Psychotherapeutic interventions in violent extremism: a cross-cultural review of radicalization pathways and resilience mechanisms

Violent extremism remains a complex and evolving threat to global peace, requiring proactive, cross-cultural strategies for prevention. This study examines the psychological and sociocultural foundations of radicalization through a comparative analysis of selected countries, with emphasis on non-Western contexts where religious and cultural identities are often marginalized. It adopts a future-oriented perspective to explore how cultural, social, political, economic, and religious factors interact to shape the rise and expression of violent extremism. A systematic literature review was conducted using 50 peer-reviewed articles retrieved from Google Scholar, EBSCOhost, SSRN, JSTOR, ResearchGate, and ScienceDirect. These studies focused on 15 countries representing diverse geographic, cultural, and socio-political contexts, with priority given to recent publications offering conceptual and theoretical insights into the drivers of violent extremism. Violent extremism emerges from the interplay of psychological, sociocultural, political, and economic factors. Structural grievances—such as marginalization, repression, and identity-based exclusion—often outweigh ideological motives. Across the 15 countries, cultural and regional specificities significantly shaped radicalization pathways. Several studies critiqued Western-centric models for their lack of cultural sensitivity, instead recommending community-based and contextually grounded approaches. The review highlights the limits of one-size-fits-all, securitized counter-extremism models and underscores the need for culturally responsive strategies. In non-Western contexts, effective prevention requires deeper engagement with local identities, historical grievances, and socio-political exclusion. Importantly, psychotherapy and trauma-informed interventions are identified as complementary tools that address collective trauma, identity crises, and social alienation, thereby strengthening resilience against radicalization.

The present review employs a comparative approach to analyzing violent radicalization across multiple national and continental contexts, aiming to identify common patterns of intervention and challenges. However, this comparison does not presuppose contextual equivalence among the cases examined. Processes of radicalization are historically produced, politically conditioned, and socially embedded phenomena, shaped by distinct trajectories of state formation, colonial legacies, security regimes, and collective grievances. Accordingly, comparison in this study is heuristic rather than homogenizing: it seeks to illuminate how similar preventive or rehabilitative instruments interact with profoundly different political and historical environments, rather than abstracting radicalization from its structural conditions. Violent extremism is an increasingly complex and adaptable global threat characterized by the use or justification of violence to promote ideological, political, or religious goals (United Nations, 2015; Schmid, 2013). Its expressions vary significantly across regions and cultural contexts, influenced by local grievances, historical factors, and sociopolitical conditions (Borum, 2011; Horgan, 2008). Examples include insurgent movements in parts of Africa and Asia (Botha and Abdile, 2019), ideologically motivated mass shootings in North America (Gill et al., 2017), far-right and ethno-nationalist mobilizations in Europe (Koehler, 2016), and religion-driven terrorism in the Middle East (Moghaddam, 2006). Violent extremism demonstrates remarkable flexibility in its forms and justifications.

In Latin America, violent extremism often intersects with organized criminal networks and political instability. This convergence blurs the lines between ideological and economic motivations (Felbab-Brown, 2020). In Australia, violent extremism has manifested as occasional but ideologically driven attacks, particularly from far-right groups (Grossman et al., 2017). Europe faces a complex threat landscape, where both transnational jihadist activities and a resurgence of xenophobic, ultra-nationalist ideologies pose significant risks. These challenges are intensified by growing socioeconomic inequalities, contentious immigration debates, and increasing political polarization, all of which jeopardize democratic norms and social cohesion (Ranstorp, 2016; Vidino, 2017).

Given the diverse cultural and geopolitical contexts in which violent extremism emerges, there is a pressing need for cross-cultural and interdisciplinary approaches that take local realities into account. Scholars increasingly argue that effective counter-extremism strategies should move beyond securitized models and include socio-psychological and community-based perspectives (Atran, 2010; Braddock and Horgan, 2016). This study addresses that need by conducting a comparative theoretical analysis of violent extremism across selected countries in Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, North America, and South America. The research investigates how cultural, historical, and political forces intersect to influence the processes of radicalization and the expression of extremist ideologies in various regions.

This review also examines the implications of these findings for global futures research and the use of mental health interventions. It considers how psychotherapeutic and trauma-informed approaches can be adjusted to address the psychological needs and cultural contexts of individuals who are vulnerable to or recovering from radicalization (Silke and Brown, 2016; Weine et al., 2020). By incorporating psychological insights within a culturally responsive framework, this study aims to enhance our understanding of violent extremism and to promote the development of sustainable, human-centered responses to one of today's most pressing threats.

Violent extremism across selected countries

Violent extremism in Nigeria

The emergence of religious extremism in Nigeria has elicited significant concerns due to the violent acts committed by extremists against those who do not share their radical beliefs. This issue is particularly pronounced in northeastern Nigeria, where militant groups such as the Islamic State West African Province (ISWAP) and Boko Haram have escalated their activities, posing serious threats to both national security and social cohesion. Their violent tactics, which include suicide bombings and mass abductions, not only inflict immediate harm but also cultivate an atmosphere of fear that undermines efforts to achieve lasting peace (Atoi, 2023; Tafida et al., 2023). The repercussions of these extremist factions extend beyond mere violence; they lead to a deterioration of social cohesion and disrupt community dynamics. To effectively break this cycle of violence fueled by radicalization, a comprehensive strategy is essential. Moreover, perceptions of violent extremism vary among Nigeria's diverse religious and ethnic groups. For example, the Hausa-Fulani and Muslim populations often focus on economic opportunities, whereas the Christian and Igbo communities prioritize religious values. Acknowledging these differing perspectives is vital for policymakers and practitioners to develop more effective, context-specific strategies (Guler et al., 2022).

Violent extremism in Kenya

Violent extremism in Kenya has been significantly influenced by Al Shabaab, a Sunni Islamist organization that originated in Somalia. Since the early 2000s, Al Shabaab has expanded its violent activities into Kenya, responding to the political turmoil in Somalia. The group has capitalized on the historical marginalization of certain communities within Kenya, creating an environment that is conducive to radicalization and recruitment. The porous border between Kenya and Somalia has facilitated the movement of militants, allowing Al Shabaab to establish networks that promote its extremist agenda. The lack of adequate surveillance and control along this border has further enabled the group to exploit security weaknesses. Al Shabaab utilizes propaganda to disseminate its ideology, specifically targeting marginalized individuals and communities who feel disconnected from the socio-political landscape of Kenya. The challenges posed by ethnic, sectarian, and political intolerance complicate efforts to counter the group's influence, as these divisions undermine national unity and create a fertile ground for extremist ideologies. Additionally, the presence of the Al-Hijrah sect, which is associated with Al Shabaab, highlights the connection between religious extremism and local grievances. This underscores the necessity for comprehensive strategies that address both security issues and the underlying socio-political factors contributing to violent extremism (Ekanem and Asukwo, 2022). In response to these emerging threats, the Kenyan government has launched initiatives such as Operation Linda Nchi and Operation Usalama Watch, with assistance from international allies. These efforts have included the deployment of the Kenya Defense Forces to southern Somalia to engage Al Shabaab insurgents, thereby aiding in the de-radicalization of the Kenyan population. However, a 2022 report from the Institute for Strategic Dialogue indicates that East African nations experiencing increased ethnic and tribal strife are more vulnerable to violent extremist groups, including Al Shabaab, Al Qaeda, and ISIS. Such conditions foster an environment where grievances and socio-economic issues can be exploited by extremist factions (Ekanem and Asukwo, 2022; Hansen et al., 2019).

Violent extremism in Ethiopia

Violent extremism in Ethiopia presents a significant threat that requires careful analysis. This issue is closely tied to destabilizing factors within the Horn of Africa, particularly the complications related to ethno-linguistic federalism, which intensifies divisions among communities. The fierce competition among different ethnic groups, combined with high levels of youth unemployment, creates an environment conducive to radicalization. Furthermore, the spread of small arms and issues regarding border encroachment complicate the security situation, increasing the potential for violent clashes. The Tigray conflict exemplifies how these destabilizing factors can escalate into widespread violence, highlighting the urgent dangers associated with violent extremism and its effects on regional stability. The shortcomings of revolutionary and inclusive leadership in addressing violent extremism have become increasingly evident, especially in the context of the Tigray conflict, leaving critical issues unaddressed. The strategic importance of the Horn of Africa, due to its proximity to the Middle East and historical connections with countries like China and India, underscores the region's significance in global trade and security. Ongoing instability and social marginalization have led to a breakdown of territorial control in several countries, complicating governance, and security as violent extremism manifests in various forms, including politically motivated violence and inter-communal conflict intertwined with socio-cultural and ethnic dynamics (Adeto, 2021; Nkomo and Buchanan-Clarke, 2020). Ethiopia has implemented a series of counter-violent extremism strategies aimed at reducing radicalization and violence. These efforts focus on fostering social unity, promoting economic equity, and enhancing community resilience against extremist ideologies. The government aims to encourage dialogue among diverse ethnic groups and prioritize youth empowerment to reduce the appeal of violent extremism. However, the effectiveness of these initiatives depends on a genuine commitment to addressing the root causes of violence and instability.

