Terror Management Theory: How Death Shapes Our Lives

Overview of the TMT 

Terror management theory (TMT) stems from the understanding that the aftermath of a terror event is more important than the event itself. Terrorists do not focus on the amount of damage they create in terms of human carnage or destruction of property, but rather on the amount of fear and terror that they create on the survivors (Menzies, Menzies & Iverach, 2018). The general idea is to make the victims feel that death is imminent, inevitable, and unpredictable. The fear will then become debilitating, making the fate of the survivors worse than that of the victims who died in the terror attack. TMT focuses on mitigating or eliminating the fear and terror by giving greater meaning to life for survivors of terrorism.

Among the approaches adopted by TMT with a high level of success are cultural approaches such as religion. Most monotheistic religions such as Christianity believe in life after death. Further, as per religion, life after death is exponentially better than normal life (Nugier et al., 2016). Thus, Christians ought to look forward to life after death. Believing in a life after death will make the prospect of dying less frightening, a fact that takes away the debilitating fear established by a terror attack. On the other hand, evolutionary psychologists also use non-faith approaches in TMT. For example, a belief that a human being is more than a collection of cells that make up the body is among the approaches used. When survivors belief that there is more to life than the body, they will be less afraid and terrorized (Nugier et al., 2016). After all, these terrorist activities only destroy the body leading to physical death, which does not result in the ultimate end. The most important aspect of TMT is that it does not seek to eliminate the apprehension about the potential for unpredictable death. TMT focuses on enabling terror victims to find peace in spite of the prospect of the imminence and unpredictability of death (Menzies, Menzies & Iverach, 2018).

Selected Terror Event: 2017 New York City Truck Attack 

The terror event on focus in the instant assignment is the 2017 truck attack that took place in downtown New York. According to Mueller, Rashbaum & Baker (2017), on October 31, 2017, 29-year-old Sayfullo Saipov drove a truck off the road in Lower Manhattan and into a pedestrian sidewalk. Saipov then intentionally used the car as a weapon, seeking to mow down as many people as he could on the sidewalk. After driving for some distance, he lost control of the truck and rammed into a school bus. Saipov then jumped out of the car, openly waving some improvised weapons, including a pellet gun and paintball gun. Saipov kept shouting the now-infamous Arabic words meaning God is great. The shouting drew more attention to the event and augmented the terror effect of the incident. Arguably, the waving of weapons and shouting of religious words sought to dispel any notion that the event was an accident.

Further, according to Mueller, Rashbaum & Baker (2017)Saipov had carried a large amount of literature associated with ISIS in the truck. His dramatics continued until a police officer shot him in the torso, and then arrested him. The instant terror event stands out for three main reasons. First, the weapon of choice was a truck, which is highly common on US roads. Secondly, the terrorist made sure that all those involved understood that it was a terror attack. Finally, the perpetrator expressed allegiance to ISIS, a powerful terror organization in 2017, thus creating the impression that more attacks would ensure.

Application of TMT to the Event’s Aftermath 

Due to the nature of the attack outlined above, the actual survivors of the attack were almost every individual in the USA. The ingenious nature of the attack ensured that every American in an urban center saw a truck on the streets as a potential weapon. Further, it is almost impossible to escape from a speeding truck if the driver decides to drive it into pedestrians intentionally. From a cognitive perspective, a normal and often friendly sight, a truck became a source of fear and terror for Americans. From a cultural perspective, Americans realized that the enemy was among them and no longer discernible. It may be easy to identify and individual with a bomb, a rifle, or wearing camouflage. However, if the enemy is a random person driving a truck, he could strike anywhere and at any time. Most importantly, once the attacks began, they would be inevitable, at least for the initial victims.

Trucks are easily accessible and common in America. Hence, ISIS could launch attacks with hundreds of attacks all over the USA, creating as much carnage as the September 11, 2001 attacks. The application of TMT would enable victims to accept the reality that further truck attacks such as the one that took place in Lower Manhattan were possible. Such attacks could also lead to death. However, death is not as bad as the terrorists would want the victims to consider it. TMT would enable victims to find courage in the understanding that physical death was not as bad as the terrorists would want them to imagine (Menzies, Menzies & Iverach, 2018). After all, the speeding truck would only affect the physical body, yet there is more to humanity than a mass of flesh and bones. TMT would mitigate fear by enabling victims to downgrade the impact of a repeat attack.

Appropriateness of TMT 

TMT is especially appropriate for the instant terror attack and perhaps the only theory that can substantively mitigate the impact of the event on its victims. The simplistic nature of the attack made the powerful US defense and internal security system technically obsolete. The defense system could prevent powerful and sophisticated attacks such as nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, and the use of planes as a battering ram. However, it would be impossible to guarantee the prevention of a fundamentalist from driving a car through a crowd. The attack was so simple that it only required one attacker, doing a very ordinary activity, which is driving a truck along the streets. No psychologist can assure the victims that they were safe and be genuine. The more effective approach was to admit that the victims may not be safe, but it is still ok. TMT was thus appropriate and potentially effective (Menzies, Menzies & Iverach, 2018).

Comparing TMT with Critical Incident Stress Management (CISM) 

An effective way of evaluating the effectiveness of TMT is by comparing it with another theoretical approach, such as Critical incident stress management (CISM). CISM is a theory applied to prepare people for an adverse event or to enable victims of an adverse event to overcome its impact without developing post-traumatic stress disorder. Under CISM, the practitioner allows the victims to discuss the event and react to it freely without criticism and judgment (Aucott & Soni, 2016). By discussing the event, victims are able to come to terms with it, and gradually overcome the dread or terror created by the adverse event. Normally, under CISM, the practitioner is more of an observer while the victims talk themselves to overcoming the adverse impact of the event. In the instant case, practitioners would allow victims to talk about the truck attacks until freely; they come to terms with it and overcome the fear of a reoccurrence. Whereas CISM may have a limited effect on the victims, this effect would not be as effective as TMT. A key issue relating to the terror attack was its cognitive impact on the victims due to its simple, yet bizarre nature. The truck attack changed what victims considered normal, leading to potential confusion. It would be difficult, if not impossible, for ordinary citizens to find the transition of trucks into instruments of terror as normal. An approach that involves getting used to the probability of the event as engendered by CISM may be difficult. However, TMT takes away the bizarre nature of the attacks as it focuses on the outcome as opposed to the process. TMT is thus more effective in the instant case that CISM.

References

Aucott, C., & Soni, A. (2016). Reflections on the use of Critical Incident Stress Debriefing in schools.  Educational Psychology in Practice ,  32 (1), 85-99.

Menzies, R. E., Menzies, R. G., & Iverach, L. (Eds.). (2018).  Curing the Dread of Death: Theory, Research and Practice . Australian Academic Press.

Mueller, B., Rashbaum, W. K., & Baker, A. (2017, October 31). Terror Attack Kills 8 and Injures 11 in Manhattan. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/31/nyregion/police-shooting-lower-manhattan.html .

Nugier, A., Roebroeck, E., Anier, N., Kleinlogel, E. P., Chatard, A., & Guimond, S. (2016). The psychological effects of terrorism are moderated by cultural worldviews.  International Review of Social Psychology ,  29 (1), 77-84.