Far-right domestic terrorism is a major threat to US national security. Despite this reality, conservative policymakers have downplayed the threat of right-wing violence while arguing that far-left violence (from groups like Antifa) is a more pressing concern. Drawing on attribution theory and research on politically motivated reasoning, we suggest that politics constrain the American public’s understanding of terrorism by shaping casual attributions for it. Using data from an experiment within a national survey (n = 700), we examine how political views moderate attributions made for the actions of far-right, far-left, and Islamist terrorism. We find that causal attributions for terrorism depend on the type of terrorist considered, with external attributions (motivated by injustice or oppression) endorsed most strongly for Islamist terrorists and internal attributions (motivated by hate or evil) endorsed most strongly for far-right terrorists. Furthermore, political views moderate this effect such that people believe terrorism committed by politically aligned groups is motivated less by the internal characteristics of the terrorists and more by external factors. Taken together, these findings may help to explain partisan differences in moral outrage over politically motivated terrorism.

中文翻译：

---

政治如何限制公众对恐怖主义的理解

极右翼国内恐怖主义是对美国国家安全的重大威胁。尽管存在这一现实，但保守派政策制定者淡化了右翼暴力的威胁，同时认为极左暴力（来自 Antifa 等组织）是一个更紧迫的问题。借鉴归因理论和对出于政治动机的推理的研究，我们认为政治通过塑造随意的归因来限制美国公众对恐怖主义的理解。我们使用来自全国调查 (n = 700) 的实验数据，研究政治观点如何缓和对极右翼、极左翼和伊斯兰恐怖主义行为的归因。我们发现恐怖主义的因果归因取决于所考虑的恐怖分子类型，外部归因（出于不公正或压迫）最强烈支持伊斯兰恐怖分子，内部归因（出于仇恨或邪恶）最强烈支持极右翼恐怖分子。此外，政治观点缓和了这种影响，以至于人们认为政治结盟团体实施恐怖主义的动机较少是恐怖分子的内部特征，而更多是外部因素。总而言之，这些发现可能有助于解释对出于政治动机的恐怖主义的道德义愤的党派差异。政治观点缓和了这种影响，以至于人们认为政治结盟团体实施恐怖主义的动机较少是恐怖分子的内部特征，而更多是出于外部因素。总而言之，这些发现可能有助于解释对出于政治动机的恐怖主义的道德义愤的党派差异。政治观点缓和了这种影响，以至于人们认为政治结盟团体实施恐怖主义的动机较少是恐怖分子的内部特征，而更多是出于外部因素。总而言之，这些发现可能有助于解释对出于政治动机的恐怖主义的道德义愤的党派差异。