Hello There, Guest!  

[OQSPS] A Global Analysis of Islamist Terrorism

#11
Given that the data I utilise include honour killings by Islamists as well as acts of overt political violence, I have decided that it is more accurate to speak of Islamist violence, rather than Islamist terrorism. I have changed the title and language of the paper accordingly.

I have also corrected a number of typos.

Files here.
 Reply
#12
I am satisfied with the changes that have been made and recommend publication.
 Reply
#13
The analysis seems to be straightforward, and the results are unsurprising. It is predictable that countries without Muslims have no Muslim violence. That countries that occupy or bomb Muslim countries are prime targets for Muslim violence is also pretty predictable. Within these modest aims, the paper is okay, and I see no methodological flaws. It would be nice to extend this research in the future to find out why some countries have a lot of problems with their Muslim populations while others don't.
 Reply
#14
Gerhard,

I agree that the findings are straightforward -- captain obvious science --, but given that many researchers don't think these simple compositional models are plausible, one needs to do the studies. As you say, when one has the basics down and validated with multiple studies, one can try to look for other predictors. Maybe Muslims are particularly terror-prone in countries with specific other religions (e.g. Christians), or countries that are very different to typical Muslim majority countries (can use World Values surveys to calculate an overall cultural distance between pairs of countries, see Mahalanobis distance).

Unfortunately, there are only so many countries in the world, so doing these kinds of regressions is statistically limited. However, it should be possible to collect lower level data. Noah and I have been discussing trying to get data for the EU NUTS units.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomenclatu...Statistics

There are 3 NUTS levels:

  1. Countries: 28
  2. NUTS-1: 98
  3. NUTS-2: 273
  4. NUTS-3: 1324
Some thoughts about this:

The smaller units one uses, the more noisy the data become because acts of terrorism are inherently rare events. Nothing can be done about this except wait for more terror to happen.

One has to determine the NUTS unit from the terrorism data and these are not given explicitly. However, they usually give the cities and EU has a table with every major city and it's NUTS regions, so this should be doable.

The EU also publishes social and economic data for the NUTS units.

It is not very easy to estimate number of Muslims by NUTS region. The EU does not publish detailed country of origin data. They use categories such as non-EU born, which can mean things depending on which country one's looking at. For instance, for north Italy, it can mean Swiss. For Sweden, it can mean Norwegian. For Eastern EU, it can be Russian or Ukrainian. And of course, it can be MENAP, or the USA and so on.

So, we thought of perhaps only collecting data for the largest cities in the terrorism dataset. Terrorism almost always happens in cities, so one would ignore the country side regions. It is usually possible to estimate the Muslim population % by city, at least with some precision. The downside is that it's not easy to find good S data by city, so it's hard to control for confounds. But one can of course control for e.g. geoposition (longitude, latitude), climate as well as country-level variables. If one sticks with EU cities, one can get semi-detailed S data from Eurostat I think. The approach requires a lot of manual labor, however, in estimating the Muslim%. Wikipedia only has a small list to begin from.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ci...population
 Reply
#15
Study has been published.

https://openpsych.net/paper/52
 Reply
 
Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)