Violent extremism in Sudan

Sudan has been significantly affected by various forms of violent extremism, influenced by a complex mix of political, ethnic, and religious factors (Abdalla, 2019). Insurgent activities are particularly common in conflict-affected regions such as Darfur, South Kordofan, and Blue Nile, and are exacerbated by the presence of Islamist extremist factions like Al-Qaeda and ISIL. The country's history of socio-political challenges, including prolonged civil wars and the 2011 secession of South Sudan, has left many areas marginalized and created a fertile ground for extremist ideologies to thrive. The authoritarian rule of former President Omar al-Bashir and the political instability that followed his ousting in 2019 have further intensified these issues.

The COVID-19 pandemic has introduced additional complexity, as extremist groups have adapted their strategies. For a time, they engaged in public health initiatives to distract from their usual violent activities. This shift illustrates their ability to exploit global crises to advance their ideological goals. The pandemic also enabled the expansion of their networks and recruitment efforts, as groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIL portrayed the crisis as a sign of the decline of Western civilization and the oppression of Muslims (Jamie, 2023; Abdalla, 2019). In light of these challenges, the Sudanese government has had to reassess its strategies for managing health crises and combating violent extremism. In response, it has implemented public health protocols alongside counter-terrorism measures, recognizing the need to address the underlying factors contributing to extremism to achieve sustainable stability.

A 2020 report from the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) noted that Sudan experiences a lower incidence of violent extremism compared to other member states, largely due to significant governance reforms and initiatives aimed at alleviating poverty and political marginalization. However, the regional landscape shows that extremist organizations have established a presence in the Sahel, especially following the 2011 collapse of the Gaddafi regime in Libya, which created a power vacuum exploited by groups such as Boko Haram and the Islamic State in the Greater Sahara. Sudan's strategic location, bordering Mali and Burkina Faso, positions it as a potential haven for these extremist groups, thereby complicating counter-terrorism efforts. The intertwined sociopolitical issues across these nations further exacerbate the development of extremist beliefs, presenting substantial challenges to regional security measures (Jamie, 2023; Gallopin et al., 2021).

Violent extremism in Niger

Niger is increasingly threatened by violent extremism, primarily driven by Islamist militant organizations such as Boko Haram, the Islamic State in the Greater Sahara (ISGS), and Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). These groups exploit the country's ongoing socio-economic challenges, ethnic conflicts, and governance shortcomings to solidify their presence. The situation in Niger is complex, with the local population seen as both victims and participants in the violence. Contributing factors include poverty, political instability, ethnic strife, and environmental challenges, all of which exacerbate the issue. As one of the world's poorest countries, many Nigeriens—particularly in rural areas—lack access to essential services like education and healthcare. This lack of opportunity creates fertile ground for extremist recruitment since these groups often offer financial incentives and capitalize on grievances stemming from state neglect (Roux, 2019). Additionally, instability in neighboring countries such as Mali, Nigeria, and Libya worsens the prevalence of violent extremism in Niger, enabling the rise of transnational criminal networks involved in arms and drug trafficking, as well as human trafficking.

Ethnic tensions and communal conflict significantly shape the extremist landscape in Niger. The country's diverse demographics include groups such as the Tuareg, Fulani, Hausa, and Zarma. Historically, certain ethnic communities, particularly the Tuareg and Fulani, have faced marginalization, fostering resentment toward the central government. This has allowed extremist factions to present themselves as champions of these marginalized groups. For instance, ISGS has recruited Fulani youth by addressing their grievances related to discrimination and economic hardship (Sieza et al., 2023).

Violent extremism in Pakistan

Violent extremism in Pakistan is deeply connected to a complex range of socio-economic, psychological, religious, and cultural factors. One of the primary drivers of violent extremism in Pakistan is the early exposure of children to domestic violence, which has been shown to contribute to psychosocial disturbances, including trauma, low self-worth, and emotional dysregulation—factors that may render individuals more vulnerable to radical ideologies and recruitment by extremist groups (Yousaf, 2019; Malik et al., 2020). Research has demonstrated a significant correlation between childhood trauma and later involvement in violent extremism, emphasizing the urgent need for early intervention and support for those affected (Tsheole et al., 2023). Continued exposure to violence between parents and poor parent-child relationships can result in a detachment from conventional moral values, subsequently increasing the likelihood of extremist behavior among young adults. The historical context of radicalization in Pakistan, especially concerning religious extremism, has created an environment where children are frequently subjected to violence, leading to lasting psychological effects and desensitization. Additionally, poverty plays a crucial role in fostering violent extremism, as socio-economic hardships create vulnerabilities that extremist groups exploit by offering financial incentives and a sense of community. This dynamic has further intensified sectarian tensions and resistance to extremism among certain groups in the population (Haleem et al., 2023). Education is vital in combating violent extremism, as inadequate access to quality education in marginalized areas makes individuals more susceptible to extremist ideologies. Some religious educational institutions have been criticized for promoting narrow interpretations of religious texts, which can exacerbate sectarian tensions and intolerance. To reduce the risk of recruitment by violent extremists, it is essential to incorporate counterterrorism narratives, such as Paigham-e-Pakistan, into public education and provide rehabilitation services (Ahmed and Shahzad, 2021; Bhatti, 2022). The blending of religion and cultural identity in Pakistan allows extremist groups to manipulate religious sentiments for their agendas. Cultural factors, including concepts of honor and tribal loyalty, further contribute to the rise of violent extremism. In many tribal and rural regions, retaliatory violence is often perceived as a way to protect honor, creating an environment where extremist groups can recruit individuals by framing their actions as defensively aligned with cultural identity. The Pakistani government has initiated various measures to address violent extremism, including the establishment of deradicalization camps that offer rehabilitation services, such as corrective religious education and vocational training. The Paigham-e-Pakistan initiative aims to counter extremist ideologies through a structured deradicalization process, coordinated by the National Counter Terrorism Authority (NACTA), which advocates for a comprehensive approach to tackling violent extremism (Naseer and Shaheen, 2023).

Violent extremism in Myanmar

In Myanmar, violent extremism and radicalization pose significant challenges, particularly among the youth population, who increasingly align themselves with ethnic armed organizations (EAOs) driven by ethnonationalist ideologies. This trend often arises from a collective desire for political recognition, territorial autonomy, and control over natural resources, which are viewed as essential for the self-determination and empowerment of historically marginalized ethnic communities (Walton, 2017; South and Lall, 2018). Young people are drawn to these groups as a means of pursuing liberation and addressing historical injustices, particularly within a context marked by systemic inequality. The protracted conflicts in Myanmar, which have lasted for over seventy years, are closely linked to the rise of ethnonationalism and radical ideologies. These ideologies reflect the unfulfilled social and political aspirations of various minority groups, resulting in deep-seated resentment and a continuous cycle of violence. As nationalism intensifies, it tends to escalate existing tensions, complicating efforts to achieve lasting peace and stability in the region (Emah, 2020). To address the challenges posed by violent extremism and radicalization, a range of initiatives has been introduced to tackle their root causes. These initiatives focus on fostering dialogue among various ethnic groups, improving socio-economic conditions, and promoting political inclusivity. It is essential to assess the effectiveness of these approaches, as they should not only mitigate immediate threats but also address the deeper grievances that lead youth toward radicalization and violence. The Government of Myanmar has prioritized combating terrorism while actively working to prevent the normalization of violent extremism. This includes efforts to promote tolerance and encourage dialogue among different faiths and cultures. A significant initiative is the establishment of a network of 130 interfaith groups nationwide, which serve as platforms for dialogue and cooperation. This endeavor aims to bridge divides and enhance understanding among diverse communities, demonstrating a commitment to creating a more peaceful society by addressing the root causes of extremism. By emphasizing interfaith and intercultural communication, Myanmar seeks to foster an environment of tolerance and mutual respect (Chowdhury and Sifat, 2024).

Violent extremism in Indonesia

Since gaining independence, Indonesia has faced persistent challenges related to violent extremism and radicalization, with extremist ideologies penetrating societal institutions, including segments of the political elite and the national security apparatus. One of the most concerning trends is the ideological infiltration of the education system, which has increasingly served as a channel for radical narratives targeting youth, thereby amplifying their susceptibility to extremist recruitment (Azca, 2020; Fealy, 2018; IPAC, 2019; Nisa, 2021). The fusion of extremist ideologies with societal norms in Indonesia presents a growing threat to the nation's future, particularly regarding the promotion of tolerance, pluralism, and social cohesion (Adnan and Amaliyah, 2021; Ali-Fauzi and Kartika, 2024). Extremist organizations have effectively leveraged social media to disseminate misinformation, manipulate public discourse, and attract vulnerable individuals—especially youth—into ideologically insulated echo chambers that reinforce radical worldviews (Ramadhan and Hapsari, 2021). The interplay between Islam and politics in Indonesia further complicates this landscape, as religious narratives are frequently instrumentalized for political gain, heightening sociopolitical tensions and shaping both governance and policymaking. In this context, the role of women in countering violent extremism is increasingly recognized as both transformative and necessary. Women's organizations actively challenge patriarchal norms and seek to dismantle the structural marginalization of women within terrorist networks. Through education, community engagement, and empowerment, women can contribute to delegitimizing extremist ideologies and cultivating peaceful, inclusive alternatives (Zuhri et al., 2023; Jamhari and Testriono, 2021). Promoting women's agency in CVE initiatives not only amplifies their unique sociocultural insights but also fosters a more resilient and harmonious society.

