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.

Juror perceptions of the stereotypical violent crime defendant.

Stereotypes and prejudice have been shown to bias information processing and decision-making. There are physical traits that are stereotypically associated with criminals (i.e. tattoos, dark skin-tone, facial untrustworthiness) and have been shown to influence juror decision-making. The current research aimed to investigate the effects of tattoos, facial trustworthiness and skin tone on juror case judgments and criminal appearance ratings, while also investigating and accounting for prejudice and motivation to respond without prejudice. Participants (n = 426) were asked to act as mock jurors in a hypothetical assault case by making case judgments and responding to appearance and attitude measures. Criminal appearance ratings indirectly mediated the relationship between physical traits and verdict decisions. Additionally, a significant interaction emerged between skin tone and racial prejudice on criminal appearance ratings, suggesting that the effects of physical traits may depend on individual attitudes. Implications and future directions are discussed.

A Psychometric Investigation of the Hate-Motivated Behavior Checklist.

Hate-motivated behavior (HMB) comprises a continuum ranging from microaggressions to criminal acts. The measurement of HMB is limited primarily to one or two minoritized groups in any given instrument. Current HMB research also lacks a way to assess the full range of acts and motivations for bias-based behavior. The present study fills gaps in HMB measurement by conducting a psychometric study of the Hate-Motivated Behavior Checklist (HMBC). The HMBC is a self-report instrument of HMB perpetration; the instrument also has sections capturing victim target group (e.g. race, sexual orientation, disability) and perpetrator motivation for HMB commission (e.g., perceived threat, impulsivity). We conducted an online cross-sectional survey of community-dwelling adults and college students (N = 463). Measures assessed demographic information, HMB, and social-political characteristics. Confirmatory factor analysis, item response theory analyses, between-groups analyses (e.g., Analysis of Variance), and descriptive statistics were used to examine HMBC properties. Primary findings included (1) poor model fit of the HMBC behaviors score; (2) good model fit with high reliability for an HMBC behaviors score adapted to binary (no/yes) scoring; (3) men reported meaningfully higher HMB scores compared to women; (4) the most common target classification for HMB was based on political affiliation; and (5) perceived intrusion was the most cited reason for committing HMB. Our findings are an important step in refining the HMBC. The instrument represents a potentially useful tool for HMB research, surveillance, and intervention evaluation. Future directions in HMBC research include application to extremist and criminal samples, replication and extension of the binary scoring to include cut-score derivation, and validation against behavioral outcomes.