Hello There, Guest!  

[OQSPS] Explaining Terrorism Threat Level Across Western Countries

#11
Emil Wrote:The sample size is also not noted... I would add the standardized betas.



The sample size has been added to the abstract, and all coefficients in Tables 1–3 have been changed to standardised betas (where they were not previously given as such), and these have also been added to the abstract.

Latest versions: https://osf.io/5tv3a/
 Reply
#12
I approve of publication.
 Reply
#13
Quote:One major caveat concerning this measure is that it was not possible to discern how the FCO actually puts it together. In particular, it was not possible to rule out that the measure is partly based on information such as percentage of Muslims in the population or military intervention in the Middle East. If it is partly based on such information, then the analyses in Section 3 are somewhat tautological. In an attempt to discern how the measure is in fact constructed, two emails were sent to the FCO (see Appendix A). However, in both cases, the reply received was wholly uninformative: each one simply provided a link to the FCO’s travel advice page, namely FCO (2016)
Noah,

It's an interesting paper.

That said, were I an OQSPS reviewer, I wouldn't approve -- as is -- on account of the caveat above. Could you not validate with a more transparent dataset, for example the Global Terrorism Index (GTI) or the political terror scale of the Global Peace Index? In theory, you could compute an Islamic terror index based on global data sets of specific cases. This would remove a good deal of confounding -- and narrow the empirical issues to: (1) does % Muslim/ Wars in the Middle East explain Islamic terror, (2) does Islamic terror explain overall terror -- but is probably not worth the time.
 Reply
#14
Chuck Wrote:That said, were I an OQSPS reviewer, I wouldn't approve -- as is -- on account of the caveat above. Could you not validate with a more transparent dataset, for example the Global Terrorism Index (GTI) or the political terror scale of the Global Peace Index? In theory, you could compute an Islamic terror index based on global data sets of specific cases. This would remove a good deal of confounding -- and narrow the empirical issues to: (1) does % Muslim/ Wars in the Middle East explain Islamic terror, (2) does Islamic terror explain overall terror -- but is probably not worth the time.



Thanks for reading the manuscript, Chuck. I downloaded the Global Terrorism Index (GTI) values for the countries in my sample, and ran a few preliminary analyses. The GTI correlates at about r = .60 (p < 0.001) with the FCO measure. It is correlated at about r = .40 (p < 0.05) with percentage Muslim, but does not seem to be significantly related to military intervention in the Middle East.

I would propose to reframe the paper as a test of the 'percentage Muslim hypothesis' and 'military intervention in the Middle East' hypothesis using two separate indexes of terrorism threat level: the FCO measure, and the GTI measure. How does this sound?
 Reply
#15
(2016-May-12, 18:59:35)NoahCarl Wrote: I would propose to reframe the paper as a test of the 'percentage Muslim hypothesis' and 'military intervention in the Middle East' hypothesis using two separate indexes of terrorism threat level: the FCO measure, and the GTI measure. How does this sound?


That would be an improvement. Ideally, though, you would also have a measure of Islamic terror -- weighted in the GTI manner. I will look around and see if I can find anything.
 Reply
#16
Noah,

Apparently the EU has data on # Islamic terror attacks (with no weighting for extent) by member nation for 2006 to 2014. I imagine that the numbers are intentionally deflated. The Department of Justice does something similar here, when it comes to racial "hate crimes". Thus, an African American screaming "kill Whitey" just before punching an elderly White man will not be convicted of a hate crimes as readily as a White American doing the equivalent to an elderly Black man will. Regardless, the rates per country might correspond to actual relative rates.

https://www.europol.europa.eu/search/apa...d%20Report

Could you run the analysis also using these number aggregated for all years and then synthesize those results with what you have. If so, I would have no objection to your paper.
 Reply
#17
Chuck Wrote:Could you run the analysis also using these number aggregated for all years and then synthesize those results with what you have. If so, I would have no objection to your paper.


Good idea––many thanks. Will do.
 Reply
#18
Completely revised (and renamed) paper: https://osf.io/5tv3a/
 Reply
#19
Edited.

The author has addressed the major theoretical deficit present in the original manuscript by adding additional measures of terrorism and showing that these inter-correlate, thus providing support for the construct validity of all measures. In the latest version, I fail to see any problems with the concept and analyses. The write up is very clear and only suffers from a couple of minor language issues.* (The only remaining concern I would have is with the reputability of the "the religion of peace" data source. When I get a chance I will pick a couple of random countries and compare RofP data to the Global Terrorism Database to see if the numbers match.)
*e.g., "In view of the preceding limitations, it could be argued that number of casualties from Islamist terrorism per capita the most valid measure..." (A verb is missing.)
 Reply
#20
I read the latest version.

You mention Nigeria as a Muslim country, but this country is about 50/50 split between Muslim and Christian.

You now have three measures of roughly the same outcome, Islamic terrorism. You report their intercorrelations early on and I was surprised that you did not factor analyze them to produce a single measure that should have less idiosyncratic variance.

I will have to re-do my replication once you have settled on your final analyses.
 Reply
 
Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)