A Model for Predicting Fear of Terrorism through Fear of Crime, Gender, Locus of Control and Coping Strategies.

This study examines the assumption that aspects of fear of crime (fear of rape and sense of insecurity) predict fear of terrorism. The online survey included 754 Israeli respondents, who answered questions about their demographic characteristics, fear of terrorism, fear of crime indicators (fear of rape and sense of insecurity), locus of control (LOC; internal and external), and coping strategies. The findings indicate that for women, higher belief in chance and fate, and powerful others (external LOC), higher sense of insecurity, and higher fear of rape were related to a higher fear of terrorism. For men, higher belief in chance and fate (external LOC), higher sense of insecurity, and higher fear of rape were related to a higher fear of terrorism. Furthermore, the effect of fear of rape on fear of terrorism was mediated by sense of insecurity. Our findings support the assumption that fear of crime shadows and affects fear of terrorism for men as well as women. Therefore, fear of rape should be addressed as a significant issue for both genders.

Public perceptions of medical cannabis diversion: A legal and moral dilemma.

The study examined public perception in Israel of the severity of medical cannabis diversion, its morality, and normativeness. The sample included 380 participants who completed a quantitative questionnaire to respond to four scenarios about diverting medical cannabis to a person with/without a license and with/without a small payment (a 2×2 design). The findings show that although the participants received advance information about the severity of medical cannabis diversion as a drug trafficking offense, they perceived the severity of the offense as moderate, and as an act that is at least moderately moral and normative. The findings are explained based on moral theories. We discuss the implications of the findings in relation to the gap between public attitudes and legal policy.

Public perception of guilt and deserved punishment in medical cannabis diversion.

INTRODUCTION: Illegal drug diversion is a well-documented social problem that has received little research attention, despite the growing use of medical cannabis (MC) worldwide. This study examines public attitudes towards the punishment of MC diversion in Israel. METHOD: We used a quantitative method. Participants were 399 Israelis who were given five scenarios of MC diversion to persons with and without a licence, with and without payment, and for personal profit. RESULTS: Respondents' attitudes differed with respect to the guilt and deserved punishment of the traffickers as a function of whether the recipient did or did not have a licence and did or did not pay for the MC. Transfers to individuals without a licence and for payment were judged more harshly than those to individuals without payment, whether or not they had a licence. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The discussion addresses the findings with reference to Kohlberg's moral development theory. The findings of the study attest to the importance of public attitudes in shaping legal policy in Israel.

Credibility assessments of alibi accounts: the role of cultural intergroup bias.

Research has shown that judges and jurors are influenced by suspect ethnicity and that they might discriminate against out-group suspects in making decisions. This study examined the tendency to favor in-group members, as predicted by social identity theory, in assessing alibi credibility. Forty Israeli-Jewish and 40 Israeli-Arab participants assessed the credibility of an alibi statement provided by a suspect who was either Israeli-Jewish or Israeli-Arab. Findings show that participants were more likely to believe the alibi when it was provided by an in-group suspect than by an out-group suspect, supporting intergroup bias in alibi credibility assessments. Practical and theoretical implications are discussed.

'Please tell me all you remember': a comparison between British and Arab interviewees' free narrative performance and its implications for lie detection.

We examined how much information British and Arab truth tellers and lie tellers volunteer in an initial free narrative. Based on cultural differences in communication styles we predicted that British interviewees would report more details and more complications than Arab interviewees (culture main effect). We further predicted that truth tellers would report more details and complications than lie tellers (veracity main effect), particularly in the British sample (Veracity × Culture interaction effect). A total of 78 British and 76 Israeli-Arab participants took part. The experiment was carried out at a British university and an Israeli university. Participants carried out a mission. Truth tellers were instructed to report the mission truthfully in a subsequent interview whereas lie tellers were asked to lie about certain aspects of the mission. The three hypotheses were supported for details, whereas for complications only the predicted veracity main effect occurred.

Attribution of Blame Toward Offenders: Victim and Offender Ethnicity, and Observer Ethnic and Religious Background.

This study focuses on the effects of victim/offender ethnic affiliation and cultural background of observers on attitudes toward offenders. To examine the effect of cultural background, we compared offender attribution among Christian Arabs (n = 51), Muslim Arabs (n = 249), and Jews (n = 285). The participants were students from several Israeli universities and colleges. The age range was 18 to 33 years (M = 20.23, SD = 2.67), and the majority were female (75.6%). The participants read a version of a vignette describing a case of a stabbing, and then rated the offender's blame. In different versions of the crime scenario, we manipulated victim and offender ethnicity: two victim (Arab/Jewish) and three offender (African/Arab/Jewish) types. The results indicate that, in general, participants blamed African offenders more than Arab or Jewish offenders. Although the results show that differences in offender blaming between Arab and Jewish participants were not statistically significant, there is an interaction between participant cultural background and victim ethnicity in regard to offender blaming: Participants attributed more blame to offenders who stabbed a victim belonging to the same ethnic group as the participants. Overall, the results support defensive attribution theory, suggesting that observer attitudes toward offenders tend to be affected by similarity in ethnic affiliation. The discussion addresses the findings through the perspectives of cultural reciprocity, defensive attribution theory, and minority threat theory. It also acknowledges the limitations related to the specific cultural and geopolitical context of this research. Practical implications for practitioners and policymakers include training and increased ethnic diversity among professionals and experts working within the criminal justice system.