Context and Objectives

Government efforts to challenge violent extremism are often thought to be comprised of so‐called “hardline” activities, geared toward policing, neutralization, and punishment of those who pose a threat for promoting or engaging in violence. However, as research on violent extremism has progressed, governments have come to recognize that an exclusive reliance on hardline activities is insufficient, and at times counterproductive. As such, governments have begun to implement other kinds of efforts to contend with the threat of violent extremism.

As part of these alternative efforts, governments have employed a wide range of communication campaigns intended to challenge the appeal of violent extremist ideologies. Well‐intentioned though these efforts may be, there exists little empirical evidence regarding their individual or collective efficacy. Moreover, there have been no attempts to gauge the effectiveness of the different mechanisms by which such communication efforts operate, that is, the active “ingredients or elements” that boost (or diminish) the efficacy of the campaigns or interventions.

This review will, therefore, synthesize existing research on the effectiveness of government‐led communication campaigns intended to challenge violent extremist ideologies and reduce radicalization to violence.

Findings generated from the analyses in this report will help inform and support decision‐making among policymakers who wish to develop their own messaging campaigns intended to challenge violent extremist ideologies.