Cited by 72Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political ViolenceSocial and Intergroup PsychologyDeath Anxiety and Social Exclusion

Ideologies that justify political violence

Open access
Webber, David, Kruglanski, Arie, Molinario, Erica, Jasko, Katarzyna·2020·Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.01.004

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 50 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Webber, D., Kruglanski, A., Molinario, E., & Jasko, K.
Affiliations
  • Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
  • University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Corresponding author
Webber, David
Venue
Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-08
Volume
34
Pages
107-111
ISSN
2352-1546 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3006911137
Cited by
72
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8
FWCI
1.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Homo Politicus (Academy of Humanities and Economics in Lodz) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
Keywords
political violence, ideology, justification of violence, ideological extremism, existential needs, epistemic needs, ideological narratives, religious extremism, conservatism

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review