Editor note: This blog post was written by Anna Thaler, student assistant to the Vortex doctoral candidates Lotta Rahlf and Laura Stritzke, who provided conceptual and editorial input.
The role of mental health in radicalisation is repeatedly discussed not only in the media but also in professional fields related to violent extremism and its prevention (P/CVE). Media coverage often frames mental health as a main driver of radicalisation, while research paints a more complex picture: mental health interacts with social, family, and ideological factors, and its exact role in the multiple pathways to violent extremism remains unclear. In response to public safety concerns, some policymakers in countries like Germany and the United Kingdom have called for increased information sharing and surveillance, but critics warn that these measures risk stigmatisation and may undermine prevention efforts. Prevention is not limited to security authorities, but social workers, psychologists, and other community practitioners play a crucial role in early intervention. Thus, this blog post discusses the potentials of including mental health in socio-preventative practice by reviewing the literature, discussing how it addresses the links between mental health and radicalisation, and highlighting what this means for prevention efforts.
Why the Focus on Mental Health in the Context of Radicalisation is Important
Overview of the Literature
A closer look at existing research helps us understand why mental health is important and highlights its implications for prevention. Early research on violent extremism mostly looked for direct links, like specific personality traits or mental health vulnerabilities that might drive extremist behaviour (Obaidi et al., 2025). Over time, however, scholars have shifted toward developmental perspectives, exploring how family dynamics, childhood experiences, and broader life-course factors shape radicalisation (Webber & Kruglanski, 2018; Sarour & El Keshky, 2022; O’Driscoll, 2018). This approach also highlights differences across age and gender: minors and female extremists often follow distinct pathways, reflecting unique social and psychological profiles (Oppetit et al., 2019; Rolling et al., 2022). Taken together, these strands offer a clear picture of the research landscape and lay the groundwork for considering what this means for prevention strategies.
Between Public Debate and Academic Research
In public discourse, radicalisation to extremist attitudes and violence are increasingly linked to mental illness, with media and security authorities often emphasizing these connections (Allroggen & Horn, 2025). Academic research has also examined psychological well-being as one potential factor in the pathways toward extremism and terrorism. While these studies explore potential links, empirical findings remain mixed. While some studies identify tendencies between mental health issues and extremist involvement, others do not observe a direct relationship. It therefore remains debated, whether mental health issues are part of a broader puzzle or directly related to extremist involvement.
Numerous studies investigate the prevalence and potential role of mental disorders in pathways to violent extremism, suggesting that certain forms of psychological vulnerability may intersect with radicalisation processes (O’Driscoll, 2018; Sarma et al., 2022; Henrich et al., 2024). Research on radicalised minors, for instance, indicates that young terrorist offenders often provide indications of mental health issues, including personality, mood, and substance use disorders. In these cases, grievances and anger related to perceived injustice appear to interact with mental health issues, while depressive symptoms are reported as particularly common among young offenders (Duits et al., 2022). Psychopathology has also been examined in the context of lone-actor terrorism, where individual-level variables such as isolation, grievance, and escalating stress are critical, although mental disorders are not defining features of such terrorism (Schulten et al., 2019; O’Driscoll 2018).
Furthermore, research shows that personal traits, motivations, and psychological factors influence how individuals may become involved in extremist activity (O’Driscoll, 2018; Al-Attar, 2020; Obaidi et al., 2025). For example, factors like strong group identification or personal motivation can make someone more likely to engage in extremist behaviour, but these traits are not inherently signs of mental illness (Obaidi et al., 2025; Hogg, 2008; Turner et al., 2006). However, studies differ on the connection between mental disorders and extremism. Some suggest a link, while others find that extremists have similar or even lower rates of mental health issues compared to non-violent individuals or the general population (Bronsard et al., 2022; Dhumad et al., 2020; Sarma et al., 2022). Mental health difficulties are therefore just one of several interacting risk factors and cannot predict who will commit extremist acts on their own (Schulten et al., 2019).
While a relationship between mental health and violent extremism is frequently discussed and the literature addresses various factors that can promote extremist attitudes, the existence of a direct causal link remains contested. It is important to note that no specific mental health disorder appears to predict terrorist involvement, and extremist individuals do not consistently show higher rates of mental illness than the general population (Dittmar et al, 2025; O’Driscoll, 2018; Al-Attar, 2020; Sarma et al., 2022).
