White College Students’ Racial Prejudice and Perceptions of Racial Hate Crime

Abstract

This study investigated how racial prejudice influences White college students’ perceptions of hate crime. We also examined the moderating effects of the race of the victim of hate crimes and the absence of hate crime laws. Our sample included 581 White students in a predominantly White university located in a state that does not have a hate crime law. The study was set up in a 2 (race of the victim and the perpetrator) × 3 (level of assault) factorial design. Participants rated their perceptions of three scenarios (i.e., non-racially biased simple assault, racially biased simple assault, and racially biased aggravated assault). The dependent variables were perceptions of hate crime and willingness to report. The key independent variable was participants’ level of racial prejudice. The moderators included race of the victim in each scenario and whether participants’ state of origin has a hate crime law. Results suggest that higher levels of modern racism were associated with lower perceptions of hate crime and lower willingness to report racially biased simple and aggravated hate crime. When the victim was White, participants with higher levels of racial prejudice were more likely to perceive a hate crime and more willing to report it. The opposite was true when the victim was Black. The absence of state hate crime laws and race of victim were significant moderators. Our study suggests that racial prejudice is associated with lower perceptions of hate crime and willingness to report. Furthermore, the moderating effect of the race of victims provides insights on how racial prejudice can lead to a differential perception of hate crime, depending on whether one’s racial in-group is targeted. Our findings also highlight the importance of having state-level hate crime laws to mitigate the linkage between modern racism and perceptions of hate crime.

Keywords

racial hate crime racially biased assaults race racial prejudice modern racism

Background

A hate crime is a bias-motivated crime against individuals because of their real or perceived race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender, gender-identity, or disability (U.S. Department of Justice, n. d.). Perpetrators of hate crimes intend for their actions to express animosity, condemnation, and distrust not only for the direct victims, but for the entire social group to which they belong (S(Saucier et al., 2010)Saucier et al., 2010). Compared to non-biased crimes, hate crimes are more serious because their negative effects extend to the victim’s entire identity group (Herek et al., 1999; McDevitt et al., 2001; Saucier et al., 2010).

Among hate crimes reported in the U.S., racial hate crimes are the most prevalently reported form (FBI, 2018). Furthermore, the majority of racial hate crimes were committed by White perpetrators (FBI, 2018). Given the nature of White privilege in our society and its connection to racial prejudice, it is important to understand what factors influence White individuals’ perceptions of hate crime and their responses to them, such as reporting the incidents to authorities. For example, does the race of the victim or the race of the perpetrator play a role in this process? Moreover, does residing in a state without a hate crime law influence how individuals think about hate crime? To date, only three states in the U.S. (i.e., Arkansas, South Carolina, and Wyoming) do not have hate crime laws. What effect, if any, does this have on the awareness of hate crimes and willingness to report for individuals who live in these states? There is a paucity of research that examines such questions. The present study investigated how modern racism influences White college students’ perceptions of racial hate crime. We also examined the moderating effects of the absence of state-level hate crime laws and the race of the victim of hate crimes.

Modern Racism and Hate Crimes

The most common factors that motivate an individual to commit a racial hate crime are racism, racial bias and racial prejudice. Studies have examined an array of connections between racial bias and hate crime in the U.S., spanning from an examination of hate crimes and hate groups (Borgeson & Valeri, 2007; Durso & Jacobs, 2013; Roussos & Dovidio, 2018), to racial bias and hate crimes in the court system (Cramer et al., 2014; Stevenson & Bottoms, 2009), to the role of contextual factors (e.g., race of the victim/perpetrator, severity of the crime) and levels of racism on perceptions of hate crimes (Saucier et al., 2008; Saucier et al., 2010), and to the role that conscious racism plays in perceptions of hate crimes (Cowan et al., 2005; Graham & Lowery, 2004). From a social psychological perspective, these prior studies examined the connections between conscious, overt forms of racism (i.e., hate groups such as White supremacists) and hate crimes, and the connections between conscious, more subtle forms of racism and hate crimes. In the current study, we focus our examination on the latter.

In the U.S., 50 years ago racism was typically displayed in conscious, overt forms (e.g., openly using racial epithets or openly expressing racial prejudice toward another racial group). This has been commonly referred to as “old-fashion” racism (e.g., Brown et al., 2009; Milner et al., 2020; Virtanen & Huddy, 1998). Research shows that expressions of old-fashion racism has significantly decreased over the decades and has been transmuted into a more conscious, subtle form of racism, often referred to as modern racism (McConahay, 1986; Sears, 1988). Modern racism is conscious because the individual who falls into this category knows that they harbor racist viewpoints. Yet, the manifestation of their racism is subtle and not easily unpacked (e.g., the individual may strongly oppose the Black Lives Matter movement and contend, instead, that All Lives Matter). It is obvious why researchers have examined old-fashion forms of racism and racial hate crime; racial hate crime and old-fashion racism are complimentary processes. However, there is a paucity of research that fully captures the connection between racial hate crime and individuals who display conscious, subtle forms of racism (i.e., modern racism). Previous studies used the Modern Racism Scale to capture participants’ level of racism (e.g., Awad et al., 2005; George & Martínez, 2002), but rarely has research examined its relationship to racial hate crimes. More studies are needed that comprehensively examine the intricate connections between modern racism and racial hate crimes.

