics would be of value and using these individual characteristics to redefine the purpose behind shared characteristics within a group.

 Understanding cultural differences and roles is important but so vast between countries that I would advise researching more group based characteristics to determine a group size and threat. Gathering information on these groups to see if these organization based recruitment centers as well as terrorist organizations are more religious or crime driven. Understanding that recruitment is taking place and it could be upwards of 5 years before a terrorist member is captured and indicted. As stated in the literature review, most terrorist attacks occur to make a statement and get their message heard. Crack downs within prisons and colleges to limit gang recruitment and mobility would help lower some of the larger recruitment techniques helping individuals understand that domestic terrorism does exist.

References

Bordei, Constantin-Valentin. 2015. "The Characteristics of the Terrorist Targets Identification Process." Scientific Research & Education in the Air Force - AFASES 1:119-24.

Dalton, Angela and Victor Asal. 2011. "Is it Ideology Or Desperation: Why do Organizations Deploy Women in Violent Terrorist Attacks?" Studies in Conflict & Terrorism 34(10):802-19.

Kosal, Margaret E. 2006. "Terrorism Targeting Industrial Chemical Facilities: Strategic Motivations and the Implications for U.S. Security." Studies in Conflict & Terrorism 29(7):719-51.

Kteily, Nour, Sarah Cotterill, Jim Sidanius, Jennifer Sheehy-Skeffington and Robin Bergh. 2014. "'Not One of Us': Predictors and Consequences of Denying Ingroup Characteristics to Ambiguous Targets." Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 40(10):1231-47.

Lindelauf, Roy, Peter Borm and Herbert Hamers. 2009. "The Influence of Secrecy on the Communication Structure of Covert Networks." Social Networks 31:126-37.

Lizardo, Omar A. and Albert J. Bergesen. 2003. "Types of Terrorism by World System Location." Humboldt Journal of Social Relations(2):162.

Marshall, Randall D., Richard A. Bryant, Lawrence Amsel, Eun J. Suh, Joan M. Cook and Yuval Neria. 2007. "The Psychology of Ongoing Threat: Relative Risk Appraisal, the September 11 Attacks, and Terrorism-Related Fears." American Psychologist 62(4):304-16.

Marques, José M., Vincent Y. Yzerbyt and Jacques-Philippe Leyens. 1988. "The 'Black Sheep Effect': Extremity of Judgments Towards Ingroup Members as a Function of Group Identification." European Journal of Social Psychology 18(1):1-16.

Miller, Saul L., Jon K. Maner and D. V. Becker. 2010. "Self-Protective Biases in Group Categorization: Threat Cues Shape the Psychological Boundary between 'Us' and 'them'." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 99(1):62-77.

Ozgul, Fatih. 2016. "Analysis of Topologies and Key Players in Terrorist Networks." Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 56:40-54.

 Note: Using the Data set, many of the statics were skewed because of the way the variables interacted with the statistical software. Please contact the author for clarity. 


Leave a comment

Please note, comments must be approved before they are published