Exposure to hate in online and traditional media: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the impact of this exposure on individuals and communities

The Problem People use social media platforms to chat, search, and share information, express their opinions, and connect with others. But these platforms also facilitate the posting of divisive, harmful, and hateful messages, targeting groups and individuals, based on their race, religion, gender,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inCampbell systematic review Vol. 21; no. 1; pp. e70018 - n/a
Main Authors Madriaza, Pablo, Hassan, Ghayda, Brouillette‐Alarie, Sébastien, Mounchingam, Aoudou Njingouo, Durocher‐Corfa, Loïc, Borokhovski, Eugene, Pickup, David, Paillé, Sabrina
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.03.2025
John Wiley and Sons Inc
Wiley
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
Abstract The Problem People use social media platforms to chat, search, and share information, express their opinions, and connect with others. But these platforms also facilitate the posting of divisive, harmful, and hateful messages, targeting groups and individuals, based on their race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or political views. Hate content is not only a problem on the Internet, but also on traditional media, especially in places where the Internet is not widely available or in rural areas. Despite growing awareness of the harms that exposure to hate can cause, especially to victims, there is no clear consensus in the literature on what specific impacts this exposure, as bystanders, produces on individuals, groups, and the population at large. Most of the existing research has focused on analyzing the content and the extent of the problem. More research in this area is needed to develop better intervention programs that are adapted to the current reality of hate. Objective The objective of this review is to synthesize the empirical evidence on how media exposure to hate affects or is associated with various outcomes for individuals and groups. Search Methods Searches covered the period up to December 2021 to assess the impact of exposure to hate. The searches were performed using search terms across 20 databases, 51 related websites, the Google search engine, as well as other systematic reviews and related papers. Selection Criteria This review included any correlational, experimental, and quasi‐experimental study that establishes an impact relationship and/or association between exposure to hate in online and traditional media and the resulting consequences on individuals or groups. Data Collection and Analysis Fifty‐five studies analyzing 101 effect sizes, classified into 43 different outcomes, were identified after the screening process. Initially, effect sizes were calculated based on the type of design and the statistics used in the studies, and then transformed into standardized mean differences. Each outcome was classified following an exhaustive review of the operational constructs present in the studies. These outcomes were grouped into five major dimensions: attitudinal changes, intergroup dynamics, interpersonal behaviors, political beliefs, and psychological effects. When two or more outcomes from the studies addressed the same construct, they were synthesized together. A separate meta‐analysis was conducted for each identified outcome from different samples. Additionally, experimental and quasi‐experimental studies were synthesized separately from correlational studies. Twenty‐four meta‐analyses were performed using a random effects model, and meta‐regressions and moderator analyses were conducted to explore factors influencing effect size estimates. Results The 55 studies included in this systematic review were published between 1996 and 2021, with most of them published since 2015. They include 25 correlational studies, and 22 randomized and 8 non‐randomized experimental studies. Most of these studies provide data extracted from individuals (e.g., self‐report); however, this review includes 6 studies that are based on quantitative analysis of comments or posts, or their relationship to specific geographic areas. Correlational studies encompass sample sizes ranging from 101 to 6829 participants, while experimental and quasi‐experimental studies involve participant numbers between 69 and 1112. In most cases, the exposure to hate content occurred online or within social media contexts (37 studies), while only 8 studies reported such