Terrorism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFiEgwLQVJk
What is Terrorism?
There are many definitions of terrorism...
“One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter”
Definition of Terrorism
● The use of violence or threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for
political purposes
● State of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization
● Terroristic method of governing or resisting a government
Retrieved from: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorism
International Terrorism as Defined by the FBI
International Terrorism: 3 characteristics
1.Involve violent acts to human life that violate Federal or State Law
2.Appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; to influence the policy of a
government by intimidation or coercion; or to affect the conduct of a government by mass
destruction, assassination, or kidnapping.
3.Occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S., or transcend national boundaries
in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to
intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.
Retrieved from: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/terrorism/terrorism-definition
Types of International Terrorism
● ISIS, Boko Haram, Hamas, Al Qaeda, IRA
● September 11 2001, Twin Towers bombings
●
London Subway Bombings on July 7, 2005.
● ISIS beheadings of Journalists
● Boko Haram kidnapping and selling high-school girls
● US, British, Israeli, as well as other democratic embassy’s vandalised, staff
attacked, murdered. e.g. Benghazi
Domestic Terrorism as defined by the FBI
Domestic terrorism: 3 characteristics:
●
Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
●
Appear intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; to influence the policy of a
government by intimidation or coercion; or to affect the conduct of a government by
mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping;
●
Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.
Retrieved from: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/terrorism/terrorism-definition
Types of Domestic Terrorism
Gangs: Ku Klux Klan, MS-13, Crips, Bloods
Lone Wolf Attacks: Boston Marathon bombings, Ottawa shooting at War
Memorial and Parliament.
Bullies? Middle school, high school etc…
How do you define
terrorism?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaKefXE
2sis
Possible Causes of Terrorism: Is Terrorism a
“Wicked” Problem?
-
Poverty
-
Hatred/Anger
-
Education
-
Individual/Group Frustration
-
Religion
-
Group Cause
-
Political Corruption
-
Cult
-
Regional Instability
-
In Group Cohesion
-
Mental Pathology
-
Damage to Enemy
-
Emotional Expression
-
Principles in Evolutionary
Psychology
Causes Of Terrorism: Does Poverty Cause Terrorism?
● Low Socioeconomic Status
● Low Quality of Life
● Poverty
Rooted in Poverty?: Terrorism, Poor Economic Development, and Social Cleavages
James A. Piazza
Purpose: One of the objectives of this study was to consider the claims of the “rooted-inpoverty and “political opportunity” theses as explanations for terrorism.
Hypotheses:
H1: Economic indicators such as inflation and unemployment are positively correlated with
terrorism.
H2: Economic indicators such as Human Development Index and GDP Growth are negatively
correlated with terrorism
Methods: Multiple regression analysis of a variety of economic, demographic and political
(independent) variables measured to see their effects on the (dependent) variable of terrorism.
Piazza, J. (2006). Rooted In Poverty?: Terrorism, Poor Economic Development, And Social Cleavages. Terrorism and Political
Violence, 18(1), 159-177.
Table 1. Top ten countries for terrorist incidents—GDP per capita and human development indices
Country
Incidents 1986–2002
(Rank)
Average GDP per capita
2001 Human development index rank
India
237
(1)
$2,358
115 (Medium)
Colombia
129
(2)
5,615
62 (Medium)
Yemen
59
(3)
1,608
133 (Low)
Turkey
56
(4)
5,805
82 (Medium)
Greece
48
(6)
11,862
23 (High)
Israel/Palestine *
48
(6)
12,651
49 (High)
Angola
45
(8)
2,510
146 (Low)
Peru
45
(8)
4,622
73 (Medium)
Pakistan
40
(9)
1,928
138 (Low)
France
39
(10)
22,897
13 (High)
*Figures for per capita GDP and Human Development Index ranking are population-weighted averages for the State of Israel and Occupied Territories.
