Markus Sanden

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.

Background and Hypothesis: Affective disturbances are a core feature of schizophrenia, yet patients’ capacity to experience momentary affective shifts in real-world settings remains underexplored. Although consummatory pleasure appears preserved, studies suggest low levels of positive affect and high levels of negative affect in daily life. Physical exercise provides an ecologically valid context for probing short-term affective reactivity. This study examined whether high-intensity interval training (HIIT) elicited greater affective change than an active control condition (ACC), whether baseline symptom levels were associated with affective state, and whether baseline symptoms moderated affective reactivity. Study Design: In a randomized controlled trial, 69 outpatients with schizophrenia were randomized to a 12-week intervention involving either supervised HIIT or an ACC involving low-intensity, interactive video gaming. Affective state was assessed immediately before and after the 12th session using the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). Depressive (CDSS), negative symptoms (PANSS-N), and apathy (AES) were measured at baseline. Linear mixed-effects models tested Group × Time effects. Study Results: HIIT did not produce significantly greater changes in positive or negative affect than the active control. Across interventions, participants showed increases in positive affect and decreases in negative affect. Higher baseline symptom levels were associated with lower pre-session positive affect. Exploratory analyses indicated that participants with more severe negative symptoms showed greater positive affective gains following HIIT. Conclusions: A single session of structured activity, regardless of intensity, was associated with small but measurable affective improvements. These findings highlight the value of accessible activity-based interventions for enhancing affective well-being in schizophrenia.