The question of whether individuals drawn into extremist ideologies online should be treated as victims or perpetrators continues to spark debate. A new study suggests that public opinion may be shaped more by age than by how people encounter extremist content.
A study by Victoria Bowland and Sandy Schumann, published in Legal and Criminological Psychology (2025), examined how people perceive those radicalized through the internet.
Using an online experiment with 383 participants, the researchers tested whether age and type of exposure—actively seeking extremist material or coming across it incidentally—affected views of victimhood and support for criminal justice responses.
The study found that younger people radicalized online were more likely to be seen as victims than adults, regardless of whether they had actively sought out extremist material or stumbled upon it. This perception, in turn, influenced attitudes toward criminal justice responses.
Participants who viewed individuals as victims were more supportive of rehabilitation, while attributing responsibility and danger was linked to greater support for criminal charges.
Radicalization is understood as a process where individuals adopt extremist beliefs or attitudes, a process often explained through social identity theory, sometimes escalating to the justification of violence.
The internet plays a central role in this, providing pathways for both deliberate searches for extremist communities and accidental encounters through algorithms or unsolicited approaches.
Adolescents, with their heightened sensitivity to peer influence and limited critical thinking skills, are seen as especially vulnerable.
The high-profile case of Shamima Begum, who left the UK for Syria as a teenager, illustrates the public struggle to reconcile ideas of victimhood and culpability.
To explore these issues, Bowland and Schumann presented participants with vignettes describing either a 12-year-old or a 30-year-old who had adopted extremist views online. Each scenario varied in whether exposure was portrayed as active selection or incidental.
Respondents were asked to evaluate how much they viewed the person as a victim, how responsible they believed the individual was, and whether they supported prosecution or rehabilitation.
The results showed a consistent age effect.
Young people radicalized online were attributed less responsibility and considered more vulnerable, which aligned with stronger support for rehabilitation programs.
Adults, in contrast, were more readily framed in terms of criminalization, with less recognition of victimhood.
Interestingly, whether extremist material was sought out or encountered by chance did not significantly change perceptions of victimhood. This suggests that once individuals adopt and express extremist views, people may focus more on the outcomes than on the pathway that led them there.
The findings matter because they highlight how public attitudes can shape criminal justice responses to extremism.
If radicalized adolescents are seen primarily as victims, policies may lean toward safeguarding measures, such as diversion programs and de-radicalization initiatives.
Recent UK proposals, for example, recommend “youth diversion orders” for terrorism-related cases, offering structured alternatives to prosecution.
For adults, however, the dominant framing remains criminalization, reinforcing the expectation of punishment rather than support.
Bowland and Schumann note that empathy alone did not predict support for rehabilitation, suggesting that perceptions of danger weigh heavily on public judgments.
Even when seen as victims, radicalized individuals were also viewed as potential risks, complicating the balance between punishment and protection.
Like any study, the research has limitations. The sample, while drawn internationally, was heavily UK-based and skewed toward younger, highly educated participants, which may influence results.
The study also focused specifically on right-wing extremism, meaning perceptions might differ in other ideological contexts.
Future research could explore how political orientation, gender assumptions, or cross-cultural differences affect judgments of radicalized individuals.
Still, the work adds nuance to the conversation about online radicalization, showing that public opinion does not simply classify individuals as either victims or perpetrators.
Instead, responses depend on contextual factors such as age, with younger people more likely to be viewed through a safeguarding lens.
As governments and communities grapple with rising concerns about online extremism, these perceptions could play an important role in shaping both policy and practice.
Citation
Bowland, V., & Schumann, S. (2025). Perceptions of people radicalised online: Examining the victim-perpetrator nexus. Legal and Criminological Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12317