Significance of Racial Hate Crime and the Focus on White Individuals

This study examined racial hate crime for several reasons. Racial hate crimes are the most reported form of hate crime in the United States. According to FBI Uniform Crime Reports (2018), of the 7036 single-bias hate incidents reported in 2018, 59.6% were racially motivated. Moreover, the majority of racial hate crimes were committed by White perpetrators (53.6%), whereas the majority of racial hate crime victims were Black individuals (47.1%). Yet, rarely is there a sole examination on racial hate crime, especially as it relates to unpacking the psychological and structural indices that predict White individuals’ perceptions and actions of the hate crimes. This is significant because in order to disrupt racial hate crimes, we must first understand the factors that motivate such hate. In the United States, this means that more studies are warranted that focus explicitly on the key perpetrators of racial hate crimes (i.e., White individuals). The current inquiry sought to add to the literature by exploring this issue.

Race of Perpetrator and Victim

One important demographic characteristic that differentially influences individuals’ perceptions of hate crime is the race of perpetrators and victims. A previous study found that in vignettes where a Black individual was a victim of hate crime, study participants rated higher certainty of guilt and provided longer sentence lengths to White perpetrators compared to Black perpetrators (Marcus-Newhall et al., 2002). Similarly, another vignette study found that an interracial hate crime scenario with a White perpetrator and a Black victim were more likely to be perceived as a hate crime than a scenario with a Black perpetrator and White victim (Lyons, 2008). The effects of the perpetrator and victim’s race may also vary by race of the observer and their attitudes toward the victims’ social group. For example, Lyons (2008) found that Black participants were more likely to perceive incidents with anti-Black slurs as hate crimes, compared to their White counterparts. In the same study, the participants with less tolerant attitudes toward homosexuality reported lower perceptions of hate crime toward the victimization of homosexuals (Lyons, 2008). Based on these previous findings, it is reasonable to anticipate that White individuals who hold more racially biased attitudes (i.e., modern racism) may be less likely to perceive Black victimization as a racial hate crime than White victimization. That is, they would show a heightened level of in-group bias. On the same note, White individuals with strong racial bias may be more likely to perceive White victimization as a hate crime and report it to the authority.

State-level Hate Crime Legislation

Given that not every state has state-level hate crime legislation, the absence of hate crime laws in the state of origin may condition how individuals interpret hate crime incidents. For example, a previous study conducted in the UK found that college students’ perception of stalking was closely matched with the England and Wales Protection from Harassment Act, compared to other legislations in the U.S. and Australia (Sheridan & Davies, 2001), suggesting that public perception of social problems may be guided by the local legislations. Relatedly, the state-level hate crime statutes can raise the residents’ exposure to information as well as their consciousness of hate crime. For example, over 149 incidents, on average, were reported in the states with hate crime laws in 2018, whereas there were approximately 39 reported incidents, on average, in the states without hate crime laws (i.e., Arkansas, Georgia, South Carolina, and Wyoming) (FBI, 2018). Note that Georgia did not have a state-level hate crime law when the present study was conducted. The absence of state-level hate crime laws not only hinders the residents’ formal reporting but also can limit the efforts and resources to promote reporting, such as public awareness trainings, outreach to target groups, and knowledge resources for victims. Therefore, it is likely that individuals from states without hate crime laws may have lower perceptions of hate crimes and lower willingness to report, compared to those from states with hate crime laws. Moreover, the absence of a state law against hate crime and legal consciousness can potentially provide more room for individuals’ attitudes to influence their interpretations of hate crime incidents. Hence, it is possible that individuals from states without a hate crime law would be more likely to perceive hate crime based on their beliefs and attitudes, including modern racism, than those who live in the states with hate crime laws. Previous studies have not examined this issue.

Level of Violence

Individuals also take into account the level of violence when determining if an incident is motivated by hate or bias and whether to report. As the concept of hate crime often remains ambiguous to many people, bystanders can experience difficulty determining whether a certain incident meets the legal definition of a hate crime. Moreover, although the legal definition of hate crime includes various types of offenses (e.g., property crime and vandalism), it is possible that individuals feel more certainty and willingness to report when an incident meets the stereotypical definition of a hate crime (i.e., interpersonal violent attacks involving verbal racial slurs) (Lantz et al., 2019; Zaykowski, 2010). Although a dearth of research has examined the link between the level of violence and perceptions specifically among White individuals in the context of their racial attitudes, extant studies suggest that crimes involving violence resulting in physical injury predict stronger hate crime certainty among bystanders (Lyons, 2008), victims’ reporting (Zaykowski, 2010), and arrest of offenders by police (Lantz et al., 2019).

