Science1 publisher2 min readPublished
Some participants describe how Victoria's terrorism rehabilitation program changed their thinking
Researchers given rare access to 24 people in Victoria's Community Integration Support Program, running since 2010, report that participants moved away from terrorism by reappraising beliefs over years with mentors they came to trust.
The Scientist · Science desk

What happened
- Victoria set up the Community Integration Support Program in 2010 to rehabilitate people whose offences were motivated by Salafi jihadism, and it has been running ever since.
- Researchers were given in-depth access to 24 participants, 20 of them convicted of terrorism-related offences, and some were interviewed years into their rehabilitation.
- They report that disengagement involved becoming willing to see nuance, built over years through trusted relationships with mentors and unexpected kindness from people once seen as the enemy.
Compiled by The ScientistSomething wrong?How this is made
Why it matters
- constraint Interviews can show how change happened; they cannot say how often. With no comparison group and no reoffending count, this account cannot compare the program with doing nothing.
- cost The support described is five kinds of staff around one participant, sustained across years, so a program funded in twelve-month cycles cannot deliver the mechanism the researchers credit.
- decision Anyone writing success criteria for these programs has to decide whether a stated renunciation counts as an outcome, when what participants here credit is a slow-earned humility and openness.
- precedent Access at this depth to 24 people inside a live rehabilitation caseload sets an expectation that the next evaluation reports its denominator, not only its interviews.
The outcomes in this study are reported as words. "Some" participants stopped offending and went on to build skills and strengths to lead lives in line with their own values and interests, the authors write [5]. "Several" genuinely changed their beliefs, through more knowledge, more contextual interpretation, more guidance, more care and respect, and more time [8]. Twenty-four people sat for the interviews. Twenty had terrorism-related convictions, so four in the sample did not [3][16].
There is no comparison group here and no reoffending figure [17]. For a caseload of this kind that is a defensible design, and the interviews do show the order in which things happened, and what the people who changed credit for it. The credit in this account goes to time, to trusted relationships with mentors, and to unexpected acts of kindness from people the participants had once viewed as the enemy [7].
The religious mentors supplied deeper knowledge, and the reappraisal was the participants' own work [9]. One participant told the researchers that the CISP taught them to pay attention to context and to see that things are not black and white, and that it taught them humility; they had been very judgmental before, and being humbled was a difficult experience for them [10].
A checklist asking whether an offender has renounced an ideology would capture little of that. The authors write that reappraising ideology helped participants move away from terrorism [6], and that ideology plays a role in most journeys into terrorism without explaining behaviour on its own, usually working alongside relationships and the way a person's social identity forms [12]. Belief change and strengths-building both sit in the account. Which of the two predicts staying out is left open, because no outcome rate is reported for either [17].
The staffing is the detail an administrator will notice. Support for one participant can involve a community imam, a case manager, a clinical psychologist, an officer who handles the move from prison back into the community, and a family support officer [2]. The researchers call the program Australia's longest-running of its kind [4]. It has run since 2010, long enough to have a reoffending count for its graduates, and this write-up does not give one [1][17].
What to watch
- A published recidivism count for CISP participants, set against some comparison group, would turn this mechanism account into an effect size.
- Whether the full paper puts numbers behind "some" and "several": how many of the 24 desisted, and how long they were followed after leaving the program.
- CISP was set up originally for Salafi-jihadism offences, so outcome data on participants outside that original cohort would test whether the same mechanism holds.