Societal consequences of prejudice-motivated violence

Prejudice-motivated crime (PMC) is an expression of group-focused enmity (Heitmeyer, 2002; Küpper et al., 2021) and represents a mechanism of power and oppression that aims to maintain or restore social hierarchies (Perry, 2002). By questioning the equality of groups, such acts undermine social cohesion and fundamental principles of democracy. PMC thus sends messages of devaluation not only to those affected and their communities, but also to a pluralisitic society as a whole (Iganski, 2001). Numerous studies have shown that the negative consequences of victimisation are greater in the case of prejudice-motivated acts than in the case of non-prejudice-motivated acts (e.g., Brunton-Smith et al., 2025; Lantz & Kim, 2019, McDevitt et al., 2001) and that PMC not only causes harm to the immediate victim, but also to the whole victim community (e.g., Bell & Perry, 2014; Iganski, 2001; Paterson et al. 2019, Walters et al., 2019). However, far fewer studies have examined the consequences of PMC on society as a whole. The aim of this research project is to investigate consequences and vicarious vitimization effects of PMC on society by examining consequences for third-party members. Prior research has demonstrated that victims of PMC exhibit lower levels of interpersonal trust and trust in political and state institutions compared to victims of non-PMC and individuals without victimization experiences (e.g., Bender & Weber, 2023; Church & Coester, 2021; Dreißigacker, 2018; Groß et al., 2018). Assuming that PMC possess a communicative or “message” character and exert broader societal effects (Iganski, 2001), in the present study, we investigate whether such losses of trust in state institutions, democracy and social cohesion can also be observed among third-party members after being exposed to a PMC. At the same time, prior research suggests that exposure to PMC may contribute to the perception of prejudice as a new social norm (e.g., Hassim et al., 2024; Wachs et al., 2019). Keel et al. (2021) found that individuals who witnessed PMC in their neighbourhood expressed greater anger toward ethnic minorities and more pronounced anti-migrant attitudes than those who were not exposed to such crimes. Within the conceptual framework of PMC, these acts are further assumed to carry an incitement or signaling function for like-minded individuals, potentially encouraging imitation (e.g., Coester, 2008). Against this background, we additionally examine the effects of PMC on expressions of prejudice and the (de)legitimation of violence among third-party members. We assume, however, that individual characteristics moderate both the direction and the strength of potential effects of PMC. Specifically, we hypothesize that exposure to PMC leads to a decline in trust in state institutions and democracy particularly among individuals who endorse egalitarian values, for whom PMC represents a fundamental violation of these principles. Conversely, in line with the assumed incitement character of PMC for ideologically aligned individuals (Coester, 2008), we expect that exposure to PMC results in stronger legitimation of violence among individuals holding anti-egalitarian attitudes. Previous studies indicate a strong association between social dominance orientation (SDO) and attitudes toward PMC (Bacon et al., 2021; Bender et al., 2025; Bilewicz et al., 2017; Kehn et al., 2023). PMC can function as a means of maintaining or restoring social hierarchies (Perry, 2002) and thus translate the anti-egalitarian preferences characteristic of individuals high in SDO into action. Against this theoretical backdrop, we examine SDO as a moderator of the relationship between crime motive (prejudice-motivated vs. non-prejudice-motivated) and the dependent variables trust in state institutions, democracy and social cohesion, legitimation of violence, and prejudice.