What Does That Mean for the Prediction of Extremist Behaviour?
Taken together, these findings challenge the notion of a clearly identifiable extremist profile. Rather than pointing to a specific mental health condition as a reliable predictor of violent radicalisation, mental health should therefore be understood as one element within a broader network of interacting risk factors social dynamics, rather than as a determining cause of extremist or terrorist behaviour (Schulten et al., 2019).
When studying extremism, focusing too much on psychological disorders can risk turning the issue into an individual problem, which may distract from its broader social and political roots. Radicalisation is also shaped by structural and societal factors, including social marginalisation, ideological dynamics, and collective grievances (Lyons‑Padilla et al., 2016; McCauley & Moskalenko, 2008). Recognising mental health vulnerabilities does not exclude these explanations. Instead, psychological factors are just one part of a bigger picture, interacting with social and political contexts (McGilloway et al., 2015).
Taken together, the literature suggests that mental health difficulties are one of several interacting risk factors for extremist involvement, but their presence alone is insufficient to predict who will engage in violent extremism. Although some studies indicate a connection between mental health and extremist behaviour in certain individuals, no clear causal link can be established, and generalisations are not justified. These findings highlight the need for prevention strategies that integrate an individual-focused approach with social-contextual understanding, balancing attention to mental health with broader societal and environmental factors (Obaidi et al., 2025).
Mental Health-related Factors and Pathways into Extremism – Developmental Perspectives
The academic understanding of mental health–related factors in radicalisation has evolved considerably over time. Early psychological approaches to violent extremism, emerging in the 1970s, primarily emphasized individual-level explanations and frequently focused on psychopathological traits as central drivers of extremist behaviour (Obaidi et al., 2025). Over time, however, the field has moved toward more nuanced and developmental perspectives that integrate social (Webber & Kruglanski, 2018) familial (Sarour & El Keshky, 2022; Dhumad et al., 2020), and life-course factors into the analysis (O’Driscoll, 2018).
A substantial body of contemporary research now examines background factors associated with radicalization. These include socio-demographic factors (Thijssen et al., 2023), childhood experiences (Grimbergen & Fassaert, 2022; O’Driscoll, 2018), family dynamics (Sarour & El Keshky, 2022), and individual risk pathways, such as personality traits, motivational drivers, trauma exposure, mental health vulnerabilities, and cognitive or emotional predispositions that may increase susceptibility to extremist involvement (Obaidi et al., 2025). In particular childhood experiences and traumatic events have gained increasing attention. O’Driscoll (2018) argues that early exposure to risk factors may increase the potential for later violent behaviour and identity struggle. Within this developmental framework, the family environment has emerged as a relevant, though still underexplored, factor. Studies indicate that family functioning influences extremist beliefs, with more balanced family functioning being associated with lower levels of extremist beliefs (Sarour & El Keshky, 2022).
Alongside research on the underlying factors of radicalisation, the literature has expanded its focus beyond a predominantly adult-cantered perspective. While much empirical research continues to concentrate on adults(Kasinathan & Parsons, 2025; Haghish et al., 2023), a growing body of literature, focuses on radicalised minors. Studies, such as Oppetit et al. (2019), demonstrate that minors often follow different radicalisation trajectories than adults and display distinct social and psychological profiles. For example, radicalised minors, particularly females, more frequently report histories of self-harm and tend to exert less influence within their social networks compared to adult extremists. These findings underscore the greater psychological vulnerability of adolescents and point to the necessity of age-specific prevention and intervention strategies (Oppetit et al., 2019). Research on women, while still limited, has begun to address gender-specific pathways into violent extremism and experiences (Rolling et al., 2022).
Furthermore, contemporary studies also recognise that extremists constitute a highly heterogeneous group. Individuals involved in violent extremism vary widely in age, education, family background, and life experiences (Thijssen et al., 2023). This recognition marks a clear departure from earlier attempts to identify uniform extremist profiles and reinforces the importance of context-sensitive and individualised analytical approaches.
