An Israeli Model for Predicting Fear of Terrorism Based on Community and Individual Factors

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to suggest a model for predicting fear of terrorism using theoretical explanations that predict fear of crime. The study focused on two different levels of analysis: community and individual. The sample consisted of 507 Israeli adults. Predictions of fear of terrorism and fear of crime were conducted with two path analysis models, calculated using AMOS software. Fear of terrorism was predicted directly by gender, age, prior victimization, religiosity, and neighborhood disorder. The findings allow the researchers to offer a predictive model for fear of terrorism based on a combination of theories that explain fear of crime as well as a theory concerning the link between fear of death and religion. A combination of environmental theories (e.g., the Broken Windows theory), theories related to personal variables (e.g., the Vulnerability theory), and the Terror Management theory can produce an adequate theoretical framework for explaining fear of terrorism.

Keywords

fear of terrorism fear of crime community variables individual variables religion.

Introduction

The rise in global terrorism has increasingly motivated researchers to investigate its causes and consequences (May, Herbert, Cline, & Nellis, 2011; Nellis, 2009). A growing body of literature is now devoted mainly to psychological implications of both direct and indirect exposure to terrorist incidents (Bensimon, Levine, et al., 2013; Besser, Zeigler-Hill, Weinberg, Pincus, & Neria, 2015; Cohen-Louck & Ben-David, 2017). Nevertheless, fear of terrorism has been relatively disregarded and has only been examined by a small number of studies (e.g., Klar, Zakay, & Sharvit, 2002; Nellis, 2009; Shechory-Bitton & Cohen-Louck, 2018). Two of these, both conducted in Israel, examined variables that determine levels of fear and showed that, apart from a few exceptions, people’s concerns are affected by age and gender (Shechory-Bitton & Cohen-Louck, 2018; Shechory-Bitton & Silawi, 2019), confirming the general pattern whereby older people and women are more inclined to worry (e.g., Van Zelst, de Beurs, & Smit, 2003).

Although theory and research have helped illuminate the nature of fear of crime (e.g., Shechory-Bitton & Soen, 2016; Vilalta, 2011), as mentioned above, little attention has been paid to fear of terrorism (Brück & Müller, 2010; Shechory-Bitton & Silawi, 2019). The current study attempts to expand the existing literature by suggesting a model for predicting fear of terrorism, based on methods provided for predicting fear of crime. Recently, numerous countries, particularly in Europe, have been exposed to a wave of terror attacks. This exposes entire populations to fears they had not previously experienced. We believe that the results of the current study can help gain insights into the causes that most affect fear of terrorism and may help design policy measures for reducing, as well as dealing with, these fears.

The literature shows that both types of fear, of terrorism and of crime, share common elements. They affect the social fabric of life by creating a sense of fear and interfering with normal daily life routines (Ganor, 2005; Zemishlany, 2012). However, terrorism has unique characteristics. Terrorism is by nature nonspecific and aims to cause overall harm, damage, and death (Dougall, Hayward, & Baum, 2005; Posner, 2002). It does not target a specific sector of the population. Rather, it tries to plant seeds of fear and chaos far beyond its immediate victims and among a wider public (Romanov, Zussman, & Zussman, 2012). The victims are usually random, people who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time (Lowry & Lating, 2002).

We used theoretical explanations provided to predict fear of crime to examine two different levels of analysis which have been linked to fear of crime: community and individual variables that allow for different theories on fear of crime (e.g., Vilalta, 2011). Due to its prolonged political and security instability, Israel has become a “stress laboratory” for the study of war- and terror-related stress (Bensimon, Solomon, & Horesh, 2013; Doeland, 2012; Laufer, Shechory, & Solomon, 2009). Since the Second Intifada began in September 2000, Israelis have endured waves of unprecedented terror, with hundreds of civilian casualties and thousands wounded. This exposure intensified after the 2005 disengagement from Gaza (Shechory & Laufer, 2011) and reached new heights in the summer of 2014. Terrorism is now more or less routine in much of Israel and security threats are part of daily life (Bensimon, Solomon, & Horesh, 2013; Shechory-Bitton, 2013).

The Broken Windows theory (Wilson & Kelling, 1982) and the Collective Efficacy theory (Sampson, 2010; Sampson & Raudenbush, 2004; Sampson, Raudenbush, & Earls, 1997) can be used to form a comprehensive approach to the community-oriented issue, to explain the public fear. The Broken Windows theory (Wilson & Kelling, 1982), focusing on neighborhood disorder, suggests that visible signs of disorder may be more important than the actual incidence of crime, and that neighborhoods with poor physical conditions (e.g., loitering, gangs, vandalized property) will have higher levels of fear of crime (Cook & Fox, 2011; Franklin, Franklin, & Fearn, 2008). The Collective Efficacy theory (Sampson, 2010; Sampson & Raudenbush, 2004; Sampson et al., 1997) emphasizes the sense of communal collective efficacy and the neighborhood’s social integration and connections as an important factor for achieving public order and controlling crime (Sampson, 2010), which in turn, improve residents’ sense of security (Scarborough, Like-Haislip, Novak, Lucas, & Alarid, 2010).

