Europeanization of Kin-Citizenship and the Dynamics of Kin-Minority Claim-Making: The Case of Hungary

Much of the current global debate around 'hate crimes' legislation is focused on the pragmatic and logistical difficulties of winning support for, and enacting, legislation. This paper takes a step back from the day-to-day issues of hate crimes and begins to unpack some of the philosophical underpinnings of the hate crime category. This is undertaken through an investigation of the coherence of hate crimes definitions and their policy implications. The paper's initial definition of hate crimes is tested for its appropriateness as applied to racist attacks and to attacks on gays and lesbians. From this, an analogy is drawn with crimes against women. The bulk of the paper is concerned with problematising the intellectual justifications for the inclusion or exclusion of gender in the hate crimes category. The extension of the hate crime category to include gender-related crimes raises particular public policy challenges.

Prior studies of ethnic conflict have consistently identified the processes of economic and political development as exacerbating ethnic tensions in nations. Drawing on research from across multiple disciplines, we introduce a new explanation for ethnic tensions that departs from these previous views. We show how the political culture of individual rights may be rooted in the macro-economic conditions of market-oriented economic development, and how a culture of markets can account for stable liberal democracy, economic development, and decreased ethnic tensions in a nation. Drawing on data obtained from the International Country Risk Guide and observing a sample of most nations from 1982 to 1997, we find robust support for this hypothesis. With consideration of the intensity of market norms in nations, it appears that democracy has a much weaker impact on reducing ethnic tensions than previously thought, and development has no significant impact in ways previously thought. The policy implications are meaningful: The solution to ethnic tensions in nations begins with expanding the market with contract-integrated development.

In the United States, hate crimes that are motivated by religious bias disproportionately impact minoritized religious groups. This study investigates religious ecological predictors of hate crimes against Jews and Muslims in the US, drawing on theories of religion and intergroup offending. Measures of areal religious composition and change are drawn from two waves of the US Religion Census. Multilevel logistic regression models predict incidence of anti-Jewish and anti-Muslim hate crimes across county-years (2010–2018), adjusting for law enforcement agency coverage, hate crime reporting, and social and political factors. Christian adherence and overall religious diversity are associated with lower incidence of anti-Jewish hate crime. Jewish and Muslim adherence are positively associated with anti-Jewish and anti-Muslim hate crime, respectively, and counties undergoing relatively large increases in Muslim adherence have heightened incidence of anti-Muslim hate crime. Implications for theory and policy, as well as opportunities for future research, are discussed.

This research examines the association between community conditions and anti-Latino hate crimes as informed by earlier research. The traditional social disorganization perspective argues that hate crimes against Latinos are more likely in communities characterized by economic disadvantage, residential instability and heterogeneity. On the other hand, the defended communities perspective suggests that hate crimes against Latinos are more prevalent in majority white communities experiencing an in-migration of Latinos. At the same time, the defended communities' perspective suggests that economic strain in majority white communities has a positive affect on hate crimes. Using hate crime data collected from the Los Angeles County Commission on Human Relations from 2003 to 2013, the present study examines the effects of the defended communities in majority black communities given the racial and ethnic landscape of Los Angeles County. The findings confirm that community conditions described by the traditional social disorganization perspective influence racially motivated hate crimes. With the exception of residential stability, economic disadvantage and heterogeneity are significantly associated to anti-Latino hate crimes as described by the traditional social disorganization perspective. In contrast, there is limited evidence to confirm the effect of the demographic change and/or economic conditions on anti-Latino hate crimes or racially motivated hate crimes as suggested by the defended communities' perspective. The analyses call attention to the importance of merging theoretical constructs and examining groups outside of anti-black and anti-white given demographic changes in communities across the United States. The conclusion suggests that research drawn from theories on communities and crime could provide a practical framework for examining hate crimes as they offer important policy implications for local communities.

