The current paper investigates Psychoanalytic, Cognitive, Behaviorist, and Socio-cultural theories and critiques how they have (or might have) contributed to the study of radicalization. The paper asserts two arguments that lack emphasis in the current radicalization research: 1) radicalization refers to a process, and does not always refer to violent behavior; 2) radicalization research needs to pay tribute to socio-cultural, political, and historical context while designing research and discussing findings. These two points are essential to extend the concept of radicalization and to be sensitive to different research contexts and populations. Currently, the conceptualization of radicalization appears to be generalized to violent action among minority groups (mainly Muslims) in limited contexts (mostly Western countries). The article claims that Psychology can better contribute to this diverse field of interest with its well-established theoretical contributions to the understanding of human beings and its compassion to seek differences amongst people across different contexts.

本论文调查了精神分析、认知、行为主义和社会文化理论，并批评了它们如何（或可能）对激进化的研究做出了贡献。论文提出了当前激进化研究中缺乏重点的两个论点：1）激进化是指一个过程，并不总是指暴力行为；2）激进化研究在设计研究和讨论研究结果时需要尊重社会文化、政治和历史背景。这两点对于扩展激进化的概念以及对不同的研究背景和人群保持敏感至关重要。目前，激进化的概念似乎被概括为少数群体（主要是穆斯林）在有限背景下（主要是西方国家）的暴力行为。文章声称，心理学可以更好地为这个多元化的兴趣领域做出贡献，因为它对理解人类的完善的理论贡献以及它对不同背景下人们之间差异的同情心。