TY - JOUR
T1 - The psychology of offensive and defensive intergroup violence
T2 - Preregistered insights from 58 countries
AU - Kunst, Jonas R.
AU - Besta, Tomasz
AU - Jaśkiewicz, Michał
AU - Gajda, Anna Natalia
AU - Sanden, Markus
AU - Flatebø, Mina Marie
AU - Adebayo, Sulaiman Olanrewaju
AU - Adonis, Marios
AU - Agyemang, Collins Badu
AU - Boateng, Raymond Agyenim
AU - Akfirat, Serap Arslan
AU - Al-Adawi, Samir
AU - Ambrosio, Chiara
AU - Anjum, Gulnaz
AU - Aruta, John Jamir Benzon R.
AU - Austers, Ivars
AU - Barry, Oumar
AU - Bastian, Brock
AU - Becker, Maja
AU - Bender, Michael
AU - Benningstad, Nora Cornelia Glerud
AU - Borinca, Islam
AU - Celikkol, Göksu
AU - Čeněk, Jiří
AU - Chaleeraktrakoon, Trawin
AU - Chobthamkit, Phatthanakit
AU - Choi, Hoon Seok
AU - Choi, Suyeong
AU - Ciordas, Patricia
AU - Coenen, Ann Cathrin
AU - Cupta, Aleksandra
AU - de Zoysa, Piyanjali
AU - Dhakal, Sandesh
AU - Duncan, Lauren E.
AU - Elcil, Tuğçenaz
AU - Eskiili, Barkan
AU - Etchezahar, Edgardo
AU - Franc, Renata
AU - Galdi, Silvia
AU - Garvanova, Magdalena
AU - Gill, Paul
AU - Gnisci, Augusto
AU - Gómez, Angel
AU - Yepes, Talía Gómez
AU - Grossmann, Igor
AU - Haines, Emily A.
AU - Haka, Fatjona
AU - Hameiri, Boaz
AU - Hamzah, Imaduddin
AU - Sullman, Mark J.M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2026 the Author(s).
PY - 2026/3/31
Y1 - 2026/3/31
N2 - Evolutionary theory and historical evidence suggest humans possess distinct psychological tendencies for defensive and offensive violence, which have insufficiently been considered in research. In a large-scale preregistered study across 58 countries (N = 18,128), we demonstrate that violent extremist intentions manifest along two distinct psychological phenomena: defensive extremism, motivated by protecting one’s group from (perceived) threats, and offensive extremism, driven by establishing group dominance. We show that these dimensions a) can be reliably differentiated across diverse cultural contexts, b) are distinctively associated with psychological dispositions, and c) systematically differentiate countries varying in macrolevel sociopolitical functioning and violence. Across nations, a two-factorial structure was observed that was invariant at the scalar level. Defensive extremist intentions were consistently higher than offensive extremism in 56 out of 58 countries, suggesting greater moral acceptance of protective violence. While psychopathy was positively related to both types of violent extremist intentions, those high in Machiavellianism and narcissism demonstrated particularly higher levels of defensive extremist intentions. By contrast, those scoring high on religious fundamentalism and social dominance orientation demonstrated particularly higher levels of offensive extremist intentions. Unexpectedly, liberal political group identification was associated with higher offensive but lower defensive extremist intentions. Crucially, offensive (but not defensive) intentions were associated with macrolevel societal dysfunction, including political terror and internal conflict. These findings establish that defensive and offensive violent extremist intentions represent two conceptually different forms of extremism across a large and diverse range of countries, with consequences for research and practice.
AB - Evolutionary theory and historical evidence suggest humans possess distinct psychological tendencies for defensive and offensive violence, which have insufficiently been considered in research. In a large-scale preregistered study across 58 countries (N = 18,128), we demonstrate that violent extremist intentions manifest along two distinct psychological phenomena: defensive extremism, motivated by protecting one’s group from (perceived) threats, and offensive extremism, driven by establishing group dominance. We show that these dimensions a) can be reliably differentiated across diverse cultural contexts, b) are distinctively associated with psychological dispositions, and c) systematically differentiate countries varying in macrolevel sociopolitical functioning and violence. Across nations, a two-factorial structure was observed that was invariant at the scalar level. Defensive extremist intentions were consistently higher than offensive extremism in 56 out of 58 countries, suggesting greater moral acceptance of protective violence. While psychopathy was positively related to both types of violent extremist intentions, those high in Machiavellianism and narcissism demonstrated particularly higher levels of defensive extremist intentions. By contrast, those scoring high on religious fundamentalism and social dominance orientation demonstrated particularly higher levels of offensive extremist intentions. Unexpectedly, liberal political group identification was associated with higher offensive but lower defensive extremist intentions. Crucially, offensive (but not defensive) intentions were associated with macrolevel societal dysfunction, including political terror and internal conflict. These findings establish that defensive and offensive violent extremist intentions represent two conceptually different forms of extremism across a large and diverse range of countries, with consequences for research and practice.
KW - defensive
KW - evolution
KW - offensive
KW - psychology
KW - violent extremism
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105034226926
U2 - 10.1073/pnas.2535665123
DO - 10.1073/pnas.2535665123
M3 - Article
C2 - 41875164
AN - SCOPUS:105034226926
SN - 0027-8424
VL - 123
JO - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
JF - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
IS - 13
M1 - e2535665123
ER -