A Partial Test of Situational Action Theory: The Role of Immoral Events in Changing the Moral Context

• In Event: Predicting Terrorist Behavior

Abstract

Prior research focusing on terrorism from a deterrence and/or rational choice framework has found that, as a whole, terrorists are not susceptible to certain and severe countermeasures. Collectively, this seems to suggest that there may be more complex mechanisms at work behind terrorist decision-making than a mere consideration of costs as measured through aspects like legislation. Situational action theory was introduced as another way to view such decision-making through a combination of two elements: propensity (to engage in terrorism) and exposure (to an environment that supports terrorism). Fundamentally, Bouhana and Wikstorm (2008) argue that terrorism can be viewed as a moral action that can be prevented by changing these two elements. This research examines the role of the latter and its influence on terrorism in the United States. We hypothesize that the Oklahoma City bombing and the September 11th attacks changed the moral environment and consequently, decreased the hazard of subsequent terrorism. We also focus on two extremist, yet morally sensitive movements, and posit that especially violent attacks perpetuated in the name of these ideologies also influenced exposure. All in all, we find that high profile incidents did significantly influence the hazard of subsequent attacks.

Authors

• Jennifer Varriale Carson, University of Central Missouri

• Brad Bartholomew, American University