Sociology of terrorism

The sociology of terrorism is a developing subfield of sociology in the United States that seeks to understand terrorism as a social phenomenon and how individuals as well as nation states address it (not to be confused with terrorism studies which sometimes overlaps with the psychology of terrorism).

Pre 9/11
Some exceptions withstanding,  sociology, which is loosely defined as the “scientific study of human interaction”, found little interest in the subject of terrorism before the attacks on September 11, 2001. Since 9/11, there has been a spike of interest in all sociological interactions related to terrorism such as moral panic, organizational response and media coverage.

Terrorism was largely ignored by sociologists prior to September 11, 2001. The most comprehensive study into the definition of terrorism comes from a study by Weinberg, Pedahzur and Hirsch-Hoefler (2004) who examined 73 definitions of terrorism from 55 articles and concluded that terrorism is: "a politically motivated tactic involving the threat or use of force or violence in which the pursuit of publicity plays a significant role." However, Weinberg et al. point out that definitions of terrorism often ignore symbolic aspects of terrorism. Due to its focus on symbolism, sociology has a unique vantage point from which to assess terror.

Post 9/11
Since 9/11, Mathieu Deflem (University of South Carolina), S.E. Costanza (Central Connecticut State University) and John C. Kilburn Jr. (Texas A&M International University) are among prolific Sociologists of note to call for development of a sub-field of sociology related to Terrorism. Common topics that are part of the discourse of the sociology of Terrorism include: military spending, counter-terrorism, the Algerian War of Independence, Immigration, Privacy Issues and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, where within these contexts questions of power, the definition of terrorism, propaganda, nationality, the media, etc. are asked. It is a subfield of sociology that attempts to discover how all these things come together and how society comes to understand terror and negotiate fear.

Early peer-reviewed post 9/11 literature from the sociology of Terrorism sub-field examined policing and citizen responses to terror during 9/11. Early literature examined interactions between first responders (police, rescue teams, etc.) and communities. Ramirez, Hoopes and Quinlan (2003) rightly predicted that police organizations would change fundamental styles of profiling people after 9/11. According to DeLone (2007), most police agencies altered their mission statements after 9/11. There is strong reason to believe that even the smallest of local police agencies are apt to feel some kind of pressure to deal with the issue of terrorism.

More recent work in the sociology of Terrorism field is philosophical and reflective and has focused on issues such as moral panic and over-spending after 9/11. Costanza and Kilburn (2005), in an article entitled: "Symbolic Security, Moral Panic and Public Sentiment: Toward a sociology of Counterterrorism" argued that issue of symbolism is of much import to understanding the war on terror. Using a classic symbolic interactionist perspective, they argue that strong public sentiment about the homeland security issue has driven policy moreso than real and concrete threats. Others argue that symbolism has led to agency a policy of “hypervigilance” in agency decision-making that is costly and untestable.

Some sociologists and legal scholars have contemplated the potential consequences of aggressive (or militaristic) policing of terror threats have might negative implications for human rights which are of great interest to sociologists as a matter of social justice. They argue that salient human emotions related to terror threats reshape public understanding of the perceived balance between the need for security and civil liberties. In a peer-reviewed article entitled: “Crouching tiger or phantom dragon? Examining the discourse on global cyber-terror”, Helms, Costanza and Johnson (2011) ask if it is possible that media hype at the national level could prompt an unnecessary and systemic over-pursuit of cyber-terror. They warn that such overreaction might lead to a "killswitch" policy which could give the federal government ultimate power over the internet.

Despite the quantitative lean of modern sociology; Kilburn, Costanza, Borgeson and Metchik (2011) point out that there are several methodological barbs to effectively and scientifically assessing the effect of Homeland Security measures. In traditional Criminology, the most quantitatively amenable starting point for measuring the effectiveness of any policing strategy (i.e.: Neighborhood Watch, Gun Abatement, Foot Patrols, etc.) is to assess total financial costs against clearance rates or arrest rates. Since terrorism is such a rare event phenomena, measuring arrests would be a naive way to test policy effectiveness.

Another methodological problem in the developing sociology of Terrorism sub-field is one of finding operational measures for key concepts in the study of homeland security (see: ). Both terrorism and homeland security are relatively new concepts for social scientists, and academicians have yet to agree on the matter of how to properly conceptualize these ideas

Along with the many professional peer-reviewed articles associated with the gamut of terror-related sociological issues, professional educators in the field of sociology, Criminology and Political Science have also been productive in organizing “sociology of Terrorism” classes and authoring textbooks to contribute to the profession.