ExtremismAre Counter Violent Extremism Interventions Effective?

By Todd C. Helmus and Elizabeth Bodine-Baron

Published 15 September 2020

Government efforts to counter the propaganda and radicalization that lead to violent extremism are becoming more common around the world, but there’s little research on whether such programs work. RAND conducted three randomized controlled trials of what are called countering violent extremism (CVE) interventions. The results were mixed, but one conclusion was inescapable: countering violent extremism is not an easy task, and programmers should not always assume their content will be successful.

Government efforts to counter the propaganda and radicalization that lead to violent extremism are becoming more common around the world, but there’s little research on whether such programs work. Funded by the Global Engagement Center at the U.S. Department of State, RAND conducted three randomized controlled trials—the gold standard in evaluation design—of what are called countering violent extremism (CVE) interventions, using radio and social media in NigeriaIndonesia, and the Philippines. RAND also conducted a qualitative assessment of a program designed to train civil society members in the Philippines to directly counter violent extremism.

The results were mixed, but one conclusion was inescapable: countering violent extremism is not an easy task, and programmers should not always assume their content will be successful.

Nigeria
In communities in northern Nigeria affected by violent extremism, RAND recruited 2,064 participants via SMS/text message and assigned them randomly to listen to a CVE-themed radio talk show called Ina Mafita or to a control program (professional soccer matches) each week over two months. To monitor compliance, we texted participants a weekly quiz and correct answers earned a small financial incentive. Baseline and monthly surveys also were also delivered via SMS.

Ina Mafita had a positive effect on listeners’ beliefs about the importance of being a role model and a positive but not significant effect on the belief in the value of locally run initiatives to reintegrate at-risk youth. Results were more pronounced for those in the treatment group who complied well and for those who reported liking the show’s story line.

Indonesia
In Indonesia, RAND recruited more than 900 Indonesian youth via Facebook and randomly assigned them to systematically observe CVE-themed Facebook posts or control content (posts derived from advertising and public service campaigns) for two months. The campaign’s goals were to increase support for diverse, inclusive communities and freedom of speech and to decrease support for the use of violence in addressing grievances. Surveys were conducted via an online portal.

The survey found a positive effect on attitudes toward promoting inclusivity online. But the result stemmed from an unusual and sudden drop in such attitudes among the control group. Also, the effect was no longer significant in analyses that controlled for baseline differences among study participants. Moreover, there were negative treatment effects on respondents’ attitudes toward living in separated communities, or what is known as a boomerang effect—the unintended consequence of an attempt to persuade that results in the adoption of an opposing position instead.