exposure in traditional media platforms. In the remaining studies, the exposure to hate content was delivered through political propaganda, primarily associated with extreme right‐wing groups. No studies were removed from the systematic review due to quality assessment. In the experimental studies, participants demonstrated high adherence to the experimental conditions and thus contributed significantly to most of the results. The correlational and quasi‐experimental studies used consistent, valid, and reliable instruments to measure exposure and outcomes derived from well‐defined variables. As with the experimental studies, the results from the correlation and quasi‐experimental studies were complete. Meta‐analyses related to four dimensions were performed: Attitudinal changes, Intergroup dynamics, Interpersonal behaviors, and Psychological effects. We were unable to conduct a meta‐analysis for the “Political Beliefs” dimension due to an insufficient number of studies. In terms of attitude changes, exposure to hate leads to negative attitudes (dEx = 0.414; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.005, 0.824; p < 0.05; n = 8 and dcorr = 0.322; 95% CI = 0.14, 0.504; p < 0.01; n = 2) and negative stereotypes (dEx = 0.28; 95% CI = –0.018, 0.586; p < 0.10; n = 9) about individuals or groups with protected characteristics, while also hindering the promotion of positive attitudes toward them (dexp = −0.227; 95% CI = −0.466, 0.011; p < 0.10; n = 3). However, it does not increase support for hate content or political violence. Concerning intergroup dynamics, exposure to hate reduces intergroup trust (dexp = −0.308; 95% CI = –0.559, −0.058; p < 0.05; n = 2), especially between targeted groups and the general population, but has no significant impact on the perception of discrimination among minorities. In the context of Interpersonal behaviors, the meta‐analyses confirm a strong association between exposure to hate and victimization (dcorr = 0.721; 95% CI = 0.472, 0.97; p < 0.01; n = 3) and moderate effects on online hate speech perpetration (dcorr = 0.36; 95% CI = –0.028, 0.754; p < 0.10; n = 2) and offline violent behavior (dcorr = 0.47; 95%CI = 0.328, 0.612; p < 0.01; n = 2). Exposure to online hate also fuels more hate in online comments (d = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.034–0.984; p < 0.05; n = 2) but does not seem to affect hate crimes directly. However, there is no evidence that exposure to hate fosters resistance behaviors among individuals who are frequently subjected to it (e.g. the intention to counter‐argue factually). In terms of psychological consequences, this review demonstrates that exposure to hate content negatively affects individuals' psychological well‐being. Experimental studies indicate a large and significant effect size concerning the development of depressive symptoms due to exposure (dexp = 1.105; 95% CI = 0.797, 1.423; p < 0.01; n = 2). Additionally, a small effect size is observed concerning the link between exposure and reduced life satisfaction(dcorr = −0.186; 95% CI = −0.279, −0.093; p < 0.01; n = 3), as well as increased social fear regarding the likelihood of a terrorist attack (dcorr = −0.206; 95% CI = 0.147, 0.264; p < 0.01 n = 5). Conversely, exposure to hate speech does not seem to generate or be linked to the development of negative emotions related to its content. Author's Conclusions This systematic review confirms that exposure to hate in online and in traditional media has a significant negative impact on individuals and groups. It emphasizes the importance of taking these findings into account for policymaking, prevention, and intervention strategies. Hate speech spreads through biased commentary and perceptions, normalizing prejudice and causing harm. This not only leads to violence, victimization, and perpetration of hate speech but also contributes to a broader climate of hostility. Conversely, this research suggests that people exposed to this type of content do not show increased shock or revulsion toward it. This may explain why it is easily disseminated and often perceived as harmless, leading some to oppose its regulation. Focusing efforts solely on content control may then have a limited impact in driving substantial change. More research is needed to explore these variables, as well as the relationship between hate speech and political beliefs and the connection to violent extremism. Indeed, we know very little about how exposure to hate influences political and extremist views.
