Verified by 
Key points
- There is evidence of radicalization among the police.
- Police officers' meta-opinions indicate belief that colleagues have radical views.
- Radicalization among police will likely increase without concerted intervention.
Based on newly leaked data, The Guardian (4/16/2021) revealed that currently serving police officers have donated to fundraisers for accused vigilante murderers, far-right activists, and fellow officers accused of shooting Black Americans. Among the beneficiaries of such donations was Kyle Rittenhouse. Rittenhouse was indicted for murdering two people and wounding a third after he traveled with weapons to a protest against police brutality in Kenosha, WI, from Illinois to, in his own words, offer protection to local businesses.
As a psychologist who has studied radicalization for over 20 years, I find an alarming pattern in these revelations. On January 6th, a crowd breached the Capitol Building, intent on stopping the count of electoral votes. Among the insurrectionists were several off-duty police officers, some of whom traveled from as far as Washington State to participate in the riot.
Both of these examples—donating to a political group or cause even if it uses violence, and traveling to a protest or rally even if it might turn violent–represent radical behavior. In fact, each corresponds to a specific question on the most widely used measure of radicalization—the Activism and Radicalism Intention Scale [1].
Further concerning is a remark that accompanied one of the donations to Rittenhouse, made anonymously, but associated with an email of Sgt William Kelly, currently serving as the executive officer of internal affairs in the Norfolk police department in Virginia. The comment said, “God bless. Thank you for your courage. Keep your head up. You’ve done nothing wrong. Every rank and file police officer supports you. Don’t be discouraged by actions of the political class of law enforcement leadership.” [emphasis mine]
The highlighted part of the statement represents what psychologists call a “meta-opinion,” an opinion about the opinions of others. Meta-opinions can be incorrect—that is, an individual may be mistaken about what others think. Nevertheless, meta opinion can often predict individual behavior better than individual opinions.
Imagine someone who thinks that it’s okay to curse—a personal opinion. This personal opinion is not yet enough to predict whether the individual would actually curse in a given situation. A better predictor would be whether the person believed others around them also believed that cursing is acceptable. More broadly, meta-opinions represent perceived social norms.
What’s more, meta-opinions that don’t align with individual opinions can sometimes make people change their position to better fit into the group. In other words, if you yourself don't believe cursing is okay, but you think others around you do, that meta-opinion can change your personal opinion: Over time you might find yourself coming to embrace the social norm. For example, incoming college students start out less accepting of drinking on campus than they think other students are. Their individual opinions are more conservative than their meta-opinions. However, over the course of their freshman year, young men tend to change their personal opinions on alcohol consumption to better fit what they feel is the social norm [2]. They become personally more accepting of drinking.
The perceived social norm, whether it corresponds to reality or not, has a real influence on opinion, which in turn can lead to changes in behavior. Radical meta-opinions of many predict radical actions of a few [3]. That is to say, even if the number of police officers who engage in radical actions or hold radical opinions is small now, meta-opinions like the one that accompanied the donation to Rittenhouse can increase that number in the future.
Police members donating to radical actors, police officers who went out of their way to participate in an insurrection attempt, and the expressed meta-opinion about police support for radical actions of people like Rittenhouse—these are evidence of radicalization among the police.
Similar concerns about radicalization in the military recently moved the U.S. military to advance a major initiative designed to fight extremism in its ranks. It is imperative that the police follow suit.
References
[1] Moskalenko, S., & McCauley, C. (2009). Measuring political mobilization: The distinction between activism and radicalism. Terrorism and political violence, 21(2), 239-260.
[2] Prentice, D. A., & Miller, D. T. (1993). Pluralistic ignorance and alcohol use on campus: some consequences of misperceiving the social norm. Journal of personality and social psychology, 64(2), 243.
[3] Krueger, A. B., & Malečková, J. (2009). Attitudes and action: Public opinion and the occurrence of international terrorism. Science, 325(5947), 1534-1536.