Violent extremism in Jordan

In Jordan, violent extremism and radicalization are inseparable from the broader historical and geopolitical dynamics of the Middle East, particularly the protracted Arab–Israeli conflict and its enduring regional repercussions. Jordan's radicalization landscape cannot be understood without reference to the structural violence generated by the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories, especially the West Bank, which has produced persistent patterns of displacement, political grievance, and collective trauma across generations. The conflict has contributed not only to regional instability but also to the normalization of securitized political discourse, resistance narratives, and moral polarization throughout the Levant (Barakat and Milton, 2020; Al-Rawashdeh, 2018). Israel's prolonged military occupation of the West Bank—marked by land expropriation, settlement expansion, mobility restrictions, and recurrent episodes of armed violence—has functioned as a central symbolic and material reference point in Jordanian political consciousness. Given Jordan's demographic composition, which includes a substantial population of Palestinian origin, the lived and inherited experiences of dispossession, statelessness, and perceived international injustice are not external to Jordanian society but embedded within it. These dynamics shape collective grievances, inform political narratives, and influence the moral framing through which violence, resistance, and legitimacy are interpreted by segments of the population. Internally, challenges related to governance, tribal structures, and the long-term presence of refugee populations—particularly from Palestine, Iraq, and Syria—further complicate the terrain of radicalization. Jordan's role as a host state for displaced populations has placed sustained pressure on economic resources, social cohesion, and public services, while simultaneously limiting political avenues for grievance articulation. These conditions have contributed to environments of marginalization, youth frustration, and identity insecurity, especially in urban peripheries and refugee-hosting communities (UNDP, 2016; Al-Hawatmeh and Al-Kilani, 2021). Such structural constraints provide fertile ground for extremist recruitment, particularly where narratives of global injustice resonate with localized experiences of exclusion. Jihadist ideologies have gained traction among marginalized populations where social exclusion, economic precarity, and limited political participation intersect. In this context, radicalization often reflects not only religious mobilization, but also political protest refracted through theological idioms. The consequences of extremist violence in Jordan have been significant, with over 132 terrorist incidents resulting in 156 deaths and undermining development initiatives and social stability (Al-Sharafat, 2024; Al-Badayneh et al., 2024). Empirical studies indicate that religious commitment among Jordanian youth may correlate with susceptibility to violent extremism when grounded in rigid, politicized, or grievance-driven interpretations of religion. However, research also demonstrates that inclusive religious education emphasizing ethical pluralism, critical reflection, and social responsibility can function as a protective factor against radicalization. This underscores that religion itself is not a causal driver of extremism; rather, it is the politicization of religious narratives within contexts of injustice and unresolved conflict that heightens vulnerability (Al-Hassan and Hijazeen, 2020). In response, Jordan has implemented counter-violent extremism strategies that emphasize community engagement, religious dialogue, and educational reform. Nevertheless, as long as regional conflicts—particularly the Israeli–Palestinian conflict—remain unresolved, and domestic socio-economic inequalities persist, CVE efforts face structural limitations. Sustainable prevention of violent extremism in Jordan, therefore, requires not only psychosocial and educational interventions, but also broader political solutions that address regional injustice, restore trust in governance, and expand legitimate pathways for political expression (Suhemat and Assasfa, 2022; Allayarovna, 2023).

Violent extremism in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Violent extremism in Bosnia and Herzegovina is closely linked to the country's complex sociopolitical history, particularly the aftermath of the 1990s conflicts and the legacy of the Bosnian War. The war left deep ethnic divisions, collective trauma, and weakened state institutions, creating structural vulnerabilities that extremist groups can exploit (Buljubašić, 2023). Persistent political corruption, fragmented governance, and economic stagnation contribute to social marginalization, particularly among youth, forming a set of push factors for radicalization. Pull factors include exposure to transnational extremist networks, online radicalization, and ideological appeals that exploit grievances related to injustice, historical victimhood, and perceived threats to religious or ethnic identity (Ahić, 2022).

The educational system, often divided along ethnic lines, reinforces social fragmentation and limits opportunities for intergroup dialogue, further exacerbating vulnerability to extremist messaging (Šuško, 2022). Post-conflict trauma, including loss, displacement, and intergenerational psychological scars, amplifies susceptibility to radical narratives, highlighting the importance of integrating psychosocial support into prevention strategies (Buljubašić, 2023). In response, Bosnia and Herzegovina has implemented multiple measures to counter violent extremism. Community-based initiatives aim to promote social cohesion and interethnic dialogue, often led in partnership with local NGOs and civil society organizations. The Islamic Community of Bosnia and Herzegovina plays a critical role in promoting moderate interpretations of Islam, providing religious guidance, and engaging youth through educational and outreach programs (Ahić, 2022; Šuško, 2022). School-based programs emphasize tolerance and civic engagement, while municipal and NGO-led projects focus on vocational training and youth empowerment to address socio-economic marginalization.

Despite these efforts, significant challenges remain. Resource constraints, limited inter-agency coordination, and entrenched political divisions hinder program reach and sustainability. Trust-building with communities affected by past conflicts can be slow, and interventions must navigate culturally and religiously sensitive contexts to avoid perceptions of external control or stigmatization (Buljubašić, 2023; Šuško, 2022). Early evaluations indicate modest success in improving intergroup understanding and reducing the appeal of extremist ideologies among targeted youth, but comprehensive, long-term monitoring is still lacking. Therefore, addressing violent extremism in Bosnia and Herzegovina thus requires integrating psychosocial support, educational reform, economic opportunities, and culturally grounded religious guidance, all coordinated within a context-sensitive, post-conflict recovery framework.

Violent extremism in Australia

Violent extremism is an escalating concern in Australia, influenced by a complex interplay of social, political, and psychological factors. The drivers of extremism are typically categorized into push and pull factors. Push factors include marginalization, socioeconomic inequality, racial or religious discrimination, and a perceived lack of political agency. These conditions can generate feelings of alienation, frustration, and resentment, making individuals more vulnerable to extremist recruitment. On the other hand, pull factors include the appeal of ideological belonging, empowerment, and identity affirmation, which can attract individuals into radicalized networks or belief systems (Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, 2022; Cherney and Murphy, 2016; Grossman et al., 2021). The internet plays a significant role in this phenomenon by providing vulnerable individuals with access to extremist content and facilitating connections with like-minded groups (Ramadhan and Hapsari, 2021; Scrivens et al., 2021). The repercussions of violent extremism are profound, affecting not only the victims but also the wider community by generating fear, fostering social divisions, and undermining trust. The rise of far-right extremism, particularly after incidents like the Christchurch Mosque attacks, underscores the need for a more comprehensive understanding of the social dynamics that contribute to such violence (Harris-Hogan, 2023; Mansouri, 2020). Addressing the psychological factors that drive individuals toward extremism—such as the quest for meaning and the need for belonging—is essential for effective counter-extremism strategies (Jaśko et al., 2020). In this context, Australia has implemented various initiatives aimed at countering violent extremism (CVE) to enhance community resilience and promote social cohesion. The “Living Safe Together” strategy emphasizes the importance of collaboration among community organizations, educational institutions, and law enforcement agencies. Additionally, assessment tools like the Violent Extremism Risk Assessment – Version 2 Revised (VERA-2R) identify and manage individuals at risk of radicalization (Belton and Cherney, 2024; Cherney, 2024). There is also an acknowledgment of the need for a pluralistic and non-punitive approach toward radicalized youth offenders, focusing on customized interventions that consider their developmental and psychosocial challenges (Barracosa and March, 2022). Ultimately, effectively combating violent extremism in Australia requires a comprehensive strategy that addresses the various factors contributing to radicalization, the effects of violence on communities, and the implementation of thorough counter-extremism initiatives. By fostering resilience and addressing the root causes of extremism, Australia can work toward creating a more cohesive and safe community (Oberg et al., 2023).