Overall, neighborhood disorder and lack of social integration were found to predict high levels of fear of crime (e.g., Franklin et al., 2008; Vilalta, 2011). As far as known, the link between these two variables (social integration and neighborhood disorder) and between fear of terrorism was examined only in two studies, both conducted in Israel (Shechory-Bitton & Cohen-Louck, 2018; Shechory-Bitton & Silawi, 2019). Although no links were found between social integration and fear of terrorism, higher levels of neighborhood disorder were predictive of higher levels of fear.

Guided by the individual characteristics framework, fear-of-crime theorists have also developed a number of models using individual factors to explain individual differences in fear of crime. The common framework that allows us to relate to individual characteristics on a comprehensive basis is the Vulnerability theory (Hale, 1996; Pantazis, 2000; Skogan & Maxfield, 1981). According to this approach, those who feel physically and socially vulnerable report higher levels of fear of crime. Overall, age and gender were found to be very good predictors of worries regarding all life domains (Fox, Nobles, & Piquero, 2009; Hayman, 2011; Scarborough et al., 2010). Women and older people are more inclined to express high levels of concern on both issues of crime and of terrorism (e.g., Brück & Müller, 2010; Franklin et al., 2008; Shechory-Bitton & Cohen-Louck, 2018; Vilalta, 2011). This although both are, relatively speaking, less likely to be assaulted (e.g., Chui, Cheng, & Wong, 2012). This is known as the “fear-victimization paradox” (Ferraro, 1996; May, Rader, & Goodrum, 2010).

In fact, although prior victimization predicts higher fear of crime (Hale, 1996; Tillyer, Fisher, & Wilcox, 2011; Vilalta, 2011), some studies have found no association between the two (e.g., Gibson, Zhao, Lovrich, & Gaffney, 2002). In addition, although the level of objective exposure to traumatic events is positively associated with the severity of distress (Benzion, Shaharabani, & Shavit, 2009; Galea et al., 2002; Hobfoll et al., 2007), few studies fail to support these findings, indicating that subjective sense of fear as well as duration of exposure (e.g., continuous ongoing and chronic exposure vs. one-time exposure) (Laufer & Solomon, 2009; Shalev, Tuval, Frenkiel-Fishman, Hadar, & Eth, 2006; Shechory-Bitton, 2013) have the greatest impact.

Due to the similarities we found in previous studies between the two types of fear (crime and terrorism), we thought that it would be beneficial to examine whether factors previously found to predict fear of crime would also predict fear of terrorism. We also attempted to suggest a new predictive model that might determine both direct and indirect relationships between variables emerging from the theoretical background mentioned above.

Based on the aforementioned literature review, we focused on the following community and individual characteristics: neighborhood disorder, social integration, age, gender, and prior victimization. Using two path analysis models, we aimed to examine the extent to which these variables predict fear of terrorism and fear of crime. As there are very few studies on this topic, the hypotheses are general and they are based on the existing literature. The extensive literature on fear of crime makes it possible to conjecture that both the community and the individual characteristics would directly predict this type of fear. Similarly, we assumed that age (older people), gender (female), and exposure would be directly related to fear of terrorism. Finally, we assumed that neighborhood disorder and social integration might serve as mediators of fear of terrorism.

Method

Participants

The participants consisted of 507 adults, 236 males (46.5%) and 271 females (53.5%), who gave informed consent to participate in the study. Their mean age was 26.26 years (SD = 6.93) and all were Jewish. Most were Israeli born (90.4%) and others were mainly of Western origin. Fifty-six percent were single, 37.5% married, and the rest divorced, separated, or widowed (6.5%). With regard to religiosity, 48.8% defined themselves as religious and the rest as secular (52.2%). Females had a higher level of education than males, χ²(2) = 16.53, p < .001; about 71% of females were academic students or had a higher education, compared to 54% of males. No other demographic differences were found by gender. In light of the differences found, the two demographic variables of education and religiosity were taken into consideration upon examination of the models.

Measures

Victimization experience

Respondents were asked four questions to assess their own or their family’s victimization experiences in the past 12 months. The responses to these questions were classified as two separate variables: violent crime victimization and terrorist victimization. All were defined dichotomously, with “victimized” coded as (1) and “not victimized” coded as (0). The questions were as follows: Self exposure to crime—“Have you been the victim of a violent crime or of a crime against your property?” Other exposure to crime—“Has any member of your family or friends been the victim of a violent crime or of a crime against their property?” Self exposure to terrorism—“Have you witnessed or been hurt in a terrorist attack?” Other exposure to terrorism—“Has any member of your family or friends witnessed or been hurt in a terrorist attack?”

Fear of crime and fear of terrorism

These types of fear were defined as behavioral responses to potential crime or terrorism, including behavioral adjustments to minimize the likelihood of that victimization, with replies ranging from 0 (never) to 4 (always). The items were based on previous instruments (Franklin et al., 2008; Klar et al., 2002; Senn & Dzinas, 1996) and were adapted to Israeli reality. For example, unlike Senn and Dzinas (1996), we did not ask about being afraid to walk to the subway as Israel has no subway. Fear of crime included 23 items (e.g., “How much do you worry about getting mugged, getting beaten up, knifed, or shot?”) (α = .93). Fear of terrorism included eight items (Klar et al., 2002) (e.g., “When I am in a public space I fear the possibility of a terrorist attack”; “I try to avoid traveling by bus due to the security situation”) (α = .87). A total score was calculated for each scale, with higher scores reflecting greater fear.

