Outgroups and ingroups: how support for torture and aggressive counterterrorism policies varies by extremist type

Abstract As domestic terrorism has become central to US national security, the American public has shown divided reactions to political violence. In the current context of increasing political polarization and racial tension, we draw on social identity theory to compare responses to Islamist, left-wing, and right-wing terrorism and identify moderators of those responses. Analyses of data from a 2022 national survey experiment (n = 1,300) reveal that Americans’ responses to terrorism depend heavily on who is doing the terrorizing. Whereas Americans are equally outraged by Islamist, right-wing, and left-wing terrorism, support for controversial policies varies by terrorist type, with greater support for the use of torture on Islamist terrorists. Our findings also point toward the importance of Republicanism and white nationalist sentiment. Compared to Democrats, Republicans were more supportive of policy and the use of torture targeting Islamist terrorists and less supportive of policy targeting right-wing extremists. In addition, white nationalist sentiment corresponded to increased support for aggressive counterterrorism policy and the use of torture when applied to left-wing and Islamist terrorists. As public opinion is key to the development of government policies, it is critical that policymakers recognize the role of outgroup animosity in public support of counterterrorism measures.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Social Forces
Published
2025-11-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soaf190
Primary Topic
Social and Intergroup Psychology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Outgroups and ingroups: how support for torture and aggressive counterterrorism policies varies by extremist type

Melissa M. Sloan, Murat Haner, Justin T. Pickett, Francis T. Cullen
Social Forces
Social and Intergroup Psychology
article

Outgroups and ingroups: how support for torture and aggressive counterterrorism policies varies by extremist type

Melissa M. Sloan, Murat Haner, Justin T. Pickett, Francis T. Cullen
article en

Abstract

Abstract As domestic terrorism has become central to US national security, the American public has shown divided reactions to political violence. In the current context of increasing political polarization and racial tension, we draw on social identity theory to compare responses to Islamist, left-wing, and right-wing terrorism and identify moderators of those responses. Analyses of data from a 2022 national survey experiment (n = 1,300) reveal that Americans’ responses to terrorism depend heavily on who is doing the terrorizing. Whereas Americans are equally outraged by Islamist, right-wing, and left-wing terrorism, support for controversial policies varies by terrorist type, with greater support for the use of torture on Islamist terrorists. Our findings also point toward the importance of Republicanism and white nationalist sentiment. Compared to Democrats, Republicans were more supportive of policy and the use of torture targeting Islamist terrorists and less supportive of policy targeting right-wing extremists. In addition, white nationalist sentiment corresponded to increased support for aggressive counterterrorism policy and the use of torture when applied to left-wing and Islamist terrorists. As public opinion is key to the development of government policies, it is critical that policymakers recognize the role of outgroup animosity in public support of counterterrorism measures.

Social Forces
University of South Florida (US), University at Albany, State University of New York (US), Arizona State University (US), University of Cincinnati (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 55%
Social and Intergroup Psychology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Outgroups and ingroups: how support for torture and aggressive counterterrorism policies varies by extremist type — Melissa M. Sloan, Murat Haner, et al. · Social Forces (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS