• Andreas Önnerfors
  • Kristian Steiner


In their opening chapter, the authors survey contemporary secondary literature, which enables the authors to highlight conceptual ambiguities of the term ‘radicalization’, extract the main trends in research and the public discourse, and contrast them to each other, identifying gaps and proposing ways forward. One of their main arguments is that radicalization denotes a relative relationship to a reference point and that issues of observation and measurement need to be addressed in order to understand radicalization with a higher level of precision. Moving away from purely unidirectional and linear modes of explanation and combining a number of approaches, the authors propose a holistic model combining cognitive and behavioural processes and their interplay with a macro-level (of ideas), a meso-level (of support communities or adversaries), and a micro-level (of individual action).


Radicalization Mainstreaming Medialization Modelling of radicalization 


  1. Borum, R. 2011a. Radicalization into Violent Extremism I: A Review of Social Science Theories. Journal of Strategic Security 4 (4): 7–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ———. 2011b. Radicalization into Violent Extremism II: A Review of Conceptual Models and Empirical Research. Journal of Strategic Security 4 (4): 37–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chomsky, N. 1997. What Makes Mainstream Media Mainstream. Z Magazine, October. Accessed 4 February 2017.
  4. Dalgaard-Nielsen, A. 2010. Violent Radicalization in Europe: What We Know and What We Do Not Know. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism 33 (9): 797–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. David, O., and D. Bar-Tal. 2009. A Sociopsychological Conception of Collective Identity: The Case of National Identity as an Example. Personality and Social Psychology Review 1: 354–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Della Porta, D., and G. LaFree. 2012. Processes of Radicalization and De-Radicalization. International Journal of Conflict and Violence 6 (1): 4–10.Google Scholar
  7. Galtung, Johan. 1990. Cultural Violence. Journal of Peace Research 27 (3): 291–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Goerzig, C., and K. Al-Hashimi. 2015. Radicalization in Western Europe. Integration, Public Discourse, and Loss of Identity Among Muslim Communities. Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Köttig, M., R. Bizan, and A. Petö, eds. 2017. Gender and Far Right Politics in Europe. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  10. Lasswell, H.D. 1927. Propaganda Technique in World War I. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  11. Mattsson, C., N. Hammarén, and Y. Odenbring. 2016. Youth ‘at Risk’: A Critical Discourse Analysis of the European Commission’s Radicalisation Awareness Network Collection of Approaches and Practices Used in Education. Power and Education 8 (3): 251–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. McLaughlin, P. 2012. Radicalism: A Philosophical Study. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. McLuhan, M. 1964. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  14. Neumann, P. 2013. The Trouble with Radicalization. International Affairs 89 (4): 873–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Neumann, P., and S. Kleinmann. 2013. How Rigorous is Radicalization Research? Democracy and Security 9 (4): 360–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Önnerfors, A. 2016a. These Denmark-Sweden Border Control Turn Back the Clock to a Pre-Europe Age. The Guardian, January 5. Accessed 22 May 2017.
  17. ———. 2016b. Civilsamhällets ‘smutsiga baksida’? Den tyska PEGIDA-rörelsen utmanar begreppen [Civil Society’s ’Dirty Back’? The German Pegida Movement Challenges our Concepts]. Kurage 2016: 6–10.Google Scholar
  18. Pike, K. 1954. Language in Relation to a Unified Theory of Structure of Human Behavior. Glendale, CA: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
  19. Powers, S.M. 2014. Conceptualising Radicalisation in a Market for Loyalties. Media, War & Conflict 7 (2): 233–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schmid, A.P. 2013. Radicalisation, De-Radicalisation, Counter-Radicalisation: A Conceptual Discussion and Literature Review. ICCT Research Paper, March, The International Centre for Counter-Terrorism, The Hague. Accessed 28 May 2016.
  21. Schottenius, M. 2015. Hur kunde radikalismen kidnappas av fundamentalisterna? [How Could Radicalism Be Kidnapped by Fundamentalists?]. Dagens Nyheter, November 30. Online. Accessed 22 May 2016.
  22. Statens Medieråd. 2013. Våldsbejakande och antidemokratiska budskap på internet [Violent and Anti-democratic Messages on the Internet]. Accessed 6 September 2016.
  23. Sveriges Riksdag. 2016. Konstitutionsutskottets och justitieutskottets hearing om radikalisering och rekrytering till våldsbejakande extremism i den digitala miljön [Committee on the Constitution and Justice Committee Hearing on Radicalization and Recruitment to Violent Extremism in the Digital Environment]. Stockholm: Riksdagstryckeriet. 2015/16:RFR10.Google Scholar
  24. Wilner, A.S., and C.J. Dubouloz. 2011. Transformative Radicalization: Applying Learning Theory to Islamist Radicalization. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism 34 (5): 418–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wittgenstein, L. 1922. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. New York: Harcourt.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andreas Önnerfors
    • 1
  • Kristian Steiner
    • 2
  1. 1.University of GothenburgGothenburgSweden
  2. 2.Malmö UniversityMalmöSweden

Personalised recommendations