Toward a Better Path:
How Group Therapy Can Address the Same Needs Extremist Groups Exploit
Aren Kiladjian, M.A.
Department of Professional Psychology, George Washington University
Abstract:
This paper explores the psychosocial parallels between the mechanisms of violent extremist groups and the therapeutic processes of group psychotherapy. Drawing on Vergani and colleagues’ (2018) “Three Ps” of radicalization (Push, Pull, and Personal factors), Kruglanski’s (2019) 3N model (Need, Narrative, and Network), and Yalom and Leszcz’s (2020) therapeutic factors, the analysis examines how both extremist groups and therapy groups address fundamental human needs for belonging, identity, and significance. While extremist groups exploit these needs through cognitive closure and out-group hostility, group therapy offers an adaptive alternative by fostering cognitive flexibility, vulnerability, and prosocial connection. The paper concludes by suggesting how group-based interventions might borrow digital engagement and community-building strategies from extremist groups to better support therapeutic outcomes.
Keywords: therapeutic factors, group psychotherapy, violent extremism, radicalization, 3N model, quest for significance, group cohesion, countering violent extremism
Toward a Better Path: How Group Therapy Can Address the Same Needs Extremist Groups Exploit
Introduction
Imagine this. Two men experience the same kind of loss of identity, belonging, and meaning. Both are minorities in their communities, have been consistently excluded from social and professional engagements, and are searching for a place where they feel understood and part of something larger than themselves. One man, isolated and marginalized, comes across extremist propaganda and drifts into an online community that promises shared purpose, belonging, a sense of identity, and concrete answers that relieve uncertainty. The other, equally isolated and lost, joins a therapy group at their friend’s recommendation, where the focus is on coping with uncertainty rather than erasing it, and on cultivating identity rather than adopting and fusing it. Each man seeks to resolve similar psychosocial needs, but in very different ways.
Many of the same psychosocial needs that drive individuals toward violent extremist groups–or at least make them susceptible to radicalization and recruitment–mirror the underlying needs of those who seek therapy. The above example is a simplified version of two paths. One that leads to disconnection, exclusion, and possibly violence, and another that leads to connection, introspection, acceptance, and growth. Today, extremist groups continue to recruit effectively across cultures and ideologies, capitalizing on political upheaval, social unrest, and rapid technological change. When the status quo is overturned, people experience heightened uncertainty and anxiety – conditions that increase the attractiveness of high-entitativity groups that promise certainty, identity, and purpose (Berger, 2018; Hogg, 2007). With this in mind, it’s likely that violent extremism will remain a persistent societal challenge in the near future.
But what if group-based interventions, such as group therapy, could address the needs of those susceptible to extremist ideologies, or even actively seeking them, more constructively? What can group therapists learn from the effectiveness of extremist groups? Drawing from Vergani and colleagues’ (2018) Three Ps of Radicalization (Push, Pull, and Personal factors), Kruglanski’s 3N model (Need, Narrative, and Network), and Yalom and Leszcz’s (2020) therapeutic factors, this paper examines what leads people to join extremist groups, explores how those mechanisms can be addressed constructively through group therapy processes, and highlights how understanding these parallels may support both countering violent extremism (CVE) efforts and the practice of group therapy.
Rather than focus specifically on terrorism or identified terrorist groups, this paper takes a broader view, looking at the mechanisms of violent extremist groups as a whole, using this definition, “violent extremist groups can be understood as those groups that believe an in-group’s success or survival can never be separated from the need for violent action against the out-group (Berger,” 2018, p. 44).
The Need: Why People Seek Groups
Similar to those who seek therapy, people who turn toward extremist groups are generally trying to meet underlying psychosocial needs. These needs create vulnerabilities that can increase a person’s receptivity to radical ideas and influences. The literature on radicalization and pathways to violent extremism is expansive, and therefore, the specific needs and drivers will vary. Three everyday needs observed amongst violent extremist groups by Borum (2014) included the need for personal meaning and identity, the need for belonging, and perceived injustice or humiliation. One way to resolve feelings of uncertainty, marginalization, or loss of control is by affiliating with a community that offers clear meaning, structure, purpose, and validation of one’s worldview. Perhaps a more straightforward way to conceptualize the various needs is through Kruglanski’s (2019) overarching Need: the quest for significance—the fundamental desire to matter, to be someone, and to have respect. This concept encompasses those of other theorists who have referred to the need for esteem, achievement, meaning, competence, or control. Kruglanski unifies these diverse motives, whether personal revenge, group grievance, or loyalty to a leader, viewing them all as manifestations of a single fundamental drive: the need to restore lost significance (McCauley & Moskalenko, 2017, p. 6).