Neighborhood disorder

Neighborhood disorder, examined based on previous instruments (Franklin et al., 2008; Gray, Jackson, & Farrall, 2011), was measured by asking participants about nine incidents of neighborhood incivility: “The following is a list of issues that may or may not be a problem in your neighborhood. For each one, please mark the appropriate answer for you.” The list included incidents such as vandalism, youth gangs, garbage and litter, and excessive drinking in public. High internal consistency was found, α = .89. A total score was calculated for the items, ranging from 1 (not a problem) to 4 (a serious problem), with higher scores reflecting greater disorder.

Social integration

Social integration was measured by responses to four questions derived from previous literature (Franklin et al., 2008): (a) “Would you describe the area where you live as a place where people help one another or a place where people mostly go their own way?” (b) “Do you feel that the area where you live is more of a real home or simply a place to live?” (c) “How often do you talk to your neighbors?” and (d) “When you do a neighbor a favor, can you trust the neighbor to return the favor?” Higher scores reflect greater social integration. Because replies to the questions were measured on different scales (dichotomous, 4-point scales, 5-point scales), responses were standardized. The mean of the four items was M = 0.00 (SD = 0.78). The total score was composed of the mean of the items, and higher scores reflected greater social integration. Reliability tests showed acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = .89).

Demographic characteristics

The questionnaire gathered information about age, gender, marital status, level of religiosity, level of education, and so on.

Procedure

Questionnaires were distributed in city centers and shopping malls throughout Israel. Before completing the questionnaires, participants were told that they could stop the interview at any stage and that their identity would be kept confidential. The purpose of the study was explained after completion of the questionnaires. Subjects were told that they are participating in a study on attitudes to terrorism and crime. Twelve individuals refused to participate in the study or did not complete the entire questionnaire. All participants signed informed consent forms. Data were collected during 2012-2013.

Results

Descriptive Statistics of Victimization by Crime and Terrorist Events

Almost 40% of the participants reported having been personally exposed to crime or terrorism (n = 187 to terrorism and n = 199 to crime), and about 25% (n = 124) had been exposed to both. Over half the participants reported that a significant other had been exposed to crime or terrorism (n = 301 to terrorism and n = 261 to crime), and almost 40% (n = 195) had significant others who were exposed to crime or terrorism. Fear of crime ranged from 0 to 4, with a mean of 1.31 (SD = 0.80). Fear of terrorism ranged from 0 to 4, with a mean of 0.97 (SD = 0.80). Social integration was composed of standardized items (M = 0), and neighborhood disorder had a mean of 1.98 (SD = 0.74). They correlated negatively at r = −.28 (p < .001).

Table 1 presents the distribution of exposure to crime and terrorism, by gender.

Table 1.

Distribution of Exposure to Crime and Terrorism, by Gender (N = 507).

	Males (n = 236)N (%)	Females (n = 271)N (%)	χ²(1)
Self exposure to crime	107 (45.3)	92 (33.9)	6.86**
Other exposure to crime	143 (60.6)	118 (43.5)	14.68***
Self exposure to terrorism	96 (40.7)	91 (33.6)	2.73
Other exposure to terrorism	160 (67.8)	141 (52.0)	13.00***

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

The table shows that men, more than women, were victims of crime, and knew more people who had been victimized by either crime or terrorism. Nonetheless, men and women were equally victimized by terrorist incidents.

Predicting Fear of Terrorism and Crime

Predictions of fear of terrorism and of crime were conducted with two path analysis models, calculated using AMOS software (Version 22). These models were aimed at examining the extent to which the research variables predict fear of terrorism and of crime. As stated, as about one half of the participants defined themselves as religious, and gender differences were found in the variable examining level of education, these variables were explored as well.

Background variables were defined: age, gender (1 = male, 0 = female), education (0 = high school, 1 = tertiary), and religiosity (1 = secular, 0 = religious), as dummy variables. Exposure to terrorism and to crime were used with the respective outcome, coded as two dummy variables (self and other exposure) in each model. Neighborhood disorder and social integration were entered third.

Table 2 and Figure 1 present the path analysis for fear of crime.

Table 2.

Path Model for Fear of Crime, by Background Variables, Neighborhood Disorder, and Social Integration (N = 507).

Dependent Variable	Predictor	B	SE	β	C.R.	R ²
Self exposure to crime	Education	−0.15	0.05	−0.15**	−3.02	.02
Other exposure to crime	Education	−0.14	0.05	−0.14**	−2.74	.04
	Gender	0.09	0.04	0.09**	2.60
	Religiosity	−0.09	0.03	−0.09**	−2.66
Neighborhood disorder	Self exposure to crime	0.18	0.06	0.12**	2.94	.09
	Gender	−0.17	0.06	−0.12**	−2.85
	Age	0.02	0.00	0.17***	4.12
	Religiosity	0.20	0.07	0.13**	3.07
Social integration	Religiosity	−0.30	0.07	−0.19***	−4.25	.04
Fear of crime	Neighborhood disorder	0.29	0.04	0.27***	7.06	.39
	Gender	−0.73	0.06	−0.46***	−12.93
	Age	0.02	0.00	0.14***	3.92
	Other exposure to crime	−0.15	0.06	−0.10**	−2.70
	Social integration	−0.11	0.04	−0.11**	−2.88

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Figure 1.