Table 2. Top ten countries for casualties due to terrorism—GDP per capita and human development indices
Country
Casualties 1986–2002
Rank
Average GDP per capita
2001 Human development index rank
Kenya
5,365
(1)
$1,211
123 (Medium)
United States
4,011
(2)
27,816
6 (High)
India
2,779
(3)
2,358
115 (Medium)
Israel/Palestine *
2,257
(4)
12,651
49 (High)
Sri Lanka
1,815
(5)
3,365
81 (Medium)
Iraq †
1,646
(6)
3,413
106 (Medium)
Russian Federation
1,314
(7)
8,377
60 (Medium)
Saudi Arabia
1,037
(8)
10,348
68 (Medium)
United Kingdom
984
(9)
19,627
14 (High)
Colombia
835
(10)
5,615
62 (Medium)
*Figures for per capita GDP and Human Development Index ranking are population-weighted averages for the State of Israel and Occupied Territories.
†GDP per capita and HDI given in pre-1991 figures only.
Results/Discussion
“The statistical models demonstrate that there is no empirical evidence to support
the crux of the “rooted-in-poverty” thesis—popularized by world leaders, the media,
and some scholars—that poor economic development, measured as low levels of
per capita income, literacy, life expectancy, more equal distribution of wealth, growth
of GDP, stable prices, employment opportunities, and food security, is related to
increased levels of terrorism.” (Piazza, 2006)
Piazza, J. (2006). Rooted In Poverty?: Terrorism, Poor Economic Development, And Social Cleavages. Terrorism and
Political Violence, 18(1), 159-177
Does poverty cause terrorism?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeKcms
wCxEI
Purpose: To connect psychological research to our understanding of the origins
and effects of terrorism.
Argument: Terrorism is not to be understood as a pathology but rather that
terrorists emerge out of a normal psychology of emotional commitment to cause
and comrades.
McCauley, C. (2002). Psychological issues in understanding terrorism and the response to terrorism. In The psychology of terrorism: Theoretical understandings
and perspectives (Vol. 3, pp. 3-29). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Results/Discussion:
●
Terrorists, as supported by interviews and comparisons to demographically and
chronologically similar individuals, do not (for the most part) show higher rates of
psychopathology.
●
Terrorists do not fit the psychopathic profile. Successful terrorist group operations require
responsibility, mutual commitment and trust, which (most) psychopaths lack. (They most
notably lack empathy). Normal people can become terrorists!
●
Individual frustration lacks evidence as source of terrorism due to the fact that most
terrorists are educated and have prospects of leading better than average lifestyles, (as
was the case with the 9/11 attackers) and notably lack individual troubles or frustrations.
McCauley, C. (2002). Psychological issues in understanding terrorism and the response to terrorism. In The psychology of terrorism: Theoretical
understandings and perspectives (Vol. 3, pp. 3-29). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Results/Discussion (cont’d):
●
Frustration-Aggression Theory was thought to have been possible explanation of
September 11 attacks. (Hate (cold) vs. Anger (hot))
●
Insult and Group Frustration due to global economic position and perceived lack of power,
as well as stereotypical labels of inherent “evil” leads to aggression toward “winning” and
inherently “good” nation.
●
Western policy and military action toward non-Western powers seen as bolstering terrorist
enterprise.
●
Common causes such as Socialist/Nationalist/Religious causes, eternal reward and doing
what is “good” in the “eyes” of God as possible reasons for terrorist attacks
McCauley, C. (2002). Psychological issues in understanding terrorism and the response to terrorism. In The psychology of terrorism: Theoretical
understandings and perspectives (Vol. 3, pp. 3-29). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Results/Discussion (cont’d):
●
Linking larger group values/causes to small-group dynamics that allow individuals to
perceive group cause and group immortality as greater and more important than personal
mortality and sacrifice
●
Like conformity and obedience to authority, the psychology behind terrorist violence is
a normal psychology of joint cause and sacrifice for comrades.
●
This psychology is obviously much more intense and focused in terrorist groups, at the
expense of family, relationships, and other causes and values.
●
Individuals who lack meaning in their lives, perceive crisis and impending doom as well as
those with zero to minimal social connections are more likely to become terrorists.
McCauley, C. (2002). Psychological issues in understanding terrorism and the response to terrorism. In The psychology of terrorism: Theoretical
understandings and perspectives (Vol. 3, pp. 3-29). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Effects of Terrorism
●
Fear/Intimidation (immediate and long lasting)
●
High Immediate Stress
●
Increased general stress
●
PTSD
●
Affects individuals as well as whole societies
Statistics and Odds of Death
● Dying from heart disease: 1 in 400
● Dying from from cancer 1 in 600
● Dying in an Automobile accident: 1in 7000
● Dying from a terrorist bombing in shopping mall: 1 in 1.5 million
Strategy of Terrorism and The Psychology of Mass-Mediated Fear
James N. Breckenridge and Philip G. Zimbardo
Purpose:
●
To highlight that fear and intimidation is a critical element of terrorism strategy.
