Abstract
In 2014, Marc Sageman proposed that terrorism research had stagnated. The claim of stagnation has resulted in a period of collective review within terrorism studies. To date, the fruits of this review have revealed a more cautiously optimistic view of the field than that proposed by Sageman. This article aims to add to this review by analyzing the interviews of forty-three guests from the first season of the Talking Terror podcast. Presented is a thematic analysis of their views on the overall health of terrorism research. The interviewees included both pre-and post-9/11 researchers. Through this analysis four themes are identified: Interdisciplinary Research and Researchers, Data, Applied Research, and Area/Field. The majority of inter- viewees were more optimistic than Sageman in relation to the overall health of the area. Analysis of their responses is presented alongside some recom- mendations for the future direction of the area.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1-21 |
| Number of pages | 21 |
| Journal | Terrorism and Political Violence |
| Early online date | 25 Aug 2020 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 25 Aug 2020 |
Keywords
- Terrorism studies; academia; thematic analysis; stagnation; podcast
