Hate Crimes Typology, Motivations, and Victims
Description: Hate Crimes Typology, Motivations, and Victims Sample Slides Robin Valeri and Kevin Borgeson Copyright 2018 Carolina Academic Press. All rights reserved. Interpersonal Theories Regarding Hate Like vs Dislike Research suggests that we like
Related Topics
Download Presentation
"Hate Crimes Typology, Motivations, and Victims" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this website for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Presentation Transcript
slide1. Hate Crimes Typology, Motivations, and Victims Sample Slides Robin Valeri and Kevin Borgeson Copyright © 2018 Carolina Academic Press. All rights reserved.<br>
slide2. Interpersonal Theories Regarding Hate Like vs Dislike
Research suggests that we like people who are familiar to us and who are similar to us.
Zajonc (1968) suggests that repeated exposure to a new stimulus leads to a more positive evaluation of the stimulus as long as one’s initial reaction to it is not an extremely negative one.
We like people and things that are familiar versus unfamiliar.
It is speculated that this is because we must remain vigilant around unfamiliar things until we can determine whether they are safe or unsafe.
As familiarity increases we become desensitized to a stimulus and our anxiety decreases.
One way to increase familiarity is through nearness.
The norms of homophily and homogamy suggest that people become friends, romantic partners, and spouses with similar others.
Research on affiliation and friendship suggests that if hate stems from, or is an extreme form of dislike, then we will be prone to hate people who are unfamiliar to us and dissimilar to us.<br>
slide3. Interpersonal Theories Regarding Hate continued Triangular Theory of Love.
Hate is not the opposite of love but it does have a complex relationship with love.
According to the Triangular Theory of Love, love has three components:
Passion: the hot component, the burning desire and intense longing.
Intimacy: the warm component.
Decision-commitment: the cold, calculating, cognitive component (decision to marry).
These three components either alone or in some combination result in seven different forms of love.<br>
slide4. Interpersonal Theories Regarding Hate continued Triangle of Hate.
Sternberg’s Triangle of hate has three components.
Negation of intimacy or distancing.
Fear or anger.
Contempt from the devaluation or diminishment of the individual as a human being.
The negation of intimacy occurs because that individual or group arouses feeling of disgust or repulsion.
These feelings may be acquired indirectly through the media or political propaganda.
According to Sternberg these feelings tend to develop and diminish slowly.
Anger and fear can either lead an individual to approach the target with the intent of harming it or cause the individual to avoid the target in order to escape the danger.
These feelings may be acquired through direct experiences with the target or indirect experiences through propaganda
The cold component of hate stems from the devaluation of that person or group.
These feelings may be acquired through direct experiences with the target or indirect experiences through propaganda.
These three components of hate alone or combined result in seven types of hate which can generate some form of hate related feelings and/or actions:
Cool hate-distance..
Hot hate- passion.
Cold hate- cognitive component of hate.
Boiling hate- revulsion toward target.
Simmering hate-devaluation of target.
Seething hate- calculated planned actions or attacks.
Burning hate- the need to annihilate a target.<br>
slide5. Interpersonal Theories Regarding Hate continued According to Sternberg, when none of the components of hate are present there is no danger, but with every added component of hate danger increases.
The presence of one component of hate suggests mild danger.
The presence of two components indicates moderate danger.
The presence of all three components suggests severe danger.
A second component of the model important to studying hate crimes relates to how the components of hate will impact characteristics of the hate crime.
Emotions generated from the passion component of hate are extreme.
These emotions come on suddenly and as a result hate crimes generated by passion would most likely be sudden, unplanned attacks, while those generated by the cold and calculating component of contempt will most likely have been premeditated and planned attacks.
Also Sternberg’s five motivations for hate are important to understand hate crimes:
To create an external enemy in order to foster in-group cohesion.
To justify the expropriation of assets from the targeted group.
To encourage the belief that the target is deserving of death.