Several constructs have been identified as relevant to the juror decision-making process in hate crime cases. However, there is a lack of research on the relationships between these constructs and their variable influence across victim group. The purpose of the current study was to reexamine factors relevant to the juror decision-making process in hate crime cases within a structural model, and across victim group, to gauge the relative strength and explanatory power of various predictors. In the current study, 313 participants sentenced a perpetrator found guilty of a hate crime committed against either a Black man or a gay man; participants also responded to individual difference measures relevant to mock juror hate crime decision making, including prejudice toward the victim's social group. Using path analysis, we explored the role of juror prejudice on sentencing decisions in hate crime cases as well as similarities and differences based on the victimized group. Results indicated that, when the victim was a Black man, modern racism influenced sentencing both directly and indirectly through perpetrator blame attributions, explaining 18% of the variance in sentencing. In contrast, when the victim was a gay man, modern homophobia did not directly predict sentencing, and the overall model explained only 4% of the variance in sentencing, suggesting variables beyond juror prejudice may be better suited to explain juror decision making in sexual orientation-based hate crimes. The current study suggests that the role of juror prejudice in hate crime cases varies as a function of the victimized group and raises questions about the importance of juror prejudice in the sentencing of hate crime cases, particularly antigay prejudice. The importance of blame attributions, social dominance orientation, and juror beliefs regarding penalty enhancements for hate crime cases, as well as policy implications, are also addressed.

Hate crimes are those in which the victim is selected because of his or her actual or perceived race, color, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or national origin. Hate crime laws have frequently been met with objections. Whereas some objections are based in constitutional law, other objections invoke a variety of psychological constructs, including attitude, motivation, behavior, emotion, and intergroup relations. These objections can be illuminated by relevant psychological theory and research. Topics addressed include the measurement of motivation and intent, and distinctions among attitudes, emotions, and behavior. Hate crimes and other crimes are compared in terms of perpetrators, type and degree of violence, psychological and physical trauma suffered by victims, and community impact. Psychologically based defense strategies used by perpetrators of hate crimes are critiqued. Hate crime laws are also discussed in terms of the political and social values they reflect. Finally, research and policy implications are outlined, including implications for prevention and intervention at the individual, community, and law enforcement levels.

Crimes motivated by hatred toward a person's sexual orientation or gender identity typically cause greater physical and emotional harm than comparative crimes not motivated by hate. Compounding these impacts, hate crime victims receive less empathy, less support, and are blamed more for their victimization both by society in general and by criminal justice agencies. However, as hate crimes are the epitome of intergroup hostility, the crimes are also likely to engender an ingroup empathy bias in which fellow LGBT+ people provide greater empathy to hate crime victims, potentially motivating greater support and reducing victim blaming for these particularly marginalized victims. Across three studies, we examined LGBT+ participants' empathic reactions to hate crime victims, along with their willingness to help victims and blame victims. In the Pilot Study (N = 131) and Study 1 (N = 600), we cross-sectionally showed that indirect experiences of hate crimes predicted a stronger LGBT+ identity which, in turn, was associated with greater empathy that predicted greater willingness to help victims and blame the victim less. In Study 2 (N = 657), we experimentally manipulated the motivation of a crime (hate vs. non-hate) and the group membership of the victim (ingroup-LGBT+ vs. outgroup-heterosexual) and found that crimes that had one or more group elements (i.e., involved an ingroup member and/or was motivated by hate) elicited greater empathy that, in turn, increased the willingness to help the victim and reduced victim blaming. Together, the findings provide cogent evidence that LGBT+ communities respond to anti-LGBT+ hate crimes with overwhelming empathy, and this ingroup empathy bias motivates helping behaviors and reduces victim blame, thereby buffering the marginalizing consequences of hate crimes. Policy implications include acknowledging and harnessing the importance of shared identities when practitioners and criminal justice agencies respond to anti-LGBT+ hate crimes.

Currently, hate crimes and hate crime policy are receiving increased public and scholarly attention. Much of the attention has been focused on crimes committed out of bias toward a victim's membership in a group based on race, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin. However, more recently, gender has been included as a status category, often causing heated debate. This article looks at the history of the initial exclusion, then inclusion, of gender in the hate crime domain. The reasons for the uneasy fit of gender as a status category are recounted, as well as arguments both for and against inclusion of gender within the hate crime model. The problem of gender essentialism is examined, which results in the marginalization of the multiple category statuses of many women. The article concludes with implications for research, policy, and practice.