Alongside these conceptual developments, the relationship between violent extremism and specific mental health diagnoses has been examined in greater depth. Contemporary research had examined association with personality disorders (Grimbergen and Fassaert, 2022), substance use disorders, mood and anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder, and neurodevelopmental conditions such as autism spectrum disorder (O’Driscoll 2018; Henrich et al. 2024; Sarma et al. 2022).
For instance, Grimbergen and Fassaert (2022), found that among individuals suspected of violent extremism, common disorders included personality disorders (41.2%), substance-related disorders (35.3%), mood and anxiety disorders, mild intellectual disability (each 29.4%), and psychotic disorders (14.7%). Furthermore, Al-Attar (2018) highlight the increasing recognition that several features of autism spectrum disorder may have links to engaging in extremist behaviour and may functionally link with push and pull factors especially to terrorism. These features include restricted and repetitive interests and behaviours, difficulties with social interaction and imagination, a strong need for order and predictability, and distinct cognitive and sensory processing styles (Al-Attar, 2018). More recently, trauma-informed perspectives have gained prominence. Evidence suggests that exposure to complex trauma can heighten vulnerability to extremist engagement (Rolling et al., 2022). Trauma-focused interventions are increasingly discussed not only as preventive measures but also as tools to support disengagement. For example, Mohammed and Neuner (2022) argue that trauma-related mental health conditions, especially PTSD, should be systematically considered in reintegration programs for young former extremists.
What Does This Mean for Prevention?
Overall, research highlights that paying attention to mental health and observable behaviours can provide valuable insights for prevention, guiding counselling and targeted interventions. However, the involvement of security agencies in such interventions has been widely debated. Relying too heavily on surveillance or treating all individuals at risk as if they fit a single profile can reinforce stigma and overlook the broader social and ideological contexts that shape radicalisation (Corner & Gill, 2015).
Despite these challenges, mental health perspectives already play an important role in prevention work. Systemic counselling in social work, for example, overlap methodologically with approaches in psychotherapy, allowing for trauma-sensitive, individualised, and family-oriented interventions (Savenije et al., 2023). One concrete example is the Psychotherapy Department of the Violence Prevention Network (VPN), which supports both professionals and those affected at the interface of mental health, radicalisation, and disengagement processes. By addressing risk factors early and considering individual life trajectories, such initiatives demonstrate how mental health can be meaningfully integrated into P/CVE strategies, complementing broader social and contextual approaches.
Although mental health issues should be understood as one risk factor among many rather than as a direct cause, clients with mental disorders are frequently encountered in extremism prevention and deradicalisation efforts (Allroggen & Horn, 2025). Psychological strain, trauma, identity struggles, and social exclusion interact with contextual factors, making individual-level variables crucial for understanding why some individuals are more susceptible to violent extremism. Radicalised adolescents, in particular, constitute a heterogeneous group with complex needs influenced by mental, familial, societal, and environmental factors, requiring individualised assessment and support (Kasinathan & Parsons, 2025). According to Obaidi et al. (2025), these individual-level variables provide a perspective that complements other approaches to studying violent extremism, ensuring that prevention efforts account for both personal and contextual dynamics.
For practitioners, this means that the presence of extremist views does not automatically indicate a mental disorder, and psychological factors may not always play a decisive role (Dittmar et al., 2025). Nevertheless, there are cases in which mental health vulnerabilities and radicalisation processes coincide, requiring careful attention. Research on the relationship between mental health, particularly mental disorders, and violent extremism has advanced in recent years, but the field remains under development. The connections between radicalisation processes, extremist attitudes, and psychological conditions should continue to be carefully analysed, as conflating radicalisation with mental health risks prematurely categorising individuals and reinforcing stigma (O’Driscoll, 2018; Dittmar et al., 2025).
Taken together, these insights highlight the need for prevention strategies that integrate an individual-focused approach with social-contextual understanding, balancing attention to mental health with broader societal and environmental factors.
Conclusion
Despite the frequent mixing of extremism and mental health in public debate, particularly in Germany, it is important to consider these topics separately in research and practice (Dittmar et al., 2025). While mental health does not offer a simple or deterministic explanation for extremist violence, it plays a crucial role in shaping vulnerability, motivation, group dynamics, and disengagement processes. Both individual differences and contextual factors must be considered to understand the complex pathways to extremism and to design effective prevention and P/CVE strategies.
