Research on hate crime stereotypes is limited by the lack of a validated instrument to measure individual beliefs in hate crime stereotypes/myths. Additionally, while university campuses present critical grounds for crosscultural exposure, this work has not examined beliefs in hate crime stereotypes in university students. We present a pilot study to validate a novel scale and understand the prevalence of hate crime myth acceptance (HCMA) in the campus context. The findings indicate a relatively high level of HCMA and that anti-Black prejudicial attitudes, some anti-Jewish attitudes, and rape myth acceptance are associated with HCMA. The findings provide guidance for future research and preliminary information about the extent of hate crime myth acceptance in the campus context.
AllportG. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.
2.
ArnoldS.TaylorB. (2019). Antisemitism and the left: Confronting an invisible racism. Journal of Social Justice, 9, 1–33.
3.
BernsteinR. S.SalipanteP. (2015). Comfort versus discomfort in interracial/interethnic interactions: Group practices on campus. Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion: An Internation Journal, 34(5), 376–394.
4.
BizumicB.DuckittJ. (2018). Investigating right wing authoritarianism with a very short authoritarianism scale. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 6(1), 129–150.
5.
BlalockH. M. (1967). Toward a theory of minority group relations. Wiley.
6.
BohnerG.SieblerF.ScmelcherJ. (2006). Social norms and the likelihood of raping: Perceived rape myth acceptance of others affects men’s rape proclivity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(3), 286–297.
7.
BurtM. R. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(2), 217–230.
8.
ChapleauK. M.OswaldD. L.RussellB. L. (2007). How ambivalent sexism toward women and men support rape myth acceptance. Sex Roles, 57(1), 131–136.
9.
ChavousT. M. (2005). An intergroup contact-theory framework for evaluating racial climate on predominately White college campuses. American Journal of Community Psychology, 36(3/4), 239–257.
10.
ClarkL. A.WatsonD. (2019). Constructing validity: New developments in creating objective measuring instruments. Psychological Assessment, 31(12), 1412–1462.
11.
CramerR. J.WrightS.LongM. M.KapustaN. D.NoblesM. R.GemberlingT. M.WechslerH. J. (2018). On hate crime victimization: Rates, types, and links with suicide risk among sexual orientation minority special interest group members. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 19(4), 476–489.
12.
DeVellisR. F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications. Sage.
13.
DixonJ. C. (2006). The ties that bind and those that don’t: Toward reconciling group threat and contact theories of prejudice. Social Forces, 84(4), 2179–2204.
14.
DollarC. B. (2014). Racial threat theory: Assessing the evidence, requesting redesign. Journal of Criminology, 2014, Article 983026.
15.
EganR.WilsonJ. C. (2012). Rape victims’ attitudes to rape myth acceptance. Psychiatry, Psychology, and Law, 19(3), 345–357.
16.
FarrellA.LockwoodS. (2023). Addressing hate crime in the 21st century: Trends, threats, and opportunities for intervention. Annual Review of Criminology, 6, 107–130.
17.
GianettoniL.RouxP. (2010). Interconnecting race and gender relations: Racism, sexism, and the attribution of sexism to the racialized other. Sex Roles, 62(5), 374–386.
18.
GladfelterA. S.LantzB.RubackR. B. (2017). The complexity of hate crime and bias activity: Variation across contexts and types of bias. Justice Quarterly, 34(1), 55–83.
19.
GrattetR.JennessV. (2001). The birth and maturation of hate crime policy in the United States. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(4), 668–696.
20.
HershE.RoydenL. (2023). Antisemitic attitudes across the ideological spectrum. Political Research Quarterly, 76(2), 697–711.
21.
HockettJ. M.SaucierD. A.HoffmanB. H.SmithS. J.CraigA. W. (2009). Oppression through acceptance? Predicting rape myth acceptance and attitudes toward rape victims. Violence Against Women, 15(8), 877–897.
22.
IganskiP. (2001). Hate crimes hurt more. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(4), 626–638.