The Current Study

The purpose of this study was to explore how racial prejudice influences White college students’ perceptions of hate crime. In particular, we examined the following research questions:

How is racial prejudice associated with White college students’ perceptions of racial hate crime and their willingness to report?

How do the race of victim and the absence of state-level hate crime law moderate the relationships between racial prejudice and the outcomes?

Do these associations differ depending on the severity of the hate crime?

Method

Data and Participants

This study was conducted in a department of psychology at a large public university located in the southeastern region of the United States. The university was predominantly White and resided in a state that did not have a hate crime law at the time of data collection. Data were collected from six large undergraduate classes in the department of psychology. Participation in the study was voluntary and more than 63% of students registered in these courses chose to participate. In total, there were 721 who participated in this study. However, because this manuscript focuses solely on the perceptions of White participants born in the United States, all participants of color and participants born in non-United States countries were excluded from analyses. Thus, the sample size for this study was 543. This study received the approval of the university’s Institutional Review Board.

Procedures

As mentioned, students voluntarily participated in this study. The researchers in this study visited each class at the beginning or toward the end of the class session. They distributed the surveys, and it took participants approximately 20 minutes to complete them. The study was set up in a 2 (race of the victim and the perpetrator) × 3 (level of assault) factorial design. Participants read three vignettes. The first vignette depicted a simple assault, where the perpetrator shoved and threatened the victim, but then walked away leaving the victim unharmed physically. This vignette represented a validity check, as the assault was not racially motivated. The second vignette depicted a racially motivated simple assault, where the perpetrator yelled racial epithets at the victim, shoved and threatened him, then walked away leaving the victim unharmed physically. The third vignette depicted a racially motivated aggravated assault, where the perpetrator yelled racial epithets and fired a gun at the victim. The victim escaped with minor injuries. For each vignette, the race of the perpetrator and victim were manipulated such that the victims of all three scenarios were Black and the perpetrators were White in one version of the survey, whereas the victims were White and the perpetrators were Black in the other version.

In essence, there were two versions of the same survey, and participants completed only one of the versions. These two versions of the survey were randomly distributed in each class, which assured an equal representation of participants for each version of the survey. Participants were equally split between the two versions of the survey.

Measures

The study measures were designed to assess participants’ perceptions of hate crimes and willingness to report, their levels of modern racism, and the influence of state-level hate crime laws on their perceptions. The specific measures are discussed below.

Perceptions of hate crime and willingness to report

After each vignette, participants answered two questions pertaining to (1) their perceptions of the vignette as representing a hate crime and (2) their willingness to report the scenario as a hate crime. The specific questions asked were: “Based on what you might know or think about ‘hate crime’, how strongly would you agree or disagree that the incident above is an example of a hate crime?” and “How strongly would you agree or disagree that you would report the incident as a “hate crime” to the authorities?” (Lyons, 2008). The response options for each question ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree), with higher scores indicating a greater level of agreement.

Modern Racism

Modern racism was measured by a 7-item Modern Racism Scale (McConahay, 1986), which evaluates the cognitive components of racial attitudes. The questions included “Discrimination against Blacks is no longer a problem in the United States” or “Black people are getting too demanding in their push for equal rights”. The response options for each item ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree), with higher scores indicating a higher level of modern racism. For this study, the internal consistency reliability for the Modern Racism Scale was satisfactory (α = 0.78).

Race of the Victim

As mentioned, participants were randomly assigned to one of two versions of the survey, where either 1) the race of the victim in the vignettes was Black and the race of the perpetrator was White or 2) the race of the victim in the vignettes was White and the race of the perpetrator was Black.

Absence of State-Level Hate Crime Law

Participants provided their states of birth. Most states have state-level hate crime laws, but there are a few that do not (i.e., Arkansas, Georgia, South Carolina, and Wyoming, at the time of data collection). We created a dichotomous variable to capture whether the participants were from (1) states with hate crime laws or (2) states without hate crime laws.

Covariates

Based on the previous research that assessed perceptions of hate crimes among college students (Lyons, 2008), we included sociodemographic characteristics as covariates in our analyses. These covariates include the participants’ age (years), sex (1 = female; male = 2), and household income (1 = $49,999 or less; 2 = $50,000–74,999; 3 = $75,000–99,999; 4 = $100,000 or more).

