Cited by 207Social and Intergroup PsychologyReligion, Theology, History, Judaism, ChristianityGerman legal, social, and political studies

Harmful Ideas, The Structure and Consequences of Anti‐S emitic Beliefs in P oland

Bilewicz, Michal, Winiewski, Mikołaj, Kofta, Mirosław, Wójcik, Adrian·2013·Political Psychology

Abstract

The harmfulness of anti‐Semitic beliefs is widely discussed in current political and legal debates (e.g.,Cutler v. Dorn). At the same time, empirical studies of the psychological consequences of such beliefs are scarce. The present research is an attempt to explore the structure of contemporary anti‐Semitic beliefs inPoland—and to evaluate their predictive role in discriminatory intentions and behavior targetingJews. Another aim was to determine dispositional, situational, and identity correlates of different forms of anti‐Semitic beliefs and behavior. Study 1, performed on a nation‐wide representative sample ofPolish adults (N = 979), suggests a three‐factorial structure of anti‐Semitic beliefs, consisting of: (1) belief inJewish conspiracy, (2) traditional religious anti‐Judaic beliefs, and (3) secondary anti‐Semitic beliefs, focusing on Holocaust commemoration. Of these three beliefs, belief inJewish conspiracy was the closest antecedent of anti‐Semitic behavioral intentions. Study 2 (N = 600 Internet users inPoland) confirmed the three‐factor structure of anti‐Semitic beliefs and proved that these beliefs explain actual behavior towardJews in monetary donations. Both studies show that anti‐Semitic beliefs are related to authoritarian personality characteristics, victimhood‐based social identity, and relative deprivation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/pops.12024

Cites

70 of 70 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 72 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bilewicz, M., Winiewski, M., Kofta, M., & Wójcik, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Warsaw
  • University of Warsaw (PL)
Venue
Political Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-04
Volume
34
Issue
6
Pages
821-839
ISSN
  • 0162-895X (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9221
OpenAlex
W1679463490
Cited by
207
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
15.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Political Psychology (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena
  • Ministerstwo Edukacji i Nauki
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Religion, Theology, History, Judaism, Christianity
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › German legal, social, and political studies
Keywords
anti-Jewish discrimination, Holocaust memory, authoritarian personality, relative deprivation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review