Logan 2020
Logan 2020
Logan 2020
https://doi.org/10.1080/14789949.2020.1859591
ABSTRACT
This paper introduces a special issue of the Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and
Psychology dedicated to violent extremism and mental health. We address
three challenges faced by mental health practitioners who work with people
whose harm potential may be ideologically motived. First, how can practi
tioners engage in good practice in risk assessment and management when
the evidence base for such practice in the violent extremism field is limited?
Second, how can a mental health practitioner establish and understand the role
of an extremist ideology in a client in their care and differentiate it from
motivational drivers that may result in broadly similar kinds of actual, attempted
or threatened violence? Third, how can practitioners and their services respond
to the risks posed in ways that recognise and balance the needs of both the
client and those multiple other agencies dedicated to public protection?
Following the examination of these challenges, and a brief comment about
the relevance of coronavirus to risk of violent extremism, each paper in the
special issue will be introduced and their contribution to the work of practi
tioners who carry such responsibility summarised. The paper concludes with
key points and recommendations linked to the three challenges addressed.
Introduction
Violent extremism is a perplexing phenomenon. The evidence on its presen
tation in individuals is small (and growing) but fragmented by myriad differ
ent perspectives on the evolution of harmful behaviour of this particular kind
(Borum, 2015). Also, an act of violent extremism is ultimately a harmful act,
and there exists good guidance for understanding and managing a wide
range of violence potential (e.g., Eaves et al., 2019; Meloy & Hoffmann, 2014;
Otto & Douglas, 2011). However, adjustments are required in order to account
for the specific characteristics of violence motivated by an extremist ideology
beliefs and to manage interventions and risk accordingly? Also, how might
this process of assessing and managing risk differ if the individual has a form
of high functioning autism instead of a psychotic disorder? Alternatively, if
a practitioner is working with a person with an antisocial personality disorder,
a significant history of non-extremist criminality and violence, and a recent
conversion to an extremist interpretation of a religious faith, how might this
combination of variables impact on the practitioner’s formulation of that
person’s risk of both extremist and non-extremist violence? It is our assertion
in this paper and this special issue that these challenges may benefit from
discussion in order to ensure that existing guidance on the risk assessment
and management of violent extremism – and on violence potential more
generally – can be applied appropriately and usefully by mental health
practitioners to address the clinical situations they encounter.
Thus, this opening paper of this special issue of the Journal of Forensic
Psychiatry and Psychology dedicated to violent extremism and mental health
addresses three challenges in the field likely to be relevant to practitioners
dedicated to supportive and preventative interventions with their clients.
First, how might mental health practitioners engage in good practice in risk
assessment and management with clients at risk of an act of violence that is
motivated at least in part by an extremist ideology? Second, how can
a mental health practitioner establish and understand the role of an extremist
ideology in a client in their care and differentiate it from motivational drivers
that may result in broadly similar kinds of actual, attempted or threatened
violence? Third, how can mental health practitioners and their services
respond to the risks posed in ways that recognise and balance the needs of
both the client and other agencies dedicated to public protection? Following
the examination of these challenges (which will be explored in much more
detail in Logan, Gill & Borum, in preparation), and a brief postscript about the
relevance of coronavirus to our subject, each of the papers in the special issue
will be introduced in turn and their contribution to the work of practitioners
who carry such immense responsibility briefly summarised. The paper will
end with a summary of its main conclusions and a set of recommendations
linked to the three challenges it addresses.
(Farnham, 2016). Second, risk assessment and management are live and
reviewable undertakings; that is, they should both anticipate and respond
to changing circumstances, especially the receipt of new information or
following direct interventions. Risk assessment and management should
never be one-off, static and unchanging (Eaves et al., 2019). Third, the harm
potential of an individual at any one time is a reflection of the interplay
among a range of risk and protective factors that range across the individual
and their context, whose influence upon one another and the context in
which they operate should be considered in the round – in the aggregate –
rather than separately (Douglas et al., 2013a).
Fourth, risk assessment and management guidance, such as the ERG-22
+ and the VERA-2 R, may be viewed as maps that one might use to explore
the terrain of a person’s hitherto unknown harm potential. The landscape of
violent extremism as a whole is relatively uncharted territory compared to
the general violence or sexual violence fields. Therefore, at the present
time, there are comparatively few maps available to support risk assess
ment and management activity in this field compared to others (Hart et al.,
2017; Logan & Lloyd, 2019). However, what we have in the guidance
available is an important start. The opportunity exists now to develop
more guidance and the existing frameworks further in order that we
might chart more fully the range of violent acts motivated by an extremist
ideology (e.g., from acts of violence through to radicalisation of others and
fundraising for extremist causes). In addition, opportunities must be taken
to develop guidance to range across different degrees of granularity (e.g.,
from rapid and relatively superficial risk triage through to in-depth and
more comprehensive risk evaluations), depending on the requirements of
the undertaking.
