| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
156907
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article focuses on the so-called “brutalization” of terrorism. The brutalization thesis as part of the larger theoretical concept of “new terrorism” argues that “new terrorism” is more brutal than “old terrorism.” Many scholars claim that the 9/11 attacks mark the beginning of a new era of terrorism that has lifted international as well as domestic terrorism to a new level of violent brutality. Others argue that this process had already started in the early 1990s. After discussing possible ways to operationalize a brutalization of terrorism, for example focusing on suicide bombings or terrorist attacks against soft targets, this article tests the empirical credibility of the brutalization thesis regarding both potential starting points. Data from the Global Terrorism Database (GTD) shows that only three out of nine indicators increased significantly during the 1990s, partially backing the idea of a general brutalization, whereas increasing numbers of suicide attacks and beheadings after 9/11 support the notion of a qualitative change in terrorism and its brutality connected with the idea of maximizing media and public attention. Yet, these developments are regionally limited and the brutality of this “new terrorism” exceeds the levels known from the zenith of “old terrorism” in the 1970s and 1980s in only a few cases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
156194
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
We constructed a co-authorship network of the global political science community. Two scientists are connected if they have co-authored a paper. We drew on more than 67,000 papers published from 1990 to 2013 in one of today’s 96 core journals. The network consists of more than 40,000 authors located worldwide. We found that the community forms a single, interconnected component as well as numerous unconnected authors. Whereas some are highly productive in terms of publications, the majority of authors published only a single paper, which suggests significant turnover in the community. Using information from the papers (e.g., title, journal, and abstract), we investigated how different subcommunities organize and interconnect, how journals reach out into the community, and how individual scientists cooperate. We also investigated how the network has evolved in the last two decades. Our analysis is supplemented by a bibliographic analysis that describes major changes in publication patterns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|