Analysis Plan

We first conducted univariate descriptive analyses for each variable. We then conducted linear regression models using ordinary least squares for each scenario (i.e., non-biased simple assault, racially biased simple assault, and racially biased aggravated assault) to examine the associations between the independent variables (modern racism, race of the victim of hate crime, absence of state hate crime law) and each dependent variable (perceptions of hate crime – Model 1, willingness to report – Model 4), controlling for covariates (see Table 2). Then, a two-way interaction term (modern racism × White as victim) was added to Model 2 and Model 5 to investigate whether the associations between modern racism and the perceptions of hate crime (Model 2) and willingness to report (Model 5) were moderated by the race of victim. Lastly, a two-way interaction term (modern racism × absence of hate crime law) was added to Model three and Model six to examine whether the associations between modern racism and perceptions of hate crime (Model 3) and willingness to report (Model 6) were moderated by absence of state hate crime law.

Approximately 9% of the collected data was incomplete. Household income was the variable most likely to be missing, as 3% of observations were missing. Multiple imputation was conducted by chained equations to handle missing data to address missing as random, where missingness is conditional on other variables. All parameters and deviances presented were estimated from five imputed data sets. Stata 15.1 was used for the data analyses.

Results

Descriptive Statistics

Table 1 presents the descriptive information of the study sample. As can be seen, the average age of White participants was 19.42 years (SD = 1.60). The majority of the sample were female (71.48%), and a large proportion (69.96%) reported annual household incomes of $75,000 or greater. White participants in this study came from 38 different states. Approximately, 43% of the participants came from a state that had no state-level hate crime laws. The mean score for modern racism was 2.13 (SD = 0.90). Table 1 also reports the average score of perception of hate crime and willingness to report for each scenario for each victim’s race group separately. Overall, the average scores of both variables were highest among Scenario 3 (i.e., racially biased aggravated assault), followed by Scenario 2 (i.e., racially biased simple assault), and Scenario 1 (i.e., non-biased simple assault). Across all three scenarios, the participants had stronger perceptions of hate crimes and greater willingness to report for the scenarios with Black victim, compared to scenarios with White victims.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics.

Variables	Total N	Mean (SD)/N (%)
Age (year)	536	19.42 (1.60)
Sex	533
Female		381 (71.48%)
Male		152 (28.52%)
Household income	516
$49,999 or less		64 (12.40%)
$50,000–74,999		91 (17.64%)
$75,000–99,999		98 (18.99%)
$100,000 or more		263 (50.97%)
Race of the victim of hate crimes	543
Black		269 (49.54%)
White		274 (50.46%)
Absence of state-level hate crime laws in the state of origin	519	224 (43.16%)
Modern racism	536	2.13 (0.90)
Scenario 1 – Non-biased simple assault
Black victim scenario
Perceptions of hate crime	269	3.81 (1.64)
Willingness to report	268	3.30 (1.65)
White victim scenario
Perceptions of hate crime	274	3.40 (1.66)
Willingness to report	274	2.91 (1.61)
Scenario 2 – Racially biased simple assault
Black victim scenario
Perceptions of hate crime	269	5.79 (1.38)
Willingness to report	269	5.13 (1.64)
White victim scenario
Perceptions of hate crime	274	5.42 (1.43)
Willingness to report	274	4.63 (1.68)
Scenario 3 – Racially biased aggravated assault
Black victim scenario
Perceptions of hate crime	268	6.67 (1.27)
Willingness to report	269	6.57 (1.43)
White victim scenario
Perceptions of hate crime	274	5.97 (1.47)
Willingness to report	274	5.82 (1.61)

Regression Results for Non-Biased Simple Assault Scenario

As mentioned earlier, regression analyses were conducted to examine how modern racism, the absence of state hate crime law, and the race of the victim of hate crime were associated with the two dependent variables (i.e., perceptions of hate crimes and willingness to report). Table 2 presents the results of these regression analyses for each scenario. The non-biased simple assault scenario was used as a validity check in this study. For all models, the findings indicate that in crimes that are not racially motivated, participants were less likely to perceive the scenario as an example of a hate crime and were less willing to report when the victim was White. There were no moderating effects for this scenario. The main goal of this study was to examine what factors are associated with participants’ perception of hate crime and willingness to report in racially biased simple and aggravated assault scenarios. The subsequent models examine these important questions.

Table 2.

Regression Estimates Predicting Perception of Hate Crime and Willingness to Report Each Scenario as a Hate Crime.