To seek revenge for perceived or actual wrongs committed by the targeted group.
To blindly follow the in-group leader whether God or man.
The reasons Sternberg provided for why individuals or groups hate are consistent with aspects of social identity theory, realistic group conflict, and relative deprivation.<br>
slide6. Intensification of Hating Opotow and McClelland’s Intensification Theory of Hating helps to explain how hate can become systemic.
This model describes the antecedents of hatred that predispose an individual or group to hate.
These antecedents can stem from an individual’s experiences or unconscious or from the group’s history or events.
The antecedents of hatred create a predisposition to hate that is mediated by:
Affect
Cognition
Morals<br>
slide7. Group Theories Regarding Hate:
We us stereotypes to quickly categorize people into groups and use the information “we know” about people in these groups as the basis for our expectations of them and our interactions with them.
Our most basic division of people is into the categories of us, versus them or ingroup versus outgroup.
Research suggests that stereotypes are difficult to change.
Social Identity Theory:
The simple act of dividing people into groups leads people to prefer their own group and assign positive attributes to it.
The research on social identity suggests that the simple act of dividing people into groups results in the favoring of one’s own group.<br>
slide8. Realistic Group Conflict:
Realistic group conflict theory states that competition for scarce resources between groups will result in negative attitudes and behaviors toward the outgroup (Sherif, 1966; Sherif, Harvey, White, Hood, & Sherif, 1961/1988; Sherif & Sherif, 1982).
Relative Deprivation:
The animosity between groups which can stem from the perception that one’s group is not fairing as well as it should be relative to another group.
The group chosen as the scapegoat is typically one that is easily identified and has, in the past, been the target of prejudice.<br>
slide9. Integrating Group Theories Social identity theory:
Emphasizes that all that is needed for ingroup favoritism to occur is the existence of more than one group.
This favoritism is enhanced by competition between groups.
The competition may be for scarce resources or relative power, prestige or advantage.<br>
slide10. Hate Inspired Action Strain Theory:
According to strain theory, capitalist societies have established goals for attaining wealth, power, and prestige.
In these societies there are legitimate paths one can take to attain these goals such as education and/or employment.
For some members of society, these paths are not open to them because of inequality, prejudice and discrimination.
These individuals may turn to illegitimate means of attainment, in the form of violence and crime.<br>
slide11. Reformulated Frustration- Aggression Hypothesis Reformulated frustration-aggression hypothesis suggests that when goals are thwarted people experience negative feelings which can then lead to emotional aggression (as opposed to instrumental aggression, which is the use of aggression to achieve a goal).
Any negative event that leads to unpleasant feelings can lead to aggression.
Experiencing a negative event does not mean a negative emotion will always occur as a result.
Situational Elements that Influence Aggression.
May make aggression more or less likely.
These situational elements can be factors related to the people involved or elements of the immediate situation or larger culture.<br>
slide12. Deindividuation: A Loss or a Change in Identity According to Zimbardo, deindividuation stems from a loss of identity that is caused by three factors relevant to mobs or crowds.
Size of the group
Diffusion of responsibility
Anonymity
It is explained by Zimbardo that as part of a group we often feel anonymous and less responsible for our actions.
The larger the group the less responsibility the individual feels.
People lose their inhibitions and engage in impulsive and irrational behavior when the threat of evaluation is removed.
When the leader of a group is advocating for violence toward an outgroup the members of a crowd will act aggressively toward that outgroup.
Ingroup members who are part of a crowd are likely to follow the directives of a leader advocating pro-ingroup or anti-outgroup behaviors, even if those behaviors are violent.<br>
slide13. Low Self-Control Walters (2010) states that strain theory and discrimination can explain why someone might hate another group or a representative group.
Walters uses Gottfredson and Hirshi’s (1990) General Theory of Crime to explain why some people choose to act on that hate and others choose not to.