Violent extremism in France

In France, violent extremism is driven by a complex interplay of social, psychological, economic, and political factors. Individuals vulnerable to radicalization often face existential distress, feelings of alienation, and a perceived lack of political agency, which can render extremist ideologies appealing as mechanisms of identity formation and emotional coping. Moreover, economic disenfranchisement, urban segregation, and social marginalization have been linked to heightened support for radical political and religious movements, particularly among youth from immigrant or postcolonial backgrounds. These dynamics are further exacerbated by polarized public discourse, securitized integration policies, and France's contentious laïcité (secularism) model, which can deepen identity conflicts and exclusion (Fadil et al., 2021; Lahnait, 2021; Käsehage, 2021; Khosrokhavar, 2017). The Internet significantly facilitates radicalization, with studies showing a correlation between the consumption of online religious content and extremist tendencies, particularly among youth (Ramadhan and Hapsari, 2021). Extremist organizations leverage digital platforms for propaganda and recruitment, intensifying personal grievances. This digital impact, alongside socio-economic and psychological hurdles, fosters an environment that is ripe for radicalization. Violent extremism has a far-reaching influence in France, causing societal separation and increased discrimination against minority and Muslim communities, further alienating these groups (Scull et al., 2019). The Yellow Vest protests exemplify how feelings of disconnection can push individuals toward extremism as they seek empowerment amid a shifting socio-political environment. Moreover, violent extremism incurs economic burdens, straining public resources through increased security expenditures and a decline in tourism, thereby reinforcing social disparities (Shawe and McAndrew, 2023). In response, France has implemented a range of counter-violent extremism (CVE) strategies, including legislative changes and enhanced surveillance in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attacks (Chalkiadaki, 2015). Nonetheless, these strategies have sparked debates regarding their efficacy and the risk of intensifying feelings of exclusion among Muslim communities. President Macron's efforts to identify radicalization across various public domains have been criticized for potentially cultivating suspicion rather than promoting vigilance (Ahmanideen and Iner, 2023; Bourekba, 2019). France can prevent violent extremism and develop a more unified society by fostering community resilience and resolving underlying grievances (Iqbal et al., 2022).

Violent extremism in Spain

In Spain, violent extremism poses a persistent threat shaped by the country's historical experiences with terrorism, most notably the 2004 Madrid train bombings. Contemporary radicalization is influenced by a convergence of socioeconomic inequality, political alienation, and psychological vulnerability, particularly among youth experiencing social marginalization. Extremist groups exploit digital platforms and social media to recruit disillusioned individuals, fostering online echo chambers and accelerating ideological indoctrination. The consequences of violent extremism extend beyond physical harm, instilling widespread fear, social polarization, and erosion of trust within affected communities (Rottweiler and Gill, 2022; Alonso and Vidino, 2020). This climate may exacerbate social tensions, particularly along ethnic and religious lines, potentially leading to retaliatory violence (Juarros-Basterretxea et al., 2018). Additionally, terrorism can disrupt local economies by requiring increased security measures and resulting in a decline in tourism. In the long term, such extremism threatens civil liberties, as governments may implement stricter security regulations (García-Mingo et al., 2023). Spain's response includes a variety of counter-radicalization initiatives aimed at addressing the underlying factors that contribute to extremism and promoting social cohesion. These initiatives emphasize community involvement and the promotion of inclusive narratives, alongside educational programs designed to enhance critical thinking skills among young people (Álvarez-Alfageme et al., 2021). However, there are concerns that these efforts could inadvertently marginalize certain communities if perceived as punitive. To effectively counter violent extremism, Spain needs a holistic strategy that addresses socio-economic issues and fosters social integration. Such a strategy could strengthen societal resilience against extremist ideologies.

Violent extremism in Colombia

Violent extremism in Colombia remains a persistent and multifaceted challenge deeply rooted in the country's historical context of protracted armed conflict, narco-trafficking, and entrenched socio-economic disparities. Armed groups such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the National Liberation Army (ELN) exploit widespread feelings of marginalization and political exclusion to recruit vulnerable populations. Additionally, rural poverty, limited access to education, and inadequate state presence in peripheral regions exacerbate susceptibility to radicalization. The illicit drug trade functions as a critical financial lifeline for these factions, perpetuating cycles of violence and undermining efforts toward stability. The ramifications of violent extremism extend beyond immediate physical harm, resulting in profound psychological trauma, pervasive fear, and erosion of social cohesion, which collectively hamper Colombia's path to sustainable development (Romero and Rojas, 2019; Dudley, 2020; United Nations, 2021; Espejo, 2021). Long-term effects of violence in Colombia include deep-rooted social divisions and ongoing conflicts that negatively impact foreign investment and tourism. Communities affected by violence often face intergenerational trauma and widespread hopelessness, particularly among the youth. In response to these challenges, Colombia has implemented counter-radicalization strategies aimed at reintegrating former combatants by providing educational and vocational opportunities. Community-level initiatives focus on promoting dialogue and reconciliation to build trust among different social groups. However, the effectiveness of these initiatives is debated, with critics arguing that there needs to be a stronger focus on addressing fundamental socio-economic inequalities. Civil society organizations play an important role in combating extremism by fostering social inclusion and supporting victims (Nieto-Valdivieso, 2022).

Violent extremism in the United States

Violent extremism in the United States has emerged as a critical security and societal concern, characterized by a notable increase in domestic terrorism and individualized processes of radicalization (Jaśko et al., 2022). Contributing factors include persistent socioeconomic disparities, heightened political polarization, and the proliferation of extremist ideologies across the political spectrum. Both far-right and far-left groups have gained traction, with individuals experiencing political marginalization often resorting to extremism as a form of identity assertion and grievance expression. The online environment plays a significant role in this dynamic, as extremist organizations exploit social media platforms to propagate propaganda, recruit susceptible individuals—particularly youth—and create ideologically homogeneous echo chambers that reinforce radical beliefs. Psychological dimensions such as envy have also been identified as catalysts that may predispose individuals toward embracing extremist worldviews. The impact of violent extremism is profound, resulting in fatalities, injuries, and widespread psychological trauma (Pew Research Center, 2021; Jaśko et al., 2022; Moncrieff and Lienard, 2023). Events such as the Capitol riots on January 6, 2021, highlight the threats posed to democratic institutions and social cohesion (Campion and Poynting, 2021). This form of extremism exacerbates existing social divisions related to race and ideology, increasing polarization and the potential for retaliatory violence. From an economic perspective, terrorism requires stricter security measures, undermines public confidence, and negatively impacts local businesses and tourism. As governments respond to perceived threats with harsher security standards, these measures can gradually erode civil liberties. In response, the U.S. government has implemented counter-radicalization strategies to address radicalization's root causes and promote social unity. These include the Department of Homeland Security initiatives focused on enhancing community resilience. However, the effectiveness of these programs is a matter of debate, with concerns that they may alienate certain communities if viewed as punitive. The Department of Homeland Security has also noted similarities between violent extremism and targeted violence, emphasizing the importance of vigilant bystanders in reporting suspicious activities (Eisenman et al., 2022). Furthermore, the connection between incarceration and subsequent violent extremism is significant; radicalization in prison settings increases the risk of extremist violence upon release (LaFree and Freilich, 2018).

Study design

This study employed a qualitative, cross-cultural comparative research design to explore the manifestations, causes, and countermeasures of violent extremism across fifteen diverse countries. The research aimed to identify both common and context-specific factors influencing radicalization and to assess how psychotherapeutic interventions are integrated into counter-violent extremism (CVE) strategies. The methodology consisted of four main components: country selection, data collection, thematic analysis, and cross-case comparison. In addition, the study was designed as a systematic qualitative literature review, following established standards for transparency and reproducibility in qualitative and mixed-method reviews. Where applicable, the review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to enhance methodological clarity, particularly in relation to search strategy, screening, and study selection.

Country selection

A purposive sampling strategy was used to include countries representing a wide range of geopolitical, cultural, religious, and socio-economic backgrounds. The criteria for selection included (1) documented cases of violent extremism; (2) the presence of active CVE policies or programs; (3) regional diversity; and (4) availability of data on psychotherapy use in CVE. Based on these criteria, fifteen countries were chosen: Nigeria, Kenya, Ethiopia, Sudan, Niger, Pakistan, Myanmar, Indonesia, Jordan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Australia, France, Spain, Colombia, and the United States. This selection allowed for comparing Western, African, Middle Eastern, Southeast Asian, and Latin American views on violent extremism. Country-level inclusion was further guided by the availability of peer-reviewed studies that explicitly addressed psychological, psychosocial, or community-based dimensions of radicalization and prevention, ensuring analytical comparability across cases while preserving contextual specificity.

Data sources and search strategy

The study utilized secondary data from peer-reviewed academic journals, government reports, policy briefs, and gray literature. A total of fifty scholarly sources, published between 2019 and 2024, were systematically identified using academic databases such as Google Scholar, JSTOR, ScienceDirect, EBSCO, SSRN, PubMed, PsycINFO, ProQuest, and ResearchGate. The search involved combinations of keywords like “violent extremism,” “radicalization,” “CVE,” “psychotherapy,” “trauma,” and specific country names. Only sources that provided empirical or conceptual insights into the causes of radicalization, cultural influences, and therapeutic interventions were included. To enhance transparency, database searches were conducted using predefined Boolean search strings adapted to each platform. Core search expressions included: (“violent extremism” OR radicalization OR radicalization) AND (psychotherapy OR psychology OR “mental health” OR trauma OR “psychosocial intervention”) AND (prevention OR deradicalization OR CVE OR P/CVE). Searches were limited to English-language publications. Inclusion criteria comprised peer-reviewed articles with a clear psychological, psychosocial, or community-oriented focus on violent extremism, prevention, or intervention. Exclusion criteria included editorials, opinion pieces, purely securitized or military analyses, and publications lacking sufficient methodological or conceptual detail (see Figure 1).