Fifth, the structured professional judgement approach to risk assessment
and management – most fully operationalised in the general violence field by
the Historical, Clinical and Risk Management-20 Violence Risk Guidance 3rd
edition (HCR-20V3, Douglas et al., 2013b) – is the industry recommended
approach in the field of violent extremism risk assessment and management
(Borum, 2003; Monahan, 2016). Actuarial approaches, focusing on risk pre
diction rather than prevention, are extremely limited in their potential to
assist and may be misleading (Cooke & Logan, in press, 25). Sixth, those
undertaking such evaluations and making risk management recommenda
tions that may impact significantly on the liberty of clients in their care ought
to have expertise in both risk assessment and management in general and
violent extremism specifically. The quality of the risk formulations and inter
vention plans produced by specialists in one area but not the other should be
subject to quality assurance.
Seven, in the violent extremism field, as in all others, there is a requirement
and a duty to ensure evidence-based, transparent, accountable, and
THE JOURNAL OF FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY & PSYCHOLOGY 5
Concluding comments
Good practice in risk assessment and management in the field of violent
extremism should reflect good practice elsewhere in respect of harm preven
tion. The key requirements are systematic decision-making processes, often
embodied in a set of published guidance for practitioners, built on evidence
about the harmful behaviour to be prevented, as well as a commitment to
evaluation and continuously improved practice.
order to gain something from that person (e.g., their money or possessions, or
sexual gratification; a gain or profit motive). Violence and aggression may also
be chosen in order to make victims do things they do not want to do, such as
to comply with orders or do something different to what they had planned
(e.g., stay in a relationship the victim was otherwise intending to leave;
a control or compliance motive). However, violence may also be chosen in
order to gratify the perpetrator – such as by enhancing their sense of power
or mastery, their self-esteem, or to alter their level of arousal (a gratification
motive) – or to give cathartic expression to negative feelings such as anger or
resentment or grievance (a justice or revenge motive). In many cases, the
decision to use violence and aggression to achieve a desired outcome may
be influenced by multiple motivational drivers rather than just one (Borum,
2003; 2015).
Therefore, if violence is a conscious choice and enacted in situations in
which its perpetrator is likely to feel that a less forceful act will be ineffective
given the nature of the outcome sought, what drives violent extremism?
Further, how might the motivational drivers for terrorist acts be differentiated
from those that may lead to more common forms of violence – can they even
be differentiated at all?
Violent extremism may be defined as actual, attempted or threatened acts
intended to cause physical harm to others and/or the fear of harm, which are
justified by an ideology supported by only a minority of people, opposed to
and intolerant of the values and beliefs of the majority, and dedicated to
diminishing social cohesion and influencing if not bringing about fundamen
tal political, religious, social or other change (from Hart, 2019). Therefore, for
an act of violence or aggression to be identified as an act of terrorism or
violent extremism, it must be underpinned by an ideology that promotes
such intolerance and aspirations, and in which the use of force is accepted if
not actively encouraged in order to bring about the desired changes.
Extremist ideologies may be broadly differentiated in terms of those that
focus on how the community, society or nation ought to be run (e.g., extreme
left and right wing and nationalist ideologies, including sovereign citizen
movements) and those that concentrate on how people ought to live their
lives (e.g., extreme religious ideologies, pro-life and animal rights move
ments). Such ideologies rely on propaganda to perpetuate their messages
and to undermine the prevailing views. Such propaganda nurtures intoler
ance and grievances as well as widespread distrust, especially with central
institutions like law and order, government and the press. As a result, more
inclusive values like tolerance, trust and cooperation are challenged and
communities are divided. The proponents of extremist ideologies may be
identified by their willingness to perpetuate such propaganda, to add to it,
and urge the taking of personal responsibility for the changes required,
encouraging if not using violence as deemed necessary (Borum, 2003).