While some of these needs and drivers are universal, many are intensified by structural pressures or personal characteristics, which Vergani and colleagues (2018) describe in terms of their push and personal factors. Push factors are the structural root causes of violent extremism, such as state repression, poverty, relative deprivation, and injustice. In contrast, personal factors refer to the individual characteristics and vulnerabilities, such as impulsiveness, trauma, or depression, that make specific people more susceptible to extremist narratives.
It is critical to consider that the 3Ps of Vergani et al. (2018) are closely interrelated. For example, a structural push factor like poverty can contribute to personal vulnerabilities like depression or low self-esteem, while simultaneously increasing the appeal of pull factors, which we discuss in the next section, that promise belonging and purpose. Another important consideration is that radicalization is not a conveyor belt: not everyone who radicalizes in thought will join an extremist group or engage in extremist violence. As noted by Moskalenko and McCauley, it is important to distinguish between the radicalization of thought and action (McCauley & Moskalenko, 2017). However, for simplicity, this theoretical comparison focuses on the pathway of an individual who radicalizes in thought and subsequently becomes involved with an extremist group aligned with that ideology. An example of this is an individual who leaves their home country to physically join the Islamic State (ISIS), but only after first being indoctrinated and recruited online through ISIS’s digital media and engagement.
The Pull: What Extremist Groups Offer
The appeal of extremist ideologies lies in their ability to provide specific “pull” factors—incentives that actively draw individuals toward a group by promising to resolve their internal conflicts and needs. To understand this attraction, it is important to review the pull factors identified by Vergani et al. (2018), which capture the aspects that make extremist groups appealing. These include: “cognitive factors (e.g., consumption of propaganda, cultural congruence, perceived efficacy and morality of a group, search for adventure), social mechanisms and group processes (e.g., identity fusion and identification, group dynamics, recruitment, and leadership), and emotional and material incentives” (p. 6). According to Vergani et al. (2018), one of the most cited pull factors mentioned in the scientific literature at the time was consumption of extremist propaganda, and the second most cited was group dynamics. These included forming strong bonds with like-minded people and fulfillment of belonging and identity needs. Viewed through Kruglanski’s (2019) 3N model, extremist groups and their ideologies offer a narrative that promises restored significance and a sense of certainty that meets their needs, and a network that reinforces those beliefs.
Many extremist groups understand these pull factors and leverage them through their recruitment strategies. For example, ISIS’s al-Hayat Media Center produced 10 videos between 2014 and 2016, focusing on themes of friendship and camaraderie, strength and victory, religious persecution, and existential fulfillment (Macnair & Frank, 2017). Macnair and Frank (2017) found that the videos catered to Western recruits and sympathizers by portraying life in the group as spiritually and existentially fulfilling, while simultaneously decrying the West as secular, immoral, and criminal. These messages underscore that extremist recruitment is rarely about ideology alone. Extremist groups are effective at drawing in members not simply because of their ideologies, but because they offer a community, purpose, and a sense of identity. However, the mechanisms that make extremist groups appealing can also be harnessed constructively.
The Alternative: Group Therapy and Constructive Group Mechanisms
If extremist groups meet psychological needs through cognitive closure and division, group therapy can do one better by meeting them through reflection and connection. Group therapy and other group-based interventions, like support groups, can support many of the same psychosocial needs that extremist groups do, but through adaptive group processes. Recent research in third-wave positive psychology, which emphasizes the systemic and relational nature of well-being, has shown that group therapy fosters virtues such as humility, forgiveness, and compassion (Marmarosh et al., 2022). To illustrate how group therapy can be a healthier alternative to extremism, we draw on Yalom and Leszcz’s (2020) therapeutic factors of group psychotherapy and describe how they leverage similar pull factors and address similar needs. While Yalom originally proposed 11 distinct factors, contemporary research utilizing the Therapeutic Factors Inventory–19 (TFI-19) has demonstrated that these clinically observed mechanisms empirically cluster into four more global factors: Instillation of Hope, Secure Emotional Expression, Awareness of Relational Impact, and Social Learning (Joyce et al., 2011). This paper explores several of Yalom’s factors and explains how they address the same fundamental needs for significance and belonging that extremist groups exploit.