Screening and study selection

The systematic literature search identified a total of 312 records through database searching across Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar. An additional 12 records were identified through manual screening of reference lists and citation tracking, resulting in 324 records before deduplication. After removing 28 duplicate records, 296 unique records remained for title and abstract screening. Title and abstract screening were conducted to assess relevance to the study's focus on violent extremism, radicalization pathways, and psychosocial or psychotherapeutic interventions. At this stage, 186 records were excluded due to irrelevance, including studies focusing exclusively on military counterterrorism, surveillance technologies, or descriptive accounts without analytical engagement. A total of 110 records were retained for full-text assessment. Full-text screening of these 110 articles resulted in the exclusion of 60 studies. Primary reasons for exclusion included: insufficient focus on psychosocial or mental health interventions (n = 23), lack of empirical or theoretical grounding in violent extremism (n = 18), inadequate methodological transparency (n = 12), and duplication of findings reported elsewhere (n = 7). Following this rigorous selection process, 50 studies met all inclusion criteria and were included in the final qualitative synthesis. These studies represented diverse national and regional contexts across Africa, Asia, Europe, the Middle East, North America, South America, and Australia, encompassing qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods designs. The selected studies formed the evidentiary basis for the comparative, context-sensitive analysis presented in this review.

Data analysis

Data were analyzed using thematic analysis, a qualitative method well-suited for identifying patterns across multiple cases. Following Braun and Clarke (2006) six-phase framework, the analysis began with data familiarization and initial code generation, followed by the construction of themes that encapsulate recurring motifs in the data. Key themes included: motives for radicalization (e.g., poverty, political marginalization, online radicalization), cultural influences (e.g., ethnic identity, religious institutions, historical narratives), and therapeutic CVE responses (e.g., trauma-focused therapy, faith-based counseling). Each country was treated as a unit of analysis. Comparative coding facilitated the classification of findings under three overarching categories: (1) cultural thread, reflecting indigenous or region-specific belief systems and social norms; (2) radicalization framework, encompassing the primary psychological and socio-political pathways to extremism; and (3) social dynamics, including the role of family, community, and state in shaping responses to radicalization. Given the heterogeneity of study designs, a formal risk-of-bias tool was not applied. Instead, a narrative quality and relevance assessment was conducted, focusing on conceptual rigor, methodological transparency, contextual sensitivity, and relevance to psychological or psychosocial intervention frameworks.

Methodological scope and limitations

This article synthesizes findings from existing peer-reviewed literature rather than presenting original empirical data. Interpretive statements in the discussion, therefore, reflect analytical patterns and thematic convergences identified across the reviewed studies. This synthesis enables cross-cultural comparison while remaining attentive to contextual variability, methodological heterogeneity, and documented challenges in the implementation of counter-violent extremism interventions.

Cross-case comparison

To enable cross-cultural comparison, a matrix table (see Table 1) summarizing key findings across the fifteen countries was constructed. This allowed for the identification of both convergent and divergent patterns, especially about the cultural embeddedness of radical ideologies and the integration of psychotherapy into CVE programs.

Consistent with the study's comparative framing outlined in the introduction, this initial grouping—based on similarities in research focus and interventional instruments—is treated as heuristic rather than homogenizing and is supplemented by a contextual analytical layer that foregrounds political history, state–society relations, and conflict trajectories as constitutive variables in radicalization processes. Accordingly, countries are not approached as equivalent or interchangeable sites of intervention, but as historically produced and politically situated contexts in which the meaning, drivers, and expressions of violent radicalization are shaped by distinct legacies of political violence, governance models, migration regimes, and regional geopolitical dynamics. Comparative analysis is therefore grounded not only in methodological convenience but also in an interpretive reading of how structural and historical conditions shape both pathways into extremism and the reception, adaptation, or failure of intervention strategies.

The analysis highlighted both universally shared drivers (e.g., youth marginalization) and culturally distinct influences (e.g., tribal structures in Jordan or religious schools in Indonesia).

Ethical considerations

The study relied solely on publicly available secondary data, which means that no human subjects were involved, and formal ethical clearance was not necessary. Nevertheless, we carefully evaluated the credibility and context of the sources to ensure a representation of diverse viewpoints and to minimize bias in our interpretations.

The findings of this cross-cultural review are organized into three main analytical categories: (1) cultural thread; (2) radicalization framework; and (3) social dynamics. These categories highlight the interconnected forces that lead to violent extremism in different national contexts, while emphasizing the need for culturally appropriate therapeutic intervention (see also Tables 2–4).

Cultural thread

The “Cultural Thread” refers to the indigenous belief systems, religious worldviews, and social norms that shape the understanding and experience of violent extremism. In countries such as Pakistan, Myanmar, and Indonesia, violent extremism is often closely linked to religious fundamentalism, which is influenced by madrasa-based education and ethno-religious identity politics (Adnan and Amaliyah, 2021; Ali-Fauzi and Kartika, 2024; Ramadhan and Hapsari, 2021). In these contexts, radical ideologies are reinforced by strict interpretations of religious doctrine, framing extremism as a legitimate path to spiritual or political fulfillment. In contrast, in Nigeria, Kenya, Ethiopia, Sudan, and Niger, radicalization is deeply rooted in ethnic and tribal affiliations, often exacerbated by the legacy of colonialism and inter-ethnic competition for resources (Zuhri et al., 2023). While these conflicts may be presented as political, they are fundamentally grounded in cultural histories that favor certain groups while marginalizing others. While Spain, France, and Australia are often grouped within Western counter-radicalization frameworks, their political and historical contexts differ substantially and produce distinct dynamics of radicalization. France's experience is inseparable from its colonial history, republican secularism (laïcité), and a strong centralized security state, which shape both Muslim marginalization and counter-terrorism responses. Spain, by contrast, is marked by the legacy of ETA-related political violence and a decentralized governance structure, resulting in different relationships between identity, violence, and state authority. Australia represents a settler-colonial context with a distinct migration regime, geographically externalized security concerns, and radicalization dynamics more closely linked to identity, belonging, and global ideological diffusion than to domestic historical insurgency. These differences highlight the limitations of policy transferability, even within broadly comparable liberal democratic settings. In France, Spain, and Australia, the cultural thread is shaped by immigration and secularism, resulting in tensions between minority religious cultures and dominant national values. This friction can lead to feelings of alienation among youth who feel culturally displaced or discriminated against based on their identity (Blee and Creasap, 2010; McCauley and Moskalenko, 2017). In the United States, the cultural thread includes a mix of individualism, racial history, and ideological polarization. Online communities often reinforce conspiratorial or nativist ideologies, capitalizing on deep-seated cultural anxieties related to race, immigration, and government overreach (Berger, 2018; ADL, 2022). Finally, in Colombia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, the cultural legacies of civil war, displacement, and narco-politics frame extremist narratives in terms of resistance and self-determination, particularly among rural or demobilized populations (Dudley, 2020; Romero and Rojas, 2019).

Radicalization framework

This category explores the psychological, ideological, and socio-political pathways through which individuals become radicalized. In many countries, a common driver is the search for identity and belonging, particularly among disenfranchised youth (McCauley and Moskalenko, 2017). In nations such as France, Spain, and the United States, radicalization often stems from existential crises, feelings of marginalization, and a desire for empowerment through ideological solidarity (Pew Research Center, 2021). In Colombia, Pakistan, and parts of Africa, factors such as rural poverty, lack of education, and inequality contribute to an environment conducive to recruitment into extremist groups or militias (Sánchez and Gómez, 2018; Dudley, 2020). These groups frequently promise material rewards, identity, and the opportunity for revenge.

Indonesia and Jordan are often juxtaposed in discussions of religiously framed radicalization; however, their socio-political and historical trajectories are fundamentally dissimilar and require differentiated analytical treatment. Indonesia's radicalization landscape is shaped by its post-authoritarian transition, decentralized governance, and long-standing religious pluralism, within which extremist movements operate alongside robust civil Islamic organizations. Jordan, by contrast, cannot be understood outside its geopolitical positioning in the Middle East, its role as a host to displaced populations, and the enduring impact of regional conflicts. In particular, the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, including the occupation of the West Bank, has contributed to political grievances, security discourses, and mobilizational narratives that directly influence radicalization pathways and state responses in Jordan. In countries like Pakistan, Indonesia, and Jordan, religious radicalization plays a significant role, with fundamentalist ideologies utilizing scriptural literalism and grievances tied to geopolitical marginalization to attract followers (Ali-Fauzi and Kartika, 2024; Jamhari and Testriono, 2021). In Western contexts, particularly in the U.S., the Internet serves as a pivotal tool for radicalization, enabling the spread of both far-right and Islamist ideologies (Berger, 2018; ADL, 2022). Additionally, envy has been identified as a psychological trigger for radicalization, as individuals may feel resentment toward others who appear to have social or economic advantages (McCauley and Moskalenko, 2017). In Myanmar, the radicalization of youth is strongly influenced by ethnonationalist narratives and the quest for political recognition, especially among minority ethnic groups (UNDP, 2021).

