Qualitative Research Approaches in Counterterrorism Studies

Introduction to Qualitative Research in Counterterrorism

The domain of counterterrorism brings with it a multitude of disciplines that help develop critical concepts and information relevant to the development of a counterterrorism program or strategy. Qualitative research approaches have been used in domains such as counterterrorism to help understand insurgency attacks and events, and to determine how best to respond to or prevent these events from occurring. In this paper, five qualitative approaches are discussed in the context of counterterrorism: narrative research, phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, and case study. Examining these qualitative approaches helps determine which among them has the least relevance to the study of counterterrorism.

This paper posits that among the approaches mentioned, phenomenology has the least relevance because the methodology it adopts lacks the rigor of narrative research and case study, and also lacks the representativeness that ethnography and grounded theory offer the reader of counterterrorism literature.

Counterterrorism as an Interdisciplinary Field

Counterterrorism as a field of study and a strategic program for national security traces its roots across different fields of specialization: it incorporates components of history, management, organizational development, political science, and cultural studies and anthropology. Because it is rooted in numerous disciplines within the social sciences, it is not surprising that counterterrorism strategy development depends heavily on social science research approaches. Qualitative approaches in particular have been identified as more useful for understanding the specific societies and cultures that exist within countries, which ultimately shape the identity of the country or cultural group of interest.

Counterterrorism is developed to provide a form of reconnaissance for a country and its national security. It acts to detect, identify, and deter or prevent terrorist attacks, and may also involve conducting organized operations against insurgents or terrorist networks.

Evaluating Approaches on a Spectrum of Rigor

With this in mind, the five qualitative approaches can be evaluated based on the type of information and knowledge needed in counterterrorism. As stated in this paper's thesis, narrative research and case study are more relevant to the study of counterterrorism because of the rigor and specificity in detail they provide for someone trying to understand a target group for a counterterrorism strategy. Conversely, if the reader of counterterrorism literature wants more generalized information and insight that broadly represents and describes a target group, then grounded theory and ethnography are more appropriate for that objective.

Because phenomenology falls in the middle of the spectrum — neither at the highly specific end nor the broadly comprehensive end — it is the least relevant of the five approaches in the study of counterterrorism.

Narrative Research and Case Study

Narrative research is considered rigorous because its focus is on the individual — specifically, the story or lived experience of a person in relation to a phenomenon the researcher is studying. Information generated is grounded in personal history and experience, and can therefore be as detailed as the researcher requires, assuming appropriate methodologies and strategies are used to draw out that information from the informant or interviewee.

Case study, meanwhile, also displays the specificity evident in narrative research. While narrative research is primarily exploratory and descriptive, case study can be particularly useful in counterterrorism because it provides not only description but also analysis of a specific case — which may be an individual, a group, or an entity — enabling the reader to develop a thorough understanding of a particular phenomenon. In both approaches, the reader of counterterrorism research benefits from the depth and wealth of information provided.