Individuals to different degrees are able to control their impulses, delay gratification, or resist temptation.
Walters argues that individuals who are low in self-control have less ability to do these things and therefore are more likely to act on their urges.<br>
slide14. The full set of 178 slides is available upon adoption.
If you are a professor using this book for a class, please contact Beth at bhall@cap-press.com to request your slides.<br>
slide2. Interpersonal Theories Regarding Hate Like vs Dislike
Research suggests that we like people who are familiar to us and who are similar to us.
Zajonc (1968) suggests that repeated exposure to a new stimulus leads to a more positive evaluation of the stimulus as long as one’s initial reaction to it is not an extremely negative one.
We like people and things that are familiar versus unfamiliar.
It is speculated that this is because we must remain vigilant around unfamiliar things until we can determine whether they are safe or unsafe.
As familiarity increases we become desensitized to a stimulus and our anxiety decreases.
One way to increase familiarity is through nearness.
The norms of homophily and homogamy suggest that people become friends, romantic partners, and spouses with similar others.
Research on affiliation and friendship suggests that if hate stems from, or is an extreme form of dislike, then we will be prone to hate people who are unfamiliar to us and dissimilar to us.<br>
slide3. Interpersonal Theories Regarding Hate continued Triangular Theory of Love.
Hate is not the opposite of love but it does have a complex relationship with love.
According to the Triangular Theory of Love, love has three components:
Passion: the hot component, the burning desire and intense longing.
Intimacy: the warm component.
Decision-commitment: the cold, calculating, cognitive component (decision to marry).
These three components either alone or in some combination result in seven different forms of love.<br>
slide4. Interpersonal Theories Regarding Hate continued Triangle of Hate.
Sternberg’s Triangle of hate has three components.
Negation of intimacy or distancing.
Fear or anger.
Contempt from the devaluation or diminishment of the individual as a human being.
The negation of intimacy occurs because that individual or group arouses feeling of disgust or repulsion.
These feelings may be acquired indirectly through the media or political propaganda.
According to Sternberg these feelings tend to develop and diminish slowly.
Anger and fear can either lead an individual to approach the target with the intent of harming it or cause the individual to avoid the target in order to escape the danger.
These feelings may be acquired through direct experiences with the target or indirect experiences through propaganda
The cold component of hate stems from the devaluation of that person or group.
These feelings may be acquired through direct experiences with the target or indirect experiences through propaganda.
These three components of hate alone or combined result in seven types of hate which can generate some form of hate related feelings and/or actions:
Cool hate-distance..
Hot hate- passion.
Cold hate- cognitive component of hate.
Boiling hate- revulsion toward target.
Simmering hate-devaluation of target.
Seething hate- calculated planned actions or attacks.
Burning hate- the need to annihilate a target.<br>
slide5. Interpersonal Theories Regarding Hate continued According to Sternberg, when none of the components of hate are present there is no danger, but with every added component of hate danger increases.
The presence of one component of hate suggests mild danger.
The presence of two components indicates moderate danger.
The presence of all three components suggests severe danger.
A second component of the model important to studying hate crimes relates to how the components of hate will impact characteristics of the hate crime.
Emotions generated from the passion component of hate are extreme.
These emotions come on suddenly and as a result hate crimes generated by passion would most likely be sudden, unplanned attacks, while those generated by the cold and calculating component of contempt will most likely have been premeditated and planned attacks.
Also Sternberg’s five motivations for hate are important to understand hate crimes:
To create an external enemy in order to foster in-group cohesion.
To justify the expropriation of assets from the targeted group.
To encourage the belief that the target is deserving of death.
To seek revenge for perceived or actual wrongs committed by the targeted group.
To blindly follow the in-group leader whether God or man.
The reasons Sternberg provided for why individuals or groups hate are consistent with aspects of social identity theory, realistic group conflict, and relative deprivation.<br>
slide6. Intensification of Hating Opotow and McClelland’s Intensification Theory of Hating helps to explain how hate can become systemic.
