Research Note: ‘If I said I trust you, I would be lying’. Reflections and recommendations for conducting interviews with (violent) extremist prisoners

Over the past decade, the (violent) extremism, terrorism and countering violent extremism (CVE) research field is witnessing an increasing number of studies based on primary data collection. Despite this evolution, however, conducting face-to-face interviews with former or active (violent) extremists and terrorists still appears to be the exception rather than the rule. In addition, most evidence-based research often lacks methodological transparency on the researchers’ experiences, good practices, and the challenges faced during the different research phases (e.g., making contact with the respondents, the process of creating trust, challenges linked to the prison context). Therefore, the aim of this article is to provide academic researchers with insight into the potential challenges they may encounter when contacting and interviewing former or active (violent) extremist prisoners, and how to overcome them. The results are based on field experiences of a PhD research on the process toward (violent) extremism and terrorism in which qualitative in-depth interviews are conducted with (violent) extremist prisoners in Belgium. By providing reflections and recommendations based on this fieldwork, this article can be used as a guideline to improve and increase future primary data collection and the methodological transparency and reliability within terrorism and CVE research

‘If I said I trust you, I would be lying’. Reflections and recommendations for conducting interviews with (violent) extremist prisoners

Over the past decade, the (violent) extremism, terrorism and countering violent extremism (CVE) research field is witnessing an increasing number of studies based on primary data collection. Despite this evolution, however, conducting face-to-face interviews with former or active (violent) extremists and terrorists still appears to be the exception rather than the rule. In addition, most evidence-based research often lacks methodological transparency on the researchers’ experiences, good practices, and the challenges faced during the different research phases (e.g., making contact with the respondents, the process of creating trust, challenges linked to the prison context). Therefore, the aim of this article is to provide academic researchers with insight into the potential challenges they may encounter when contacting and interviewing former or active (violent) extremist prisoners, and how to overcome them. The results are based on field experiences of a PhD research on the process toward (violent) extremism and terrorism in which qualitative in-depth interviews are conducted with (violent) extremist prisoners in Belgium. By providing reflections and recommendations based on this fieldwork, this article can be used as a guideline to improve and increase future primary data collection and the methodological transparency and reliability within terrorism and CVE research

Waar een wil is, is een (uit)weg? Exit in de gevangenis: processen, programma’s en aanbevelingen

One of the priorities on the political agenda in Belgium is the approach of radicalization in prison. With a modified prison policy and the implementation of disengagement and de-radicalization programs during detention, the government tries to prevent detainees from radicalizing. The question is what the concrete content is and/or should be of such disengagement programs and to what extent they are effectively achieving their goal? In order to answer these questions, we look at the disengagement programs of three European countries: Denmark, the Netherlands and Germany. Based on these international insights and expertise, we identify a number of ‘good practices’ for the Belgian situation. Although the Belgian federal and Flemish government have taken a number of initial steps, it is clear that there is still much work to be done

‘One for all, all for one?’ A research into the steps toward (violent) extremism and terrorism

A key challenge within the (violent) extremism research field is building a comprehensive understanding of the process toward (violent) extremism and terrorism. Despite the extensive (violent) extremism literature, and the proliferation of different explanatory models, there are still several knowledge gaps that hinder the development of a complete, unambiguous understanding of the phenomenon. More specifically, there is no consensus ‘why’ and ‘how’ an individual becomes sympathetic to and/or involved in (violent) extremism and is willing to make costly sacrifices for a higher purpose. To address these key questions, we developed an integrated theoretical model of (violent) extremism using the Theory Knitting Approach. According to our integrated theoretical model, the process toward (violent) extremism is, intra-psychically, a non-linear and dynamic process in which for the outside observer four different constitutive elements can be identified: (1) predisposing life experiences, (2) cognitive opening(s), (3) the identification with a violence justifying in-group, and (4) the identification with a violence-justifying ideology. The hypotheses of our integrated theoretical model of (violent) extremism are currently being tested using qualitative in-depth interviews with a robust sample of (violent) extremist prisoners and family members, combined with the use of vignettes and photo-elicitation interviews. The aim of this presentation is to offer an interim/preliminary evaluation of the key elements of our integrated model, using results based on the first phase of in-depth interviews