["Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, EarlyView. ", "\n\nBackground\nSupport for violent and non‐violent radicalization co‐exists in some, but not all, adolescents. Yet, little is known about how adolescents transition towards or away from violent and/or non‐violent radicalization over time. Within a socio‐ecological framework, this study investigates how Canadian adolescents move from profiles that support violent radicalization to non‐violent profiles and vice‐versa and whether profile belonging is associated with social‐, school‐ and family‐related factors, psychological distress and specific ideologies.\n\n\nMethods\nHigh school students (N = 574; Mage = 15.1; SDage = 0.76; 47.7% girls) completed an online survey in 2023 and 2024. A latent transition analysis on scores of support for violent and non‐violent radicalization was conducted. Multinomial regression was used to explore the associations between profiles and variables of interest.\n\n\nResults\nAdolescents moved significantly across the six identified profiles over time. School unsafety was associated with an increased probability of being in more violent profiles, whereas depressive symptoms were lower in disengaged and violent profiles. Glorification of violence was higher in the more violent and less activist profile. Adolescents reporting more distress related to international conflicts and pro‐environmental ideologies were more likely to belong to more activist profiles, including those supportive of violence.\n\n\nConclusions\nExploration of activism and violence as idioms of protest is common during adolescence and youth's attitudes in this regard are very dynamic, influenced by local and global grievances. Primary prevention efforts should accompany youth in their exploration in order to support non‐violent avenues as responses to global conflicts, as well as daily injustices.\n\n"]