Cited by 329Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political ViolenceSocial and Intergroup PsychologyDeath Anxiety and Social Exclusion

A New Stress-Based Model of Political Extremism: Personal Exposure to Terrorism, Psychological Distress, and Exclusionist Political Attitudes

Open access
Canetti-Nisim, Daphna, Halperin, Eran, Sharvit, Keren, Hobfoll, Stevan E.·2009·Journal of Conflict Resolution

Abstract

Does exposure to terrorism lead to hostility toward minorities? Drawing on theories from clinical and social psychology, we propose a stress-based model of political extremism in which psychological distress-which is largely overlooked in political scholarship-and threat perceptions mediate the relationship between exposure to terrorism and attitudes toward minorities. To test the model, a representative sample of 469 Israeli Jewish respondents was interviewed on three occasions at six-month intervals. Structural Equation Modeling indicated that exposure to terrorism predicted psychological distress (t1), which predicted perceived threat from Palestinian citizens of Israel (t2), which, in turn, predicted exclusionist attitudes toward Palestinian citizens of Israel (t3). These findings provide solid evidence and a mechanism for the hypothesis that terrorism introduces nondemocratic attitudes threatening minority rights. It suggests that psychological distress plays an important role in political decision making and should be incorporated in models drawing upon political psychology.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0022002709333296

Cites

89 of 89 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The decision whether to label a cyberattack as cyberterrorism has significant implications: applying a terrorism label activates far-reaching counter-terrorism powers and amplifies public fear and anger.

    “The decision about whether to label a cyberattack as cyberterrorism bears significant implications, with the application of a terrorism label activating far-reaching counter-terrorism powers, and amplifying public fear and anger (Canetti-Nisim et al. 2009; Zeitzoff 2014; Snider et al. 2021).”

    From Public Opinion and Cyberterrorism (2023) · cites this paper as Canetti-Nisim et al. 2009

    The Abstract (page unavailable) links exposure to terrorism with fear and rage, and the Discussion and Conclusion links it with support for nondemocratic policies. Neither passage says that labeling a cyberattack as terrorism amplifies those emotions or activates counter-terrorism powers. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 90 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Smooha Sammy Rebhun Uzi Waxman Chaim I. Jewish ethnicity in Israel: Symbolic or real? Jews in Israel: Contemporary social and cultural patterns 2004 47 80 University Press of New England Hanover, NH
  2. Soffer Arnon Demography in Eretz Israel: 1988 and the year 2000 Jerusalem Quarterly 1988 51 115 44
  3. Solomon Zahava Iancu Iulian Tyano Samuel World assumptions following disaster Journal of Applied Social Psychology 1997 27 1785 98
  4. Sullivan John L. Shamir Michal Walsh Pat Roberts Nigel S. Political tolerance in context: Support for unpopular minorities in Israel, New Zealand, and the United States 1985 Westview Press Boulder, CO

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Canetti-Nisim, D., Halperin, E., Sharvit, K., & Hobfoll, S. E.
Affiliations
  • Department of Psychology University of Maryland, College Park
  • Stanford University (US)
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
  • Rush University Medical Center (US)
Venue
Journal of Conflict Resolution
Published
2009-05-04
Volume
53
Issue
3
Pages
363-389
ISSN
  • 0022-0027 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8766
OpenAlex
W2153590306
Cited by
329
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 38 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 11
FWCI
24.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Conflict Resolution (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH073687)
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 extremism, psychological distress, terrorism exposure, threat perception, Arab citizens of Israel, Israeli Jews, minority rights, political decision-making

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