Group Cohesiveness: The group’s attractiveness to its members, known as cohesiveness, is foundational to a group’s success, just like the alliance is in individual therapy. While researchers have developed various ways to define and measure cohesiveness, it is generally understood to be a central component and a precondition for optimal therapy. According to the Group Cohesion Scale–Revised, high cohesion involved vulnerability among members, receptive feedback, and the acceptance of cultural variations (Treadwell et al., 2002). Members in cohesive groups feel warmth, comfort, and a sense of belonging. They value the group, and feel valued, accepted, and supported by other members in return. This cohesion is a necessary precondition for therapy to function optimally (Yalom & Leszcz, 2020). In Kruglanski’s terms, cohesiveness builds a prosocial Network that reinforces engagement and learning, making other therapeutic factors possible. Cohesion directly mirrors the pull factor of group dynamics described by Vergani et al., meeting the needs of belonging and identity without demanding radicalization of thought or action.
Universality and Instillation of Hope: A powerful source of relief in group therapy, especially early on, is that one’s struggles are not unique, and that others share similar experiences (Yalom & Leszcz, 2020). Members experience a sense of universality as they connect with others who understand their challenges, reducing feelings of isolation and shame. Witnessing peers making progress also instills hope and reinforces the belief that change is possible (Yalom & Leszcz, 2020). Some programs intentionally combine these factors by employing leaders who have overcome similar challenges, such as substance abuse treatment programs that employ recovering addicts to serve as group leaders. Life After Hate, a U.S. nonprofit organization that helps people leave violent hate groups, has former extremists (“Formers”) who have successfully changed their violent extremist beliefs serve as peer mentors to model success for members and support their processes (Life After Hate, 2023). Together, universality and instillation of hope address several push and personal factors, like alienation and low self-worth, by replacing isolation with connection and despair with optimism.
Altruism: People “gain through giving” when they help one another in group therapy (Yalom & Leszcz, 2020, p. 37-38). This experience of helping others boosts self-esteem and fosters a sense of significance and purpose. Altruism also encourages role versatility, with members shifting between the helper and receiver roles, benefiting from both. This therapeutic factor mirrors the prosocial bonding extremist groups provide in a healthier way, and it creates a more positive opportunity for personal meaning and significance.
Interpersonal Learning and Imparting Information: Members learn about their own thoughts and biases, practice new ways of connecting with others, and receive corrective emotional experiences. Through didactic instruction and direct advice from therapists and leaders, members receive psychoeducation and are exposed to healthier narratives about emotional regulation, moral reasoning, and alternative frames for making sense of their distress (Yalom & Leszcz, 2020, p. 32 – 37). The result is greater empathy and cognitive flexibility, which helps combat cognitive closure and weakens in-group/out-group thinking. Through the lens of the 3N model, groups learn healthier Narratives about themselves and others, and the Network of the group reinforces these ideas, models them, and allows members to practice them out loud. This concept of imparting healthier narratives is common in deradicalization programs that aim to unwind radical narratives, including Saudi Arabia’s Mohammed bin Naif Center, where Islamic religious scholars offer groups religious re-education to refute violent ideologies (International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research, 2010).
Existential factors: This therapeutic factor helps members confront life’s ultimate concerns of mortality, freedom, isolation, and meaning. This includes recognizing that life can be unfair and unjust, and that ultimately there is no escape from some of life’s pain (Yalom & Leszcz, 2020, p. 161). Facing these realities often provokes existential anxiety. Engaging these concepts in group therapy is the opposite of the ideological closure that defines most radical ideologies. Through this process, members learn to tolerate ambiguity, accept life’s uncertainty and their responsibilities, and gain a sense of control. In doing so, group therapy offers a narrative without the absolutism and gives members the tools to cope with underlying anxiety and address questions surrounding their identity.
Despite the above overlap, there are important limitations in this comparison. Group therapy does not, and frankly should not, replicate all the same mechanisms that make extremist groups effective. Group therapy does not offer the same quick, immediate relief associated with blaming an out-group for one’s struggles, nor does it provide the constant digital propaganda that reinforces rigid, comforting ideas. Growth requires effort, vulnerability, and a willingness to face uncertainty as you build internal resilience, which often requires far more effort than joining an extremist group and adopting its ideas and values. Therapy may be a slower mechanism, but it can offer a more adaptive path toward addressing one’s psychosocial needs.