●
Terrorism possesses certain psychological advantages, namely evoking disproportionate fear and to
create an enduring and pervasive apprehension of threat.
●
Public reactions differ to other tragic or disastrous events.
●
Fear can influence people's views on governing policies.
Arguments:
●
Reactions to threats of terrorism, result from emotionally driven biases.
●
When appraising risks and making decisions, humans tend to pay much of their attention to negative
information.
●
Terrorism is also made more menacing by stereotypical “evil-doers”
Breckenridge, J., & Zimbardo, P. (2007). The strategy of terrorism and the psychology of mass-mediated fear. InPsychology of terrorism (pp. 116133). New York, New York: Oxford University Press.
Arguments (cont’d):
●
Gains from terroristic tactics are not measured by the number of people harmed but from the political
impact of public fear and the perception of personal vulnerability.
●
This depends largely on mass media! The strategy of terrorism aims to undermine the public's sense
of security, disrupt everyday life, and sway public opinion via propaganda as well as Western
journalism.
●
The publics attention is highly selective and emotionally driven.
●
Individuals perceptions of fear of harm to themselves do not automatically determine their perceptions of
sociotropic fear - the estimation of danger or risk to society.
●
The publics perception of threat can outpace rational analysis.
●
Actions with obvious malevolent intent have much more of an emotional impact. Terrorism seeks to make
whatever action one takes the next act of terror is inevitable, and likely to occur sooner rather then later.
Breckenridge, J., & Zimbardo, P. (2007). The strategy of terrorism and the psychology of mass-mediated fear. InPsychology of
terrorism (pp. 116-133). New York, New York: Oxford University Press.
●
Availability Heuristic: Tendency for people to rely on immediate
examples/events/situations that come to mind. As a result, you might judge that those
events are more frequent and possible than others, and tend to overestimate the
probability and likelihood of similar things happening in the future.
●
Affect Heuristic: A mental shortcut that helps you to make decisions and risk appraisals
quickly by bringing your emotional response into play.
●
Negativity Bias: Humans are more powerfully influenced by negative information than
from positive. Negative events hold more weight than positive ones. As a result negative
events have a greater impact in damaging public trust than positive ones have on
bolstering trust.
Breckenridge, J., & Zimbardo, P. (2007). The strategy of terrorism and the psychology of mass-mediated fear. In Psychology of terrorism (pp.
116-133). New York, New York: Oxford University Press.
Terrorist Propaganda to Reinforce:
In-Group Cohesion
Group Frustration and Cause
Out-Group Hostility
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXeqkthziKU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBdCSmHmBek
The Logic of Public Fear in Terrorism and Counter-terrorism
Alex Braithwaite
●
The act of terrorism is the use of violence, with the citizen being the most common target.
●
Terrorism is a form of psychological warfare in which the terrorist is attempting to affect policy
change by influencing individual fears and attitudes.
At the very core of this logic the public plays two crucial roles:
●
First, they represent the direct targets (or victims) of the physical violence.
●
Second, they act as the audience that is assumed to be the victim of the psychological
violence.
Braithwaite, A. (2013). The Logic of Public Fear in Terrorism and Counter-terrorism.Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology,28(2), 95-101.
●
The media is viewed to be a key mechanism by which the terrorists are able to
ensure that members of the public that are not directly harmed by the violence
continue to believe that they could be harmed by future attacks.
●
A key priority of the terrorist is to carry out violence that can be watched by an
audience comprised of members of the public.
●
Terrorists rely upon communicating an exaggerated sense of their ability to do
harm.
●
They do this by attempting to convince the population that their government is
unable to protect them.
Braithwaite, A. (2013). The Logic of Public Fear in Terrorism and Counter-terrorism.Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology,28(2), 95-101.
●
A key priority of terrorists when employing physical violence is to intimidate a
broader public that is the audience of the violence.