It could be valuable to look more closely at how mental health approaches in P/CVE might not only benefit individuals with pre-existing disorders but also those who develop psychological strain or trauma through involvement in violent extremist groups. Understanding how trauma-informed and individualized approaches support disengagement and rehabilitation could inform more effective intervention strategies. This approach can draw on insights from Marsden et al. (2024), who investigate explores how trauma and adverse experiences influence radicalisation, emphasising the role of mental health.
These insights understanding have direct implications for prevention practice. By moving beyond stereotypes and simplistic risk profiles, practitioners, including mental health professionals, educators, social workers, doctors, and psychotherapists, can engage in early identification and targeted intervention. Strengthening resilience, addressing trauma, and reducing stigma around mental health support can all help to reduce vulnerability to extremist narratives (Heimgartner et al., 2021; Schulten, 2024). Integrating mental health considerations into comprehensive prevention strategies ensures interventions are context-sensitive, evidence-informed, and tailored to individual needs, ultimately enhancing the effectiveness of P/CVE efforts
This blog post was written by Anna Thaler, student assistant to the Vortex doctoral candidates Lotta Rahlf and Laura Stritzke, who provided conceptual and editorial input.
Bibliography
Al-Attar, Z. (2018). Terrorism and autism – Making sense of the links in formulations of risk and protective factors. In The autism professionals annual conference 2018, Harrogate.
Al-Attar, Z. (2020). Severe Mental Disorder and Terrorism: When Psychosis, PTSD and Addictions Become a Vulnerability. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 31(6), 950–970. https://doi.org/10.1080/14789949.2020.1812696.
Allroggen, M., Horn, A. (2025). Psychische Erkrankungen bei Menschen mit extremistischer Einstellung in der Fachberatung. In: Dittmar, V., Mücke, T. (eds) Psychische Belastungen bei Klient*innen der Deradikalisierungs- und Distanzierungsarbeit. Ideologie und Gewalt – Schriften zur Deradikalisierung. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-48613-6_7.
Bronsard, G., Cohen, D., Diallo, I., Pellerin, H., Varnoux, A., Podlipski, M. A., Gerardin, P., Boyer, L., & Campelo, N. (2022). Adolescents engaged in radicalisation and terrorism: A dimensional and categorical assessment. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, 774063. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.774063.
Corner, E., & Gill, P. (2015). A false dichotomy? Mental illness and lone-actor terrorism.Law and Human Behavior, 39(1), 23–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000102
Dhumad, S., Candilis, P. J., Cleary, S. D., Dyer, A. R., & Khalifa, N. (2020). Risk factors for terrorism: a comparison of family, childhood, and personality risk factors among Iraqi terrorists, murderers, and controls. Behavioralsciences of terrorism and political aggression, 12(1), 72-88.
Dittmar, V., Dreyhaupt, R., & Strauß, H. (2025). Menschenrechte, Grundbedürfnisse und psychische Gesundheit im Themenfeld Extremismus. In Psychische Belastungen bei Klient* innen der Deradikalisierungs-undDistanzierungsarbeit: Extremismusprävention an der Schnittstelle von Therapie und Beratung (pp. 11-20). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
Duits, N., Alberda, D. L., & Kempes, M. (2022). Psychopathology of young terrorist offenders, and the interaction with ideology and grievances. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13, 801751.
Grimbergen, C., & Fassaert, T. (2022). Occurrence of psychiatric disorders, self-sufficiency problems and adverse childhood experiences in a population suspected of violent extremism. Frontiers in psychiatry, 13, 779714.
Haghish, E. F., Obaidi, M., Strømme, T., Bjørgo, T., & Grønnerød, C. (2023). Mental health, well-being, and adolescent extremism: a machine learning study on risk and protective factors. Research on child and adolescent psychopathology, 51(11), 1699-1714.
Heimgartner, A., Rau, Allroggen, M. & Fegert, J. M. (2021). Radikalisierungsprozesse wahrnehmen–einschätzen–handeln: Grundlagenwissen für Ärzt* innen und Psychotherapeut* innen. Universitätsklinikum Ulm.
