Radicalization of Homegrown Sunni Militants in the United States: Comparing Converts and Non-Converts

Are the mechanisms and processes that lead to radicalization different for Muslim converts and non-converts in the United States? While many scholars attempt to explain why people violently radicalize, the theories are diverse and most treat converts and non-converts the same. This study answers this question by categorizing the many radicalization theories into three levels of analysis so that cases of radicalization can be analyzed across and within disciplines. Out of 83 cases studies, individual-level factors are more prevalent among converts than non-converts. Group-level processes similarly affect both groups. Mass-level mechanisms are not significant factors in radicalization.     

How platforms facilitate collaboration across organizational boundaries: fighting human trafficking in Sweden

Policy Sciences - The use of collaborations and partnerships that engage a variety of actors from both the public and private spheres has drawn attention during the last decade as a promising...     

When Do Leaders Free-Ride? Business Experience and Contributions to Collective Defense

The logic of free-riding expects that individuals will underinvest in public goods, but people often behave in ways that are inconsistent with this prediction. Why do we observe variation in free-riding behavior? This study addresses this question by examining contributions to an important international public good—collective defense in military alliances. It develops a behavioral theory of free-riding in which the beliefs of world leaders are important for explaining investments in public goods. The argument holds that leaders with business experience make smaller contributions to collective defense because they are egoistic and more comfortable relying on a powerful ally for their defense. An analysis of defense expenditures in 17 non-U.S. members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization from 1952 to 2014 provides evidence consistent with the theory. The findings suggest that leaders with business experience are more likely than other heads of government to act as self-interested utility maximizers.     

Beyond the Unit Root Question: Uncertainty and Inference

A fundamental challenge facing applied time-series analysts is how to draw inferences about long-run relationships (LRR) when we are uncertain whether the data contain unit roots. Unit root tests are notoriously unreliable and often leave analysts uncertain, but popular extant methods hinge on correct classification. Webb, Linn, and Lebo (WLL; 2019) develop a framework for inference based on critical value bounds for hypothesis tests on the long-run multiplier (LRM) that eschews unit root tests and incorporates the uncertainty inherent in identifying the dynamic properties of the data into inferences about LRRs. We show how the WLL bounds procedure can be applied to any fully specified regression model to solve this fundamental challenge, extend the results of WLL by presenting a general set of critical value bounds to be used in applied work, and demonstrate the empirical relevance of the LRM bounds procedure in two applications.