THE JOURNAL OF FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY & PSYCHOLOGY 7
PERCEPTIONS ENDURING
STRESSORS SHORT-TERM OUTCOMES
environmental conditions OF STRESSORS RESPONSES e.g., commitment to a
e.g., inequality e.g., injustice, unfairness,
e.g., anger, resentment violent extremist
denial of opportunity
ideology
Figure 1. A model of the interaction between individual and environment and the
influence of personal and social resources on outcomes in the short and long-term,
based on the Michigan model of stress and coping.
8 C. LOGAN AND R. SELLERS
see as injustice and discrimination. The group introduces him to more argu
ments in favour of the beliefs they share, in addition to misleading and false
information about the impact of immigration, the changing roles of women,
and the increasing recognition of the range of non-binary expressions of
gender and sexuality. They guide John to more extreme materials to view and
in things to say and do to let his feelings more effectively be known and
understood by others. They nurture his belief that he is being discriminated
against as a white British man and justify his feelings of victimisation and
marginalisation. Further, they encourage John to feel that he is at risk of
attack from people unlike him, that such people are dangerous and not to be
trusted, and that he must be on his guard at all times. They advocate the use
of violence against such members of his community, justifying it in terms of
his self-defence.
John starts to carry a kitchen knife when he leaves the house in order to feel
safe. He eschews the company of the few members of his family and network of
friends he still has who might challenge what he now thinks and does. Also, his
loyalty to his new friends encourages him to feel even more accepted, at home
among them, and grateful. Such gratitude makes it more likely John will say yes
when it is suggested to him that he engage in acts of public disorder or
violence in order to protect himself and marginalised people like him.
With their encouragement, John starts going out on ‘patrol’ in the eve
nings. His motive is to protect innocent people – like him – from attack. One
evening, he spots a group of young men chatting animatedly outside
a Middle Eastern fast food shop. John perceives their behaviour as threaten
ing to the other people who happen to be on the street at the time. He starts
shouting abuse at the group of young men. One of them challenges John
about what he is saying – he retaliates by repeatedly making fascist salute
signs and shouting associated and extremely racist slogans and statements at
the top of his voice. Then John takes out his knife, runs across the street, and
stabs in the neck the young man who challenged him as well as stabbing two
other men who came quickly to the first victim’s aid.
John is wrestled to the ground by the other men of that group and quickly
overwhelmed. He is arrested shortly afterwards by the police on suspicion of
attempted murder, an arrest that he challenges at the time on the grounds
that he acted in self-defence. When the police search John’s home in the early
hours of the following morning, they find a stockpile of extreme right wing
memorabilia, as well as a range of weapons (e.g., machetes, samurai swords,
zombie knives, knuckle dusters, CS gas, bomb-making equipment and 14
viable pipe-bombs and component parts). They also find evidence of his
engagement with the extremist group. The police observe daubed on the
walls of his badly maintained flat many intolerant and obscene slogans and
symbols, as well as a list of the names and local home addresses of politicians,
journalists, as well as community leaders under the heading ‘Race Traitors Hit
10 C. LOGAN AND R. SELLERS
Concluding comments
The task of establishing a violent extremist motive is nuanced and ultimately
challenging. However, mental health professionals, with their experience of
complex human behaviour as well as the practice of risk assessment and
12 C. LOGAN AND R. SELLERS
management, are well placed to try to understand the nature of risk in the
individual case and the requirements of risk management planning.
Third, mental health practitioners working with men, women and young
people at risk of violent extremism have a wealth of skills and competencies
in more common forms of harm prevention (e.g., violence, suicide). While
violent extremism is not identical to these other forms of violence in terms of
the range and prominence of motives and methods, the process and disci
pline of carefully appraising, formulating, and managing risk is ubiquitous;
risk assessment and management in violent extremism must stand on the
shoulders of the giants of the general field of violence risk (Logan & Lloyd,
2018). In addition, mental health practitioners are unlikely to over-simplify
risk and its assessment, which can be a challenge in other agencies for whom
such activity is less familiar or where evidence-based practice is less of
a priority or expectation. As a consequence, the inclusion of mental health
practitioners as partners in multiagency risk management with individuals at
risk of violent extremism maximises the potential for best practice. Their role
in such a purpose must be supported and respected.