Model of the Relationships Between the Study Variables for Fear of Crime (N = 507).

The model for fear of crime was found to fit the data: χ²(17) = 20.11, p = .269, normed fit index (NFI) = .971, nonnormed fit index (NNFI) = .987, comparative fit index (CFI) = .995, and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = .019.

Table 2 and Figure 1 show that fear of crime was positively predicted by neighborhood disorder and negatively predicted by social integration. That is, higher levels of neighborhood disorder and lower levels of social integration were predictive of higher levels of fear of crime. Furthermore, fear of crime was negatively predicted by gender, and positively predicted by age, such that females and older participants experienced higher levels of fear. Fear of crime was negatively predicted by other exposure to crime as well, such that knowing a significant other who had been victimized by crime was related to lower levels of fear.

Several mediated relationships may be observed. First, neighborhood disorder mediates the relationship between self exposure to crime and fear of crime, such that personal exposure to crime predicts higher perceived neighborhood disorder, which is then related to greater fear of crime. Second, gender (females), age (older), and religiosity (secular) are related to higher perceived neighborhood disorder, which is predictive of greater fear of crime. Third, education (high school), gender (males), and religiosity (religious participants) are related to knowing a significant other who was victimized by crime, which is then related to lower levels of fear. Fourth, and similarly, religiosity (religious observance) is related to higher perceived social integration, which is predictive of lower levels of fear.

Table 3 and Figure 2 present the path analysis for fear of terrorism.

Table 3.

Path Model for Fear of Terrorism, by Background Variables, Neighborhood Disorder, and Social Integration (N = 507).

Dependent variable	Predictor	B	SE	β	C.R.	R ²
Self exposure to terrorism	Age	0.01	0.01	0.14***	3.31	.03
Self exposure to terrorism	Religiosity	−0.15	0.04	−0.15***	−3.33
Other exposure to terrorism	Gender	0.13	0.04	0.13***	3.34	.09
	Religiosity	−0.26	0.04	−0.27***	−6.34
Neighborhood disorder	Gender	−0.13	0.06	−0.09*	−1.81	.10
	Age	0.02	0.01	0.19***	4.60
	Other exposure to terrorism	−0.32	0.07	−0.22***	−5.02
Social integration	Other exposure to terrorism	0.29	0.07	0.18***	3.90	.06
	Religiosity	−0.20	0.07	−0.13**	−2.82
Fear of terror	Neighborhood disorder	0.26	0.05	0.24***	5.56	.19
	Self exposure to terrorism	0.21	0.08	0.13**	2.73
	Gender	−0.33	0.07	−0.20***	−4.98
	Age	0.02	0.01	0.14***	3.33
	Other exposure to terrorism	−0.17	0.08	−0.10*	−2.19
	Religiosity	0.15	0.07	0.09*	2.19

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Figure 2.

Model of the Relationships Between the Study Variables for Fear of Terrorism (N = 507).

The model for fear of terrorism was found to fit the data: χ²(8) = 11.44, p = .178, NFI = .974, NNFI = .961, CFI = .991, RMSEA = .029.

Table 3 and Figure 2 show that fear of terrorism was positively predicted by neighborhood disorder but not by social integration. That is, higher levels of neighborhood disorder were predictive of higher levels of fear of terrorism. Furthermore, fear of terrorism was negatively predicted by gender, positively predicted by age, and positively predicted by religiosity, such that females, older participants, and secular participants experienced higher levels of fear. Fear of terrorism was positively predicted by self exposure to terrorism, and negatively predicted by other exposure to terrorism, such that not being personally exposed to terrorism yet knowing a significant other who had been victimized by terrorism, was related to lower levels of fear.

Several mediated relationships may be observed. First, neighborhood disorder mediates the relationship between other exposure to terrorism and fear of terrorism, such that knowing a significant other who was victimized by terrorism predicts a lower perception of neighborhood disorder, which is then related to lower fear of terrorism. Second, gender (males) and religiosity (religious observance) are related to knowing someone who was victimized by terrorism, which is then related to lower levels of fear. Fourth, gender (females) and age (older) are related to higher perceived neighborhood disorder, which is predictive of greater fear of terrorism.

Discussion

The main purpose of the current study was to offer a model for predicting fear of terrorism, based on the broad theoretical and research knowledge on the topic of fear of crime described in the “Introduction” section. Before discussing the outcome of the terrorism model, there is room to relate to the results of fear of crime.

Fear of Crime Model

In general, unsurprisingly, a similar pattern of results emerged in the fear of crime model in comparison to the literature. The direct variables we found, that is, gender, age, neighborhood disorder, and social integration, confirm other findings showing that women and older people report experiencing greater fear of being victims of crime (Fox et al., 2009; Scarborough et al., 2010) and that higher levels of neighborhood disorder and lower levels of social integration are linked to higher levels of fear of crime (Franklin et al., 2008).

Examination of the mediated relationship also reinforces the findings concerning prediction of fear of crime. For example, women and older people perceive more neighborhood disorder and thus are also more fearful. Men and more educated people demonstrate less fear, mainly when they are familiar with other victims.

The state of affairs with regard to the link between fear of crime and personal victimization or acquaintance with other victims is also similar to that evident from the literature. Similar to some studies (e.g., Gibson et al., 2002) and unlike others (Tillyer et al., 2011; Vilalta, 2011), in the current study, personal victimization did not directly predict fear of crime. However, victims described their place of residence as problematic and also expressed greater fear.

