Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background The difficulties in defining hate crime, hate incidents and hate speech, and in finding a common conceptual basis constitute a key barrier toward operationalisation in research, policy and programming. Definitions disagree about issues such as the identities that should be protected, the types of behaviours that should be referred to as hateful, and how the ‘hate element’ should be assessed. The lack of solid conceptual foundations is reflected in the absence of sound data. These issues have been raised since the early 1990s (Berk, 1990; Byers & Venturelli, 1994) but they proved to be an intractable problem that continues to affect this research and policy domain. Objectives Our systematic review has two objectives that are fundamentally connected: mapping (1) original definitions and (2) original measurement tools of hate crime, hate speech, hate incidents and surrogate terms, that is, alternative terms used for these concepts (e.g., prejudice‐motivated crime, bias crime, among many others). Search Methods We systematically searched over 19 databases to retrieve academic and grey literature, as well as legislation. In addition, we contacted 26 country experts and searched 211 websites, as well as bibliographies of published reviews of related literature, and scrutiny of annotated bibliographies of related literature. Inclusion Criteria This review included documents published after 1990 found in academic literature, grey literature and legislation. We included academic empirical articles with any study design, as well as theoretical articles that focused specifically on defining hate crime, hate speech, hate incidents or surrogate terms. We also reviewed current criminal or civil legislation that is intended to regulate forms of hate speech, hate incidents and hate crimes. Eligible countries included Canada, USA, UK, Ireland, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Australia and New Zealand. For documents to be included in relation to research objective (1), they had to contain at least one original definition of hate speech, hate incidents or hate crimes, or any surrogate term. For documents to be included in relation to research objective (2), they had to contain at least one original measurement tool of hate speech, hate incidents or hate crimes, or any surrogate term. Documents could be included in relation to both research objectives. Data Collection and Analysis The systematic search covered 1 January 1990 to 31 December 2021, with searches of academic databases conducted between 8th March and 12th April 2022 yielding 35,191 references. We carried out country‐specific searches for grey literature published in the same time period between 27th August and 2nd December 2021. These searches yielded a total of 2748 results. We coded characteristics of the definitions and measurement tools, including the protected characteristics, the approaches to categorise the ‘hate element’ and other variables. We used univariate and bivariate statistical methods for data analysis. We also carried out a social network analysis. Main Results We provide as annex complete lists of the original definitions and measurement tools that met our inclusion criteria, for the use of researchers and policy makers worldwide. We included 423 definitions and 168 measurement tools in academic and grey literature, and 83 definitions found in legislation. To support future research and policy work in this area, we included a synthetic assessment of the (1) the operationalisability of each definition and (2) the theoretical robustness and transparency of each measurement tool. Our mapping of the definitions and measurement tools revealed numerous significant trends, clusters and differences between and within definitions and measurement tools focusing on hate crime, hate speech and hate incidents. For example, definitions and measurement tools tend to focus more on ethnic and religious identities (e.g., racism, antisemitism, Islamophobia) compared to sexual, gender and disability‐related identities. This gap is greater in the definitions and measurement tools of hate speech than hate crime. Our analysis showed geographical patterns: hate crime definitions and measurement tools are more likely to originate from Anglophonic countries, especially the USA, but hate speech definitions and measurement tools are more likely to originate from continental Europe. In terms of disciplinary fragmentation, our social network analysis revealed that the collaboration and exchange of conceptual frameworks and methodological tools between social sciences and computer science is limited, with most definitions and measurement tools clustering along disciplinary lines. More detailed findings are presented in the results section of the report. Authors' Conclusions There is an urgent need to close the research and policy gap between the protections of ‘ethnic and religious identities’ and other (less) protected characteristics such as gender and sexual identities, age and disability. There is also an urgent need to improve the quality of methodological and reporting standards in research examining hate behaviours, including transparency in methodology and data reporting, and discussion of limitations (e.g., bias in data). Many of the measurement tools found in the academic literature were excluded because they did not report transparently how they collected and analysed the data. Further, 41% of documents presenting research on hate behaviours did not provide a definition of what they were looking at. Given the importance of this policy domain, it is vital to raise the quality and trustworthiness of research in this area. This review found that researchers in different disciplinary areas (e.g., social sciences and computer science) rarely collaborate. Future research should attempt to build on existing definitions and measurement tools (instead of duplicating efforts), and engage in more interdisciplinary collaborations. It is our hope that that this review can provide a solid foundation for researchers, government, and other bodies to build cumulative knowledge and collaboration in this important field.