●
By focusing the costs of violence upon the public, terrorists are able to imply
that the fear instilled within the public by their violence is a direct result of their
governments political agenda.
●
Thus, the successful political terror campaign is able to compel citizens to
place political pressure upon their government to give into the demands of the
terrorists in order to restore a semblance of public safety
Braithwaite, A. (2013). The Logic of Public Fear in Terrorism and Counter-terrorism.Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology,28(2), 95-101.
Terrorism and psychological warfare
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxbcLOi_
GIs
The Role of the Media
Mass Media = oxygen of terrorism
●
Media can play an indirect role to terrorism through a pattern of selective coverage
●
Terrorists have found ways to circumvent journalistic censorship e.g. recordings, coded
communications, beheadings, hostages.
●
Vivid and repetitive coverage of acts and threats help create a disproportionate sense of risk
and vulnerability
●
Televised reportings have a larger emotional impact than print news.
●
Three characteristics of modern Terroristic acts: 1) increased lethality and brutality in contrast
to earlier terrorist groups. 2) anonymous acts of terrorism would have limited tactical value if
not for the media’s focus. 3) increase of terror attacks on journalists
Breckenridge, J., & Zimbardo, P. (2007). The strategy of terrorism and the psychology of mass-mediated fear. In Psychology of terrorism (pp. 116133). New York, New York: Oxford University Press.
●
The media competes with one another to get viewers, thus they report on things that will
get viewers attention, using psychological processes. such as the knowledge of the
negativity bias.
●
If availability and affect heuristics contribute to the disproportionate perception of risks, the
media only enhances this.
●
The media also shapes the viewers understanding of terrorism. the media do not so much
as persuade our views but they dictate the facts, choices or questions we should consider
Breckenridge, J., & Zimbardo, P. (2007). The strategy of terrorism and the psychology of mass-mediated fear. In Psychology of terrorism (pp.
116-133). New York, New York: Oxford University Press.
Questions
1. Do you believe in honest reporting?
2. Have you seen media bias?
3. Where have you seen this bias?
4. Is it important for university students to be able to think critically and
examine their own beliefs?
Media Portrayals that can Shape our Views of people or groups
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_C9s7yHXekI
If there is time, blatant biased and stereotypical views of jews in Egyptian media
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSN19yo3PH0
The Effects of Terrorism on Children
Overview:
● Uncertainty and Confusion
● Direct vs. Indirect Exposure
● The Influence of Personality Characteristics on Coping
● Parental Influences on Coping
● The Role of Media in Exposure
● Intervention strategies
Uncertainty and Confusion
● Children may become targets of people who hate them for political rather
than personal reasons.
● These events can cause feelings of uncertainty and risk which may
eventually lead to psychological harm.
● It is perhaps a combination of targeted hate and random violence that is
particularly frightening to children.
(Pine, 2005)
Direct Exposure
● Children are affected by terrorism in two fundamental ways: direct
exposure and indirect exposure.
● Direct exposure to terrorism refers to events that have a direct impact on
the child. These include the physical dangers often accompanied by
terrorism such as injury, starvation, contaminated water, torture, or loss of a
loved one (Masten, 2012).
● Indirect exposure to terrorism refers to events that have an indirect impact
on the child.
Indirect Exposure
Indirect exposure can occur in a number of different ways:
● Children can learn about the acts of terrorism against their country through
TV coverage, the internet or other media.
● Children are impacted by how their parents react to such events.
● Events can lead to changes in home or school life, such as heightened
security measures.
● Threats toward loved ones.
The Effects of Direct Exposure
Studies have shown that the more directly a child is exposed to a traumatic
event, the more serious the risk of post traumatic stress disorder as well as
other psychological issues (Pine, 2005).
● This is often referred to as the ‘dose-response effect’ (Pine,2005).
● “Direct exposure of children to a terrorist attack produces terror and
confusion and disturbs the daily routines and stability that are
essential for their development” (Pereda, 2013).
The Effects of Indirect Exposure
● Most reports dealing with children who are exposed to terrorism as
‘distant trauma’ tend to be fairly optimistic
● The few cases that came to clinical attention appeared to involve
children of anxious parents
● These findings suggest that the impact of a traumatic event on a child
is correlated with their parent’s view on the terrorist event.