Another finding related to fear of crime is religion. In the current study, we examined the variable of religion, as half the respondents were found to be religious. Religious faith did not directly predict fear of crime. In fact, we found that higher perception of social integration mediates the relationship between religiosity and fear of crime. The lack of a direct correlation between fear of crime and religiosity is compatible with other findings (Shechory-Bitton & Silawi, 2019). However, the findings in this context are not unequivocal, as others have reported that religious faith reduces fear of crime (e.g., Matthews, Johnson, & Jenks, 2011). This must be further studied. In any case, it may be assumed that religion can serve as a buffer to fear. Compatible with the findings of others (e.g., Matthews et al., 2011), religious people described their neighborhood as safer and their social relationships as stronger than did secular people, predicting lower levels of fear.

The perception of religious people in these contexts is undoubtedly related to the nature of the community ties customary within religious populations (Matthews et al., 2011). Communal life centering around religion (prayers in the synagogue, joint celebrations of various holidays, and social events focusing on religious topics) (Shechory-Bitton, 2014) and social religious support (Solomon & Berger, 2005) also facilitates social surveillance and reduction of crime rates in the neighborhood.

These links between social integration and neighborhood disorder are also consistent with the major ideas underlying the Broken Windows theory (Wilson & Kelling, 1982) and the Collective Efficacy theory (Sampson, 2010; Sampson & Raudenbush, 2004; Sampson et al., 1997). In conclusion of this part, it is evident that the model of crime uncovered in the current study matches both the theoretical explanations and the findings of other studies.

Fear of Terrorism Model

As stated, the main purpose of the current study was to offer a model for predicting fear of terrorism. The research findings make it possible to suggest a model that utilizes the same explanations offered for fear of crime. However, as seen further on, there is also room to consider other factors. The theoretical model for predicting fear of terrorism received partial support, especially on the basis of the Vulnerability theory (Hale, 1996; Pantazis, 2000; Skogan & Maxfield, 1981) and the Broken Windows theory (Wilson & Kelling, 1982).

Our results provide evidence in support of the vulnerability perspective, suggested for understanding fear of crime. Fear of terrorism was predicted directly by gender, age, and prior victimization. Social vulnerability refers to the concept that some groups are more vulnerable to victimization due to their social standing. Being female and older, in our case, may cause people to feel more susceptible to terrorist attacks (see also: Bleich, Gelkopf, & Solomon, 2003; Cohen-Louck, 2019; Nellis, 2009; Van Zelst et al., 2003). This in spite of the current finding indicating that women report less victimization than their male counterparts (the “fear-victimization paradox”) (Ferraro, 1996; May et al., 2010). Moreover, prior victimization was found to be a direct predictor of fear of terrorism, regardless of gender.

The current findings also demonstrated the utility of using the Broken Windows theory as an explanation for fear of terrorism. Those who described their neighborhood as decrepit were also afraid of terrorism (and not only of crime, as described above). Lacking a considerable number of previous studies on the relationship between fear of terrorism and neighborhood disorder, the research hypothesis was that the features of the neighborhood would serve as mediators and not necessarily as a direct predictor. This finding is interesting, as terrorism is defined as unexpected and random (Dougall et al., 2005; Gidron, Gal, & Zahavi, 1999). However, the current findings confirm the findings of Shechory-Bitton and colleagues (Shechory-Bitton & Cohen-Louck, 2018; Shechory-Bitton & Silawi, 2019), which explained their findings in the Israeli context.

During the last decade, most of the terrorist incidents in Israel consisted of missiles fired from the north (by Hizbollah) and from the south (by Hamas and others). The Israeli population was exposed to chronic terror attacks and no place was safe since the attacks encompassed most of Israel (Bensimon, Levine, et al., 2013). One of the most significant problems arising from rocket missile launching to Israel is the lack of bomb shelters, especially in neglected areas. The sense of fear uncovered in the current study may be related to the lack of security and safety means such as bomb shelters and not necessarily to physical features evident in the context of fear of crime (vandalism, gangs, graffiti, etc.) (e.g., Shechory-Bitton & Silawi, 2019). We did not discuss this point in the current study and it merits further research. Nonetheless, this does not detract from the significance and relationship between fear of terror and features of people’s residential environment.

Social integration served neither as a predictor nor as a mediator of fear of terrorism. Although it confirms the two previous studies mentioned above, it contrasts to a certain extent with others (e.g., Galea et al., 2001; Gelkopf, Berger, Bleich, & Silver 2012; Shechory-Bitton & Silawi, 2019) showing that social support buffers fear of terrorism. Thus, there is room to explain our findings. In the current study (as well as in the other two previous studies), social integration relates only to the number of social interactions (e.g., Tay, Tan, Diener, & Gonzalez, 2013). Future research on the quality of interactions, that is, perceived availability of help and support as measured by social support (Tay et al., 2013) with regard to terrorism, will make it possible to reach clearer results in this context. The relationship found between social integration and religiosity reinforces this claim, as religiosity positively predicted fear of terrorism, such that religious participants experienced lower levels of fear than secular participants.

