Hate crimes (e.g., anti-Asian and antisemitic) continue to be a problem in the United States. Federal laws protect specific groups (i.e., race, color, national origin, religion, gender/sex, gender identity, disability, and sexual orientation) from victimization of bias-motivated crimes. There is little research investigating how laypeople “know” whether a hate crime has occurred, as well as who they believe are hate crime offenders and victims. The current study explores laypeople's awareness and recognition of hate crimes, offenders, and victims that fit or do not fit their lay theories (e.g., stereotypes). More specifically, the study explores laypeople's (i.e., jurors’) lack of knowledge about federal hate crime legislation, offenders, and victims. The overarching research question is “What are people's lay beliefs about hate crimes, offenders, and victims?” A sample of jury-eligible participants was recruited through Prolific Academic. We conducted semi-structured interviews using quota sampling based on gender (men, women) and race (White, Asian, Black, Hispanic). We conducted a content analysis of the qualitative data. Results demonstrated that participants’ lay beliefs generally aligned with what federal law dictates; however, there were some non-protected groups that laypeople believed could still be victims of hate crimes. Additionally, results can inform researchers and policy makers about laypeople's beliefs about hate crimes, offenders, and victims, which can be applied broadly and to the context of juror decision-making. If laypeople's beliefs about hate crimes, offenders, and victims are inaccurate or do not align with the federal definition of hate crimes, they could subsequently make legally unsound and inaccurate decisions.
AndersonC. A.LindsayJ. J. (1998). The development, perseverance, and change of naive theories. Social Cognition, 16(1), 8–30. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.1998.16.1.8
2.
BoeckmannR.Turpin-PetrosinoC. (2002). Understanding the harm of hate crime. Journal of Social Issues, 58(2), 207–225. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00257
BrewerW. F.NakamuraG. V. (1984). The nature and functions of schemas. In WyerR. S.SrullT. K. (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (pp. 119–160). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
ChakrabortiN.GarlandJ. (2012). Reconceptualizing hate crime victimization through the lens of vulnerability and difference. Theoretical Criminology, 16(4), 499–514. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480612439432
7.
ChengW.IckesW.KenworthyJ. B. (2013). The phenomenon of hate crimes in the United States. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(4), 761–794. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12004
8.
ComstockG. D. (1991). Violence against lesbians and gay men. Columbia University Press.
9.
CraigK. M. (2002). Examining hate-motivated aggression: A review of the social psychological literature on hate crimes as a distinct form of aggression. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 7(1), 85–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-1789(00)00039-2
10.
CraigK. M.WaldoC. R. (1996). So, what’s a hate crime anyway? Young adults’ perceptions of hate crimes, victims, and perpetrators. Law and Human Behavior, 20(2), 113–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01499350
11.
CroninS. W.McDevittJ.FarrellA.NolanJ. J.III. (2007). Bias-crime reporting: Organizational responses to ambiguity, uncertainty, and infrequency in eight police departments. American Behavioral Scientist, 51(2), 213–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/https://doi.org/0002764207306054
12.
CurleyL. J.MunroJ.DrorI. E. (2022). Cognitive and human factors in legal layperson decision making: Sources of bias in juror decision making. Medicine, Science, and Law, 62(3), 206–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/0025802422108065
13.
DeCampW.DeCampE. (2020). It’s still about race: Peremptory challenge use on Black prospective jurors. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 57(1), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427819873943
14.
DevineP. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.56.1.5
15.
DrakulichK.Fay-RamirezS.BenierK. (2022). The neighborhood context of perceived and reported anti-white hate crimes. Race and Justice, 12(1), 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/2153368719832944
16.
DunbarE.MolinaA. (2004). Opposition to the legitimacy of hate crime laws: The role of argument acceptance, knowledge, individual differences, and peer influence. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 4(1), 91–113. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-2415.2004.00036.x
17.
EllingwoodH.PicaE.PozzuloJ.SchultheisE. (2023). The influence of victim sexual orientation, gender, and gender identity on mock jurors’ judgements. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 38, 461–468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-022-09533-7
FiskeS. T.NeubergS. E. (1990). A continuum of impression formation from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. In ZannaM. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 23, pp. 1–74). Academic Press.
20.
FletcherG. (1995). The scientific credibility of folk psychology. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21.
FurnhamA. (1988). Lay theories: Everyday understandings of problems in the social sciences. Pergamon Press.
22.
GamblinB. W.KehnA.VanderzandenK.RuthigJ. C.JonesK. M.LongB. L. (2021). A comparison of juror decision making in race-based and sexual orientation-based hate crime cases. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(7–8), 3231–3256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518774305
GerstenfeldP. B. (2013). Hate crimes: Causes, controls, and controversies (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
25.
Ghazi-TehraniA.KearnsE. M. (2023). Biased coverage of bias crime: Examining differences in media coverage of hate crimes and terrorism. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 46(8), 1283–1303. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610X.2020.1830573
26.