AbstractList Abstract The Problem People use social media platforms to chat, search, and share information, express their opinions, and connect with others. But these platforms also facilitate the posting of divisive, harmful, and hateful messages, targeting groups and individuals, based on their race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or political views. Hate content is not only a problem on the Internet, but also on traditional media, especially in places where the Internet is not widely available or in rural areas. Despite growing awareness of the harms that exposure to hate can cause, especially to victims, there is no clear consensus in the literature on what specific impacts this exposure, as bystanders, produces on individuals, groups, and the population at large. Most of the existing research has focused on analyzing the content and the extent of the problem. More research in this area is needed to develop better intervention programs that are adapted to the current reality of hate. Objective The objective of this review is to synthesize the empirical evidence on how media exposure to hate affects or is associated with various outcomes for individuals and groups. Search Methods Searches covered the period up to December 2021 to assess the impact of exposure to hate. The searches were performed using search terms across 20 databases, 51 related websites, the Google search engine, as well as other systematic reviews and related papers. Selection Criteria This review included any correlational, experimental, and quasi‐experimental study that establishes an impact relationship and/or association between exposure to hate in online and traditional media and the resulting consequences on individuals or groups. Data Collection and Analysis Fifty‐five studies analyzing 101 effect sizes, classified into 43 different outcomes, were identified after the screening process. Initially, effect sizes were calculated based on the type of design and the statistics used in the studies, and then transformed into standardized mean differences. Each outcome was classified following an exhaustive review of the operational constructs present in the studies. These outcomes were grouped into five major dimensions: attitudinal changes, intergroup dynamics, interpersonal behaviors, political beliefs, and psychological effects. When two or more outcomes from the studies addressed the same construct, they were synthesized together. A separate meta‐analysis was conducted for each identified outcome from different samples. Additionally, experimental and quasi‐experimental studies were synthesized separately from correlational studies. Twenty‐four meta‐analyses were performed using a random effects model, and meta‐regressions and moderator analyses were conducted to explore factors influencing effect size estimates. Results The 55 studies included in this systematic review were published between 1996 and 2021, with most of them published since 2015. They include 25 correlational studies, and 22 randomized and 8 non‐randomized experimental studies. Most of these studies provide data extracted from individuals (e.g., self‐report); however, this review includes 6 studies that are based on quantitative analysis of comments or posts, or their relationship to specific geographic areas. Correlational studies encompass sample sizes ranging from 101 to 6829 participants, while experimental and quasi‐experimental studies involve participant numbers between 69 and 1112. In most cases, the exposure to hate content occurred online or within social media contexts (37 studies), while only 8 studies reported such exposure in traditional media platforms. In the remaining studies, the exposure to hate content was delivered through political propaganda, primarily associated with extreme right‐wing groups. No studies were removed from the systematic review due to quality assessment. In the experimental studies, participants demonstrated high adherence to the experimental conditions and thus contributed significantly to most of the results. The correlational and quasi‐experimental studies used consistent, valid, and reliable instruments to measure exposure and outcomes derived from well‐defined variables. As with the experimental studies, the results from the correlation and quasi‐experimental studies were complete. Meta‐analyses related to four dimensions were performed: Attitudinal changes, Intergroup dynamics, Interpersonal behaviors, and Psychological effects. We were unable to conduct a meta‐analysis for the “Political Beliefs” dimension due to an insufficient number of studies. In terms of attitude changes, exposure to hate leads to negative attitudes (dEx = 0.414; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.005, 0.824; p < 0.05; n = 8 and dcorr = 0.322; 95% CI = 0.14, 0.504; p < 0.01; n = 2) and negative stereotypes (dEx = 0.28; 95% CI = –0.018, 0.586; p < 0.10; n = 9) about individuals or groups with protected characteristics, while also hindering the promotion of positive attitudes toward them (dexp = −0.227; 95% CI = −0.466, 0.011; p < 0.10; n = 3). However, it does not increase support for hate content or political violence. Concerning intergroup dynamics, exposure to hate reduces intergroup trust (dexp = −0.308; 95% CI = –0.559, −0.058; p < 0.05; n = 2), especially between targeted groups and the general population, but has no significant impact on the perception of discrimination among minorities. In the context of Interpersonal behaviors, the meta‐analyses confirm a strong association between exposure to hate and victimization (dcorr = 0.721; 95% CI = 0.472, 0.97; p < 0.01; n = 3) and moderate effects on online hate speech perpetration (dcorr = 0.36; 95% CI = –0.028, 0.754; p < 0.10; n = 2) and offline violent behavior (dcorr = 0.47; 95%CI = 0.328, 0.612; p < 0.01; n = 2). Exposure to online hate also fuels more hate in online comments (d = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.034–0.984; p < 0.05; n = 2) but does not seem to affect hate crimes directly. However, there is no evidence that exposure to hate fosters resistance behaviors among individuals who are frequently subjected to it (e.g. the intention to counter‐argue factually). In terms of psychological consequences, this review demonstrates that exposure to hate content negatively affects individuals' psychological well‐being. Experimental studies indicate a large and significant effect size concerning the development of depressive symptoms due to exposure (dexp = 1.105; 95% CI = 0.797, 1.423; p < 0.01; n = 2). Additionally, a small effect size is observed concerning the link between exposure and reduced life satisfaction(dcorr = −0.186; 95% CI = −0.279, −0.093; p < 0.01; n = 3), as well as increased social fear regarding the likelihood of a terrorist attack (dcorr = −0.206; 95% CI = 0.147, 0.264; p < 0.01 n = 5). Conversely, exposure to hate speech does not seem to generate or be linked to the development of negative emotions related to its content. Author's Conclusions This systematic review confirms that exposure to hate in online and in traditional media has a significant negative impact on individuals and groups. It emphasizes the importance of taking these findings into account for policymaking, prevention, and intervention strategies. Hate speech spreads through biased commentary and perceptions, normalizing prejudice and causing harm. This not only leads to violence, victimization, and perpetration of hate speech but also contributes to a broader climate of hostility. Conversely, this research suggests that people exposed to this type of content do not show increased shock or revulsion toward it. This may explain why it is easily disseminated and often perceived as harmless, leading some to oppose its regulation. Focusing efforts solely on content control may then have a limited impact in driving substantial change. More research is needed to explore these variables, as well as the relationship between hate speech and political beliefs and the connection to violent extremism. Indeed, we know very little about how exposure to hate influences political and extremist views.
The Problem People use social media platforms to chat, search, and share information, express their opinions, and connect with others. But these platforms also facilitate the posting of divisive, harmful, and hateful messages, targeting groups and individuals, based on their race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or political views. Hate content is not only a problem on the Internet, but also on traditional media, especially in places where the Internet is not widely available or in rural areas. Despite growing awareness of the harms that exposure to hate can cause, especially to victims, there is no clear consensus in the literature on what specific impacts this exposure, as bystanders, produces on individuals, groups, and the population at large. Most of the existing research has focused on analyzing the content and the extent of the problem. More research in this area is needed to develop better intervention programs that are adapted to the current reality of hate. Objective The objective of this review is to synthesize the empirical evidence on how media exposure to hate affects or is associated with various outcomes for individuals and groups. Search Methods Searches covered the period up to December 2021 to assess the impact of exposure to hate. The searches were performed using search terms across 20 databases, 51 related websites, the Google search engine, as well as other systematic reviews and related papers. Selection Criteria This review included any correlational, experimental, and quasi‐experimental study that establishes an impact relationship and/or association between exposure to hate in online and traditional media and the resulting consequences on individuals or groups. Data Collection and Analysis Fifty‐five studies analyzing 101 effect sizes, classified into 43 different outcomes, were identified after the screening process. Initially, effect sizes were calculated based on the type of design and the statistics used in the studies, and then transformed into standardized mean differences. Each outcome was classified following an exhaustive review of the operational constructs present in the studies. These outcomes were grouped into five major dimensions: attitudinal changes, intergroup dynamics, interpersonal behaviors, political beliefs, and psychological effects. When two or more outcomes from the studies addressed the same construct, they were synthesized together. A separate meta‐analysis was conducted for each identified outcome from different samples. Additionally, experimental and quasi‐experimental studies were synthesized separately from correlational studies. Twenty‐four meta‐analyses were performed using a random effects model, and meta‐regressions and moderator analyses were conducted to explore factors influencing effect size estimates. Results The 55 studies included in this systematic review were published between 1996 and 2021, with most of them published since 2015. They include 25 correlational studies, and 22 randomized and 8 non‐randomized experimental studies. Most of these studies provide data extracted from individuals (e.g., self‐report); however, this review includes 6 studies that are based on quantitative analysis of comments or posts, or