Small Wars Journal

Mental Illness and Terrorism

Wed, 08/10/2016 - 11:28am

Mental Illness and Terrorism

Patrick Andres James and Daniela Pisoiu

This editorial was originally a published as a Discussion Point by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), a Department of Homeland Security Center of Excellence based at the University of Maryland, College Park. This editorial reflects solely the opinions of the authors, and not necessarily the opinions of the START Consortium or the Department of Homeland Security.

The recent attack at an Orlando night club has provoked both intrigue and confusion. Given the lack of an obvious operational connection to the Islamic State and the shooter’s rather rudimentary religious knowledge and history of mental instability, some voices have rightfully questioned the appropriateness of the label ‘terrorism’ to something that rather resembles mass school shootings. Journalist Ryan Cooper, for example, writes that the shooting was not organized terrorism but mass murder, and the “result of a single unbalanced person”. The attack underscores the point emphasized by researchers that radicalization to violent extremism is a complex, psycho-social process that belies a simple explanation and that the role played by mental illness in the radicalization process is not well understood. While not a “cause” of radicalization, research suggests that mental illness may contribute to violent extremism when it combines with a host of other factors, like emotional trauma, substance abuse, and extremist narratives.

An analysis of START’s Profiles of Individual Radicalization in the United States (PIRUS) dataset, which allows researchers to compare violent outcomes against non-violent criminal outcomes, suggests that those with evidence of mental illness are more likely to act out violently than those without such a history.[i] More so, this study and others found that lone actors like Mateen are more likely to exhibit signs of mental illness than extremists who act as part of a group. And while the overall occurrence of mental illness in the dataset is low (ranging from 3.8% to 8.4%, depending on one’s assessment of the validity of sources),[ii] the relationship between mental illness and violent behavior is strong and positive across time and ideological preference.

The apparent relationship between mental illness and extremist violence stands against a lengthy and well-evidenced tradition of terrorism studies showing that most terrorists are psychologically normal. This makes quite a bit of sense; terrorist group leaders tend to emphasize the importance of ideological and religious knowledge, and most of all, the ability to acquire specialized skills, be they combat, logistical, propaganda skills, or other types thereof. Thus, groups like al-Qaeda core have typically not been interested in recruiting mentally unstable individuals, who are generally neither reliable nor controllable. This style of organizational preference seems to have fundamentally changed with the so-called Islamic State, for whom anyone will do; any operative and any type of attack. Unlike groups past, the Islamic State does not seem to care either way if its adherents are mentally healthy or not. Through a savvy social media campaign, they have doubled down on al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula’s ‘Inspire’ magazine ethos, cultivating an organizational brand that emphasizes a ‘do-it-yourself’ approach.

However, most traditional research on terrorist decision-making focuses on groups, not individuals. At the individual level, radicalization is complex and over-determined; that is, there are multiple sufficient explanations for why radicalization occurs for any given case. In the case of Mateen, mental illness was one of many plausible factors that may have facilitated his radicalization. Some reports suggest that Mateen dealt with profound failure and rejection in his professional life following his swift termination as a prison guard and then as a private security guard. His past was marked by repeated violent behavior requiring psychological attention; he was convicted in juvenile court of battery, and repeatedly suspended for rule violations. It is possible that he may have dealt with issues of identity, torn between his Afghan and American roots in a complicated post-9/11 world.

Further obscuring the problem is that the link between mental health and radicalization is not limited to clinically diagnosable disorders alone. In some cases, an individual’s radicalization process can be better understood through a lens of traumatic emotional and personal experiences. Qualitative analysis of the same START study found that for some individuals, intense feelings of injustice, outrage, revenge or even love can potentially act as mechanisms to push people toward extremist violence. For example, Colleen LaRose, a.k.a. “Jihad Jane”, who was implicated in a plot to assassinate Swedish cartoonist Lars Vilks, suffered various types of physical and mental abuse in her youth, including repeated rape by her own father. Naser Jason Abdo, who conspired to attack an Army base in Fort Hood, TX, suffered humiliating harassment in the Army and grew up in a broken and abusive family environment, with both parents in and out of his life due to their criminal records.

One of the Boston Marathon bombers, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, had a history of conflict-related traumas, domestic abuse, as well as untreated mental problems. Instances of such humiliation and personal failure, when combined with an extremist narrative offering personal redemption and self-worth, can interact in ways that are difficult, if not impossible to predict ahead of time, and can produce potentially dangerous outcomes.

Mental illness is certainly atypical in the broader population of terrorists. Yet given START’s recent research indicating that mental health conditions may be linked to higher propensities for violent behavior among extremists, it is crucial that we do more to understand the processes involved when these phenomena coincide. Future research efforts should focus on that question, while also considering other potentially compounding factors such as substance abuse and criminal history. Doing so will require a qualitative approach that focuses on causal mechanisms that unfold over time, as opposed to simple behavioral indicators. Radicalization researchers should draw on methods that account for causal complexity, such as process tracing, path dependency, and explanatory typologies, which are commonly used in related fields but have yet to be fully harnessed for understanding violent extremism.

