Peer-reviewed, open access journal; ISSN 2334-3745; Editor-in-Chief @jjfforest; indexed by JSTOR, SCOPUS, etc. Published by @ICCT_TheHague
The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined August 2013
- Tweets916
- Following145
- Followers16.2K
- Likes327
Don't miss this research note. On the gore sites studied, only 0.52% of users posted ideological extremist videos, yet repeat uploads made up 76.79% of that content.
Lewys Brace explains the "specialisation effect": buff.ly/7ENDLKI
Working with terrorism data? Our latest issue has a study you shouldn't skip.
@malonsovillota and @RubenArcosM compared 55 open datasets on definitions, sources and codebooks.
Take a look: buff.ly/z4fmqXJ
Don't miss this one from our latest issue. Elena Martynova and Jessica Davis studied seven IMVE groups and eleven attacks in Canada. Every attack was self-financed.
Read their findings here: buff.ly/hDPSejN
Why do foreign fighters shape some insurgencies more than others?
Peter S. Henne reviews @tricbacon's book 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘺 𝘋𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘮𝘢, on Afghanistan and Somalia: strong empirics, a debatable explanation.
📖 buff.ly/Lxx0wQ6
Can language reveal who might turn to mass violence?
@julie_renbe proposes a Violence Risk Index in her book; 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘓𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘶𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘛𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴. Kaitlyn DaVisio reviews its promise and its limits.
📖 buff.ly/rdKOUXR
New in Perspectives on Terrorism: a bibliography on terrorism and CBRN weapons by Judith Tinnes.
Books, articles, theses and grey literature up to July 2026, drawn from more than 200 sources. Great resource if you're interested in the field!
👉️ buff.ly/HtVEVLA
AI is unlikely to change why terrorists act. It can change how easily they do it.
@Joana_Cook, @GraigKlein and Bàrbara Molas report on 26 experts from 11 countries and propose a Force Multiplier Framework.
👉️ buff.ly/Qd1u0Bt
Only 0.52% of users on the gore sites studied posted ideological extremist videos, but repeat uploads make up 76.79% of that content.
Lewys Brace on the "specialisation effect" and violence-fixated attackers.
🔗 buff.ly/u89d4l7
Why do terrorism datasets disagree?
Often it comes down to how they were built. @malonsovillota and @RubenArcosM examined 55 open databases and found gaps in definitions, sources and codebooks.
Take a look: buff.ly/ON4Tk3a
Every IMVE attack studied in Canada was self-financed.
Elena Martynova and Jessica Davis trace how extremist groups raise and move money, and which counter-financing tools fit.
Perspectives on Terrorism Vol. XX, Issue 3 out now!
🔗 buff.ly/hDPSejN
📢 Our September Perspectives on Terrorism Newsletter is out!
Read highlights from the latest issue and stay informed on the latest research, analysis, and resources in terrorism studies.
Read it here ➡️ buff.ly/3rB5XgB
Last week marked 25 years since the start of the War on Terror.
Most retrospectives focused on Afghanistan, Iraq, and the US.
Rarely mentioned: Kenya, never an official war zone, but one that lived through the War on Terror all the same.
Emma Boyle reviews Samar Al-Bulushi's War-Making as Worldmaking: 15 months of fieldwork on who defines "security" in Kenya, who it protects, and who gets branded a threat, including a chapter on the home becoming a site of state suspicion.
One striking thread: Kenyan Muslims, present on the coast since the 10th century, recast as foreign threats, echoing "no-go zone" rhetoric used in Europe.
25 years on, a reminder that the WOT's legacy reaches far beyond the usual headlines.
👉️ buff.ly/qLCUXPr
What if the thing that makes someone a terrorist is the same thing that makes someone a saint, an artist, or just really into their hobby?
A book review we published earlier this year by John Morrison unpacks Kruglanski & Moskalenko's provocative case.
Their argument: a "single-track mind" - total dedication to one pursuit, any means justified - shows up in figures we admire just as much as in terrorists. Not that extremists are "normal."
That extreme focus isn't unique to them.
Morrison's one critique: the book's accessibility (readable in one sitting) comes at some cost to depth for those already in the field.
Still, a sharp read for anyone teaching or studying extremism.
🔗 buff.ly/Snf72sO
Writing on critical infrastructure security and dreading the lit review?
Tinnes' 2025 bibliography maps the field for you: journals, books, theses, grey lit, all focused on preventing and responding to terrorist attacks on infrastructure. Bookmark it: buff.ly/CiP5DVZ
A scale built to measure incel radicalisation might just be taking incels' own victimhood narrative at face value and calling it data.
That's the sharp critique in this piece from two years ago - still very relevant to today's debates.
Kelly, Rothermel, and Sugiura take apart the "Incel Radicalisation Scale" on three fronts: its core definitions, its reliance on self-reported data while dismissing harmful online activity, and what that gets wrong about mental health and misogyny in these movements.
It lands right in the middle of an ongoing fight over how to even classify incel violence - pantheon of terrorism or not, how much weight self-reported grievance should carry. Before classifying it, we need to agree on what we're measuring.
Worth a read: buff.ly/pNYxkhQ