Video games aren’t major engines for extremist radicalization, new research suggests

A recent study exploring how political extremists use video games to find new members suggests that while recruitment attempts do happen, they are relatively rare. The research provides evidence that encountering far-right or far-left messaging in gaming spaces can influence hostile attitudes and aggression in different ways. These findings were published in the journal Psychology of Popular Media.

With the rise of digital media, political extremist groups have increasingly turned to online platforms to spread their ideologies. Video games offer immersive and interactive environments that allow users to communicate privately. Some games even allow players to create custom modifications that introduce specific political narratives. This environment has raised concerns that gaming communities might serve as prime locations for radicalizing young people.

Sanjram Premjit Khanganba, a professor of human-system interaction and chair of the Focused Research Group in Human Factors at the Indian Institute of Technology Indore, noticed this dynamic firsthand. “My interest in this topic emerged from my own experiences in multiplayer gaming,” Khanganba said.

He noted that players would sometimes bring up sensitive topics. “Several times, I encountered players within my gaming teams discussing political ideologies, asking about political affiliations, and engaging in conversations that touched upon extremist viewpoints,” Khanganba explained. “Since communication in these gaming spaces is often highly fluid and socially sensitive, I began to wonder whether such environments could potentially facilitate extremist exposure or recruitment. This led to the initiation of the current study.”

Much of the existing research on this topic tends to focus almost entirely on far-right groups within Western countries. Far-right extremism typically involves a strong belief in cultural or national superiority and often targets marginalized groups. In India, this frequently takes the form of religious nationalism, which seeks to establish a state rooted in specific religious dominance.

Free daily newsletter

On the other hand, far-left extremism in India often involves radical communist movements. These movements sometimes use coercion or violence to oppose state policies and advocate for marginalized classes. Because the academic focus has been so heavily skewed toward the political right, the potential influence of far-left ideologies in digital spaces has received much less attention.

To address this imbalance, the research team designed a study to look at both sides of the political spectrum within the Indian gaming community. The project was co-authored by first author Anantha Ubaradka, an assistant professor and assistant dean of the PhD program at Jindal Global Law School at O.P. Jindal Global University in India, and Christopher J. Ferguson, a professor and co-chair of psychology at Stetson University. The authors wanted to understand if everyday gamers actually encounter these recruitment efforts. They also wanted to see how exposure to such messaging interacts with a person’s psychological traits to shape aggressive or prejudiced behaviors.

Specifically, the authors looked at authoritarianism. Authoritarianism is a psychological trait where a person strongly prefers strict obedience to authority and social rules. People with these traits often view the world as dangerous and unpredictable. This perception creates a strong desire to enforce traditional social orders, which can lead to prejudice against anyone who seems to threaten that stability.

While authoritarianism is often associated with conservative politics, it can appear on both the political right and the political left. Left-wing authoritarianism involves similar desires for strict control and moral absolutism. However, it is directed toward challenging existing hierarchies or traditions rather than preserving them. The researchers wanted to know if preexisting authoritarian traits make someone more susceptible to extremist messaging in video games.

To explore these questions, the authors surveyed 395 active video gamers living in India. The participants had an average age of about 21 years old. The group was mostly male, making up roughly 87 percent of the sample, while women made up about 13 percent. The participants represented a geographically diverse group, hailing from 29 different Indian states.

The participants completed questionnaires asking how often they experienced recruitment attempts from far-right or far-left organizations while playing video games. They were also asked how often they actually agreed to join these groups. The responses were recorded on a simple four-point rating scale, ranging from never to most of the time.

The researchers also used specific scales to measure the participants’ levels of right-wing and left-wing authoritarianism. These questionnaires asked participants to rate their agreement with various statements about obedience, social hierarchy, and wealth distribution. In addition to political traits, the survey measured hostile sexism and adherence to traditional male role norms.

Hostile sexism refers to overtly negative or antagonistic beliefs about women, particularly those who challenge traditional gender roles. Traditional male role norms involve the belief that men should behave in specific ways, such as hiding their emotions and acting dominant. The survey also included a short-form questionnaire to measure general physical and verbal aggression.

The findings indicated that extremist recruitment in video games is not as widespread as some media reports might suggest. Only about 34 percent of gamers reported ever experiencing recruitment attempts by far-right groups. Similarly, about 31 percent reported encountering far-left recruitment efforts. Most participants noted that they rarely or never saw such attempts, and very few actually agreed to join these groups.

