ARTICLE CRITIQUE
Name of Student
Institution Affiliation
Course Number: Course Name
Instructor’s Name
Assignment Due Date
Article Critique
In their methods and data section, the authors mention that the research analysis was in the form of a case study, evidently showing that they use the the the case study as their qualitative analysis design. They acquire data from the American Terrorism Study (ATS)’s database. The use of collected data and analysis of information such as recruitment strategies and radicalization also show that the research uses the case study design.
Pete and his team do not directly mention their research problem as they introduce their research. However, as they discuss the increase in cases of far-right extremists and terrorists, they state that there are no researches to identify the reasons why individuals with military experiences transform to violent far-right extremists or terrorists. The research team should note the research question directly: ‘what causes people with military experience to become far right terrorists?’ to avoid confusion and unnecessary problems.
The researchers clearly outline their research’s purpose in the last paragraph of the introduction section, which is strategic because it gives the readers a flow as they read the article. They have three objectives; first is explaining far-right extremists and their link with the US military. The second purpose is discussing the studies concerning radicalization, and the third is the use of identity theory to describe radicalization.
Pete and his colleagues obtain their sample data from the ATS and open online sources. From the ATS, they limited their sample to only people already identified as far-right terrorists. They viewed and investigated their samples each differently, gathering data on each subject. The research team obtained information about their samples from various sources such as court documents, articles by journalists, and one on one interviews with the individuals.
The authors fail to mention how they selected their samples, both from the ATS and online sources. They state that ATS has more than 500 terrorists in their database, and though they centralize on the category of their interest, they do not indicate whether they use all in that category or select a number. Pete and his team state the number of individuals they use as samples from ATS. They do not give the number they obtain from online open sources; hence, it is unclear that their total sample contains how many individuals. This missing information is crucial, and its omission could raise doubts in readers about the percentages in the results.
Pete and his colleagues mention the use of a codebook to obtain data about the individuals studied. They fail to mention the name of the book leading to uncertainties. Also, in APA format, this book should be under materials, because they use it as a tool to filter and obtain desired data such as recruitment characteristics. The authors indicate that they obtain more information from articles, but they fail to state the criteria they used to select the articles. Therefore, it is unclear whether these articles and their information are viable, leaving readers with doubt about the research. Pete and his team state the number of individuals interviewed, which helps the readers know whether generalization is possible. However, they do not include the methods used to identify the number of individuals interviewed or why not all the individuals participated in interviews.
The authors provide quantitative results on the case studies such as 31% of individuals had a military encounter, but the higher percentage comprised of subjects with dark backgrounds such that the researchers could not tell if they had military experience. They discover that out of the far-right terrorists with military experience, 17% were initiators, 22% headed, and 43% were key members.
About half of the sample had a negative experience when in the military, which lead to their involvement in far-right terrorism (FRT). The authors indicate that most of the FRTs with military experience follows that path due to discharge from the military for various reasons and retirement without the appraisals they thought they deserved. These two reasons alter the thoughts of some ex-military members to considering FRT. In their different FRTs, the ex-military individuals meet with other individuals like them, and they motivate each other; hence, the transformation from non-violent to violent extremists.
Despite the results showing that most FRTs are ex-military, the authors indicate that other studies show that a small percentage of the ex-military individuals get into FRT; hence, military experience is not the issue. The authors also recommend further research on the relationship between ex-military individuals and FRT based on different cultural groups and ideologies.
The results in percentages are slightly unreliable because the authors did not state the total number of individuals they used as samples, making it difficult to estimate whether the results are applicable in untested cases. The authors give a concluding statement on the results, which gives solid affirmation to the readers on the research findings. Pete and his team use an external source that agrees with their findings, strengthening their results’ reliability. They also use that source to prevent readers from making assumptions based on their findings that most FRTs have military experience. A good research article contains recommendations on further research regarding the project, and so does Pete and his colleagues’ article.
References
Simi, P., Bubolz, B. F. & Hardman, A., 2013. Military Experience, Identity Discrepancies, and Far Right Terrorism: An Exploratory Analysis. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, Volume 36, pp. 654 – 671.