What impact do terrorist attacks have on our shared sense of identity?

Georgios Efthyvoulou - Associate Fellow, SPERI, and Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Sheffield

Harry Pickard - Lecturer in Economics, Newcastle University

Vincenzo Bove - IMT School for Advanced Studies, Lucca Italy

Group identity (based on factors such as nationality and ethnicity) has also been shown to be a central concept in understanding phenomena in economics. One of the most prominent questions is how stronger identities can influence social preferences and, consequently, social-welfare-maximisation actions. When individuals strongly identify with a group, they are more motivated to contribute to collective goods and engage in cooperative behaviour within their group. This can lead to improved social welfare, as resources are more effectively pooled to meet shared goals. In this context, stronger group identity could enhance social welfare by increasing trust, reciprocity, and mutual support among members. At the same time, when group identity becomes more salient, individuals may prioritise the interests of their own group to the detriment of others, leading to a reduction in intergroup cooperation. This can result in social fragmentation, where different groups pursue conflicting interests, making it harder to reach consensus on policy or distribute resources equitably. Therefore, understanding how crises and critical events affect identities – especially the trade-off between broader, more cohesive identities and narrower, less inclusive ones – can provide valuable insights into the implications for collective well-being.

In a recently published study in The Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, we investigate how unexpected shocks that raise public awareness of domestic security and personal safety – as captured by terrorist attacks – shape expressions of national identity in Great Britain. Extant research suggests that exposure to terrorist incidents amplifies national identifications. However, considering that individuals in Great Britain possess multiple identities, an important question arises: which identifications are more likely to be affected in the wake of a terrorist attack? Specifically, we seek to address whether terrorism strengthens the British identity while potentially weakening the constituent national identities (English, Scottish and Welsh), or whether it intensifies all identifications simultaneously.

Terrorist attacks create a sense of shared negative experience and psychological trauma among the population, which can lead to stronger feelings of solidarity and unity. This effect is often accompanied by a “rally around the flag” dynamic, wherein the public turns to the leaders and symbols which seem to represent the state’s power to provide security and protection. At the same time, the rhetoric of politicians in the wake of terrorist attacks tends to emphasise themes of supranational unity and the power of the central state to address terrorism, which likely strengthens identification with Britain rather than its constituent nations. However, exposure to terrorism can also bolster support for ethnic and regional identities. The identity of Britain’s constituent nations is often shaped by a belief in common ethnic characteristics and shared descent, and people may seek to assert their distinct cultural, linguistic, and historical heritage in the face of adversity. In other words, terrorist events may contribute to the strengthening of ‘narrow’ forms of in-group identifications, which contain distinct racial and ethnic elements.

To address our research question, we utilise data from the Global Terrorism Database, covering all terrorist attacks that occurred in Great Britain between 2014 and 2019. We then merge the terrorism data with detailed information on self-reported identity perceptions for 49K individuals interviewed in 11 different waves of the British Election Study over the same time period. Following the common practice in the related literature, we create a measure of geographic proximity to attacks and use this as a proxy for exposure to terrorism. We also analyse the temporal proximity between the date of the interview and the date of the attacks, which allows us to make inferences about the duration of terrorism effects and provide valuable insights into their transient nature. Our estimation strategy is carefully designed to address potential self-selection bias: the possibility that unobserved factors might simultaneously affect both an area’s likelihood of experiencing terrorist attacks and its residents’ identity perceptions.

We find that higher exposure to terrorist attacks strengthens identification with Britain but has no effect on identification with its constituent nations. The estimated effects last for about 45 days, but diminish as the threat fades away in the mind of exposed individuals. We also find that the effects of the two forms of national identity depend, to some extent, on their perceived compatibility: individuals who view the British and their regional identity as somewhat incompatible exhibit a post-attack trade-off between them, while those who incorporate the same sense of the two identities into their self-concept display a post-attack boost in both of them – though the effects are still larger and more precisely estimated for the British identity. En route, we show that terrorism induces individuals to express more positive attitudes about international organizations, such as the European Union, providing further support for the emergence of a supranational-unity effect in the aftermath of terrorist incidents. Taken together, our results challenge the prevailing narrative in the literature, which finds that terrorism reinforces hardline beliefs and “narrow”, nativist forms of identity.

Collective traumatic events – such as terrorist attacks or natural disasters – leave a significant mark on societies. These events disrupt lives, threaten wellbeing, and generate widespread fear and uncertainty, with the corresponding effects lasting for several weeks. Yet, while such crises reveal societal vulnerabilities, they can also foster a more cohesive shared identity. This sense of unity can boost altruism, reciprocity, and social trust, all important determinants of prosperity and a well-functioning society.