Aside from the conclusions stated above, in our opinion, because in terrorism one of the main concerns is the possibility of dying or fear of death (Boscarino, Adams, Figley, Galea, & Foa, 2006), the Terror Management theory (TMT; Greenberg, Pyszczynski, & Solomon, 1997) provides us with a complementary explanation. TMT postulates that a key variable in understanding a person’s reaction to terrorism is fear of death. When individuals are exposed to moral threats, thoughts of death tend to emerge consciously (Pyszczynski, Solomon, & Greenberg, 2002). According to this theory, religion serves to manage the potential terror engendered by the uniquely human awareness of death by affording a sense of psychological security and hope of immortality. People develop and maintain religious beliefs, as a solution to the persistent and pervasive problem of death. Believing in an omnipotent God affords an all-encompassing view of reality that explains reality and enables people to believe that they can control their surroundings (including uncontrollable events) by currying favor with beings more powerful than themselves who can do things they themselves cannot (Vail et al., 2010). Especially in uncontrollable situations such as terrorism, people turn to the one whom they perceive as having control (Cohen-Louck & Saka, 2017; Solomon & Berger, 2005).

Research findings support the TMT assumptions. Religiosity was found to buffer psychological outcomes of exposure to terrorism (e.g., Kaplan, Matar, Kamin, Sadan, & Cohen, 2005; Solomon & Berger, 2005). Similarly, in Israel, those who live in areas constantly exposed to terrorism events, and who espouse a religious ideological faith that justifies living there, reported low levels of distress and fear of terror (Dekel & Nuttman-Shwartz, 2009; Kaplan et al., 2005; Vail et al., 2010). Terror may involve a greater concern of death than fear of crime; therefore, in the case of fear of terror, religion was found to be a direct predictor while in fear of crime, it was only found to be a mediator.

Limitations, Future Directions, and Conclusion

In summary, the research findings make it possible to offer a model for predicting fear of terror based on a combination between theories that explain fear of crime and a theory focusing on the link between fear of death (in our case terrorism) and religion. The combination of environmental theories, such as the Broken Windows theory, theories related to personal variables, such as the vulnerability theory, and the TMT that explains the connection to religion, can form an adequate theoretical framework for explaining fear of terror. However, as we did not ask direct questions regarding fear of death as a result of terrorism and fear of death as a result of crime, further research is needed with regard to the TMT and in the context of these specific questions. Furthermore, in the current study, we did not discuss the relationship between religion and ideology, although indicated by the research as mediating feelings of fear and distress (e.g., Kaplan et al., 2005; Laufer et al., 2009). There is room to further explore the variable of religion, including its association with one’s ideological views.

As far as known, this is the first study that uses the same sample to measure the impact of these theoretical perspectives on fear of terror. The results of this study provide a new approach, based on theoretical perspectives, to predicting fear of terrorism, in addition to from unique factors that must be taken in consideration. However, since it is an initial study, further research is needed to examine how this theoretical model applies to other populations. The current sample consisted only of Jewish participants. Arab Israelis comprise about 20% of the Israeli population. This study cannot be generalized to the Arab population. Although mass terrorism in Israel is aimed at Israeli Jews, and Muslims and Arabs are not intended targets of the terror attacks, Israel’s Arab population is affected by it as well (Shechory-Bitton & Silawi, 2019).

Another concern may relate to the gender differences found in the current study. As victimization by sexual assaults was not examined in the current study, further research could present a full disclosure concerning women’s exposure to interpersonal violence. This is particularly important in light of official statistics from Western countries, reporting thousands of sexual victims each year, mostly female (e.g., Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014; Israeli Ministry of Public Security, 2014).

Finally, the current study took place in Israel and dealt with fear resulting from continuous exposure to terrorism. There is room to examine the issue also in the context of one-time events, as the impact of continuous exposure is different than that of one-time exposure to terrorism (Bensimon, Solomon, & Horesh, 2013). Notwithstanding, this study has an important contribution to the literature on fear of terrorism. It expands the topic of understanding this type of fear and its various aspects, examining as it does environmental variables in addition to the personal variables studied previously, and it offers a combined model of factors that predict fear of terrorism. Moreover, numerous countries, particularly in Europe, have recently been exposed to a wave of terror attacks. This exposes entire populations to fears they had not previously experienced. We believe that the results of the current study can help gain more insight into the causes that most affect fear of terrorism and may help design policy measures for reducing as well as dealing with these fears.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Mally Shechory-Bitton is the vice rector and the chair of the Criminology department at Ariel University. Her academic work includes both practical and theoretical experience in the fields of victimology, violence, and aggression.

Keren Cohen-Louck, PhD, is a lecturer in the Department of Criminology at Ariel University. Her main research interests are terrorism—fear of terrorism, coping with terrorism, and the terrorists characteristics.

References

Bensimon

Levine

S. Z.

Zerach

Stein

Svetlicky

Solomon

(2013). Elaboration on posttraumatic stress disorder diagnostic criteria: A factor analytic study of PTSD exposure to war or terror. Israel Journal of Psychiatry and Related Sciences, 50(2), 84-90.

Bensimon

Solomon

Horesh

(2013). The utility of Criterion A under chronic national terror. The Israel Journal of Psychiatry and Related Sciences, 50(2), 81-83.

Benzion

Shaharabani

Shavit

(2009). Emotions and perceived risks after the 2006 Israel–Lebanon war. Mind & Society, 8, 21-41.

