Measuring Attitudes About Hate: Development of the Hate Crime Beliefs Scale

Revisiting the Harm of Hate: A Quasi-Experimental Approach Using the National Crime Victimization Survey

Early legal challenges to the 1990 Hate Crime Statistics Act were originally excused on the argument that hate crimes "hurt more," but there remain some empirical gaps on this topic. Although many works have concluded that biased offenders cause greater harms to their victims relative to unbiased perpetrators, this effect tends to be sensitive to individual and situational factors like victim and offender characteristics, bias motivation, weapon use, or crime location. This type of confounding has the potential to introduce selection bias in the estimation of victimization harms among biased criminal incidents. With data from the National Crime Victimization Survey (2010-2020), I use propensity scores and inverse-probability weighting to show that, on average, victims of bias motivated offenses are more likely to report later physical and emotional harms despite not suffering greater initial injury in incidence. Findings also demonstrate that the harm of hate varies across different bias motivations, with such crimes directed toward those on the basis of disability, gender, and sexual orientation causing greater short- and long-term individual trauma and damage.

Assessment of Functional and Dysfunctional Perceived Threat of Hate Crimes Among Persons With and Without Disability

This study examined the relationship between disability status and perceived threat of hate crimes. Building on existing conceptual frameworks, first we differentiated between dysfunctional perceived threat that damages quality of life and functional perceived threat that has the capacity to be motivational and precautionary. We then examined how disability status predicts individuals' threat memberships across dysfunctional and functional perceived threats of hate crimes. Results-based on a survey of 1,824 adults recruited from Amazon's Mechanical Turk-indicate that persons with a disability are more likely than those without a disability to exhibit dysfunctional perceived threat (vs. functional or no perceived threat) of hate crime across different bias motivations. This relationship was evident even when accounting for those most at risk for each type of hate crime (e.g., persons of color for anti-race/ethnicity hate crime). Further, persons with cognitive and physical disabilities were associated with higher odds of dysfunctional perceived threat of all types of hate crimes when compared to persons without a disability. Overall, the present study highlights that persons with a disability may experience exacerbated consequences of subjective threat of hate crimes. Findings also suggest the importance of an intersectional approach to hate crime by considering how disability may intersect with other forms of oppression in relation to perceived threat of hate crime. Implications and future directions, especially as they relate to measurement, are discussed.

Not Ideal, But Still Acknowledged: A 10-Country Survey on Empathy for Victims of Anti-LGBT Violence

Using data from a cross-national survey conducted on representative samples of populations from 10 European countries (n = 10,766), the present study is the first one to empirically measure the validity of Christie's influential ideal victim model. We use a range of scenarios built around common types of anti-LGBT violence to verify the extent to which the public's empathy for victims is contingent on the victim's identity and the circumstances of the crime. The results provide strong evidence that, when applied to this group of victims, the rules of the ideal victim work, adequately moderating the public's emotional reactions. We found that all victims receive relatively high levels of empathy, but the further the victim is from the ideal, the less support they can count on. Thus, even though no victim is "rejected," a clear hierarchy of victimization emerges. As a group, LGBT people suffer from an empathy deficit, but there also are considerable variations within this group, with a lesbian attacked by extremists receiving the most, and a drunk transgender person receiving the least empathy from the public. The study contributes to the development of theory by embedding the ideal victim model in a broader sociological paradigm of dramaturgical analysis. Since our research shows that the victim's LGBT status decreases the levels of empathy (being seen as a type of stigma), we call for more attention to be paid to the actor's identity in Goffman's framework. Implications for practice and further research are offered.

Assessing attitudes about hate: Further validation of the hate crime beliefs scale

The Hate Crime Beliefs Scale (HCBS) is an assessment of attitudes about hate crime laws, offenders, and victims. The original HCBS includes four subscales (negative beliefs, offender punishment, deterrence, and victim harm), while a shortened and modified version from the United Kingdom (UK; HCBS-UK) consists of three subscales (denial, sentencing, and compassion). We conducted a psychometric test of the HCBS in order to identify a best fitting structure with possible item reduction. A total of 463 participants completed the original HCBS, measures of social dominance orientation (SDO) and right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), and demographic questions. Factor analyses revealed good fit of the data for a Hate Crime Beliefs Scale-Short Form (HCBS-SF), largely modeled after the HCBS-UK. The three subscales were: denial (i.e., downplaying hate crime severity and low support for hate crime laws), sentencing (i.e., support for more punitive offender punishment), and compassion (i.e., understanding and concern for victims). All subscales possessed acceptable internal consistency. The denial subscale was positively associated with RWA subscale and SDO scores. The sentencing and compassion subscales were significantly negatively correlated with SDO and RWA subscale scores. Republicans held the least supportive views of hate crime laws, concern for victims, and punishment of offenders. Data underscore the importance of evaluating hate crime beliefs in public opinion and other contexts. The HCBS-SF better captures hate crime related attitudes than the previously developed longer version of the HCBS.