Social dynamics

The final category—Social Dynamics—examines the role of family, community, institutional settings, and state policy in shaping either resistance to or support for violent extremism. In sub-Saharan Africa, weak governance and corruption have eroded community trust in state authority. This vacuum has been filled by insurgent groups, such as Boko Haram, which often present themselves as alternative providers of governance. In these regions, community-based psychotherapy has been introduced as a tool for reintegrating former combatants (Zuhri et al., 2023). In Indonesia, the active involvement of women's organizations in countering violent extremism (CVE) emphasizes the importance of community engagement. Women serve as de-radicalizing agents within families and society, challenging patriarchal norms and extremist ideologies (Jamhari and Testriono, 2021). In France and Australia, psychological resilience programs are increasingly integrated into education and social policies to mitigate the effects of youth alienation and social fragmentation (Blee and Creasap, 2010; ADL, 2022). These programs promote civic identity, media literacy, and critical thinking. In Pakistan, Jordan, and Indonesia, religious counseling has become central to deradicalization programs. Imams and moderate scholars engage youth in reformist theological discussions to counteract extremist teachings (Ali-Fauzi and Kartika, 2024; Ramadhan and Hapsari, 2021). In Colombia and Bosnia, CVE strategies focus on counseling within prisons and post-release reintegration, recognizing that many radicalized individuals emerge from conflict zones or correctional systems (Romero and Rojas, 2019; United Nations, 2021).

Psychotherapeutic interventions in countering violent extremism

Multilevel psychotherapeutic strategies: from individual to community

Psychotherapeutic intervention in the field of countering violent extremism (CVE) needs to go beyond the narrow scope of traditional clinical practice. While traditional psychotherapy remains a useful tool, its availability is often limited to privileged settings, leaving out populations in vulnerable or marginalized communities (Lewis, 2022).

Moreover, an exclusively clinical and individual-centered focus risks obscuring the fundamentally social, relational, and group-based nature of radicalization processes, as emphasized in social psychological research.

Therefore, there is an urgent need to adopt a more inclusive and adaptable approach, which includes trauma-informed and integrative practices involving collaboration among mental health professionals, educators, social workers, law enforcement, and community organizations (Kapustina et al., 2024).

Moreover, an exclusively clinical and individual-centered focus risks obscuring the fundamentally social, relational, and group-based nature of radicalization processes, as emphasized in social psychological research. CVE therapeutic strategies should include not only individual therapy but also systemic and community-based models.

Social psychological frameworks, such as Moghaddam's staircase model, highlight how individuals move toward violence through progressive group-based processes shaped by perceived injustice, moral disengagement, and narrowing social alternatives, underscoring the importance of interventions that operate beyond the individual level.

For example, empathy-building programs and psychoeducational workshops have shown promise in fostering tolerance and encouraging critical self-reflection among at-risk youth (French et al., 2019). Likewise, art therapy initiatives that support social cohesion in post-conflict or segregated environments have yielded positive psychosocial results (Santoprete, 2019). Systemic family therapy has also been effective in restoring broken social bonds, providing a space to renegotiate identity and group belonging, which extremist ideologies often exploit (Bhatti, 2022). Additionally, integrating person-centered therapeutic approaches into the broader frameworks of justice and security—especially within policing, counterterrorism, and correctional systems—can lead to more compassionate, trust-based governance.

This alignment mirrors European CVE practices, particularly those promoted by the Radicalisation Awareness Network (RAN), which emphasize prevention, social inclusion, and community engagement rather than exclusively therapeutic correction. Such strategies facilitate psychological healing and bolster institutional legitimacy in the eyes of historically marginalized communities (Lewis, 2022).

Psychological resilience and social identity dynamics

At the core of radicalization are deeply rooted psychological vulnerabilities. Many studies have shown that identity crises, unresolved trauma, perceived social marginalization, and emotional neglect are key factors in the process of radicalization (French et al., 2019; Santoprete, 2019).

However, social psychological research cautions against interpreting these vulnerabilities solely as individual deficits, emphasizing instead how they are activated and reinforced through group dynamics, collective narratives of victimhood, and intergroup polarization (Dooje et al., 2016).

People dealing with depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), or chronic social isolation often seek meaning, identity, and belonging—needs that extremist groups are skilled at exploiting (Berger, 2018). Psychotherapy is essential in addressing these vulnerabilities. Techniques such as Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) have proven effective in helping individuals recognize and challenge maladaptive beliefs and cognitive distortions that support radical ideologies (Almalki and Alsuwat, 2024; Bhatti, 2022). CBT can help clients challenge polarizing narratives, improve emotional regulation, and develop healthy coping strategies to deal with sociopolitical issues more constructively. Nevertheless, CBT is most effective when embedded within a broader multilevel framework that acknowledges the social production of meaning, identity, and grievance rather than treating radicalization as primarily a cognitive dysfunction.

Additionally, trauma-informed psychotherapeutic approaches focus on the social and ecological aspects of trauma, examining how micro (individual), meso (community), and macro (societal) factors influence experiences of violence and victimization. This ecological orientation closely aligns with Community Psychology and European CVE models, which prioritize resilience-building at the collective level. These methods are especially relevant in CVE programs aimed at post-conflict or refugee populations, where trauma is both a legacy and a trigger for further radicalization (Lewis, 2022).

Early psychotherapeutic intervention as prevention

Early identification and intervention are crucial for preventing the escalation of extremist tendencies. Mental health professionals often act as the first line of defense in spotting early signs of radicalization, such as emotional instability, social withdrawal, identity confusion, and sudden ideological changes (Kapustina et al., 2024). From a social psychological perspective, these early indicators often reflect emerging identity alignment with extremist in-groups rather than fixed ideological commitment.

These behavioral signs usually come before more obvious expressions of extremism and, if addressed quickly, can be effectively managed. Early therapeutic engagement offers a safe and nonjudgmental space for individuals to work through inner conflicts, examine moral dilemmas, and rebuild a resilient, coherent self-narrative. Such early steps are especially important for adolescents and young adults, whose identities are still forming and can be easily swayed by charismatic extremist recruiters (Bhatti, 2022). Consistent with RAN guidelines, preventive interventions are most effective when delivered in group-based and community settings, such as schools and youth centers, where identity formation and peer influence are most salient.

Programs that integrate psychotherapeutic tools into schools, community centers, youth organizations, and correctional facilities have proven successful in boosting emotional intelligence, fostering empathy, and encouraging a critical view of ideological manipulation (Kapustina et al., 2024). For example, psychoeducation efforts in secondary schools in France and Spain have shown promise in reducing vulnerability to extremist messages by promoting debate, civic participation, and perspective-taking (Blee and Creasap, 2010). When combined within a multidisciplinary approach involving educators, law enforcement, and community leaders, psychotherapy becomes not just a healing method but also a proactive, human-centered strategy for preventing radicalization and maintaining community peace.

Deradicalization, reintegration, and identity reconstruction

Mental health professionals, especially psychotherapists, are increasingly recognized as essential contributors to the design, implementation, and evaluation of deradicalization and reintegration initiatives. These programs play a vital role in the psychological rehabilitation of individuals who have engaged in extremist activities, while also advancing broader societal goals such as long-term public safety, cohesion, and resilience (Dumornay et al., 2022). Social psychological research reinforces that successful disengagement requires not only cognitive change but also the reconstruction of social identity and belonging outside extremist networks.

A variety of evidence-based therapeutic modalities have been integrated into Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) frameworks to address the complex psychological and relational needs of formerly radicalized individuals. One of the most widely used approaches is Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), which focuses on identifying and restructuring cognitive distortions, black-and-white thinking, and maladaptive belief systems associated with extremist ideologies. CBT interventions promote critical self-reflection and encourage more adaptive behavioral responses, significantly contributing to successful deradicalization outcomes (Dumornay et al., 2022). However, European practice frameworks such as RAN emphasize that individual therapy must be complemented by family, peer, and community-based support structures to prevent social isolation and ideological relapse. Another key modality is trauma-informed therapy, which addresses adverse life experiences—such as violence, abuse, or neglect—that often precede radicalization. This approach prioritizes safety and empowerment while avoiding retraumatization, enabling clients to process unresolved trauma in a supportive therapeutic environment (Mohammed and Neuner, 2022). For example, in reintegration programs for former militants in Nigeria, trauma-informed approaches have been effective in helping clients cope with post-traumatic stress while facilitating their reintegration into local communities (Ezeibe et al., 2022). Motivational Interviewing (MI) is also effective, particularly for individuals who are ambivalent about disengaging from extremist networks. By enhancing intrinsic motivation and reinforcing self-efficacy, MI encourages voluntary behavior change without confrontation, which is crucial in the delicate post-radicalization phase (Grossman et al., 2020). Additionally, Family Therapy has become an important component of reintegration strategies by addressing breakdowns in familial relationships. Rebuilding trust and fostering communication within families not only enhances emotional stability but also serves as a protective buffer against potential re-offending (Tsvieli et al., 2021). Programs in the Netherlands have shown that involving family members in therapeutic reintegration significantly increases long-term commitment to disengagement and strengthens emotional support networks (van der Heide and Schuurman, 2018).

