Document Type
Article
Publication Date
3-24-2026
Publication Title
PNAS
Abstract
Historically, intergroup violence has been motivated by both offensive and defensive goals, often blending narratives of protection with ambitions of domination. In a preregistered study spanning 58 countries, we show that defensive and offensive extremist intentions are positively correlated yet psychologically distinct, relating differently to individual and societal factors. Defensive extremist intentions were far more common and primarily linked to narcissism and Machiavellianism, whereas offensive extremist intentions were primarily associated with social dominance orientation and religious fundamentalism, were lower in more democratic and developed societies, and higher in those experiencing violence and conflict. This global evidence suggests that violent extremist intentions are not a single phenomenon but encapsulate two distinct motivational pathways, underscoring the importance of tailored intervention strategies.
Evolutionary theory and historical evidence suggest humans possess distinct psychological tendencies for defensive and offensive violence, which have insufficiently been considered in research. In a large-scale preregistered study across 58 countries (N = 18,128), we demonstrate that violent extremist intentions manifest along two distinct psychological phenomena: defensive extremism, motivated by protecting one’s group from (perceived) threats, and offensive extremism, driven by establishing group dominance. We show that these dimensions a) can be reliably differentiated across diverse cultural contexts, b) are distinctively associated with psychological dispositions, and c) systematically differentiate countries varying in macrolevel sociopolitical functioning and violence. Across nations, a two-factorial structure was observed that was invariant at the scalar level. Defensive extremist intentions were consistently higher than offensive extremism in 56 out of 58 countries, suggesting greater moral acceptance of protective violence. While psychopathy was positively related to both types of violent extremist intentions, those high in Machiavellianism and narcissism demonstrated particularly higher levels of defensive extremist intentions. By contrast, those scoring high on religious fundamentalism and social dominance orientation demonstrated particularly higher levels of offensive extremist intentions. Unexpectedly, liberal political group identification was associated with higher offensive but lower defensive extremist intentions. Crucially, offensive (but not defensive) intentions were associated with macrolevel societal dysfunction, including political terror and internal conflict. These findings establish that defensive and offensive violent extremist intentions represent two conceptually different forms of extremism across a large and diverse range of countries, with consequences for research and practice.
Volume
123
Issue
13
First Page
e2535665123
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2535665123
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Rights
Licensed to Smith College and distributed CC-BY 4.0 under the Smith College Faculty Open Access Policy.
Version
Author's Submitted Manuscript
Recommended Citation
Kunst, Jonas R.; Besta, Tomasz; Jaśkiewicz, Michał; al, et; and Duncan, Lauren E., "The Psychology of Offensive and Defensive Intergroup Violence: Preregistered Insights from 58 Countries" (2026). Psychology: Faculty Publications, Smith College, Northampton, MA.
https://scholarworks.smith.edu/psy_facpubs/256