Concluding comments
Mental health practitioners are well placed to contribute valuable information
relevant to the risk management of individuals thought to be at risk of an act
of violence extremism, but also to inform and support multiagency working
towards managed risk.
justice, and law and order – already underfunded, will be further undermined
because of the need to make major cuts to pay for exceptional levels of national
debt, and just at a time when demand on those services is likely to soar. The
vulnerability of people with mental health problems is increasing, and so is the
allure of extremist ideologies (e.g., Zuckerman, 2019). Therefore, as a direct result
of coronavirus, our collective capacity to address the long-term problems it has
given rise to may be diminished because we may not have adequate means to
respond. The divisions in our society may widen, and social unrest is likely (Avis,
2020) – and all of this is set to last for as long as the economic fallout of the near
global lockdown remains with us. The active involvement of mental health
professionals in working with people at risk of violent extremism may be
a challenge to fund but has never been required more.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
References
Augestad Knudsen, R. (2020). Measuring radicalisation: Risk assessment concep
tualisations and practice in England and Wales. Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism
and Political Aggression, 12 (1), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/19434472.2018.
1509105
Avis, W. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic and response on violent extremist recruit
ment and radicalisation. K4D Helpdesk Report 808. Institute of Development Studies.
Accessed 24 July 2020 from https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/bitstream/han
dle/20.500.12413/15322/808_COVID19%20_and_Violent_Extremism.pdf?
sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Borum Borum, R. (2003). Understanding the terrorist mindset. FBI Law Enforcement
Bulletin, 72. 7–10 doi:10.1037/e318402004-002
Borum, R. (2015). Assessing risk for terrorism involvement. Journal of Threat
Assessment and Management, 2, 63–87. https://doi.org/10.1037/tam0000043 2 2
doi:10.1037/tam0000043
Cook, A. N., Hart, S. D., & Kropp, P. R. (2013). Multi-level Guidelines (MLG) for the
assessment and management of group-based violence. User Manual. Burnaby, BC,
Canada: Mental Health, Law, and Policy Institute.
Cooke, D. J., & Logan, C. (in press). Violent extremism: The practical assessment and
management of risk. In R. Corrado & G. Wössner (Eds.), Terrorism threat assessment.
NATO.
THE JOURNAL OF FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY & PSYCHOLOGY 21
Daffern, M., & Howells, K. (2009). The function of aggression in personality disordered
patients. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24(4), 586–600. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0886260508317178
Douglas, K. S., Blanchard, A. J., & Hendry, M. C. (2013a). Violence risk assessment and
management: Putting structured professional judgment into practice. In C. Logan &
L. Johnstone (Eds.), Managing clinical risk (pp. 46–72). Willan. https://doi.org/10.
4324/9780203106433
Douglas, K. S., Hart, S. D., Webster, C. D., & Belfrage, H. (2013b). HCR-20: Assessing risk
for violence (3rd ed.). Vancouver: Mental Health, Law and Policy Institute, Simon
Fraser University.
Eaves, D., Webster, C. D., Haque, Q., & Eaves-Thalken, J. 2019. Risk rules: A practical
guide to structured professional judgement and violence prevention Shoreham-by-
Sea. Pavilion Publishing and Media Ltd.
Farnham, F., (2016). Personal communication, 31st July.
Hart, S. D. (2019). Extremist violence. Seminar, delivered on 4th September 2019 on
behalf of Protect International Risk and Safety Services, https://protect-
international.com/products/web-based-programs/
Hart, S. D., Cook, A. N., Pressman, D. E., Strang, S., & Lim, Y. L. (2017). A concurrent
evaluation of threat assessment tools for the individual assessment of terrorism.
Canadian Network for Research on Terrorism, Security, and Society. Accessed 10
July 2020 from http://tsas.ca/research/tsas-workingpapers/
Herzog-Evans, M. (2018). A comparison of two structured professional judgment tools
for violent extremism and their relevance in the French context. European Journal of
Probation, 10(1), 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/2066220317749140
HMPPS/DH (2020). Practitioner’s guide: Working with people in the criminal justice
system showing personality difficulties. NHS England Publications Gateway
Reference 04004. London: NHS England.
Howells, K. (2011). Cognitive behavioural approaches to formulating aggression and
violence. In P. Sturmey & M. McMurran (Eds.), Forensic case formulation (pp.
107–127). John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119977018
Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament. (2018). The 2017 attacks: What
needs to change? HM Stationary Office. Accessed 10 July 2020 from www.isc.
independent.gov.uk
Israel, B. A., Schurman, S. J., Hugentobler, M. K., & House, J. S. (1992). A participatory
action research approach to reducing occupational stress in the United States.
Conditions of Work Digest: Preventing Stress at Work, 11(2), 152–163.