Narrative Therapy complements these interventions by allowing individuals to re-author their life stories and create alternative identities that transcend extremist ideologies. This process directly addresses the identity-based mechanisms emphasized by Dooje et al. (2016), enabling clients to detach from collective narratives of grievance and moral absolutism.

This reconfiguration of self-narratives helps clients detach from the absolutist thinking that characterizes radical worldviews, enabling them to adopt more flexible, value-based perspectives (Rani et al., 2023; Gakhokidze and Kaishauri, 2023). In summary, these therapeutic models—when incorporated into community-based and institutional support systems—address the psychological, relational, and identity-based aspects of radicalization. Their effectiveness is maximized when situated within a multilevel framework that integrates individual therapy, group dynamics, and community resilience, as advocated by social psychology and European CVE practice.

Their integrated application significantly enhances the likelihood of successful rehabilitation while reducing the risk of ideological recidivism.

Trauma-informed care: integrating individual and collective perspectives

Trauma-informed care and psychosocial support are essential components in preventing and reversing radicalization. A significant body of literature highlights the psychological vulnerabilities of individuals drawn to extremist ideologies, especially those who have experienced structural violence, displacement, intergenerational trauma, or chronic marginalization (Barracosa and March, 2022). However, social psychological research emphasizes that trauma-related vulnerabilities are often activated and sustained through collective narratives of injustice and shared group identities rather than existing solely at the individual level.

Trauma-informed psychotherapy acknowledges these underlying issues and aims to address their impact on emotional regulation, identity development, and belief formation. Core elements of this approach include psychoeducation, emotional self-regulation strategies, and the establishment of therapeutic trust. Beyond individual healing, trauma-informed care increasingly incorporates group-based and community-oriented modalities that recognize the relational and social dimensions of trauma. These tools not only facilitate individual healing but also enhance cognitive flexibility and promote ideological moderation (Mohammed and Neuner, 2022). For example, Germany's Hayat program provides trauma-informed counseling to families of radicalized individuals, helping to reduce anxiety and prevent re-engagement with extremist networks by supporting both the individual and their family environment (Weine et al., 2020). This family- and network-oriented approach reflects broader European CVE practices that emphasize psychosocial support at the relational level rather than isolated clinical treatment.

Similarly, interventions in post-conflict Colombia utilize trauma-informed group therapy for former child soldiers, aiming to rebuild social trust and promote their reintegration (Klasen et al., 2010). Group-based trauma interventions are particularly effective in addressing collective forms of victimization and restoring disrupted social bonds.

Additionally, psychotherapeutic approaches that directly address trauma-induced cognitive distortions can help alleviate symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, and depression—conditions that extremist recruiters often exploit to foster dependence and loyalty to ideological causes (Grossman et al., 2020). When embedded within a community psychology framework, such interventions also counteract social isolation and reduce susceptibility to group polarization. These interventions promote healthier interpersonal relationships, reduce emotional reactivity, and strengthen prosocial coping mechanisms. Importantly, incorporating psychosocial support into broader counter-violent extremism (CVE) strategies enhances their sustainability and effectiveness. European CVE frameworks, including those promoted by the Radicalisation Awareness Network (RAN), explicitly advocate for integrating trauma-informed care with social services, education, and community development initiatives.

When coordinated with social services, community development initiatives, and educational outreach, trauma-informed therapy contributes not only to individual recovery but also to systemic resilience. For example, school-based mental health interventions in Indonesia, which integrate trauma counseling with civic education, have been successful in preventing youth recruitment into extremist movements (Ali-Fauzi and Kartika, 2024). Such preventive approaches illustrate how trauma-informed care can operate as both a therapeutic and community-level resilience-building mechanism.

In all, trauma-informed care functions as both a rehabilitative and preventative mechanism, addressing the psychosocial roots of violent extremism while promoting long-term reintegration and peacebuilding. These approaches must be part of holistic, multidisciplinary frameworks that are responsive to cultural, political, and community-specific dynamics.

Psychoeducation and multidisciplinary group interventions

Psychoeducation has become a key therapeutic strategy in the broader effort to prevent and counter violent extremism (P/CVE). Its main objective is to provide individuals with cognitive and emotional tools to critically analyze extremist ideologies and narratives. From a social psychological perspective, psychoeducation also serves to disrupt group-based mechanisms of radicalization by challenging in-group/out-group dichotomies and absolutist moral framings. By fostering self-awareness and enhancing psychological insight, psychoeducation addresses the complex relationship between psychological vulnerabilities and sociopolitical influences that can lead to radicalization (Madhuri et al., 2021). This approach demystifies the attraction of extremist worldviews by explaining the psychological and ideological mechanisms that support them. It enables individuals to better understand their cognitive and emotional reactions, thereby diminishing the appeal of radical beliefs. Consequently, psychoeducation can alleviate feelings of alienation, exclusion, and victimization that radical organizations often exploit for recruitment (Bélanger et al., 2019a,b). For example, youth engagement programs in France and Indonesia that combine psychoeducation with civic education have shown improved critical thinking skills and reduced susceptibility to ideological manipulation (Ali-Fauzi and Kartika, 2024; Jamhari and Testriono, 2021). These outcomes align with European CVE strategies that prioritize group-based prevention in educational and community settings rather than individualized clinical interventions alone. In addition to cognitive restructuring, psychoeducational programs usually include modules on emotional regulation, identity development, and conflict resolution. These components directly address the identity-related and relational processes emphasized in social psychological models of radicalization.

These components encourage participants to question absolutist narratives and explore the sociopolitical factors that contribute to perceived grievances. Such programs have been especially effective in environments marked by identity confusion and marginalization, such as among second-generation immigrant youth in Western Europe (Bélanger et al., 2019a,b). Effective psychoeducation must be integrated within multidisciplinary intervention frameworks that leverage the expertise of psychotherapists, educators, community leaders, religious figures, and law enforcement. A collaborative approach ensures that interventions are relevant to local contexts, culturally sensitive, and grounded in community realities (Mazerolle et al., 2020). This multidisciplinary orientation reflects the Community Psychology emphasis on participation, empowerment, and collective problem-solving.

Community-based workshops, youth clubs, and family support initiatives that promote dialogue and trust-building have been vital in fostering resilience against extremist influences and encouraging pro-social behavior. For instance, Australia's “Living Safe Together” initiative has effectively utilized multidisciplinary collaboration to deliver community outreach programs that address radicalization risks through localized psychoeducation and peer mentoring (Grossman et al., 2020). When incorporated into comprehensive CVE strategies, psychoeducation not only enhances individual psychological resilience but also strengthens the overall social fabric. By targeting both individual cognition and collective meaning-making processes, psychoeducation functions as a preventive tool addressing the social and communal dimensions of violent extremism.

By promoting open dialogue, critical reflection, and civic engagement, it serves as a preventive tool addressing both the cognitive and communal aspects of violent extremism.

Addressing historical, politicaland structural grievances

Understanding historical and political grievances is essential for the effectiveness of Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) strategies. Radicalization is often not just the result of individual psychological vulnerabilities; it is also influenced by collective experiences of injustice, marginalization, and structural discrimination. Social psychological research underscores that such grievances gain mobilizing power when they are shared, narrated, and reinforced within groups. These factors can act as powerful catalysts for extremist ideologies, especially when they resonate with personal or communal narratives of oppression (Hafez, 2022). In various national contexts, the securitization and stigmatization of Muslim populations have heightened feelings of social exclusion and political disenfranchisement. Such experiences often foster a sense of collective victimhood that extremist groups exploit to justify violence and recruitment. For example, in the United Kingdom, the Prevent strategy has faced criticism for disproportionately targeting Muslim communities, which may inadvertently reinforce the grievances it is intended to address (Kundnani, 2015). Effective deradicalization efforts must go beyond individualized interventions to engage with the broader historical and political contexts that shape identity and meaning. This includes recognizing the legacies of colonialism, systemic racism, militarized state responses, and socio-economic exclusion. Moghaddam's staircase model illustrates how such structural grievances form the initial stages of radicalization by constraining perceived alternatives and normalizing moral disengagement. Psychotherapeutic approaches that integrate socio-political awareness, such as trauma-informed care, are particularly well-suited for this purpose (Barracosa and March, 2022). This form of psychotherapy provides individuals with a structured environment to process complex traumas related to political repression, ethnic violence, and displacement. For instance, in post-conflict regions like Northern Nigeria and Bosnia and Herzegovina, such interventions have helped former combatants reinterpret their experiences through non-violent narratives, facilitating their reintegration and reconciliation (Ezeibe et al., 2022; Gakhokidze and Kaishauri, 2023). By situating personal suffering within broader historical and political frameworks, therapy validates lived experiences while discouraging the absolutist narratives promoted by extremist groups.

