There may be a psychological ‘signature’ for extremism — with those who are more dogmatic and slower at decision making being more susceptible to radicalisation.
This is the conclusion of experts from Cambridge, who used a broad range of psychological surveys to identify the mental characteristics common to extremists.
These included a poorer working memory, impulsive and risk-taking behaviour, sensation-seeking tendencies and slower unconscious processing of stimuli.
People with this combination of traits, the team said, were more likely to endorse the use of violence in support of their ideologies — whether social, political or religious.
These findings could pave the way towards new methods to help identify and support those individuals who are more vulnerable to radicalisation.
In fact, the team report, cognitive and personality assessments can improve the prediction of ideological worldviews by 4–15 times over simple demographic data.
There may be a psychological ‘signature’ for extremism — with those who are more dogmatic and slower at decision making being more susceptible to radicalisation
‘I’m interested in the role that hidden cognitive functions play in sculpting ideological thinking,’ said paper author and psychologist Leor Zmigrod of the University of Cambridge.
‘Many people will know those in their communities who have become radicalised or adopted increasingly extreme political views, whether on the left or right. We want to know why particular individuals are more susceptible.’
‘By examining “hot” emotional cognition alongside the “cold” unconscious cognition of basic information processing we can see a psychological signature for those at risk of engaging with an ideology in an extreme way.’
‘Subtle difficulties with complex mental processing may subconsciously push people towards extreme doctrines that provide clearer, more defined explanations of the world.’
This, he continued, makes these people ‘susceptible to toxic forms of dogmatic and authoritarian ideologies.’
The new study built upon previous research from California’s Stanford University, in which 522 US adults completed a series of 22 different behavioural surveys and 37 cognitive tasks intended to shed light on the origins of self-control.
Dr Zmigrod and colleagues successfully recruited 334 of the participants from the 2016–7 study, asking them to complete 16 extra surveys designed to determine their attitudes towards ideologies from patriotism and religiosity to authoritarianism.
Based on data from both sets of surveys, the team found that for all the ideologies they examined there was a consistent psychological profile for all those people who endorsed ‘extreme pro-group action, including ideologically-driven violence.
The extremist mind, they said, harbours a mix of conservative and dogmatic psychological signatures — and tends to be cognitively cautious, slower at perceptual processing and operates with a weaker working memory.
Extremists were also found to have impulsive traits, such that drive them to seek risky and sensation-driven experiences.
‘There appear to be hidden similarities in the minds of those most willing to take extreme measures to support their ideological doctrines,’ said Dr Zmigrod.
‘Understanding this could help us to support those individuals vulnerable to extremism, and foster social understanding across ideological divides.’
The study revealed the psychological signatures that appear to underpin both fierce political conservatism and dogmatism.
Conservatism, the team said, is linked to what they call ‘cognitive caution’, with a slower-but-more-accurate unconscious decision making process than the faster-but-less-precise approaches taken in more liberal-minded people.
Along with nationalism, conservatism was found to be linked to traits including greater goal-orientedness, impulsivity and lower social risk-taking.
Both groups were also found to perform what the researchers called ‘temporal discounting’ — in which rewards are thought to lose value if delayed.
Strong religious beliefs were found to be rooted in similar cognitive traits as conservatism, but with higher levels of risk perception and agreeableness.
The rigid worldviews of dogmatists, meanwhile, appear to be rooted in a combination of slow processing of stimuli with a heightened impulsivity, less social risk-taking and reduced agreeableness.
The full findings of the study were published in the journal Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B.