James, D. V., & Farnham, F. R. (2016). Outcome and efficacy of interventions by a public
figure threat assessment and management unit: A mirrored study of concerning
behaviors and police contacts before and after intervention. Behavioral Sciences and
the Law, 34(5), 660–680. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2255
Johnstone, L., & Boyle, M. (2018). The power threat meaning framework: An alternative
nondiagnostic conceptual system. Journal of Humanistic Psychology. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0022167818793289
Keyser, P., & McSherry, B. Eds.. (2011). Dangerous people: Policy, prediction and practice.
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203807774
Knauer, V., Walker, J., & Roberts, A. (2017). Offender personality disorder pathway: the
impact of case consultation and formulation with probation staff. The Journal of
Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology,28(6), 825–840 doi:10.1080/
14789949.2017.1331370
22 C. LOGAN AND R. SELLERS
Livesley, W. J., Dimaggio, G., & Clarkin, J. F. (2016). Integrated treatment for personality
disorder: A modular approach. Guilford Press.
Lloyd, M., & Dean, C. (2015). The development of structured guidelines for assessing
risk in extremist offenders. Journal of Threat Assessment and Management, 2(1),
40–52. https://doi.org/10.1037/tam0000035
Logan, C. (in press, 2021). Threat assessment in law enforcement: Advances in the
appraisal and management of violence risk by police. In MarquesP. & PaulinoM. F.
(Eds.), Police psychology. Elsevier.
Logan, C. (2017). Forensic case formulation of violence and aggression. In P. Sturmey
(Ed.), The Wiley handbook of violence and aggression. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.
org/10.1002/9781119057574
Logan, C. (2020). Violence risk management and personality disorder. In J. S. Wormith,
L. A. Craig, & T. Hogue (Eds.), What works in violence risk management: Theory,
research and practice (pp.399-418). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/
9781119315933
Logan, C., Gill, P., & Borum, R. (in preparation). Violent extremism: A handbook of risk
assessment and management. University College London Press.
Logan, C., & Lloyd, M. (2019). Violent extremism: A comparison of approaches to
assessing and managing risk. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 24, 141–161.
https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12140
Meloy, J. R. (2018). The operational development and empirical testing of the terrorist
radicalization assessment protocol (TRAP–18). Journal of Personality Assessment, 100
(5), 483–492. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2018.1481077
Meloy, J. R., & Gill, P. (2016). The lone-actor terrorist and the TRAP-18. Journal of Threat
Assessment and Management, 3(1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1037/tam0000061
Meloy, J. R., & Hoffmann, J. (Eds.). (2014). International handbook of threat assessment.
Oxford University Press.
Monahan, J. (2016). The individual risk assessment of terrorism: Recent developments.
Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper, paper number 57. https://doi.
org/10.2139/ssrn.2665815.
Otto, R. K., & Douglas, K. S. (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of violence risk assessment.
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203843666
Pressman, D. E. (2018). Risk assessment and management of violent extremists and
terrorists: Background, principles, and practice. In J. L. Ireland, C. A. Ireland, &
P. Birch (Eds.), Violent and sexual offenders: Assessment, treatment and management
(pp. 105–119). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315310411-5
Pressman, E., Duits, N., Rinne, T., & Flockton, J. (2016). VERA-2R violent extremism risk
assessment version 2 revised: A structured professional judgement approach. NIFP/
DJI.
Puntis, S., Perfect, D., Kirubarajan, A., Bolton, S., Davies, F., Hayes, A., Harriss, E., &
Molodynski, A. (2018). A systematic review of co-responder models of police mental
health ‘street’ triage. BMC Psychiatry, 18(1), 256. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-
018-1836-2
Scarcella, A., Page, R., & Furtado, V. (2016). Terrorism, radicalisation, extremism,
authoritarianism and fundamentalism: A systematic review of the quality and
psychometric properties of assessments. PloS One, 11(12). https://doi.org/10.1371/
journal.pone.0166947
Sturmey, P., & McMurran, M. (Eds.). (2011). Forensic case formulation. John Wiley &
Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119977018
THE JOURNAL OF FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY & PSYCHOLOGY 23
Webster, S., Kerr, J., & Tompkins, C. (2017). A process evaluation of the structured risk
guidance for extremist offenders. HM Prison and Probation Service, Ministry of
Justice Analytical Series. London: HMPPS. Accessed 24 July 2020 from http://
www.justice.gov.uk/publications/research-and-analysis/moj.
Zuckerman, E. (2019). QAnon and the emergence of the unreal. Journal of Design and
Science, 6. https://doi.org/10.21428/7808da6b.6b8a82b9