Can Terrorist Behavior Measures Predict Group Violence?

On January 6, 2021, an event unfolded that would etch itself into the annals of American history. The U.S. Capitol, a symbol of democracy, was stormed by a crowd of individuals, an event now known as the January 6th Insurrection. This wasn't just a random act of violence; it was a calculated attempt to overturn the presidential election results. But who were these people, and what led them to this point?

The participants were a diverse group, ranging from members of the Proud Boys to individuals connected with QAnon. Some were charged with violent felonies, while others faced trespassing or nonviolent misdemeanor charges. But they all had one thing in common: They were stirred by speeches made by then-President Donald Trump and others, leading them to break through police barricades and illegally enter the Capitol building.

In today's digital age, social media played a significant role in this event. Many participants relied heavily on these platforms, some even live-streaming the attack. They were proud to support what they believed was a cause to overturn the election and were not ashamed of their actions.

The insurrection was a classic example of groupthink, where emotionally charged individuals were told that this was their last chance to keep Trump—their hero—in the White House. Those who had prepared likely took the lead, and the others possibly just went along with the mob.

Misinformation also played a significant role in the lead-up to the insurrection. Months of misleading or inaccurate information being heralded as fact and the constant abrasive challenges to any individual or group that did not support Trump fueled the fire.

In the aftermath, law enforcement secured the Capitol after approximately six hours. The following days were filled with reports of arrests and indictments. By the summer of 2021, over 300 people had been indicted for their participation in the event.

To understand the mindset of these individuals, a new study published in the Journal of Threat Assessment and Management used the Trap-18 (terrorism radicalization assessment protocol) to provide insight into those participants indicted for their actions during the insurrection.

Typically used for lone wolf terrorists, the Trap-18 consists of two separate lists of indicators—eight proximal warning behaviors (signs of accelerating risk) and 10 distal characteristics (more long-term predisposing factors.) It's like a checklist that helps identify individuals with potential for terrorism or criminal violence.

The study identified four proximal warning behaviors linked to violent behaviors on January 6: pathway (advance planning) identification (viewing self as a soldier or warrior) leakage (informing an outside party of violent intent) and directly communicating threat to police or government. Only one distal behavior personal was identified, grievance and moral outrage, while the other 13 factors weren't significant.

According to the study authors, Darin J. Challacombe and Carol L. Patrick of Fort Hays State University in Kansas, tools like Trap-18 can be useful in predicting violent behavior in large groups. However, it's important to note that the study was based on open-source data, which has an information-limitation bias. Some violent participants had limited data, possibly due to state or local political pressures on various media outlets.

In the end, the insurrection serves as a stark reminder of the power of misinformation and groupthink. It underscores the importance of tools like Trap-18 in understanding and potentially predicting such events.

As we move forward, it's crucial to learn from these incidents, so we can work towards a more peaceful and informed society.