GiannettaT. S.CuniusM. K.MillerM. K. (2025). Investigating jurors’ lay theories about hate crimes, offenders, and victims: Do they match the law? In MillerM. K.BornsteinB. H.DeMatteoD. S. (Eds.), Advances in psychology and law (Vol. 7, pp. 181–217). Springer.
27.
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2015.1096952
28.
GrattetR.JennessV.CurryT. (1998). The homogenization and differentiation of hate crime law in the United States, 1978 to 1995: Innovation and diffusion in the criminalization of bigotry. American Sociological Review, 63(2), 286–307. https://doi.org/10.2307/2657328
29.
GreenD. P.StrolovitchD. Z.WongJ. S. (1998). Defended neighborhoods, integration, and racially motivated crime. American Journal of Sociology, 104(2), 372–403. https://doi.org/10.1086/210042
30.
GuestG.BunceA.JohnsonL. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
31.
HallN. (2013). Hate crime. Routledge.
32.
HallS. (1973). The determinations of new photographs. Routledge.
33.
HaslamN.RothschildL.ErnstD. (2002). Are essentialist beliefs associated with prejudice?British Journal of Social Psychology, 41(1), 87–100. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466602165072
34.
HolstiO. R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
35.
HongY.LevyS. R.ChiuC. (2001). The contribution of the lay theories approach to the study of groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(2), 98–106. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0502_1
36.
JennessV.BroadK. (1997). Hate crimes: New social movements and the politics of violence. Aldine de Gruyter.
37.
JennessV.GrattetR. (2001). Making hate a crime: From social movement to law enforcement. Russell Sage Foundation.
38.
KelleyH. H. (1973). The processes of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28(2), 107–128. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034225
39.
KingR. D.KutateladzeB. L. (2023). A higher bar: Institutional impediments to hate crime prosecution. Law & Society Review, 57(4), 489–507. https://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12685
40.
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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.56.1.5
41.
LevyS. R.StroessnerS. J.DweckC. S. (1998). Stereotype formation and endorsement: The role of implicit theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1421–1436. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1421
42.
LyonsC. J. (2007). Community (dis)organization and racially motivated crime. American Journal of Sociology, 113(3), 815–863. https://doi.org/10.1086/521846
43.
LyonsC. J. (2008). Individual perceptions and the social construction of hate crimes: A factorial survey. The Social Science Journal, 45(1), 107–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2007.12.013
44.
MahalingamR.RodriguezJ. (2003). Essentialism, power, and cultural psychology of gender. Journal of Cognition & Culture, 3(2), 157–174. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853703322148525
45.
MalcomZ. T.WengerM. R.LantzB. (2023). Politics or prejudice? Separating the influence of political affiliation and prejudicial attitudes in determining support for hate crime law. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 29(2), 182–195. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000350
46.
Marcus-NewhallA.BlakeL. P.BaumannJ. (2002). Perceptions of hate crime perpetrators and victims as influenced by race, political orientation, and peer group. American Behavioral Scientist, 46(1), 108–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764202046001008
47.
MasonG. (2014). The symbolic purpose of hate crime law: Ideal victims and emotion. Theoretical Criminology, 18(1), 75–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480613499792
48.
McDevittJ.LevinJ.BennettS. (2002). Hate crime offenders: An expanded typology. Journal of Social Issues, 58(2), 303–317. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00262
49.
MirabitoL. A.LecciL. (2021). The impact of anti-gay bias on verdicts and sentencing with gay defendants. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 33(1), 32–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10538720.2020.1830220
50.
MüllerK.SchwarzC. (2021). Fanning the flames of hate: Social media and hate crime. Journal of the European Economic Association, 19(4), 2131–2167. httpsss://doi.org/http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3082972 https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvaa045
51.
PapakyriakopoulosO.ZuckermanE. (2021). The media during the rise of Trump: Identity politics, immigration, “Mexican” demonization and hate-crime. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 15(1), 467–478. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v15i1.18076
52.
PerezB., & Matusitz. (2025). Comparative analysis between left and right leaning US newspaper in the coverage of the Kyle Rittenhouse case. Journal of Applied Journalism & Media Studies. https://doi.org/10.1386/ajms_00166_1
53.
ReifmanA.GusickS. M.EllsworthP. C. (1992). Real jurors’ understanding of the law in real cases. Law and Human Behavior, 16(5), 539–554. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01044622
54.
SemmlerC.BrewerN. (2002). Using a flow-chart to improve comprehension of jury instructions. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 9(2), 262–270. https://doi.org/10.1375/13218710260612136
55.
ShermanS. J.CortyE. (1984). Cognitive heuristics. In WyerR. S.SrullT. K. (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (pp. 189–286). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Warren-GordonK.RhinebergerG. (2021). The “trump effect” on hate crime reporting: Media coverage before and after the 2016 presidential election. Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, 19(1), 25–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377938.2021.1895944
