Through the Looking Glass: The Role of Ethnicity and Affiliation in Responses to Terrorism in the Media

Media Exposure to Armed Conflict: Dispositional Optimism and Self-Mastery Moderate Distress and Post-Traumatic Symptoms among Adolescents

BACKGROUND

Rapid technological developments enable the immediate transmission of armed conflict events through a variety of media channels, inducing mass anxiety, fear, and helplessness. Youth are particularly vulnerable and face new challenges as a result of this exposure. The effects of media exposure to such events on psychological distress and post-traumatic symptoms were examined.

METHODS

A total of 161 participants aged 13-18 years completed a questionnaire battery that included measures of media exposure to armed conflict events, previous direct exposure to armed conflict events, psychological distress, post-traumatic symptoms, dispositional optimism, and self-mastery. A structural equation model (SEM) approach was employed for data analysis.

RESULTS

The extent of media exposure to armed conflict was directly associated with psychological distress and post-traumatic symptoms. Dispositional optimism moderated the association between media exposure and psychological distress, while self-mastery moderated the association between media exposure and post-traumatic symptoms. The effects of the Internet factor of media exposure, which included social media, were particularly disturbing as neither of the resilience factors moderated negative outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that clinical interventions to enhance dispositional optimism and self-mastery as well as other potential resilience factors can protect adolescents from the severe effects of media exposure to violent armed conflict events. Developmental and public health implications related to vulnerabilities and resilience during adolescence are discussed.

Public Reactions to Male Versus Female Terrorism: Experimental Evidence for the Male Warrior Hypothesis

One of the most consistent findings in the domain of criminal justice is that female and male offenders are perceived differently, often resulting in milder sentencing of women compared to men. Although previous studies have sought to identify factors that shape public reactions to terrorism and support for harsh interrogation techniques in its aftermath, empirical studies on differential reactions to female (vs. male) terrorist violence remain scarce. Here, it is argued that the often-violent evolutionary history of our species has shaped the way in which we perceive and react to female (vs. male) terrorist violence. Based on the framework of coalitional psychology-and specifically, the male warrior hypothesis-the assumption is tested that terror-suspect sex, in interaction with other threat cues such as in- or out-group membership and size of coalition, affects support for interrogational torture. This prediction was tested by conducting a survey experiment on a nationally representative sample of 2,126 U.S. adults. Results demonstrated that terror-suspect sex significantly shapes reactions to and perceptions of terrorist violence. Further, nuanced responses based on respondent sex revealed that these associations were exclusively driven by male participants. Gender attitudes and mere punitiveness did not account for the findings, suggesting that male coalitional psychology is deeply ingrained and readily activated by cues implying intergroup conflict.