↓ Skip to main content

Motivation for aggressive religious radicalization: goal regulation theory and a personality × threat × affordance hypothesis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
227 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Motivation for aggressive religious radicalization: goal regulation theory and a personality × threat × affordance hypothesis
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01325
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ian McGregor, Joseph Hayes, Mike Prentice

Abstract

A new set of hypotheses is presented regarding the cause of aggressive religious radicalization (ARR). It is grounded in classic and contemporary theory of human motivation and goal regulation, together with recent empirical advances in personality, social, and neurophysiological psychology. We specify personality traits, threats, and group affordances that combine to divert normal motivational processes toward ARR. Conducive personality traits are oppositional, anxiety-prone, and identity-weak (i.e., morally bewildered). Conducive threats are those that arise from seemingly insurmountable external forces and frustrate effective goal regulation. Conducive affordances include opportunity for immediate and concrete engagement in active groups that are powered by conspiracy narratives, infused with cosmic significance, encouraging of moral violence, and sealed with religious unfalsifiability. We propose that ARR is rewarding because it can spur approach motivated states that mask vulnerability for people whose dispositions and circumstances would otherwise leave them mired in anxious distress.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 227 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 224 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 29 13%
Researcher 29 13%
Student > Master 26 11%
Student > Bachelor 21 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 9%
Other 27 12%
Unknown 75 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 54 24%
Social Sciences 49 22%
Business, Management and Accounting 11 5%
Computer Science 8 4%
Arts and Humanities 6 3%
Other 17 7%
Unknown 82 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 November 2023.
All research outputs
#6,222,760
of 24,929,945 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,915
of 33,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,213
of 274,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#156
of 572 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,929,945 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,641 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,848 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 572 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.