The Terrorist You Know, and The Terrorist You Don't : Defining terrorism in the United Kingdom and Finland
Gaughan, Iona (2026)
2026
Master's Programme in Peace, Mediation and Conflict Research
Yhteiskuntatieteiden tiedekunta - Faculty of Social Sciences
This publication is copyrighted. You may download, display and print it for Your own personal use. Commercial use is prohibited.
Hyväksymispäivämäärä
2026-05-19
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:tuni-202605185805
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:tuni-202605185805
Tiivistelmä
In contribution to peace studies, this thesis offers an insight into how these two specific samples interact with their own definitions, prejudices and understanding of the term ‘Terrorism’ and how these things are influenced and formed. This thesis attempts to offer a basis for how this term is interacted with and how the term moves from a securitised one, into a desecuritised one.
This thesis discusses the understandings and definitions of terrorism in the United Kingdom and Finland. Two samples were collected using online dissemination of a questionnaire using Reddit as a platform. This thesis uses a multitude of works by and involving Ole Waever concerning Speech Act Theory and through this, securitisation. This thesis employs primarily qualitative methods to analyse the data collected for this research, using thematic analysis as the main analytical method. The analysis of the research is split into three distinct sections that interact with the answers to the questions, in the order they appeared in the questionnaire. These sections concern the definitions given by the respondents, scenarios given and how the respondents interacted with them, and the reflections of the respondents after partaking in the questionnaire, in relation to it. To interact with the data collected in this thesis, a comparison between the Finnish and the British samples is drawn. This is primarily done by nationality, with the age of the respondent presented also.
This thesis finds some small differences between the samples, which primarily lie between the age groups of the samples, but also in how the Finnish and the British respond differently. The British sample tended to remain steadfast in their answers with small modifications, whereas the Finnish sample tended to show a willingness to interact and modify their answers. Both samples indicate that their answers were influenced by similar sources (e.g. traditional media, social media, the government), with differing strength of influence in each sample. Overall, the samples discuss similar things and the differences between them remain minor, but still present.
This thesis discusses the understandings and definitions of terrorism in the United Kingdom and Finland. Two samples were collected using online dissemination of a questionnaire using Reddit as a platform. This thesis uses a multitude of works by and involving Ole Waever concerning Speech Act Theory and through this, securitisation. This thesis employs primarily qualitative methods to analyse the data collected for this research, using thematic analysis as the main analytical method. The analysis of the research is split into three distinct sections that interact with the answers to the questions, in the order they appeared in the questionnaire. These sections concern the definitions given by the respondents, scenarios given and how the respondents interacted with them, and the reflections of the respondents after partaking in the questionnaire, in relation to it. To interact with the data collected in this thesis, a comparison between the Finnish and the British samples is drawn. This is primarily done by nationality, with the age of the respondent presented also.
This thesis finds some small differences between the samples, which primarily lie between the age groups of the samples, but also in how the Finnish and the British respond differently. The British sample tended to remain steadfast in their answers with small modifications, whereas the Finnish sample tended to show a willingness to interact and modify their answers. Both samples indicate that their answers were influenced by similar sources (e.g. traditional media, social media, the government), with differing strength of influence in each sample. Overall, the samples discuss similar things and the differences between them remain minor, but still present.