(Pine,2005)
The Effects of Indirect Exposure (Con’t)
Pfefferbaum et al (2003) conducted research regarding three terrorist events to
involve children in the United States
●
The focus was on the Trade Centre bombings of 1993, the Oklahoma City bombing
in 1995, and the 2001 Trade Centre bombing
●
The goal of this study was to investigate all three incidents and compare the effect it
had on children who were either directly or indirectly exposed
●
The conclusion was that PTSD scores were relatively low in the ‘indirectly exposed’
samples and that children reported that it had minimal impact on their functioning
The Influence of Personality Characteristics on Coping
●
Although traumatic symptoms are expected to be higher when the frequency and intensity of
such events rises, the average level of symptoms may vary quite a lot among individuals who
appear to be exposed to the “same” situation (Masten, 2012).
●
A survey done by (Pfefferbaum el at 2003) found that among the 500 children who were
indirectly exposed to terrorist acts, reactions appeared to be more severe among the children
who had a history of previous trauma
●
These findings suggest that individual characteristics could be an important factor in
determining either how vulnerable or how resilient children will be when coping with
The Influence of Personality Characteristics on Coping (Con’t)
● In Palestinian children, Thabet & Colleagues (1999, 2000, 2004) found that
children with high emotional and behavioral symptom scores on an initial
assessment were more likely to have persistent symptoms of PTSD when
reassessed a year later
Parental Influences on Coping
● Resilience can be defined as “the capacity of a dynamic system to withstand
or recover from significant challenges that threaten its stability, viability or
development”.
● In studies of naturally occurring resilience, it has been shown that “effective
adults function as highly adaptable protective systems for children”.
(Masten, 2012).
Parental Influences on Coping (Con’t)
● Children observe the fear and concerns of their parent to predict the extent
of danger in a situation. This phenomenon is known as social referencing
(Masten, 2012).
● In other words, terrified parents tend to scare their children whereas calm
and functional parents are more reassuring.
● Studies have shown that parental expressions of suffering after the 9/11
attacks such as crying or the presence of PTSD symptoms were associated
with the development of these symptoms in their children (Pereda,2013).
The Role of Media in Exposure
● Research on the effects of media on children after 9/11 found an
association between media exposure and symptoms of PTSD in children
(Masten,2012).
Intervention Strategies
●
Generally, in the event of a terrorist attack, it may be more effective to gear
intervention strategies toward parents, teachers, and other adults who are close to
children (Pine, 2005).
●
A consistent set of factors have been found to be very important in promoting
strength and resilience among children faced by adversity in the context of terrorism.
●
Factors include: hope and beliefs that life has meaning, close and supportive
relationships, religious beliefs and practices, and strong community support (Masten,
2012).
Intervention Strategies (Con’t)
● The few reports that have examined the issue of mental health programs for
children after a terrorist attack have shown that short periods of counseling
delivered in a school setting are effective
● This could be because the school setting is easily accessible, normalizes the
terror experience the child has to cope with, and also reduces the stigma
associated with the use of mental health services.
(Pereda, 2013)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUTIoVM2mxc
Questions
● Do you think there is hope for children?
● When does a terrorist cease to be a child?
● Is there an age where we consider the person a bona fide terrorist or
just anyone trying to kill others regardless of indoctrination?
● Are children still children?
Adults and Coping with Terrorism
Overview:
● Coping Strategies
● Terror Management Theory
● Psychological Intervention
● Rehabilitation
Coping Strategies
● Coping refers to “the strategies individuals employ in the face of
psychological stress and is conceptualized as moderating the effect of
stress on health and well being” (Aldwin &Park, 2004).
●
As coping research has evolved, researchers have come to realize that
the effects of coping vary depending on the context and situational
demands (Dickstein et al, 2011).
Coping and Mental Health Outcomes Among Israelis Living With the Chronic Threat of Terrorism
Benjamin D. Dickstein, Lillian H. Krantz, Brett T. Litz, Yonit Schorr, Zahava Solomon, & Nathan Stein.
●
Purpose: To identify coping factors and test their relationship with mental health outcomes.