Understanding Public Attitudes to Hate: Developing and Testing a U.K. Version of the Hate Crime Beliefs Scale

Against the backdrop of an increase in reported hate crimes, we present the development of a U.K.-focussed instrument designed to evaluate the nature of public beliefs about hate crime, legislation, offenders and victims. In Study 1, 438 participants completed an Anglicized version of the Hate Crime Beliefs Scale (HCBS). Factor analyses revealed three subfactors: Denial (high scores represent a denial of hate crime severity and need for legislation), Compassion (high score reflect compassion toward victims and affected communities) and Sentencing (higher scores reflect more punitive attitudes). In Study 2 (N = 134) we show that scores on Denial are positively associated with those on Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO), ideologies known to be associated with prejudice. Compassion was negatively associated with these ideologies. Mediation analyses showed that Big Five personality traits Openness to Experience and Conscientiousness predicted Denial and Compassion via RWA, whereas Agreeableness and Openness predicted scores via SDO, consistent with a dual-process motivation model of hate crime beliefs. Results are discussed in terms of the nature of hate crime beliefs and the importance of understanding public attitudes which may support undesirable social norms and influence jury decision making in trials of hate related offenses.

Are We Comparing Apples and Oranges? Exploring Trauma Experienced by Victims of Interpersonal Violence and Abuse and by Court-Involved Women Who Have Used Force in Relationships

Due to the enactment of mandatory and proarrest policies, there has been a sharp increase in the number of women arrested for use of force against an intimate partner. Many of these arrested women are also victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) and experience high levels of trauma and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Our study explores experiences of two groups: 80 women who self-refer into survivor groups or individual counseling sessions facilitated by a trained counselor and 86 court-involved women who have been arrested on an IPV/abuse (IPV/A)-related charge and (in lieu of more substantial punishment) participate in an intervention/treatment program. The current research asks, "What do trauma measures tell us about women who voluntarily seek IPV/A victim support groups and about women court-mandated to a treatment program?" Using measures of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), post-trauma distress, and danger assessments, we explore these two groups. Our findings demonstrate that within the three measures used, women who voluntarily sought victim counseling services had a higher mean compared with women arrested for use of force against an intimate partner. Yet, both groups are significantly different from the general population in terms of having experienced significant trauma. Both groups of women report significantly higher levels of ACEs, post-trauma distress, and danger assessments compared with the general population, indicating that women who experience IPV/A or women who use force in relationships may share more similarities than differences. In addition, we explore the ways in which different relationship characteristics and treatment trajectories might help explain the differences present between these two groups of women. We conclude with a discussion of policy and treatment implications.

A Systematic Review of the Psychometric Properties of Composite LGBT Prejudice and Discrimination Scales

Prejudice and discrimination against LGBT individuals is widespread and has been shown to have negative consequences for sexual and gender minority persons' physical and psychological wellbeing. A recent and problematic trend in the literature is to compositely measure prejudice toward and discrimination against LGBT persons. As such, a review of the psychometric properties of scales assessing, in a combinatory fashion, negative attitudes and/or behaviors toward LGBT persons is warranted. In the current study, 32 scales were identified, and their psychometric properties were evaluated. Most of the scales reviewed did not provide sufficient information regarding item development and refinement, scale dimensionality, scale score reliability, or validity. Properties of the reviewed scales are summarized, and recommendations for better measurement practice are articulated.

Evaluations of Antigay Hate Crimes and Hate Crime Legislation: Independent and Differentially Predicted

Minimal studies have investigated individuals' evaluations of antigay hate crimes and hate crime legislation simultaneously, with most research focusing on one or the other. In a sample of 246 heterosexual undergraduates, the present study found that evaluations of antigay hate crimes and hate crime legislation were unrelated. Higher social dominance orientation (SDO) and crime control orientation scores were associated with more positive evaluations of antigay hate crimes. Positive evaluations of hate crime legislation were associated with more positive attitudes toward gay men and lesbians. We also found that the relationship between SDO and evaluations were mediated by crime control beliefs (for hate crimes evaluations) and antigay attitudes (for hate crime legislation evaluations). The present findings have possible implications for the manner in which organizations advocate for the extension of hate crime legislation to include sexual orientation.