Posters

No specific profile of those who engage in radicalisation, extremism and/or terrorism has been found to exist. The lack of a single pathway into extremism has led to the recognition of the need for a dynamic approach to identify and understand individuals who enter this trajectory. A rehabilitative framework of increasing attention in the space of prevention and reduction of offending behaviour is the Good Lives Model (GLM). The GLM is a strengths-based model focused on harnessing the strengths and opportunities available to an individual, to redirect behaviour to a prosocial outlook. This research aims to explore the general and etiological assumptions of the GLM in relation to extremism. The GLM allows for a consideration of individuality and identity, accounting for the variation of individual’s found to hold extremist views. Results further show that attempting to meet primary goods in an antisocial way is predictive of extremism intention risk. Therefore, this research both theoretically and empirically links the GLM to the extremism space, providing evidence of its potential uses in guiding prevention and interventions. 

Privacy-preserving behaviours instantiate the freedom-accountability debate. Inherently, the same techniques that protect can also enable harm. We examine Identity Obfuscation Behaviours (IOBs) - actions taken to avoid digital identification - as a patterned behavioural repertoire. Study 1 consulted 33 experts across academia, industry, and government to develop an IOB inventory. Study 2 used a large-scale online survey (N = 1,001) to measure adoption of IOBs alongside demographic variables, technical skill, privacy concern, motivations, and engagement in sensitive activities. Quantitative modelling identified three robust user profiles – high, low, and selective obfuscators – distinguished by configurations of practice. Profiles differed systematically by occupational and geopolitical context, non-linearly by technical skill, and inversely by privacy concern. Qualitative analysis found obfuscation to be motivated by concerns of protection, autonomy, and principled opposition to surveillance, while quantitative analyses suggest that only instrumental motivations translated into action. Obfuscation was associated with consistently greater engagement in all sensitive activities. Although causal direction cannot be inferred, qualitative accounts suggested that obfuscation can shape subsequent attitudes and behaviours in divergent ways, including empowerment, caution, anxiety, and, for a minority, encouraging harmful conduct. These findings position identity obfuscation as a heterogeneous, context-dependent behavioural system, highlighting the limits of tool-based proxies.

Despite music concerts and festivals contributing billions to local and global economies, there is a relative dearth of academic study on security and safety at these events, with existing studies predominantly focusing on singular criminal aspects such as sexual violence or drug (mis)use. The securitisation of these events can cost millions, including both private and public sector involvement, and yet very little research to date has taken into account the impact of these measures on the feelings of perceived safety experienced by attendees. Do protective security measures make people feel safer, or remind them of the potential danger?

This poster will outline the key findings and recommendations from a study that utilised a novel data source (event incident reports) in combination with more familiar methodologies in order to examine perceptions of safety and security at music events, and the alignment between expectation and experience.