How Securitization Theory Can Benefit from Psychology Findings

Securitization Theory has been applied and advanced continuously since the publication of the seminal work “Security – A New Framework for Analysis” by Buzan et al. in 1998. Various extensions, clarifications and definitions have been added over the years. Ontological and epistemological debates as well as debates about the normativity of the concept have taken place, furthering the approach incrementally and adapting it to new empirical cases. This paper aims at contributing to the improvement of the still useful framework in a more general way by amending it with well-established findings from another discipline: Psychology. The exploratory article will point out what elements of Securitization Theory might benefit most from incorporating insights from Psychology and in which ways they might change our understanding of the phenomenon. Some well-studied phenomena in the field of (Social) Psychology, it is argued here, play an important role for the construction and perception of security threats and the acceptance of the audience to grant the executive branch extraordinary measures to counter these threats: availability heuristic, loss-aversion and social identity theory are central psychological concepts that can help us to better understand how securitization works, and in which situations securitizing moves have great or little chances to reverberate. The empirical cases of the 9/11 and Paris terror attacks will serve to illustrate the potential of this approach, allowing for variances in key factors, among them: (point in) time, system of government and ideological orientation. As a hypotheses-generating pilot study, the paper will conclude by discussing further research possibilities in the field of Securitization