Applying Lessons: What Group Therapy Can Borrow
While there are important limitations and distinctions between extremist groups and therapy groups, there may be elements that group therapy and other group-based interventions can borrow from extremist groups. Two worth considering are fostering belonging and significance beyond the session and increasing virtual engagement. Joining an extremist group is usually a 24/7 undertaking. For those in-person, they live alongside one another, immersed in an environment where radical narratives and networks are constantly reinforced. For those online, engagement often happens daily through digital forums and chats, such as those on 4chan or Discord. In contrast, group therapy occurs during structured, time-limited sessions, and often without outside engagement between group members. Some support groups do encourage members to meet between sessions and build relationships, which enhances belonging, but some therapy groups recommend limiting outside contact. Group leaders could explore more frequent touchpoints or organize community-based activities that reinforce healthy thought patterns, collective identity, and healthy behaviors, which could help fulfill psychosocial needs on a more regular basis.
Another element worth borrowing is extremist groups’ mastery of digital engagement and marketing. As discussed earlier with regard to ISIS, violent extremist groups recruit effectively online through targeted propaganda, which includes media publications and social media engagements. Could group therapists and psychologists adapt similar strategies to deploy healthier counter narratives, increase engagement, and expand access of care to communities? One promising example of digital engagement is Life After Hate’s Daily Former podcast and Discord channel, which offer monitored discussions and peer support. As Life After Hate’s executive director said, “If one can be recruited into an extremist group on Discord, one can successfully disengage with the help of Discord” (Life After Hate, 2024). As Kruglanski (2014, p. 3) noted, “the fight against extremism needs to harness the same psychological forces that made extremism attractive in the first place… the counter-radicalization narrative should be presented boldly and assertively.” Taking on this charge, perhaps therapy and support groups should consider leveraging digital platforms to boldly and directly attract members, communicate the value of their therapeutic services, and normalize group therapy.
References
Berger, J. M. (2018). Extremism (1st edition). The MIT Press.
Borum, R. (2014). Psychological Vulnerabilities and Propensities for Involvement in Violent Extremism. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 32(3), 286–305. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2110
Hogg, M. A. (2007). Uncertainty–Identity Theory. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 39, pp. 69–126). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(06)39002-8
International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research. (2010). Saudi initiatives in countering terrorism. S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University. https://www.rsis.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Report-Saudi-Initiatives-in-Countering-Terrorism.pdf
Joyce, A. S., MacNair-Semands, R., Tasca, G. A., & Ogrodniczuk, J. S. (2011). Factor structure and validity of the Therapeutic Factors Inventory-Short Form. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 15(3), 201–219. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024677
Kruglanski, A. W. (2014). Psychology Not Theology: Overcoming ISIS’ Secret Appeal. International Relations.
Kruglanski, A. W., Bélanger, J. J., & Gunaratna, R. (2019). The three pillars of radicalization: Needs, narratives, and networks. Oxford University Press.
Life After Hate. (2024). Life After Hate Releases Discord Channel, Engaging with Today’s Violent Extremists Where They Digitally Live. https://www.lifeafterhate.org/blog/2024/5/23/the-daily-former-discord/
Life After Hate. (2023, March). Formers as Peer Mentors.
Macnair, L., & Frank, R. (2017). “To My Brothers in the West . . .”: A Thematic Analysis of Videos Produced by the Islamic State’s al-Hayat Media Center. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 33(3), 234–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986217699313
Marmarosh, C. L., Sandage, S., Wade, N., Captari, L. E., & Crabtree, S. (2022). New horizons in group psychotherapy research and practice from third wave positive psychology: a practice-friendly review. Research in psychotherapy (Milano), 25(3), 643. https://doi.org/10.4081/ripppo.2022.643
McCauley, C., & Moskalenko, S. (2017). Understanding political radicalization: The two-pyramids model. American Psychologist, 72(3), 205–216. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000062
Treadwell, T., Kumar, V. K., Stein, S. A., & Wright, K. (2002). The Group Cohesion Scale-Revised: Reliability and validity. International Journal of Action Methods: Psychodrama, Skill Training, and Role Playing, 54, 3–12.
Vergani, M., Iqbal, M., Ilbahar, E., & Barton, G. (2018). The Three Ps of Radicalization: Push, Pull and Personal. A Systematic Scoping Review of the Scientific Evidence about Radicalization Into Violent Extremism. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 43(10), 854–854. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610X.2018.1505686
Yalom, I. D., & Leszcz, M. (2020). The theory and practice of group psychotherapy (6th edition). Basic Books.