Responses to hate crimes, hate incidents and hate speech are characterised by an exceptional fragmentation in terminology and lack of coordination among governmental and non-governmental organisations. This article proposes a new conceptual framework to map the diversity of responses to hate crime, hate incidents and hate speech, with the aim of assessing gaps and needs in this important policy area. Using Australia as a case study, we create and analyse a database of 222 organisations running activities focusing on tackling hate against different target groups. The results highlight an uneven distribution of efforts across different geographical areas, types of activities and target groups. The majority of anti-hate efforts, especially by government organisations, focus on awareness raising and education rather than victim support and data collection. Racial and religious hate are the main foci of anti-hate efforts, compared to other forms of hate, such as anti-LGBTIQ+ and disablist hate.

Whether hate crime against minority groups increases or decreases over time underpins important theoretical and policy questions. However, the ability to capture trends is limited due to a dearth of data and measurement problems, especially in countries where there is no official register of hate crime. Using Chile as a case study, we compare longitudinal data from victimization surveys, registers of community organizations and mainstream media reports. The results allow us to discuss opportunities and limitations of triangulating different data sources to capture trends of hate crime. Our study results show a general increase in trends of hate crimes in Chile between 2015 and 2019, but important differences between data sources and victim groups (we consider LGBTI, migrant and Indigenous victims). We propose that the qualitative difference in the size of variation across different sources is explained by different biases of the data, which we review. This article illustrates the importance of disaggregating hate crimes because trends, correlates and key predictors often differ depending on the type of hate crime and the source of data.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, anti-Asian hate incidents (AAHIs) increased conspicuously. Literature reports discrepancies in how crimes are reported differently in media and law enforcement data, emphasizing potential biases and inconsistencies in AAHI reporting. Understanding the discrepancies in AAHI reporting between the two sources is crucial for improving documentation procedures and addressing systemic issues in reporting mechanisms. This study aimed to (1) present the monthly trends in AAHI counts reported by media and law enforcement data from 2020 to 2021, (2) investigate variations in AAHI counts across states and counties for each year, (3) examine discrepancies in AAHI reporting between the two sources at state and county levels during the same period, and (4) delineate differences in the types and geographic distribution of incidents as represented by the two sources. This study used two data sources for AAHIs, media data (n=1288) from The Asian American Foundation and law enforcement data (n=1086) from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, for the 2020-2021 period. Descriptive analyses were conducted to evaluate monthly trends, state and county-level variations, and differences in incident types and locations. Ratios of reported incidents between the two sources were calculated to assess discrepancies. Temporal trends were contextualized within key sociopolitical events to offer insights into reporting dynamics. First, both media and law enforcement data presented a sharp increase in reported AAHIs following the first confirmed COVID-19 case in the United States, peaking around March 2020, coinciding with controversial political rhetoric. A second peak occurred from March to April 2021, immediately following the pandemic's peak, and was followed by a decline as the situation improved. Second, in the two data sources, the state-level analysis indicated that California, Texas, New York, and Washington consistently reported the highest AAHI counts. In 2021, there were notable increases in reported incidents in states such as Wisconsin and Illinois. County-level data revealed persistent high counts in California, particularly in Los Angeles County. Ratios of AAHI counts between the two data sources presented significant discrepancies, with higher ratios in California and New York. Finally, the analysis of incident types revealed that media data reported a higher proportion of harassment (477/1288, 37%), while the law enforcement data reported more property-related incidents (239/1086, 22%). Regarding location types, media data frequently reported incidents in public areas (515/1288, 40%) and businesses (361/1288, 28%), whereas law enforcement data reported more incidents occurring in residential settings (201/1086, 18.5%). This study highlighted significant trends and disparities in AAHI reporting between media and law enforcement data, underscoring the need for a nuanced understanding of how these incidents were reported. Practice and policy implications suggested fostering community engagement to support Asian communities while enhancing the accuracy and consistency of hate crime reporting.

