The purpose of this study was to understand how adolescents respond as bystanders of cyberbullying and to seek factors that might influence their actions. The study explored the effects of type of contact (online vs. face to face), form of violence (private vs. public), and empathy activation (affective and cognitive) on negative bystander behaviour understood as active participation in victimisation. The influence of experience of cyberbullying as perpetrator and as victim and gender on negative bystander behaviour was also controlled. Three experimental studies were conducted. The results indicate that online contact increases the likelihood of negative bystander behaviour. Private violence was less likely to elicit negative bystander action than was public violence. Previous experience of cyberperpetration was proved to increase the probability of negative bystander behaviour. Neither gender nor cybervictimisation affected the engagement in negative bystander behaviour in any of the studies. The inhibitory effect of empathy activation (both affective and cognitive) on negative bystander behaviour was demonstrated. Both types of cognitive empathy induction, emotion and behaviour focused, diminish the likelihood of negative bystander behaviour. The conclusions of the research are that negative bystander behaviour occurs more often in cyberspace than offline and that forms of intervention involving both affective and cognitive empathy may limit the negative bystander behaviour that supports cyberbullying. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Gender studies have often been criticised for undermining family and religious values. In this paper we argue that these criticisms exhibit the characteristics of conspiracy theories. We define gender conspiracy beliefs as convictions that gender studies and gender-equality activists represent an ideology secretly designed to harm traditional values and social arrangements. In two studies conducted among Catholics in Poland (Study 1 N=1019; Study 2 N=223), we examined the prevalence of gender conspiracy beliefs and their psychological concomitants. We hypothesized that gender conspiracy beliefs should be associated with a defensive identification with one's religious group, captured by religious collective narcissism. In both studies, Catholic collective narcissism was demonstrated to be a robust predictor of gender conspiracy beliefs. We additionally demonstrated that Catholic collective narcissism predicted outgroup hostility and this effect was mediated by gender conspiracy beliefs. We discuss the implications for gender-based prejudice.

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 in Poland—and to evaluate their predictive role in discriminatory intentions and behavior targeting Jews. 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 of Polish adults (N = 979), suggests a three‐factorial structure of anti‐Semitic beliefs, consisting of: (1) belief in Jewish conspiracy, (2) traditional religious anti‐Judaic beliefs, and (3) secondary anti‐Semitic beliefs, focusing on Holocaust commemoration. Of these three beliefs, belief in Jewish conspiracy was the closest antecedent of anti‐Semitic behavioral intentions. Study 2 (N = 600 Internet users in Poland) confirmed the three‐factor structure of anti‐Semitic beliefs and proved that these beliefs explain actual behavior toward Jews in monetary donations. Both studies show that anti‐Semitic beliefs are related to authoritarian personality characteristics, victimhood‐based social identity, and relative deprivation.

In three studies (two representative nationwide surveys, N = 1,007, N = 682; and one experimental, N = 76) we explored the effects of exposure to hate speech on outgroup prejudice. Following the General Aggression Model, we suggest that frequent and repetitive exposure to hate speech leads to desensitization to this form of verbal violence and subsequently to lower evaluations of the victims and greater distancing, thus increasing outgroup prejudice. In the first survey study, we found that lower sensitivity to hate speech was a positive mediator of the relationship between frequent exposure to hate speech and outgroup prejudice. In the second study, we obtained a crucial confirmation of these effects. After desensitization training individuals were less sensitive to hate speech and more prejudiced toward hate speech victims than their counterparts in the control condition. In the final study, we replicated several previous effects and additionally found that the effects of exposure to hate speech on prejudice were mediated by a lower sensitivity to hate speech, and not by lower sensitivity to social norms. Altogether, our studies are the first to elucidate the effects of exposure to hate speech on outgroup prejudice.

The purpose of this study was to investigate if affective (vicarious sharing of emotions) and cognitive empathy (mental perspective taking) induction may stimulate adolescent online bystanders’ intervention in cyberbullying cases. The role of reporting the abuse is crucial because it is a form of active support to the victim, initiated by children, to stop the bullying. The effectiveness of empathy activation in decreasing negative cyberbystander reinforcing behavior has been proved in previous studies. The effects of affective and cognitive empathy activation on positive cyberbystander behavior, defined as reporting the bullying online, were explored in two follow-up studies N = 271 and N = 265. The influence of experiencing cyberbullying as perpetrator, victim, and as determined by gender on prosocial cyberbystander behavior was also controlled. The results indicate that only cognitive empathy activation increases the likelihood of intervening bystander behavior. Neither affective empathy induction, previous experience of cyberperpetration, cybervictimization, nor gender affected the engagement in prosocial bystander behavior. The conclusion of the research is that a program consequently activating more reflective cognitive empathy induction can contribute toward the establishment of healthier behavioral patterns among bystanders to cyberbullying, increasing the probability of their reporting the cyberbullying acts.

The long- versus short-term effectiveness of empathy activation on reducing bystander behavior reinforcing cyberbullying was tested. The focus was on limiting the frequency of forwarding a message ridiculing a peer. Experimental research on adolescent students was conducted in conditions simulating online contact. The results confirmed the significance of cognitive empathy activated immediately prior to decision making on limiting involvement in reinforcing cyberbullying behavior. The long-term impact of empathy was markedly limited.

Two nationwide representative studies (N = 653 adolescents; N = 1007 adults) investigated the psychological correlates of the intention to penalize public expressions of prejudice in the form of support for hate‐speech prohibition. We presented participants with preselected examples of hate speech from the Internet and other mass media and assessed their willingness to support the prohibition of public expressions of such remarks. Both studies found that social dominance orientation and right‐wing authoritarianism are positively correlated with outgroup prejudice, but they have differential effects on hate‐speech prohibition. Social dominance orientation was positively related to the acceptance of hate speech, whereas right‐wing authoritarianism was positively related to hate‐speech prohibition. In discussing this counterintuitive finding, we suggest that right‐wing authoritarians are particularly vigilant toward norm violations—and this makes them more punitive toward counternormative expressions of prejudice, such as hate speech.

Collective memories of historical ingroup victimization can be linked to prosocial or hostile intergroup outcomes. We hypothesize that such discrepant responses are predicted by different construals of the ingroup's victimization in relation to other groups (i.e., comparative victim beliefs). Using improved measures of inclusive and exclusive victim beliefs, with a global or regional reference group, multigroup structural equation modeling showed across four different groups (Armenian Americans [N = 265], Jewish Americans [N = 297], Hungarians [N = 301], Poles [N = 468]) that inclusive victim beliefs predict prosocial, conciliatory attitudes, while exclusive victim beliefs predict hostile attitudes towards historical perpetrator groups and (in the Polish and Hungarian samples) religious and ethnic outgroups targeted in the present. Moreover, comparative victim beliefs mediated effects of more general psychological orientations (ingroup superiority, universal orientation, perspective-taking) on intergroup outcomes. These findings suggest the importance of considering distinct collective victim beliefs, and different contexts in research on collective victimhood.