23.
JonesK. P.PeddieC. I.GilraneV. L.KingE. B.GrayA. L. (2016). Not so subtle: A meta-analytic investigation of the correlates of subtle and overt discrimination. Journal of Management, 42(6), 1588–1613.
24.
KatzJ.MooreJ. (2013). Bystander education training for campus sexual assault prevention: An initial meta-analysis. Violence and Victims, 28(6), 1054–1067.
25.
KingR. D. (2007). The context of minority group threat: Race, institutions, and complying with hate crime law. Law & Society Review, 41(1), 189–224.
26.
KingR. D.KutateladzeB. L. (2023). A higher bar: Institutional impediments to hate crime prosecution. Law & Society Review, 57(4), 489–507.
27.
KingR. D.WeinerM. F. (2007). Group position, collective threat, and American anti-Semitism. Social Problems, 54(1), 47–77.
28.
KotzurP. F.WagnerU. (2021). The dynamic relationship between contact opportunities, positive and negative intergroup contact, and prejudice: A longitudinal investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 120(2), 418–442.
29.
LantzB.GladfelterA. S.RubackR. B. (2019). Stereotypical hate crimes and criminal justice processing. A multi-dataset comparison of bias crime arrest patterns by offender and victim race. Justice Quarterly, 36(2), 193–224.
30.
LantzB.KimJ. (2019). Hate crimes hurt more, but so do co-offenders: Separating the influence of co-offending and bias on hate-motivated physical injury. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46(3), 437–456.
31.
LantzB.MalcomZ. T.WengerM. R. (2024). The consequences of hate crime victimization: Considering prejudicial attitudes as an outcome of interracial bias-motivated conflict. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 61(5), 772–809.
32.
LantzB.Vanden BoschM.WengerM. R.MalcomZ. T. (2024). Punishing hate: Examining individual variation in support for hate crime laws. Crime & Delinquency. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00111287241243087
33.
LyonsC. J.RobertsA. (2014). The difference “hate” makes in clearing crime: An event history analysis of incident factors. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 30(3), 268–289.
34.
MillerP. K. (2016). “But aren’t we all poor?” How whites’ perceptions of economic group threat influence racial attitudes in Michigan. Michigan Sociological Review, 30(2), 44–68.
35.
OlzakS. (1990). The political context of competition: Lynching and urban racial violence, 1882 – 1914. Social Forces, 69(2), 395–421.
36.
PaluckE. L.GreenS. A.GreenD. P. (2019). The contact hypothesis re-evaluated. Behavioral Public Policy, 3(2), 129–158.
37.
PerryB.AlviS. (2011). ‘We are all vulnerable’: The in terrorem effects of hate crimes. International Review of Victimology, 18(1), 57–71.
38.
PetersonZ. D.MuehlenhardC. L. (2014). Was it rape? The function of women’s rape myth acceptance and definitions of sex in labeling their own experiences. Sex Roles, 51(3), 129–144.
39.
PettigrewT. F. (1998). Intergroup contact theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 49(1), 65–85.
40.
PettigrewT. F.TroppL. R.WagnerU.ChristO. (2011). Recent advances in intergroup contact theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 35(3), 271–280.
41.
RodriguezJ.NagdaB. A.SorensonN.GurinP. (2018). Engaging race and racism for socially just intergroup relations: The impact of intergroup dialogue on college campuses in the United States. Multicultural Education Review, 10(3), 224–245.
42.
ShermanR. L. (1990). Intergroup conflict on high school campuses. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 18(1), 11–18.
43.
ThelanA. R.MeadowsE. A. (2022). The Illinois rape myth acceptance scale–subtle version: Using an adapted measure to understand the declining rates of rape myth acceptance. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(19–20), NP17807–NP17833.
44.
WilsonT. C. (1996). Compliments will get you nowhere: Benign stereotypes, prejudice, and anti-Semitism. The Sociological Quarterly, 37(3), 465–479.
