Fisher & Kearns (2023)

Objectives: Examines how criminology has theorized terrorism and tested theories in leading journals.
Methods: Analyzes theoretical framing, hypotheses, methodologies, focus, and policy recommendations of terrorism articles.
Results:
- Increased focus on terrorism, but limited attention to useful criminological theories.
- Highlights need for qualitative and mixed-methods research.
- Under-explored aspects include the creation of terrorism laws.
Conclusions: Engaged theories but identified strengths and weaknesses in terrorism research; calls for future research.

Importance of Theory: Integral to all scientific research; aids in overcoming biases and testing knowledge.
Historical Context:
- Before 9/11: Terrorism research criticized as theoretical and unempirical.
- Post-9/11 era witnessed a substantial increase in research.
Criminology’s Role: As terrorism is a crime, it aligns with criminology's study areas: law making, breaking, and reactions.
Challenges: Other fields (political science, psychology, etc.) also analyze terrorism, but criminology’s data collection and empirical research can provide clear insights.

Growth of Terrorism Research: Notable growth since 2001; criminological theories have not been fully utilized.
Methodological Advances: Various methodologies allow criminologists to contribute to terrorism literature, although many areas remain under-researched.

Theoretical Applicability: Some criminological theories fit well; others (self-control, social disorganization) face applicability challenges.
Need for Broader Application: Some significant theories in criminology have yet to be applied to terrorism; continuing theoretical development is necessary.
Biases in Historical Research: Early studies lacked empirical focus and were often criticized.

Article Analysis:
- Observed 1,419 articles, narrowed to 144 meet criteria focusing on terrorism explicitly.
- Noted the publication years predominantly post-9/11, impacting research output.
Theoretical Framework Usage:
- 73.61% of articles had a theoretical framework, mostly from criminology.
- Limited use of diverse theories; some areas remain unexplored.
Hypothesis Testing: Less than one third of articles articulated hypotheses, indicating a gap in rigorous testing.
Methodological Approaches: Predominantly quantitative (57.64%); limited qualitative and mixed-methods.

Trends in Terrorism Research: Increased attention and improved quality in studies since 2006; yet challenges remain in publishing coherent studies that engage deeply with criminological theory.
Implications for Policymaking: While many articles suggest implications, only about half provide clear policy recommendations.
Conclusion: Criminological contributions are vital, but further exploration is needed to better integrate theories, tests, and practical applications in terrorism studies.

Research Opportunities: Identify gaps in theories and methodological approaches for future studies.
Engagement with Policy: Emphasizes the necessity of actionable insights from criminological theory to inform counter-terrorism strategies.