Besser

Zeigler-Hill

Weinberg

Pincus

A. L.

Neria

(2015). Intrapersonal resilience moderates the association between exposure-severity and PTSD symptoms among civilians exposed to the 2014 Israel–Gaza Conflict. Self and Identity, 14, 1-15.

Bleich

Gelkopf

Solomon

(2003). Exposure to terrorism, stress-related mental health symptoms, and coping behavior among a nationally representative sample in Israel. Journal of the American Medical Association, 290, 612-621.

Boscarino

J. A.

Adams

R. E.

Figley

C. R.

Galea

Foa

E. B.

(2006). Fear of terrorism and preparedness in New York City 2 years after the attacks: Implications for disaster planning and research. Journal of Public Health Management & Practice, 12, 505-513.

Brück

Müller

(2010). Comparing the determinants of concern about terrorism and crime. Global Crime, 11, 1-15.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014). Prevalence and characteristics of sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence victimization—National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, United States, 2011. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss6308a1.htm

Chui

W. H.

Cheng

K. K.

Wong

L. P.

(2012). Gender, fear of crime, and attitudes toward prisoners among social work majors in a Hong Kong University. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 57(4), 1-16.

10.

Cohen-Louck

(2019). Perception of the threat of terrorism. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 34(5), 887-911.

11.

Cohen-Louck

Ben-David

(2017). Coping with terrorism: Coping types and effectiveness. International Journal of Stress Management, 24, 1-17.

12.

Cohen-Louck

Saka

(2017). Patterns in response to chronic terrorism threats: A construct of emotional, cognitive, and behavioral responses among Israeli citizens. Stress & Health, 33(4), 448-458.

13.

Cook

C. L.

Fox

K. A.

(2011). Fear of property crime: Examining the effects of victimization, vicarious victimization, and perceived risk. Violence and Victims, 26, 684-700.

14.

Dekel

Nuttman-Shwartz

(2009). Posttraumatic stress and growth: The contribution of cognitive appraisal and sense of belonging to the country. Health & Social Work, 34, 87-96.

15.

Doeland

E. M.

(2012). The influence of terrorist threats on Israeli children and adolescents. Social Cosmos, 3(1), 61-67.

16.

Dougall

A. L.

Hayward

M. C.

Baum

(2005). Media exposure to bioterrorism: Stress and the anthrax attacks. Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes, 68, 28-42.

17.

Ferraro

K. F.

(1996). Women’s fear of victimization: Shadow of sexual assault? Social Forces, 75, 667-690.

18.

Fox

K. A.

Nobles

M. R.

Piquero

A. R.

(2009). Gender, crime victimization and fear of crime. Security Journal, 22(1), 24-39.

19.

Franklin

T. W.

Franklin

C. A.

Fearn

N. E.

(2008). A multilevel analysis of the vulnerability, disorder, and social integration models of fear of crime. Social Justice Research, 21, 204-227.

20.

Galea

Ahern

Resnick

Kilpatrick

Bucuvalas

Gold

Vlahov

(2002). Psychological sequelae of the September 11 terrorist attacks in New York City. New England Journal of Medicine, 346, 982-987.

21.

Ganor , & (2005). Terrorism as a strategy of psychological welfare. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment and Trauma, 9, 33-43.

22.

Gelkopf

M. B.

Berger

Bleich

Silver

R. C.

(2012). Protective factors and predictors of vulnerability to chronic stress: A comparative study of 4 communities after 7 years of continuous rocket fire. Social Science & Medicine, 74, 757-766.

23.

Gibson

C. L.

Zhao

Lovrich

N. P.

Gaffney

M. J.

(2002). Social integration, individual perceptions of collective efficacy, and fear of crime in three cities. Justice Quarterly, 19, 537-564.

24.

Gidron

Gal

Zahavi

S. A.

(1999). Bus commuters’ coping strategies and anxiety from terrorism: An example of the Israeli experience. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 12, 185-192.

25.

Gray

Jackson

Farrall

(2011). Feelings and functions in the fear of crime: Applying a new approach to victimization insecurity. British Journal of Criminology, 51, 75-94.

26.

Greenberg

Pyszczynski

Solomon

(1997). Terror management theory of self-esteem and cultural worldviews: Empirical assessments and conceptual refinements. In Zanna

P. M.

(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 61-141). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

27.

Hale

(1996). Fear of crime: A review of the literature. International Review of Victimology, 4, 79-150.

28.

Hayman

(2011). Older people in Canada: Their victimization and fear of crime. Canadian Journal on Aging, 30, 423-436.

29.

Hobfoll

S. E.

Hall

B. J.

Canetti-Nisim

Galea

Johnso

R. J.

Palmieri

P. A.

(2007). Refining our understanding of traumatic growth in the face of terrorism: Moving from meaning cognitions to doing what is meaningful. Applied Psychology, 56, 345-366.

30.

Israeli Ministry of Public Security. (2014). National violence index. Retrieved from http://mops.gov.il/researchanddevelopment/israelviolenceindex/pages/israelvioind_statistics_2014.aspx

31.

Kaplan

Matar

M. A.

Kamin

Sadan

Cohen

(2005). Stress-related responses after 3 years of exposure to terror in Israel: Are ideological-religious factors associated with resilience? Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 66, 1146-1154.

32.

Klar

Zakay

Sharvit

(2002). If I don’t get blown up: Realism in face of terrorism in an Israeli Nationwide Sample. Risk Decision and Policy, 7, 203-219.

