MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2418535567 · doi:10.5038/1944-0472.9.2.1486

The Influence of Charismatic Authority on Operational Strategies and Attack Outcomes of Terrorist Groups

2016· article· en· W2418535567 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Strategic Security · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersPublic Safety Canada
KeywordsCharismaTerrorismCharismatic authorityEmpirical researchPolitical scienceSample (material)Public relationsLawEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the historical and contemporary prevalence of charismatic terrorist leaders, there has been very little empirical examination of the relationship between charismatic forms of authority and the strategic operation of terrorist groups. In response to this gap in knowledge, this study seeks to investigate if charismatic authority has a real-world impact on strategic choices and attack outcomes of terrorist groups. Using a theoretical framework meant to help measure charisma in terrorist organizations, this study quantitatively examines how differing levels of the presence of charismatic authority contributes to the choice in operational tactics (e.g., weapon and target choices) and the results of attack outcomes (e.g., success rates, lethality) within a sample of thirty international terrorist groups. In the concluding section, relevant findings, policy recommendations, study limitations, and areas for future research are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.300 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it