	Non-biased simple assault
	Coefficient (95% Confidence Interval)
	Perception of Hate Crime (DV)			Willingness to Report (DV)
	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4	Model 5	Model 6
Modern racism	−0.09 [−0.25, 0.07]	−0.13 [−0.35, 0.08]	−0.03 [−0.25, 0.19]	−0.11 [−0.26, 0.05]	−0.25* [−0.46, −0.03]	−0.07 [−0.28, 0.15]
Race of victim of hate crimes
Black (ref)
White	−0.43** [−0.70, −0.16]	−0.64 [−1.34, 0.07]	−0.44** [−0.71, −0.16]	−0.42** [−0.69, −0.15]	−1.04** [−1.73, −0.34]	−0.43** [−0.70, −0.15]
State-level hate crime laws in the state of origin
Existence of hate crime law (ref)
Absence of hate crime law	0.11 [−0.18, 0.40]	0.11 [−0.18, 0.40]	0.37 [−0.37, 1.11]	0.14 [−0.15, 0.43]	0.15 [−0.14, 0.43]	0.33 [−0.42, 1.07]
Two-way interaction terms
Modern racism × White as victim		0.09 [−0.21, 0.40]			0.29 [−0.01, 0.59]
Modern racism × Absence of hate crime law			−0.12 [−0.44, 0.19]			−0.09 [−0.40, 0.22]
Modern racism	−0.27*** [−0.41, −0.14]	−0.40*** [−0.58, −0.21]	−0.26** [−0.45, −0.08]	−0.17* [−0.33, −0.01]	−0.30** [−0.51, −0.07]	−0.25* [−0.47, −0.03]
Race of the victim of hate crimes
Black (ref)
White	−0.38** [−0.61, −0.14]	−0.92** [−1.52, −0.32]	−0.38** [−0.61, −0.15]	−0.51*** [−0.79, −0.24]	−1.06** [−1.78, −0.34]	−0.51*** [−0.79, −0.23]
State-level hate crime laws in the state of origin
Existence of hate crime law (ref)
Absence of hate crime law	0.10 [−0.15, 0.35]	0.10 [−0.15, 0.35]	0.14 [−0.48, 0.77]	0.07 [−0.23, 0.37]	0.07 [−0.23, 0.37]	−0.31 [−1.06, 0.43]
Two-way interaction terms
Modern racism × White as victim		0.25 [−0.01, 0.51]			0.26 [0.06, 0.57]
Modern racism × Absence of hate crime law			−0.02 [−0.29, 0.25]			0.17 [−0.14, 0.49]
Modern racism	−0.15* [−0.28, −0.03]	−0.28** [−0.44, −0.11]	−0.03 [−0.19, 0.14]	−0.15* [−0.29, −0.01]	−0.35*** [−0.54, −0.17]	−0.04 [−0.22, 0.15]
Race of the victim of hate crimes
Black (ref)
White	−0.71*** [−0.91, −0.50]	−1.25*** [−1.78, −0.72]	0.72*** [−0.92, −0.51]	−0.75*** [−0.99, −0.52]	−1.66*** [−2.26, −1.05]	−0.75*** [−0.99, −0.53]
State-level hate crime laws in the state of origin
Existence of hate crime law (ref)
Absence of hate crime law	0.04 [−0.18, 0.27]	0.05 [−0.17, 0.27]	0.64* [0.08, 1.20]	−0.001 [−0.26, 0.26]	−0.01 [−0.25, 0.27]	0.52 [−0.11, 1.15]
Two-way interaction terms
Modern racism × White as victim		0.25* [0.02, 0.48]			0.42** [0.16, 0.68]
Modern racism × Absence of hate crime law			−0.27* [−0.51, −0.04]			−0.24 [−0.51, −0.03]

All models control for age, sex, and household income. These estimates are not shown for the sake of space but are available upon request. DV denotes dependent variable.

*p < 0.05. **p < 0.01. ***p < 0.001.

Regression Results for Racially Biased Simple Assault Scenario

As can be seen in Models 1 and 4, higher levels of modern racism were associated with lower perceptions of hate crime (b = −0.27, p < 0.001) and lower willingness to report (b = −0.17, p < 0.05) in racially biased simple assault scenarios. The models also indicate that absence of state-level hate crime law did not reach statistical significance for both dependent variables. When the victim was White, participants were less likely to perceive the scenario as an example of hate crime (b = −0.38, p < 0.01) and were less willing to report (b = −0.51, p < 0.001).

To determine whether the race of victim and the absence of state-level hate crime law moderate the association between modern racism and dependent variables (i.e., perception of hate crime and willingness to report), Models 2, 3, 5, and 6 add a two-way interaction with each moderator and modern racism. As can be seen, there were no significant moderators for these models.

Regression Results for Racially Biased Aggravated Assault Scenario

For racially biased aggravated assault, Models 1 and 4 indicate that results for aggravated assault were consistent with the results of racially biased simple assaults. Higher levels of modern racism were associated with lower perceptions of hate crime (b = −0.15, p < 0.05) and lower willingness to report (b = −0.15, p < 0.05). In addition, participants were less likely to perceive the scenario as a hate crime (b = −0.71, p < 0.001) and less willing to report (b = −0.75, p < 0.001) when the victim was White. State-level hate crime laws did not reach statistical significance for both dependent variables.