“One surprising finding was the relatively modest number of participants reporting exposure to extremist ideologies in gaming spaces,” Khanganba said. “We initially expected such exposure to be more frequent.”

When the researchers looked at how these encounters affected player attitudes, they noticed distinct differences between the two political extremes. Exposure to far-right messaging in video games directly predicted higher levels of hostile sexism. It also predicted stronger support for traditional male role norms and increased overall aggression.

Interestingly, this happened largely independent of whether the player already had right-wing authoritarian personality traits. The researchers suggest that far-right narratives often align with culturally embedded patriarchal values. Because these underlying cultural biases already exist, far-right messaging in video games can directly reinforce sexist attitudes without needing a rigid authoritarian personality to act as a bridge.

The impact of far-left exposure followed a different pattern. Encountering far-left extremism in video games did not directly lead to increased sexism or aggression. Instead, this exposure only predicted these negative attitudes if the player already possessed high levels of left-wing authoritarianism.

“Another unexpected result emerged when examining the relationship between extremist exposure and authoritarian attitudes,” Khanganba noted. “Specifically, we observed a notable association involving left-wing authoritarianism (LWA). Much of the existing literature has historically focused more heavily on right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), so our findings contribute a fresh perspective by suggesting that, where extremist exposure occurs, LWA may also play a meaningful role.”

This suggests that far-left messaging mainly resonates with individuals who already hold rigid beliefs aligned with leftist ideologies. Without that preexisting psychological disposition, encountering far-left recruitment in a video game did not translate into hostile attitudes. The authors propose that far-left content might activate aggressive tendencies only in those who already support punishing ideological opponents.

Despite these differences, the study showed that authoritarianism itself is a strong predictor of hostility. Both right-wing and left-wing authoritarian traits were linked to increased aggression and sexist attitudes. This challenges the common assumption that authoritarianism only exists on the political right, showing that extreme rigidity on either end of the spectrum can foster prejudice.

“Our findings did not align entirely with our initial expectations,” Khanganba said. “The study suggests that gamers may encounter ideological extremism incidentally within gaming spaces, but the issue does not currently appear to be at an alarming level.”

Khanganba elaborated that the current data does not support exaggerated fears. “As of now, there is no strong evidence to support widespread panic regarding extremist recruitment through video games,” he added. “However, caution is still warranted, and further longitudinal studies are necessary to determine whether these patterns evolve over time.”

He emphasized that the research challenges the idea that video games are massive radicalization engines. “The paper does not support alarmist narratives surrounding extremism in video games,” Khanganba said. “Our findings challenge the assumption that video games are major drivers of extremist recruitment. At the same time, the results should be interpreted cautiously, as they may represent only an early or baseline trend.”

The authors also hope the findings encourage a more balanced view of political extremism. “The study also argues against viewing extremism solely through the lens of far-right ideology,” Khanganba noted. “If extremist recruitment does occur in gaming spaces, the findings suggest that both far-right and far-left ideological influences should be examined with equal critical attention.”

As with all research, the study has some limitations. For example, the research relied on a cross-sectional design, meaning the data was collected at a single point in time. Because of this, the authors cannot prove that exposure to extremist content directly causes increased aggression over time.

Khanganba also warned against misinterpreting the study’s balanced approach as a specific political stance. “One possible misinterpretation could arise if readers focus only on the introduction or review of literature without considering the study’s findings in the full context,” he said. “At first glance, some readers may assume that the paper takes a position against particular political ideologies.”

“However, the broader argument of the paper is not to promote anti-establishment narratives or ideological bias,” Khanganba explained. “Rather, the study attempts to examine far-right and far-left extremism with equal scrutiny, avoiding favoritism while presenting the findings as objectively as possible.”

Going forward, the authors plan to expand their investigation. “Our next step is to conduct longitudinal and cross-cultural studies to determine whether these trends remain stable across time and across different sociocultural contexts,” Khanganba said.

The study, “Video Games as Conduits for Radicalization: Impact of Exposure to Extremist Recruitment and Authoritarianism on Sexist Attitudes and Aggression,” was authored by Anantha Ubaradka, Christopher J. Ferguson, and Sanjram Premjit Khanganba.