Investigating the Use of Techniques of Neutralization by Violent Extremists: A Qualitative Comparison

• In Event: Their Own Words: Online Behavior, Manifestos, and Techniques of Neutralization

Abstract

This study applies Sykes and Matza's neutralization theory by qualitatively analyzing the use of techniques of neutralization by violent extremists in the United States. Neutralization theory holds that offenders justify their criminal behavior in order to neutralize feelings of guilt. The limited prior evidence shows that denial of victim is the most common technique used by ideologically motivated offenders. Relying on Liddick’s (2013) expanded list of techniques of neutralization, we developed a database of all neutralizing statements made by perpetrators of ideologically motivated violence using the U.S. Extremist Crime Database’s data on violent incidents committed by far-right extremists, Al-Qaeda and Affiliated Movements (AQAM) supporters, and ALF/ELF (animal/environmental rights) extremists over a twenty-five-year period (1995-2019). In addition to identifying the prevalence of the use of techniques of neutralization by violent extremists as well as differences in use of techniques across ideological subscription, this study qualitatively analyzes perpetrators’ statements coded within each of the techniques of neutralization, uncovering an array of subthemes in the use of such techniques by violent extremists. Overall, the findings reveal how violent extremists neutralize their violence as well as important similarities and differences in the use of techniques of neutralization between extremist offenders motivated by different ideologies.

Authors

• Colleen E. Mills, Pennsylvania State University, Abington

• Margaret Schmuhl, State University of New York at Oswego

• Celinet Duran, State University of New York at Oswego