Terrorism
Practical Distinctions and Research Priorities
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12693076 |
|---|---|
| Authors | John Steinbruner (Center for Strategic and International Studies, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2005 |
| Volume | 7 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 137-140 |
| Publication date | 2005-03-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Studies Review (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1468-2486 • E-ISSN: 1521-9488 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1521-9488.2005.479_2.x |
| OpenAlex | W2069004734 |
| Language | EN |
Terrorism is obviously a term that is widely used and poorly defined. As best I can judge, the existing literature does not provide either a generally agreed upon definition of the term or a categorization of the meaningfully different circumstances to which the term has been applied. There are nonetheless some commonsense distinctions that can be used in considering an appropriate research agenda on the topic. Assuming that the fundamental concern of terrorists has to do with deliberately initiated violence judged to have broader social consequence than ordinary crime, one can argue for organizing analysis according to the following distinctions among the imputed purposes for the activity: One can also argue for a complementary set of organizing distinctions having to do with the protective reactions of terrorist victims: The intersection of these distinctions (types of deliberately initiated violence and kinds of protective reactions of terrorist victims) can
Categorization · Criminology · Epistemology · Intersection (aeronautics · Political science · Set (abstract data type · Sociology · Term (time · Terrorism · Computer Science · Engineering · Law · Philosophy · Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
| Highly cited | No |
|---|