Summary
Social Network Analysis (SNA) in the study of political
violence has remained quite limited, and still amounts to only a small fraction
of the research in the field due to the fact that the majority of political
violence students have very limited acquaintance with the rationale, and the
main concepts and methodological tools of SNA. Since September 11th, growing
numbers of media outlets and the striking increase in the efforts and resources
invested in data collection (for example, START at the university of Maryland
and TIGER at the University of Texas at Austin), have simplified the adaptation
of research methods which demands high resolution information about the
terrorists and their groups, among them SNA. However, many of the researchers
are still reluctant to exercise SNA in their studies and consequently tend to
express doubt regarding its efficiency and relevance for the study of complex
social phenomena.
How to Study Violent Social Networks
Naturally, in the case of terrorist groups, researchers
strive to include all the actors who take part in the group’s activities and
the social processes leading to the violent activities. However, this raises
the question of what constitutes significant participation in these processes. A
more inclusive perspective would involve all those who assisted in the
execution of the attacks. This includes actors who were part of the group for
short time, individuals who were not present in the formation stages of the
group yet did not participate in the decision-making processes, or spiritual
leaders who just provided moral support for the actual perpetrators. By
contrast, an exclusive outlook would include only actors who are longtime
members of the group, participating consistently in its activities and in the
decision-making processes, and who have continuous relations with other
members. The inclusive approach better fits mapping the network in its initial
stages. However, exclusive approach will provide more valid representation of
the network in the operational stages of its activities. After deciding which
actors belong to the network, a decision must be made regarding the
categorizations of tie types. While ties may have different
characteristics—they can be binary or not, symmetrical or asymmetrical (even
strength in both directions or stronger in one direction), negative or
positive—it seems that measuring tie strength is most relevant for understanding
the social dynamic within violent networks.
One of the main advantages, which SNA provides for
researchers of terrorists groups, is the capability to uncover the informal
division of influence and social capital within the group, which, in turn,
influences the group’s internal political and social processes and the outcome
of its activities. Besides, it also helps to better understand the motives
beyond the group’s actions. A high number of ties is not the only criteria for
detecting informal leaders. The actors who are in strategic locations and serve
as connectors between the different subgroups possess significant power and are
crucial for the survival of the network. While they do not have to be connected
to high numbers of members, they can veto almost any operation that needs the
cooperation of the different subgroups. Besides, there are those who do not
have a particularly large number of ties, nor are they connectors between
different parts of the network, but they are situated in a strategic location
in terms of their proximity to hubs or to large numbers of members within the
network; hence, they have high level of access to information and resources. Some
of the prominent relevant measures, which can be effective in the study of
violent groups, are degree of centrality, closeness and betweenness. Identifying
the subgroups is also crucial point. It allows us to detect different functions
of the network (founders, collaborators, passersby), network recruitment
paths, operational characteristics and patterns of flow of information.
Since we can assume that actors’ behaviors are a product of
their structural opportunities and constraints, we can expect actors with
similar location characteristics to react in similar ways. Thus, SNA could be
of high value for understanding the relations between different terrorist
groups worldwide.
Critique
The article illustrates the potential of SNA in the study of
political violence and terrorism. This
method can be highly useful for further developing and testing some of the
current prominent theoretical frameworks in the field. However, the article
does not give a deep insight. It just gives an overall idea about how to conduct
SNA in political violence and terrorism domain.
Source:
Perliger, Arie and Pedahzur, Ami, "Social Network
Analysis in the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence" (2010). Working
Papers. Paper 48.
Posts
Osman, I agree that this is another good article that mainly discusses the potential for SNA. You mention that many of the researchers are still reluctant to exercise SNA and express doubt regarding its relevancy. I don't know if the article elaborates on this point, but I would assume it is because of the somewhat subjective nature of SNA. What are your thoughts on its relative usefulness?
ReplyDeleteThe author does not elaborate the issue. However, I can infer that the author believe that SNA is a useful analysis technique for terrorism and political violence topics despite its constraints like subjectivity.
ReplyDeleteI feel like this article does a good job of describing the importance of bridging members, and that they may not be well connected but they are highly influential. It seems that this is particularly important in the field of counter-terrorism since they represent a week point in the organization.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Dan. I think this article does a good job at outlining SNA's potential to identify subgroups and highly influential people that are critical to the organization's activities. When discussing the different levels of intelligence (tactical, operational, and strategic), which level do you think this technique would help the most?
ReplyDeleteI believe it works best for tactical and operational level.
ReplyDelete