With the breakout of the COVID-19 pandemic, health risks are common, while trepidation over physical harm risks during travel has emerged, notably anti-Asian violence. Tourists tend to avoid traveling, and their perceived risks related to these harms may hinder their travel decision-making. This research aims to explore the inter-relationships among destination image, perceived risk perceptions, and behavioral intention of Chinese international students visiting San Francisco. Drawing from 252 survey responses, findings highlighted that perceived risk did not affect destination image in general; however, the levels of student traveller’s perceived risk influence the destination image’s relationship to behavioral intentions. The group with low perceived risk relies more on their affective image to determine their behavioral intention. Furthermore, this study validated that affective image could serve as the antecedent to cognitive image despite being firmly held as the cognitive image’s consequence. Managerial implications were provided for destination marketers in the post-pandemic era.

In this essay, we review how the COVID-19 (coronavirus) pandemic that began in the United States in early 2020 has elevated the risks of Asian Americans to hate crimes and Asian American businesses to vandalism. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the incidents of negative bias and microaggressions against Asian Americans have also increased. COVID-19 is directly linked to China, not just in terms of the origins of the disease, but also in the coverage of it. Because Asian Americans have historically been viewed as perpetually foreign no matter how long they have lived in the United States, we posit that it has been relatively easy for people to treat Chinese or Asian Americans as the physical embodiment of foreignness and disease. We examine the historical antecedents that link Asian Americans to infectious diseases. Finally, we contemplate the possibility that these experiences will lead to a reinvigoration of a panethnic Asian American identity and social movement.

While much is known about the prevalence and impact of incivility in the workplace, relatively less is known about those who instigate workplace incivility. This research aims to investigate incivility instigation through a moral lens by examining the roles of other-condemning moral emotions (contempt, disgust, and anger) and appraisals of coworkers’ morality as predictors of this behavior at work. In Study 1, we used structural equation modeling to analyze two waves of self-report data collected from a sample of 447 full-time United States (U.S.) working adults. Findings from this study indicate that appraising coworkers as low in morality elicited feelings of contempt, disgust, and anger. However, only contempt predicted incivility instigation and mediated the relationship between appraising coworkers as low in morality and instigating incivility. In Study 2, we collected self-report data from a sample of 309 full-time U.S. workers using a critical incident technique. Structural equation modeling was used to analyze the data. Results from Study 2 replicated the association between low morality appraisals and contempt, anger, and disgust found in Study 1. However, anger predicted incivility instigation and mediated the relationship between appraising coworkers as low in morality and instigating incivility. Additionally, contempt and perceived civility norms had an interactive effect on instigated incivility. These studies provide insight into the roles of contempt, disgust, and anger in predicting incivility instigation, suggesting that employees may engage in incivility to condemn others who engage in moral transgressions. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

For most Americans, September 11, 2001, symbolized the moment when their security was altered. For Middle Eastern and Muslim Americans, 9/11 also ushered in a backlash in the form of hate crimes, discrimination, and a string of devastating government initiatives. This book provides the first comprehensive analysis of the impact of the post-9/11 events on Middle Eastern and Muslim Americans as well as their organized response. Through fieldwork and interviews with community leaders, Anny Bakalian and Mehdi Bozorgmehr show how ethnic organizations mobilized to demonstrate their commitment to the United States while defending their rights and distancing themselves from the terrorists.

Using the organizational dimension of the multicontextual model for diverse learning environments, this study examined the philosophies and perspectives of bias response team leaders at 19 institutions. Through semi-structured interviews, administrators described theoretical approaches to bias response work that were primarily educational in nature and that aligned with institutional values. However, in the practice of responding to bias, administrators found themselves employing punitive frameworks, managing institutional public relations, and, on occasion, providing educational efforts. This tension between theory and practice created a balancing act for administrators to manage and multiple groups to which they perceived themselves as accountable.

Despite popular claims that the United States has reached a \"post-racial\" era-one in which race no longer matters for determining one's life chances-college students continue to have strong views toward whether or not racial discrimination is still a major problem in this country. Utilizing multilevel modeling on data merged from the Cooperative Institutional Research Program's (CIRP) 2005 Freshman Survey (TFS) and 2009 College Senior Survey (CSS), as well as the Integrated Postsecondary Educational Data System (IPEDS) and the Office of Postsecondary Education Campus Safety and Security database, this study examined individual and institutional predictors of white male and female college students' senior-year views on whether racial discrimination is still a major problem in the United States, with a particular focus on campus racially biased incidents and hate crimes. Results show that having a reported hate crime on campus did not have a significant association with white students' senior-year views, while a higher level of news coverage of campus racially biased incidents significantly predicted white women's senior-year views on racial discrimination. Implications of the findings with respect to higher education research, policy, and practice are discussed.