The relationship between mental illness and radicalization is not simple, but is potentially very important. Indeed, it is a good sign that there is a growing consensus among researchers and practitioners that countering violent extremism efforts need to integrate mental health and social service professionals into prevention and intervention efforts. These experts have an important role to play in working with community leaders through awareness training to recognize at-risk individuals, building trust between communities and law enforcement, and implementing a more holistic approach to countering violent extremism. However, the integration of mental health and social service professionals in CVE programs is likely to fail unless we better understand the role that mental illness plays amongst a host of other factors that drive individuals toward extremism. This in turn can only happen once we move past simple indicators and embrace research methods that are designed to solve complex problems.

End Notes

[i] According to an analysis of the PIRUS (Profiles of Individual Radicalization in the United States) dataset, only 8.4% of individuals (122 out of 1451) had some evidence of mental illness, either through a clinical diagnosis or popular speculation according to open sources. Among the 209 individuals in PIRUS without a known group affiliation, 25.8% of individuals had evidence of mental illness (54/209). This project was supported by Award Number 2012-ZA-BX-0005, awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this op-ed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Justice.

[ii] Discussions are still ongoing whether or not these numbers merely reflect a regular proportion of the general population – a difficult question to accurately answer for social scientists reliant on open source information.


About the Author(s)

Patrick Andres James is a faculty researcher at START and project manager for the Profiles of Individual Radicalization in the United States (PIRUS) project, which seeks to explain the underlying mechanisms and processes of domestic radicalization. He completed his B.A. in International Studies from the University of North Texas and his M.A. in International Studies from the University of Denver, focusing on political violence, Middle East policy, and international security issues. Prior to joining START, Patrick worked with the One Earth Future Foundation, a think-tank located near Denver, Colorado that seeks to reduce global conflict by promoting better global governance. He also was a Research Assistant with the Program on Terrorism and Insurgency Research based out of the University of Denver.

Dr. Daniela Pisoiu is senior researcher at the Austrian Institute for International Affairs - oiip. Her fields of research are: terrorism, radicalization, extremism, comparative regional security, American and European foreign and security policy. She completed her PhD at the University of St Andrews, Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence and has conducted fieldwork on the topic of radicalization in Austria, Germany and France, as well as other European countries. She is the author of Islamist Radicalization in Europe: An Occupational Change Process (2011/2012), and editor of Arguing Counterterrorism: New Perspectives (2014), both with Routledge.


In general, it is important that such studies are conducted and measures are developed. For myself, I decided that I can independently monitor the level of criticality of your psychological state, you just need to pass mental illness tests  These free online tests and quizzes help me to understand whether there is a need to contact a specialist for a particular question. Thus, I feel more protected and confident.


Fri, 05/26/2023 - 1:41pm

Mental illness and terrorism are complex topics that require thoughtful analysis. It's essential to understand that the vast majority of individuals struggling with mental health issues are not terrorists. However, there may be cases where untreated mental illness exacerbates vulnerability to extremist ideologies. Raising awareness about mental health and providing access to resources like speech therapy from professionals at Sparks Speech Therapy Tampa ( ) can play a crucial role in addressing underlying conditions and promoting well-being for all individuals. Let's foster understanding and support to build a more inclusive society.


Sat, 10/30/2021 - 5:59pm

A good place to start your search for an online therapist is by visiting one of the top online counseling resources. An increasing number of people are turning to online counseling as a therapeutic option for their mental health problems and Why You Feel Stuck in Life and What to Do With It. CBT, hypnotherapy, and NLP are some of the more current sorts of online counseling programs available today. Because numerous websites have been built specifically to provide customers with high-quality therapy programs, online therapy has this advantage. Listed here are a few of the greatest websites for online treatment.


Wed, 08/10/2016 - 1:09pm

There is a recent Forum thread on the issues raised by the authors:

It contains links to two useful European perspectives: 1)… Which has a grim sub-title 'It is possible to be both a terrorist and mentally unstable'
2)…? Which has a key passage '...looking for a cause that will give them meaning and make sense of their mental turmoil. Crucially, an extremist ideology offers them the possibility of transforming their identity: to re-imagine themselves not as failures, but as warriors, whose prior difficulties are not personal shortcomings, but evidence of the cultural decadence that they now disavow.'

Here in the UK CVE is known as Preventing Extremism (it was till 2010 PVE) and has become a controversial topic. Recently I found an unexpected contribution to the debate from a mental health professional, Jonathan Hurlow, a Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist. Readers might find it useful IF CVE includes mental health and social services professionals:…