●
Participants: Sample of 450 Israelis living in the city of Sderot and Kibbutzim. Participants were 46.7% male and 53.3%
female. The mean age was 49.50 (SD=16.57)
●
Variables to be correlated (coping factors to be correlated with mental health outcomes in the context of exposure to
terrorist violence): Coping Factors: (1) Active coping/ positive engagement; (2) Denial/ disengagement; (3) Humor; (4)
Religious coping; (5) Substance Abuse; (6) Social support seeking; and (7) Acceptance/ positive reframing.
●
Mental Health Outcomes: (1) PTSD; (2) Depression; (3) Anxiety; (4) Stress.
●
Hypothesis: States that alcohol/substance use coping and social support seeking would worsen the effect of exposure to
terrorist violence on psychological outcomes and that acceptance/positive reframing would help lessen the impact of
exposure to terrorist violence.
●
Method: Data was collected by telephone. Structured interviews of approximately 100 questions were given to participants.
Results/ Discussion:
●
Four coping factors had a significant effect on the relationship between terror-related exposure
and psychiatric symptoms.
●
Denial/disengagement, substance use coping, and social support seeking were associated with
increased levels of depression, anxiety and stress.
●
Acceptance/positive reframing was associated with decreased levels of PTSD, depression, anxiety,
and stress.
●
Our findings suggest that Israelis exposed to the chronic threat of terrorism use seven distinct
coping strategies and that these coping factors differed in how they affected the relationship
between terror-related exposure and psychiatric symptoms.
Terror Management Theory
● Explains that much of human behaviour is motivated by a fear of death.
● In order to cope with the knowledge of their inevitable death, people
vigorously adhere to their cultural worldviews. This is especially the case
when people are reminded of their mortality.
● Americans’ positive reactions as well as their negative reactions can be seen
as people’s need to cope with the events of 9/11 that provided a reminder
of how fragile life is as well as the inevitability of death.
Psychological Intervention
●
Mitchell and Everly (1996) have developed approaches to crisis intervention that stress the
importance of helping individuals to become fully aware of their thoughts and feelings in relation
to traumatic circumstances
●
The following group protocol for coping with threats of terrorism will incorporate the principles
outlined by Mitchell and Everly.
The Protocol Outline for Coping with the Threat of Terrorism:
I. Introduction
II. Use of psychological coping strategies
III. Resorting to unhealthy habits when under extreme stress
IV. Turning to spiritual beliefs in times of distress
V. Coping with the frustrations of new security and safety procedures
VI. Ventilating emotions about fears in safe and constructive ways
VII. Summarization
VIII. Teaching
References
Pine, D., Costello, J., & Masten, A. (n.d.). Trauma, Proximity, And Developmental Psychopathology: The Effects Of War And
Terrorism On Children. Neuropsychopharmacology, 1781-1792.
Masten, A., & Narayan, A. (n.d.). Child Development in the Context of Disaster, War, and Terrorism: Pathways of Risk and
Resilience. Annual Review of Psychology, 227-257.
Morgan, G., Wisneski, D., & Skitka, L. (n.d.). The Expulsion From Disneyland: The Social Psychological Impact Of 9/11.
American Psychologist, 447-454.
Ottenstein, R.J. (2003). Coping with Threats of Terrorism A Protocol for Group Intervention. International Journal of Emergency
Mental Health, 1-5.
Pereda, N. (2013). Systematic review of the psychological consequences of terrorism among child victims. International Review
of Victimology, 181-199.
Rehabilitation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUTIoVM2mxc
Breather and Comedic Relief
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsqPeqh
KJ7Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9U4Ha9
HQvMo
Questions From the Readings
1.
Does psychology have the ability to predict the occurrence of terrorist acts? Can
psychology provide a valid profile of terrorists?
2. Aside from the obvious example of fear, what other behavioural, emotional, or cognitive
responses follow in the aftermath of terrorism?
3.
Recently, there have been a number of television and movie dramas portraying a
frightening dystopian future (e.g., Revolution, The Road, The Walking Dead, etc.). Why
do you think there has been a sudden rash of these portrayals? What does this
recurring theme suggest about the mood of contemporary North American society?
4.
What is the effect of terrorism on children? How do they understand what has
happened? Are there especially vulnerable groups of children? What reactions might
occur in children drawn from the same religious/cultural/ ethnic groups as terrorists?