This model describes the antecedents of hatred that predispose an individual or group to hate.
These antecedents can stem from an individual’s experiences or unconscious or from the group’s history or events.
The antecedents of hatred create a predisposition to hate that is mediated by:
Affect
Cognition
Morals<br>
slide7. Group Theories Regarding Hate:
We us stereotypes to quickly categorize people into groups and use the information “we know” about people in these groups as the basis for our expectations of them and our interactions with them.
Our most basic division of people is into the categories of us, versus them or ingroup versus outgroup.
Research suggests that stereotypes are difficult to change.
Social Identity Theory:
The simple act of dividing people into groups leads people to prefer their own group and assign positive attributes to it.
The research on social identity suggests that the simple act of dividing people into groups results in the favoring of one’s own group.<br>
slide8. Realistic Group Conflict:
Realistic group conflict theory states that competition for scarce resources between groups will result in negative attitudes and behaviors toward the outgroup (Sherif, 1966; Sherif, Harvey, White, Hood, & Sherif, 1961/1988; Sherif & Sherif, 1982).
Relative Deprivation:
The animosity between groups which can stem from the perception that one’s group is not fairing as well as it should be relative to another group.
The group chosen as the scapegoat is typically one that is easily identified and has, in the past, been the target of prejudice.<br>
slide9. Integrating Group Theories Social identity theory:
Emphasizes that all that is needed for ingroup favoritism to occur is the existence of more than one group.
This favoritism is enhanced by competition between groups.
The competition may be for scarce resources or relative power, prestige or advantage.<br>
slide10. Hate Inspired Action Strain Theory:
According to strain theory, capitalist societies have established goals for attaining wealth, power, and prestige.
In these societies there are legitimate paths one can take to attain these goals such as education and/or employment.
For some members of society, these paths are not open to them because of inequality, prejudice and discrimination.
These individuals may turn to illegitimate means of attainment, in the form of violence and crime.<br>
slide11. Reformulated Frustration- Aggression Hypothesis Reformulated frustration-aggression hypothesis suggests that when goals are thwarted people experience negative feelings which can then lead to emotional aggression (as opposed to instrumental aggression, which is the use of aggression to achieve a goal).
Any negative event that leads to unpleasant feelings can lead to aggression.
Experiencing a negative event does not mean a negative emotion will always occur as a result.
Situational Elements that Influence Aggression.
May make aggression more or less likely.
These situational elements can be factors related to the people involved or elements of the immediate situation or larger culture.<br>
slide12. Deindividuation: A Loss or a Change in Identity According to Zimbardo, deindividuation stems from a loss of identity that is caused by three factors relevant to mobs or crowds.
Size of the group
Diffusion of responsibility
Anonymity
It is explained by Zimbardo that as part of a group we often feel anonymous and less responsible for our actions.
The larger the group the less responsibility the individual feels.
People lose their inhibitions and engage in impulsive and irrational behavior when the threat of evaluation is removed.
When the leader of a group is advocating for violence toward an outgroup the members of a crowd will act aggressively toward that outgroup.
Ingroup members who are part of a crowd are likely to follow the directives of a leader advocating pro-ingroup or anti-outgroup behaviors, even if those behaviors are violent.<br>
slide13. Low Self-Control Walters (2010) states that strain theory and discrimination can explain why someone might hate another group or a representative group.
Walters uses Gottfredson and Hirshi’s (1990) General Theory of Crime to explain why some people choose to act on that hate and others choose not to.
Individuals to different degrees are able to control their impulses, delay gratification, or resist temptation.
Walters argues that individuals who are low in self-control have less ability to do these things and therefore are more likely to act on their urges.<br>
slide14. The full set of 178 slides is available upon adoption.
If you are a professor using this book for a class, please contact Beth at bhall@cap-press.com to request your slides.<br>