33.

Laufer

Shechory

Solomon

(2009). The association between right-wing political ideology and youth distress. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 26, 1-13.

34.

Laufer

Solomon

(2009). Gender differences in PTSD in Israeli youth exposed to terror attacks. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24, 959-976.

35.

Lowry

J. L.

Lating

L. M.

(2002). Reflections on the response to mass terrorist attacks: An elaboration on Everly and Mitchell’s 10 commandments. Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention, 2, 95-104.

36.

Matthews

Johnson

L. M.

Jenks

(2011). Does religious involvement generate or inhibit fear of crime? Religions, 2, 485-503.

37.

May

D. C.

Herbert

Cline

Nellis

(2011). Predictors of fear and risk of terrorism in a rural state. International Journal of Rural Criminology, 1, 1-22.

38.

May

D. C.

Rader

N. E.

Goodrum

(2010). A gendered assessment of the “threat of victimization”: Examining gender differences in fear of crime, perceived risk, avoidance, and defensive behaviors. Criminal Justice Review, 35, 159-182.

39.

Nellis

A. M.

(2009). Gender differences in fear of terrorism. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 25, 322-340.

40.

Pantazis

(2000). “Fear of crime,” vulnerability and poverty. British Journal of Criminology, 40, 414-436.

41.

Posner

E. A.

(2002). Fear of regulatory model of counterterrorism. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 25, 681-691.

42.

Pyszczynski

Solomon

Greenberg

(2002). In the wake of 9/11: The psychology of terror. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

43.

Romanov

Zussman

(2012). Does terrorism demoralize? Evidence from Israel. Economica, 79, 183-198.

44.

Sampson

R. J.

(2010). Collective efficacy theory. In Cullen

F. T.

Wilcox

(Eds.), Encyclopedia of criminological theory (pp. 802-812). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

45.

Sampson

R. J.

Raudenbush

S. W.

(2004). Seeing disorder: Neighborhood stigma and the social construction of “broken windows.” Social Psychology Quarterly, 67, 319-342.

46.

Sampson

R. J.

Raudenbush

S. W.

Earls

(1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277, 918-924.

47.

Scarborough

B. K.

Like-Haislip

T. Z.

Novak

K. J.

Lucas

W. L.

Alarid

L. F.

(2010). Assessing the relationship between individual characteristics, neighborhood context, and fear of crime. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 819-826.

48.

Senn

C. Y.

Dzinas

(1996). Measuring fear of rape: A new scale. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 28, 141-144.

49.

Shalev

A. Y.

Tuval

Frenkiel-Fishman

Hadar

Eth

(2006). Psychological responses to continuous terror: A study of two communities in Israel. American Journal of Psychiatry, 163, 667-673.

50.

Shechory-Bitton

(2013). The impact of repetitive and chronic exposure to terror attacks on Israeli mothers’ and children’s functioning. Israel Journal of Psychiatry and Related Sciences, 50, 157-163.

51.

Shechory-Bitton

(2014). A glimpse into the world of battered ultra-orthodox Jewish women in Israel: A follow-up study on women who resided in a shelter. Health Care for Women International, 35, 400-422.

52.

Shechory-Bitton

Cohen-Louck

(2018). Does fear of terrorism differ from fear of crime and sexual assault: A question of geographical location and residential area. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(3), 806-826.

53.

Shechory-Bitton

Silawi

(2019). Do Jews and Arabs differ in their fear of terrorism and crime: The Israeli case. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 34(19), 4041-4060.

54.

Shechory-Bitton

Soen

(2016). Community cohesion, sense of threat, and fear of crime: The refugee problem in the eyes of Israeli veteran residents. Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, 14(4), 290-306.

55.

Shechory

Laufer

(2011). Ideological delinquency: Gender differences among Israeli youth during the withdrawal from the Gaza strip. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 55, 326-343.

56.

Skogan

W. G.

Maxfield

M. G.

(1981). Coping with crime. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

57.

Solomon

Berger

(2005). Coping with the aftermath of terror-resilience of ZAKA body handlers. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 10, 593-604.

58.

Tay

Tan

Diener

Gonzalez

(2013). Social relations, health behaviors, and health outcomes: A survey and synthesis. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 5, 5-27.

59.

Tillyer

M. S.

Fisher

B. S.

Wilcox

(2011). The effects of school crime prevention on students’ violent victimization, risk perception, and fear of crime: A multilevel opportunity perspective. Justice Quarterly, 28, 249-277.

60.

Vail

K. E.

Rothschild

Z. K.

Weise

D. R.

Solomon

Pyszczynski

Greenberg

(2010). A terror management analysis of the psychological functions of religion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 84-94.

61.

Van Zelst

de Beurs

Smit

J. H

. (2003). Effects of the September 11th attacks on symptoms of PTSD on community-dwelling older persons in the Netherlands. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 18, 187-190.

62.

Vilalta

C. J.

(2011). Fear of crime in gated communities and apartment buildings: A comparison of housing types and a test of theories. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 26, 107-121.

63.

Wilson

J. Q.

Kelling

G. L.

(1982). Broken windows. The Atlantic, 249(3), 29-38.

64.

Zemishlany

(2012). Resilience and vulnerability in coping with stress and terrorism. Israeli Medial Association, 14, 307-309.