This therapeutic process not only promotes emotional healing but also validates the lived experiences of those most affected by structural violence. By empowering individuals to examine and reinterpret extremist ideologies rooted in grievances critically, psychotherapy supports a shift from destructive to constructive identity formation. Moreover, incorporating historical and political literacy into therapeutic discussions enhances the cultural sensitivity and contextual relevance of CVE programs (Mohammed and Neuner, 2022). Ultimately, including historical and political awareness in CVE strategies improves their effectiveness by addressing both the symptoms of radicalization and its systemic roots. Mental health practitioners, in collaboration with policymakers and civil society actors, must therefore adopt holistic, group-sensitive frameworks that integrate individual transformation with social justice and community resilience.

This review synthesizes cross-cultural scholarship on the psychological and sociopolitical dimensions of violent extremism by integrating findings from fifty peer-reviewed studies across fifteen national contexts. Rather than generating original empirical evidence, the analysis consolidates existing research to identify recurring patterns, contextual divergences, and intervention-relevant insights concerning radicalization processes and preventive responses. Across the reviewed literature, violent extremism consistently emerges as a multidimensional phenomenon shaped by the interaction of individual psychological vulnerabilities, collective identity dynamics, and broader historical, political, and structural conditions (Bélanger et al., 2019a,b; Hafez, 2022; Lobato, 2023). The synthesis aligns closely with established theoretical frameworks in radicalization psychology, particularly Quest for Significance Theory and uncertainty–identity approaches. These perspectives conceptualize extremist engagement as an attempt to restore meaning, dignity, and belonging under conditions of perceived injustice, identity threat, and existential uncertainty (Moghaddam, 2005, 2018; Bélanger et al., 2019a,b). Across diverse contexts, the reviewed studies indicate that radicalization pathways are rarely linear or monocausal. Instead, they reflect layered processes in which trauma exposure, social exclusion, moral disengagement, and politicized narratives mutually reinforce one another (French et al., 2019; Obaidi et al., 2023). Importantly, several studies caution that psychological vulnerability alone is insufficient to explain extremist engagement without situating it within enabling social and political environments (Hafez, 2022; Käsehage, 2021).

The thematic category identified as the Cultural Thread highlights the central role of historical memory, religious narratives, and locally embedded social norms in shaping both grievance articulation and the legitimacy of extremist frames. In non-Western, post-conflict, and post-colonial contexts, collective trauma, colonial legacies, and ongoing political violence structure radicalization trajectories in ways that differ markedly from those documented in Western European or Australian settings (Ezeibe et al., 2022; Buljubašić, 2023; Ahić, 2022). The literature repeatedly warns that neglecting these contextual dimensions risks misinterpreting radicalization as an individualized psychological pathology rather than recognizing it as a socially embedded and historically situated process (Hafez, 2022). Such decontextualization may also lead to interventions that lack cultural legitimacy or fail to resonate with affected communities.

Within the Radicalization Framework theme, the reviewed studies converge on the finding that psychological mechanisms—such as loss of significance, perceived humiliation, moral disengagement, and identity threat—interact with political grievances and social networks to facilitate extremist mobilization (Mahfud, 2019; Haleem et al., 2023; Lobato, 2023). However, these mechanisms manifest differently across contexts. Evidence from Jordan, Nigeria, and Bosnia and Herzegovina emphasizes the salience of collective victimhood narratives rooted in geopolitical conflict and historical violence (Speckhard, 2017; Suhemat and Assasfa, 2022; Buljubašić, 2023), whereas studies from Western Europe more frequently highlight experiences of stigmatization, discrimination, and marginalization within host societies (Bourekba, 2019; Lahnait, 2021; Hafez, 2022). This comparative insight underscores the limitations of decontextualized typologies or instrument-driven groupings when analyzing cross-national radicalization patterns.

The Social Dynamics theme underscores the pivotal role of families, peer networks, religious institutions, and community structures in shaping both vulnerability to and protection from extremist engagement. Across regions, community-based and relational interventions are emphasized more consistently than narrowly individualized clinical approaches (Mazerolle et al., 2020; Shawe and McAndrew, 2023). This emphasis aligns with social psychological research demonstrating that radicalization is fundamentally a group-based and relational process (Dooje et al., 2016), as well as with European policy frameworks such as the Radicalisation Awareness Network, which prioritize multi-agency, community-oriented prevention strategies (Radicalisation Awareness Network (RAN), 2016). Nonetheless, several studies caution that community-based approaches can encounter resistance where trust in institutions is low or where communities perceive CVE initiatives as securitized or stigmatizing (Oberg et al., 2023; Lewis, 2022).

At the level of intervention, the synthesis indicates that trauma-informed and psychosocial approaches are frequently identified as promising components of prevention-oriented CVE strategies, particularly in contexts marked by chronic violence, displacement, or structural inequality (Barracosa and March, 2022; Mohammed and Neuner, 2022). Therapeutic modalities such as Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Motivational Interviewing, and Narrative Therapy are commonly discussed as mechanisms for addressing trauma-related cognitive distortions, facilitating identity reconstruction, and supporting disengagement from extremist narratives (Dumornay et al., 2022; Rani et al., 2023). However, the reviewed literature also documents substantial challenges that complicate these interventions in practice. Reported implementation barriers include limited institutional capacity and financial resources, shortages of trained mental health professionals, difficulties in sustaining long-term engagement, and challenges in adapting therapeutic models developed in Western contexts to culturally distinct settings (Lewis, 2022; Cherney et al., 2022). Trust-building emerges as a recurrent obstacle, particularly in communities with histories of surveillance, repression, or discriminatory security practices (Hafez, 2022; Oberg et al., 2023). Ethical dilemmas are also prominent, including risks of stigmatization, blurred boundaries between care and surveillance, and the potential instrumentalization of mental health services for security objectives. These concerns raise important questions about consent, confidentiality, and professional autonomy in CVE-related clinical work (Kapustina et al., 2024). The literature further indicates that the distinction between prevention and rehabilitation interventions is frequently blurred in practice. Many programs framed as preventive engage individuals or communities already affected by radicalization-related harm, trauma, or social exclusion (Grossman et al., 2020; Tsvieli et al., 2021). While such overlap may reflect pragmatic realities, it also underscores the need for greater conceptual clarity in CVE research and policy, particularly in distinguishing primary prevention, secondary prevention, and rehabilitation-oriented interventions.

Taken together, this synthesis contributes to ongoing debates by foregrounding the importance of culturally responsive, community-based, and trauma-informed approaches to preventing violent extremism, while also critically engaging with their limitations. Rather than advancing definitive causal claims or universally applicable solutions, the review highlights converging evidence alongside significant contextual variation, implementation challenges, and ethical constraints. By situating psychotherapeutic interventions within broader sociopolitical, historical, and cultural frameworks, the analysis supports a move away from decontextualized or securitized models toward more holistic, ethically grounded, and socially embedded approaches to countering violent extremism.

Practical implications, limitations, and future perspectives

a) Policy: policymakers must recognize the centrality of mental health in CVE and allocate sustained funding for evidence-based psychological services. Legal frameworks should also support trauma-informed, rights-based interventions that prioritize rehabilitation over punishment, particularly for vulnerable groups such as youth, women, and returnees from conflict zones.

b) Practice: mental health professionals should receive specialized training in radicalization dynamics, trauma recovery, and cross-cultural competence. Practitioners must be equipped to work collaboratively with educators, community leaders, and law enforcement to develop trust-based, locally resonant interventions.

c) Research: further empirical research is required to evaluate the long-term efficacy of psychotherapeutic interventions in CVE, particularly in non-Western and post-conflict contexts. Longitudinal studies and culturally grounded evaluations will help refine best practices and ensure adaptability across diverse settings.

While this study provides a comprehensive synthesis of cross-cultural practices and therapeutic strategies, several limitations should be acknowledged. First, the data largely rely on published case studies and program evaluations, which may not capture informal or grassroots efforts. Second, the effectiveness of some therapeutic interventions remains difficult to quantify due to the sensitive and stigmatized nature of radicalization. Future research should prioritize participatory methodologies and incorporate the voices of formerly radicalized individuals, families, and frontline practitioners to deepen understanding. This discussion highlights the complex role of psychotherapy in tackling violent extremism. Mental health interventions provide essential tools for individual healing, as well as ways to reconstruct identity, rebuild trust, and address structural grievances. By integrating psychotherapy into culturally sensitive, interdisciplinary counter-violent extremism (CVE) frameworks, practitioners and policymakers can create sustainable pathways for individuals to move away from extremism and toward reintegration, resilience, and peace.