Models 2 and 5 indicate that the race of victim moderates the relationship between modern racism and both perception of hate crime (b = 0.25, p < 0.05) and willingness to report (b = 0.42, p < 0.01). The significant interaction on perception of hate crime is plotted in the left side of Figure 1, where the relationship between modern racism (X-axis: light gray, gray, and dark gray bars) and perception of hate crime (Y-axis) is plotted for when the victim in the scenario was Black and White, respectively. As shown in the figure, while the relationship between modern racism and perception of hate crime were negative for both groups, the effects of modern racism (i.e., the gap between bars) was much larger when the victim was Black. This result indicates the linkage between modern racism and perception of hate crime intensifies when the victim was Black, compared to when the victim was White.

Figure 1.

Presence of state-level hate crime and race of victims as moderators in the relationship between modern racism (X-axis: light gray, gray, and dark gray bars) and perception of hate crime (Y-axis): Racially aggravated assault scenario. Note. Low modern racism refers to the 10^th percentile of the modern racism scale. Moderate modern racism refers to the 50^th percentile of the modern racism scale. High modern racism refers to the 90^th percentile of modern racism scale.

Models 3 and 6 show that state-level hate crime laws moderate the relationship between modern racism and perception of hate crime. This significant interaction is plotted in Figure 1, where the relationship between modern racism (X-axis: light gray, gray, and dark gray bars) and perception of hate crime (Y-axis) is plotted for participants from states with hate crime laws and those from states without it. As can be seen in the right side of Figure 1, the negative association between modern racism and perception of hate crime was found for those who are from states without hate crime law (b = −0.27, p < 0.05), but not among those from states who are from states with hate crime law. The moderating effect of state hate crime law was not significant on the relationship between modern racism and willingness to report (b = −0.24, p > 0.05).

The significant moderating effect of race of victim on the relationship between modern racism and willingness to report is plotted in Figure 2, where the relationship between modern racism (X-axis: light gray, gray, and dark gray bars) and willingness to report (Y-axis) is plotted for the race of victim. As shown in this figure, the direction of association between modern racism and willingness report are opposite depending on the race of victim. When the victim was Black, participants with higher levels of modern racism were less willing to report. Conversely, when the victim was White, participants with higher levels of modern racism were more willing to report.

Figure 2.

Race of victims as moderators in the relationship between modern racism (X-axis: light gray, gray, and dark gray bars) and willingness to report (Y-axis): Racially aggravated assault scenario. Note. Low modern racism refers to the 10^th percentile of the modern racism scale. Moderate modern racism refers to the 50^th percentile of the modern racism scale. High modern racism refers to the 90^th percentile of modern racism scale.

Discussion

Using a sample of White college students, the present study examined whether modern racism is associated with their perceptions of racial hate crime and whether the race of victims and the absence of state hate crime laws moderate the effects of modern racism. Overall, the results indicate that White participants with higher levels of modern racism reported lower perceptions of hate crime and less willingness to report them. The significant moderating effect of the race of victims in racially biased aggravated assault provides insights on how racial prejudice can lead to differential perceptions of violent hate crimes, depending on whether the victim is in one’s racial in-group. In addition, the findings suggest the importance of having state-level hate crime laws to mitigate the association between levels of modern racism and perceptions of hate crime. Below we discuss each of these key findings.

Regarding the effects of the participants’ level of modern racism, our findings show that individuals with higher levels of modern racism were less likely to perceive racial hate crimes and less inclined to report them to authorities. These results are similar to previous vignette studies, which indicated that individuals with higher levels of anti-Black racism were more likely to recommend longer sentences for Black perpetrators who committed aggravated assault against White victims (Saucier et al., 2008, 2010). However, unlike Saucier et al. studies, which did not find a relationship between racism and perceptions of hate crime, the present study shows that more conscious and subtle forms of racism, when measured by the modern racism scale, is associated with the extent to which individuals perceive racially biased crime as a hate crime. These results suggest that modern racism, racial bias, and White privilege can hinder the society from recognizing the significance of racial hate crime and from protecting the victims and their communities from hate.

The significant effect of modern racism was observed in two hate crime scenarios (i.e., racially biased simple assault and aggravated assault), but not in the non-biased simple assault case scenario. This indicates that one’s racial attitudes affect perceptions of hate crime when there is evidence that the assault was racially motivated (e.g., the use of racial slurs by perpetrators). These differential results of modern racism across the case scenarios indicate that participants commonly used racial slurs as markers to distinguish hate crimes from non-hate crimes, which is consistent with previous studies (Saucier et al., 2008; Herek et al., 2002).

When it comes to the victim’s race, participants reported higher perceptions of hate crime and higher levels of willingness to report assaults committed by White perpetrators against Black victims, compared to the crimes committed by Black perpetrators against White victims. This pattern is consistent with previous research (Marcus-Newhall et al., 2002; Saucier et al., 2008), and with the reality that most racial hate crimes are committed by White perpetrators and most hate crime victims are Black (FBI, 2018). Our study showed significant effects for race of victim in the non-biased simple assault case scenario, which supports the notion that individuals tend to believe that hate crimes are committed by majority group perpetrators against minority group victims (Craig & Waldo, 1996).

