IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v101y2020i1p325-345.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Honor and Terrorism: Cultural Origins of the Severity of Terrorist Attacks

Author

Listed:
  • Joshua Tschantret

Abstract

Objective Why are some terrorist attacks so much more devastating than others? Despite the importance of this question, few studies examine the great variance in lethality across terrorist incidents. This article proposes that some cultures witness deadlier terrorism. In particular, it maintains that deadlier terrorism will occur in cultures of honor that socialize individuals to view violence as an acceptable means for upholding a reputation for toughness. Cultures of honor produce terrorists motivated by perceived slight and reputational challenges, which they are compelled to rectify through especially severe acts of violence. Reclaiming one's honor is possible by inflicting maximum damage on the offending person or group. Method This argument is empirically tested in a multilevel statistical analysis of domestic terrorism in the United States from 1970 to 2015. Results Clear evidence emerges that terrorism is deadlier in the U.S. South—the quintessential culture of honor—than in the other regions of the United States. Other variables highlighted in the existing literature, however, receive mixed support. Conclusion The evidence presented in this article indicates that cultural variables help explain variation in terrorist attack lethality. Future research on political violence, including terrorism, would benefit from taking culture into greater consideration.

Suggested Citation

  • Joshua Tschantret, 2020. "Honor and Terrorism: Cultural Origins of the Severity of Terrorist Attacks," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(1), pages 325-345, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:101:y:2020:i:1:p:325-345
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12721
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12721
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12721?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:101:y:2020:i:1:p:325-345. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.