Psychological responses to jihadist terrorism: Exploring a small but significant opinion shift towards minority inclusion among French citizens in response to the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attacks

IF 4 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Political Psychology Pub Date : 2023-08-24 DOI:10.1111/pops.12916
Adrian Lueders, Robin Wollast, Armelle Nugier, S. Guimond
{"title":"Psychological responses to jihadist terrorism: Exploring a small but significant opinion shift towards minority inclusion among French citizens in response to the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attacks","authors":"Adrian Lueders, Robin Wollast, Armelle Nugier, S. Guimond","doi":"10.1111/pops.12916","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Experiences with jihadist terrorism sparked debates about the boundaries of religious expression within secular societies. Standpoints majority members hold in such discussions may be inclusive or exclusive towards religious minorities and inform wider intergroup perceptions. The present research explores these relationships in the context of the 2015 Charlie Hebdo terrorist attacks in Paris, France. Using longitudinal data from a diverse French sample (N = 558) collected before and after the attacks, we test whether within‐person changes in exclusionary and inclusionary interpretations of the French Laïcité principle can account for changes in public perceptions of context‐relevant minorities. Meta‐analytical findings suggest a small significant conservative shift after experiences with terrorism. Previous research conducted in the context of the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attacks departed from this pattern, however, without identifying underlying psychological mechanisms. Accordingly, the present data suggests a small but significant opinion shift in favor of context‐relevant minorities. This shifting was partially explained through an increased endorsement of an inclusionary interpretation of the Laïcité principle that stresses the freedom of religious expression. We offer a contextualized interpretation of our data, suggesting that the collective coping dynamics that followed the events (i.e., republican marches, #JeSuisCharlie) have been critical for the observed effects.","PeriodicalId":48332,"journal":{"name":"Political Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12916","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Experiences with jihadist terrorism sparked debates about the boundaries of religious expression within secular societies. Standpoints majority members hold in such discussions may be inclusive or exclusive towards religious minorities and inform wider intergroup perceptions. The present research explores these relationships in the context of the 2015 Charlie Hebdo terrorist attacks in Paris, France. Using longitudinal data from a diverse French sample (N = 558) collected before and after the attacks, we test whether within‐person changes in exclusionary and inclusionary interpretations of the French Laïcité principle can account for changes in public perceptions of context‐relevant minorities. Meta‐analytical findings suggest a small significant conservative shift after experiences with terrorism. Previous research conducted in the context of the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attacks departed from this pattern, however, without identifying underlying psychological mechanisms. Accordingly, the present data suggests a small but significant opinion shift in favor of context‐relevant minorities. This shifting was partially explained through an increased endorsement of an inclusionary interpretation of the Laïcité principle that stresses the freedom of religious expression. We offer a contextualized interpretation of our data, suggesting that the collective coping dynamics that followed the events (i.e., republican marches, #JeSuisCharlie) have been critical for the observed effects.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
圣战恐怖主义的心理反应:探索法国公民在应对《查理周刊》恐怖袭击时对少数族裔包容的微小但重要的意见转变
圣战恐怖主义的经历引发了关于世俗社会中宗教表达界限的辩论。大多数成员在此类讨论中持有的立场可能对宗教少数群体具有包容性或排他性,并为更广泛的群体间观念提供信息。本研究以2015年法国巴黎《查理周刊》恐怖袭击事件为背景,探讨了这些关系。使用来自不同法国样本的纵向数据(N = 558),我们测试了对法国Laïcité原则的排斥性和包容性解释的人内变化是否可以解释公众对与背景相关的少数群体的看法的变化。荟萃分析结果表明,在经历过恐怖主义之后,保守主义发生了微小的重大转变。然而,之前在《查理周刊》恐怖袭击背景下进行的研究偏离了这种模式,没有确定潜在的心理机制。因此,目前的数据表明,有利于与背景相关的少数群体的意见发生了微小但重大的转变。这种转变的部分原因是,人们越来越支持对强调宗教言论自由的Laïcité原则的包容性解释。我们对我们的数据进行了情境化解释,表明事件发生后的集体应对动态(即共和党游行、#JeSuisCharlie)对观察到的影响至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
6.50%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: Understanding the psychological aspects of national and international political developments is increasingly important in this age of international tension and sweeping political change. Political Psychology, the journal of the International Society of Political Psychology, is dedicated to the analysis of the interrelationships between psychological and political processes. International contributors draw on a diverse range of sources, including clinical and cognitive psychology, economics, history, international relations, philosophy, political science, political theory, sociology, personality and social psychology.
期刊最新文献
When saying sorry is not enough: The paradox of a political apology offered to Irish mother and baby home survivors Political censorship feels acceptable when ideas seem harmful and false Dealing with uncertainty and cognitive biases in international politics Overcoming (vegan) burnout: Mass gatherings can provide respite and rekindle shared identity and social action efforts in moralized minority groups Perceived threat, compassion, and public evaluations toward refugees
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1