The significant interactions in our findings add an important dynamic to the racial hate crime literature. The two-way interaction between modern racism and victim’s race showed that the degree to which modern racism hinders perceptions of hate crime was weaker when the crime was committed against a White victim by a Black perpetrator, compared to the crime being committed against a Black victim by a White perpetrator. Similarly, our findings show that when the victim was White, participants with higher levels of modern racism were more willing to report this as a hate crime compared to those with lower levels of modern racism. By contrast, when the victim was Black, participants with higher levels of modern racism were less willing to report this as a hate crime. These moderating effects were observed only for the aggravated assault scenario, suggesting that violent crimes may have provided a justification for study participants to express their implicit racial biases and in-group favoritism (Greenwald & Pettigrew, 2014; Saucier et al., 2010). These results may indicate that individuals with higher levels of modern racism may perceive aggravated racial hate crimes as larger interracial conflicts and feel compelled to defend their same-race victims or perpetrators. Relatedly, Saucier et al. (2010) found that individuals with high levels of racism are more likely to blame victims if the crime was committed by their own race. Overall, our findings suggest that individuals who have high levels of modern racism may place more blame on out-group victims, and such attitudes can translate into lower perceptions of hate crime and refusal to report as a crime.

We also found a significant moderating effect for state-level hate crime laws and aggravated assault. In this study, the absence of state-level hate crime laws intensified the negative relationship between modern racism and perception of hate crime. It is possible that individuals from states without hate crime laws are not familiar with the concept of hate crime or have less frequent exposure to hate crime reporting, compared to those from the states with hate crime laws. Amid the lack of state-level recognition of hate crimes in some states, the success of efforts to recognize and fight hate crime may largely depend on how citizens define, perceive, and respond to hate crimes. Our findings suggest that, amid the absence of state-level legal consciousness of hate crime, individuals’ conscious, subtle forms of racism can play especially significant roles in their perceptions of hate crime.

Limitations

Our study is not without limitations and our findings should be considered in light of these limitations. First, this study is based on cross-sectional data, which precludes making causal inferences about the relationships between variables. Second, our study findings may not be generalizable to other population. Although college student perceptions of racial hate crime can be important in that campus environments create frequent intergroup contacts among students with different racial backgrounds (Lyons, 2008), future research should expand the effects of modern racism among the general population to better understand public perceptions of racial hate crime. Third, though our findings indicate that the absence of state-level hate crime law moderates the linkages between modern racism and perceptions of hate crime, the present study did not examine the implications of the absence of the state-level laws directly. While individuals’ perception of certain social problems may be affected by the local legislations (Sheridan & Davies, 2001), future studies should investigate directly how different state-level legislations translate into residents’ understanding of and familiarity with hate crime. Moreover, the present study only examined the states where the study participants were born. Therefore, we could not capture the state-level laws in other states that a particular participant may have moved to as they were growing up. Despite these limitations, our study is novel, and our findings add significantly to the racial hate literature base.

Conclusion

Our study examined how modern racism affects the perceptions of hate crime and the willingness to report among White college students. Our findings suggest that, for White individuals, higher levels of modern racism were associated with lower perceptions of hate crime and lower willingness to report. Furthermore, the moderating effect of the race of victims provides insights on how racial prejudice can lead to a differential perception of hate crime, depending on whether one’s racial in-group is targeted. Moreover, the findings highlight the importance of having state-level hate crime laws to mitigate the linkage between racial prejudice and perceptions of hate crime.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The present study was funded by the Office of Vice President for Research at the University of South Carolina.

ORCID iD

Bongki Woo

Author Biographies

Bongki Woo, PhD, is an Assistant Professor in the College of Social Work at the University of South Carolina. His research focuses on the health and mental health consequences of inequality in society, with a specific interest in the experiences of racial, ethnic and immigrant minority populations. His primary research seeks to understand the specific conditions under which social sources of stress, such as racial discrimination, helps explain the link between race/ethnicity and health.

Ronald Pitner, PhD, is the chair of Department of Social Work in the University of Alabama at Birmingham’s College of Arts and Sciences. His primary area of research focuses on the role that contextual factors play in children and adolescents’ evaluations of interpersonal forms of violence, youth violence, and youth and community civic engagement. His secondary area of research focuses on race and racial inequities, diversity, and culturally responsive and anti-oppressive practices.

Betty Wilson, MSW is a PhD candidate in the College of Social Work at the University of South Carolina. Her research focuses on the mental health and trauma-related impacts of police violence exposure for historically marginalized communities. Her secondary research area focuses on the development and implementation of culturally responsive interventions to help mitigate the trauma-related impacts of police violence exposure, and policy reform around policing.

