Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/172490 
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2018
Quellenangabe: 
[Journal:] Journal of Conflict Resolution [ISSN:] 1552-8766 [Volume:] 62 [Issue:] 6 [Publisher:] Sage [Place:] Thousand Oaks, CA [Year:] 2018 [Pages:] 1229-1261
Verlag: 
Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA
Zusammenfassung: 
A variety of theories attempt to explain why some individuals radicalize along religious lines. Few studies, however, have jointly put these diverse hypotheses under empirical scrutiny. Focusing on Muslim–Christian tensions in Kenya, we distill salient micro-, meso-, and macro-level hypotheses that try to account for the recent spike in religious radicalization. We use an empirical strategy that compares survey evidence from Christian and Muslim respondents with differing degrees of religious radicalization. We find no evidence that radicalization is predicted by macro-level political or economic grievances. Rather, radicalization is strongly associated with individual-level psychological trauma, including historically troubled social relations, and process-oriented factors, particularly religious identification and exposure to radical networks. The findings point to a model of radicalization as an individual-level process that is largely unaffected by macro-level influences. As such, radicalization is better understood in a relational, idea-driven framework as opposed to a macro-level structural approach.
Schlagwörter: 
radicalization
religion
Kenya
extremism
Persistent Identifier der Erstveröffentlichung: 
Sonstige Angaben: 
Dieser Beitrag ist mit Zustimmung des Rechteinhabers aufgrund einer (DFG-geförderten) Allianz- bzw. Nationallizenz frei zugänglich / This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively.
Dokumentart: 
Article
Dokumentversion: 
Published Version

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe
209.43 kB





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.