Background: Women are often portrayed in the common sense as nonviolent. If they do engage in terrorist activities, women are assumed to be passive agents, supporting their extremist husband, caring for their children, supporting the organization, or contributing to recruitment. The assumption that women merely follow their husband or dream to become brides of IS fighters is incorrect. This systematic review aims to analyze the existing literature on risk and protective factors in female violent extremists, in order to inform gender-specific counterterrorism policies.

Methods: Inclusion criteria encompassed studies containing data on risk and protective factors of female violent extremist behavior towards persons/property or a willingness to engage in violent extremist behavior. Methodological quality assessment included checklists for qualitative and quantitative studies.

Results: Following the systematic review process, 26 studies were included. Demographic factors, mental health problems, personal and family problems, significance loss, revenge, religious motivations, family involvement, coercion, gender inequality, and group solidarity emerged as contributors to female violent extremism. Conversely, desistance was associated with prosocial environments, personal status, maturation, future perspectives, and negative experiences with terrorism involvement. In addition, certain criminological theories were identified as valuable tools for understanding women’s involvement.

Discussion: With respect to possible biases, it was found that the included studies were mostly based on a small sample size or secondary source data. Moreover, several studies drew on identical data of suicide bombers from an Israeli prison. Understanding the risk and protective factors present in female violent extremists is essential for counterterrorism interventions of this specific group. Addressing personal vulnerabilities should be a first step in establishing effective deradicalization programs and successful reintegration. More empirical research with bigger sample sizes, and specified to the diverse ideologies, is needed to distinguish actual risk and protective factors.