Henrich, S., Ireland, J. L., & Lewis, M. (2024). Radicalisation across the community and forensic units: a systematic literature review on the psychology of violent extremism. Preventing and Countering Violent Extremism and Radicalisation, 163-215.
Hogg, M. A. (2008). Personality, individuality, and social identity. In F. Rhodewalt (Ed.), Personality and social behavior (pp. 177–196). Psychology Press.
Kasinathan, J., & Parsons, A. (2025). Radicalisation in adolescents: mental health considerations for violent extremism. Australasian Psychiatry, 33(1), 57-63.
Lyons‑Padilla, S., Gelfand, M. J., Mirahmadi, H., Farooq, M., & van Egmond, M. C. (2016). Belonging nowhere: Marginalization & radicalization risk among Muslim immigrants. Behavioral Science & Policy.
Marsden, S., Lewis, J., & Leslie, A. (2024). Trauma, Adversity and Violent Extremism: Implications for Risk Assessment. https://crestresearch.ac.uk/resources/trauma-adversity-and-violent-extremism-implications-for-risk-assessment/.
McCauley, C., & Moskalenko, S. (2008). Mechanisms of political radicalization: Pathways toward terrorism. Terrorism and Political Violence, 20(3), 415‑433.
McGilloway, A., Ghosh, P., & Bhui, K. (2015). A systematic review of pathways to and processes associated with radicalization and extremism amongst Muslims in Western societies. International Review of Psychiatry, 27(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.3109/09540261.2014.992008
Mohammed, R., & Neuner, F. (2022). Putative juvenile terrorists: the relationship between multiple traumatization, mental health, and expectations for reintegration among Islamic State recruited adolescent and young adult fighters. Conflict and health, 16(1), 58.
Obaidi, M., Bergh, R., & Dovidio, J. F. (2025). Individual Differences and Violent Extremism: Personality, Mental Disorders, and Risk Pathways.
O’Driscoll, D. (2018). Violent extremism and mental disorders. Knowledge, Evidence and Learning for Development.
Oppetit, A., Campelo, N., Bouzar, L., Pellerin, H., Hefez, S., Bronsard, G., Bouzar, D. & Cohen, D. (2019). Do radicalized minors have different social and psychological profiles from radicalized adults?. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10, 644.
Rolling, J., Corduan, G., Roth, M., Schroder, C. M., & Mengin, A. C. (2022). Violent radicalization and post-traumatic dissociation: clinical case of a young adolescent girl radicalized. Frontiers in psychiatry, 13, 793291.
Sarma, K. M., Carthy, S. L., & Cox, K. M. (2022). Mental disorder, psychological problems and terrorist behaviour: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 18(3), e1268.
Sarour, E. O., & El Keshky, M. E. S. (2022). Understanding extremist ideas: The mediating role of psychological well-being in the relationship between family functioning and extremism. Children and youth services review, 136, 106420.
Savenije, A., van Lawick, J., & Reijmers, E. (2023). Systemic perspectives in mental health, social work and youth care: A relational compass. Routledge.
Schulten, N. (2024). Practitioners’ perspectives on the challenges of dealing with the interaction between mental illness and violent extremism in Countering Violent Extremism (CVE). Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression, 16(4), 530–555. https://doi.org/10.1080/19434472.2022.2142268.
Schulten, N., Doosje, B., Spaaij, R., & Kamphuis, J. H. (2019). Radicalization, terrorism & psychopathology: State of affairs, gaps and priorities for future research. University of Amsterdam-Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences.
Thijssen, G., Masthoff, E., Sijtsema, J., & Bogaerts, S. (2023). Understanding violent extremism: Socio-demographic, criminal and psychopathological background characteristics of detainees residing in Dutch terrorism wings. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 23(2), 290-308.
Turner, J. C., Reynolds, K. J., Haslam, S. A., & Veenstra, K. E. (2006). Reconceptualizing personality: Producing individuality by defining the personal self. In T. Postmes & J. Jetten (Eds.), Individuality and the group: Advances in social identity (pp. 11–36). Sage Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446211946.n2
Webber, D., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2018). The social psychological makings of a terrorist. Current opinion in psychology, 19, 131-134.