References

Awad

G. H.

Cokley

Ravitch

(2005). Attitudes toward affirmative action: A comparison of color‐blind versus modern racist attitudes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35(7), 1384–1399. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02175.x

Borgenon

Valeri

(2007). The enemy of my enemy is my friend. American Behavioral Scientist, 51(2), 182–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764207306050

Brown

T. N.

Akiyama

M. K.

White

I. K.

Jayaratne

T. E.

Anderson

E. S.

(2009). Differentiating contemporary racial prejudice from old-fashioned racial prejudice. Race and Social Problems, 1(2), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-009-9010-6

Cowan

Heiple

Marquez

Khatchadourian

McNevin

(2005). Heterosexuals’ attitudes toward hate crimes and hate speech against gays and lesbians: Old fashioned and modern heterosexism. Journal of Homosexuality, 49(2), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1300/J082v49n02_04

Craig

K. M.

Waldo

C. 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

Cramer

Clark

Kehn

Burks

Wechsler

(2014). A mock juror investigation of blame attribution in the punishment of hate crime perpetrators. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 37(6), 551–557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2014.02.028

Durso

Jacobs

(2013). The determinants of the number of white supremacist groups: A pooled time-series analysis. Social Problems, 60(1), 128–144. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2013.60.1.128

Federal Bureau of Investigation (2018). 2018 hate crime statistics. https://ucr.fbi.gov/hate-crime/2018/topic-pages/victims

George

W. H.

Martínez

L. J.

(2002). Victim blaming in rape: Effects of victim and perpetrator race, type of rape, and participant racism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26(2), 110–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.00049

10.

Graham

Lowery

B. S.

(2004). Priming unconscious racial stereotypes about adolescent offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 28(5), 483–504. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:lahu.0000046430.65485.1f

11.

Greenwald

A. G.

Pettigrew

T. F.

(2014). With malice toward none and charity for some: Ingroup favoritism enables discrimination. American Psychologist, 69(7), 669–684. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036056

12.

Herek

G. M.

Cogan

J. C.

Gillis

J. R.

(2002). Victim experiences in hate crimes based on sexual orientation. Journal of Social Issues, 58(2), 319–339. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00263

13.

Herek

G. M.

Gillis

J. R.

Cogan

J. C.

(1999). Psychological sequelae of hatecrime victimization among lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67(6), 945–951. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-006x.67.6.945

14.

Lantz

Gladfelter

A. S.

Ruback

R. 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/10.1080/07418825.2017.1399211

15.

Lyons

C. 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

16.

Marcus-Newhall

Blake

L. P.

Baumann

(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

17.

McConahay

J. B.

(1986). Modern racism, ambivalence, and the modern racism scale. In Dovidio

J. F.

Gaertner

S. L.

(Eds), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 91–125). Academic Press.

18.

McDevitt

Balboni

Garcia

(2001). Consequences for victims: A comparison of bias- and non-bias-motivated assaults. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(4), 697–713. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764201045004010

19.

Milner

Franz

Henry Braddock

(2020). We need to talk about racism – in all of its forms – to understand COVID-19 disparities. Health Equity, 4(1), 397–402. https://doi.org/10.1089/heq.2020.0069

20.

Roussos

Dovidio

J. F.

(2018). Hate speech is in the eye of the beholder: The influence of racial attitudes and freedom of speech beliefs on perceptions of racially motivated threats to violence. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(2), 176–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617748728

21.

Saucier

D. A.

Hockett

Wallenberg

(2008). The impact of racial slurs and racism on the perceptions and punishment of violent crime. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23(5), 685–701. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260507313774.

22.

Saucier

D. A.

Hockett

J. M.

Zanotti

D. C.

Heffel

(2010). Effects of racism on perceptions and punishment of intra- and interracial crimes. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25(10), 1767–1784. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260509358386

23.

Sears

D. O.

(1988). Symbolic racism. In Katz

Taylor

(Eds), Perspectives in social psychology. Eliminating racism: Profiles in controversy (pp. 53–84). Plenum Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0818-6_4

24.

Sheridan

Davies

G. M.

(2001). What is stalking? The match between legislation and public perception. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 6(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1348/135532501168163

25.

Stevenson

M. C.

Bottoms

B. L.

(2009). Race shapes perceptions of juvenile offenders in criminal court. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39(7), 1660–1689. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009.00499.x.

26.

Virtanen

S. V.

Huddy

(1998). Old-fashioned racism and new forms of racial prejudice. The Journal of Politics, 60(2), 311–332. https://doi.org/10.2307/2647911.

27.

Zaykowski

(2010). Racial disparities in hate crime reporting. Violence and Victims, 25(3), 378–394. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.25.3.378