After the 2017 Manchester Arena bombing, which killed 22 people, public concern about terrorism rose sharply across the UK. Surveys by YouGov have tracked how this concern changes over time. Immediately after major attacks, terrorism ranks among the country’s top worries, but in more recent years, public attention has shifted towards the economy, immigration, and the National Health Service. Psychologists describe this pattern as normalcy bias, the tendency to believe that life will continue as usual even after major shocks. It protects people from fear but can also make societies underestimate genuine risks.
Normalcy bias helps explain why people sometimes downplay extremism or treat violent incidents as isolated events. The United Kingdom has experienced a series of Islamist-related terror incidents recognised by the authorities:
- 7 July 2005 – London bombings: Four coordinated explosions on London’s transport network killed 52 people.
- 21 July 2005 – attempted London bombings: A failed follow-up attack in which the devices did not detonate.
- May 2013 – murder of Lee Rigby: The soldier was killed in Woolwich by two men citing extremist motives.
- 22 March 2017 – Westminster attack: A vehicle and knife attack near Parliament left five people dead.
- 22 May 2017 – Manchester Arena bombing: A suicide bombing at a concert killed 22 people.
- 3 June 2017 – London Bridge and Borough Market attacks: Eight people were killed in a vehicle and knife attack.
- 15 September 2017 – Parsons Green bombing: A homemade bomb partially detonated on a Tube train, injuring passengers.
- 29 November 2019 – London Bridge stabbings: Two people were killed before police shot the attacker.
- 20 June 2020 – Reading stabbings: Three men were killed in Forbury Gardens in a terrorist attack.
- 15 October 2021 – murder of MP Sir David Amess: The killing was found by the court to be motivated by Islamist extremism.
Each of these moments brought national shock and a short-lived sense of vigilance, followed by a gradual return to normal life. Denial becomes a form of emotional protection, and comfort often replaces caution.
Another psychological process, known as cognitive dissonance, reinforces this pattern. It occurs when people hold two conflicting beliefs and try to reconcile them. In a society that values tolerance and diversity, it can feel uncomfortable to recognise that a very small number of individuals have distorted those same values to justify violence. To ease that tension, some people dismiss information about ongoing threats as exaggerated or politically motivated. This response allows them to protect their sense of moral consistency.
Differences in threat perception are well documented. Recent YouGov polling shows that older Britons and Conservative voters are more likely to see terrorism as a major threat, while younger and liberal groups express greater confidence in social stability. These contrasts do not reflect intelligence or morality but rather reveal how people manage anxiety. Minds interpret information through emotional filters that determine what feels safe to acknowledge.
Denial may bring peace of mind, but it carries risk. When societies avoid difficult conversations, they create room for harmful ideologies of any kind to develop unnoticed. Recognising psychological defences such as normalcy bias and cognitive dissonance does not mean living in fear. It means learning how the human mind avoids discomfort and how that avoidance can reduce collective awareness.
It is natural to seek comfort in stability, yet that same comfort can become a barrier to understanding. Seeing clearly is not pessimism. It is responsibility. Awareness, supported by evidence rather than emotion, allows communities to stay both open and secure.
This article was written under the pseudonym “Clara Jennings” at the author’s request to protect their professional identity.