Anti-Asian hate crimes have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, no research has considered whether crime reporting patterns are different among Asian hate crime victims, relative to other victims. Following this, this research presents an examination of differences in reporting victimization to the police between Asian and non-Asian victims using information from 997 respondents who experienced a hate crime in the first 1 to 2 months of the pandemic. Results indicate that Asian victims are significantly and substantially less likely to report victimization to the police than other victims. Taken together, these results suggest that current estimates of increases in anti-Asian hate crime based on official crime statistics—although high—may actually be an under-estimation of the true extent of the problem.

Questions remain on whether the UCR constitutes a legitimate source for analyzing hate crime. While a handful of studies have attempted to uncover the law enforcement characteristics associated with reporting hate crime, scholars have yet to triangulate official data with other sources, namely the NCVS. In this study, I replicate past UCR-NCVS convergence analyses on hate crime incidents, determining whether these series converge and if they do so across different forms of bias motivation. Using 18 years of data from 2003 through 2020 at a national level, results indicate mixed support for convergence, drawing implications for research and policy.

The present study examines experiences of hate crimes with multiple motives with a focus on policy and theory-related issues. The authors found that every fifth hate crime victim reports having experiences of multiple motives. These victims are more likely to report their victimization to the police in comparison to victims of hate crimes with single motives. The results also show that belonging to several socially vulnerable groups does not correlate with higher levels of repeat victimization. This is in contrast with intersectional theory as it would predict heightened levels of victimization among such individuals. Lastly, the results show that individuals who belong to more than one socially vulnerable group are more likely to experience hate crimes with multiple motives. Implications for policy and intersectional theory are discussed.

This book examines key philosophical, ethical, legal and professional practice issues in the area of privacy and confidentiality, and explores their implications for policy and practice.

IntroductionEmerging transgender and gender diverse (TGD) health models focus on social well-being. The present study contributes to this movement through investigation of hate crime statutes, state-level political and anti-TGD attitudes, and multiple marginalized identities as correlates of social well-being (i.e., outness, community connection, and workplace and familial support).MethodsThe current study merged data from three sources: (a) the 2015 United States Transgender Survey (USTS), (b) the 2014 and 2018 Cooperative Congressional Election Studies (CCES), and (c) the 2018 Anti-Defamation League’s (ADL) Hate Crime Map. Bivariate (e.g., chi-square) and regression analyses were used to identify correlates of social well-being among TGD adults in the USA.ResultsAll types of hate crime laws showed bivariate protective associations for outness and family support. Regression models showed that several marginalized identities (e.g., having a disability) were the most consistent and largest correlates of social well-being. Higher state-level anti-TGD attitudes were linked with lower familial support and outness. The presence of state-level hate crime law civil action and police training statutes was positively associated with outness.ConclusionsThe results extend the limited research on correlates of TGD social well-being. Findings support TGD health models addressing resilience and social safety. Future research should address hate crime law policy analysis, police training evaluation, and prospective testing of TGD social well-being.Policy ImplicationsHate crime laws, in particular civil action and police training statutes, may be associated with better outcomes for transgender and gender diverse (TGD) persons. Evaluation of hate crime law effectiveness may need to focus on implementation as opposed to mere presence of laws. Policies specific to police training should include guidelines for training content and rigorous evaluation.

The need for fresh responses to hate crime has become all the more apparent at a time when numbers of incidents have risen to record levels, both within the UK and beyond. Despite progress within the domains of scholarship and policy, these escalating levels of hate crime cast doubt over the effectiveness of existing measures and their ability to address the needs of hate crime victims. This chapter explores the practical implications of our research and is designed to generate improved policy within and beyond the domain of criminal justice by providing evidence-based recommendations which acknowledge the diverse needs of diverse groups as well as the very real practical constraints facing all professionals tasked with responding to hate crime.

Honoring Asian diversity by collecting Asian subpopulation data in health research.