their relationship to specific geographic areas. Correlational studies encompass sample sizes ranging from 101 to 6829 participants, while experimental and quasi‐experimental studies involve participant numbers between 69 and 1112. In most cases, the exposure to hate content occurred online or within social media contexts (37 studies), while only 8 studies reported such exposure in traditional media platforms. In the remaining studies, the exposure to hate content was delivered through political propaganda, primarily associated with extreme right‐wing groups. No studies were removed from the systematic review due to quality assessment. In the experimental studies, participants demonstrated high adherence to the experimental conditions and thus contributed significantly to most of the results. The correlational and quasi‐experimental studies used consistent, valid, and reliable instruments to measure exposure and outcomes derived from well‐defined variables. As with the experimental studies, the results from the correlation and quasi‐experimental studies were complete. Meta‐analyses related to four dimensions were performed: Attitudinal changes, Intergroup dynamics, Interpersonal behaviors, and Psychological effects. We were unable to conduct a meta‐analysis for the “Political Beliefs” dimension due to an insufficient number of studies. In terms of attitude changes, exposure to hate leads to negative attitudes (dEx = 0.414; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.005, 0.824; p < 0.05; n = 8 and dcorr = 0.322; 95% CI = 0.14, 0.504; p < 0.01; n = 2) and negative stereotypes (dEx = 0.28; 95% CI = –0.018, 0.586; p < 0.10; n = 9) about individuals or groups with protected characteristics, while also hindering the promotion of positive attitudes toward them (dexp = −0.227; 95% CI = −0.466, 0.011; p < 0.10; n = 3). However, it does not increase support for hate content or political violence. Concerning intergroup dynamics, exposure to hate reduces intergroup trust (dexp = −0.308; 95% CI = –0.559, −0.058; p < 0.05; n = 2), especially between targeted groups and the general population, but has no significant impact on the perception of discrimination among minorities. In the context of Interpersonal behaviors, the meta‐analyses confirm a strong association between exposure to hate and victimization (dcorr = 0.721; 95% CI = 0.472, 0.97; p < 0.01; n = 3) and moderate effects on online hate speech perpetration (dcorr = 0.36; 95% CI = –0.028, 0.754; p < 0.10; n = 2) and offline violent behavior (dcorr = 0.47; 95%CI = 0.328, 0.612; p < 0.01; n = 2). Exposure to online hate also fuels more hate in online comments (d = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.034–0.984; p < 0.05; n = 2) but does not seem to affect hate crimes directly. However, there is no evidence that exposure to hate fosters resistance behaviors among individuals who are frequently subjected to it (e.g. the intention to counter‐argue factually). In terms of psychological consequences, this review demonstrates that exposure to hate content negatively affects individuals' psychological well‐being. Experimental studies indicate a large and significant effect size concerning the development of depressive symptoms due to exposure (dexp = 1.105; 95% CI = 0.797, 1.423; p < 0.01; n = 2). Additionally, a small effect size is observed concerning the link between exposure and reduced life satisfaction(dcorr = −0.186; 95% CI = −0.279, −0.093; p < 0.01; n = 3), as well as increased social fear regarding the likelihood of a terrorist attack (dcorr = −0.206; 95% CI = 0.147, 0.264; p < 0.01 n = 5). Conversely, exposure to hate speech does not seem to generate or be linked to the development of negative emotions related to its content. Author's Conclusions This systematic review confirms that exposure to hate in online and in traditional media has a significant negative impact on individuals and groups. It emphasizes the importance of taking these findings into account for policymaking, prevention, and intervention strategies. Hate speech spreads through biased commentary and perceptions, normalizing prejudice and causing harm. This not only leads to violence, victimization, and perpetration of hate speech but also contributes to a broader climate of hostility. Conversely, this research suggests that people exposed to this type of content do not show increased shock or revulsion toward it. This may explain why it is easily disseminated and often perceived as harmless, leading some to oppose its regulation. Focusing efforts solely on content control may then have a limited impact in driving substantial change. More research is needed to explore these variables, as well as the relationship between hate speech and political beliefs and the connection to violent extremism. Indeed, we know very little about how exposure to hate influences political and extremist views.
People use social media platforms to chat, search, and share information, express their opinions, and connect with others. But these platforms also facilitate the posting of divisive, harmful, and hateful messages, targeting groups and individuals, based on their race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or political views. Hate content is not only a problem on the Internet, but also on traditional media, especially in places where the Internet is not widely available or in rural areas. Despite growing awareness of the harms that exposure to hate can cause, especially to victims, there is no clear consensus in the literature on what specific impacts this exposure, as bystanders, produces on individuals, groups, and the population at large. Most of the existing research has focused on analyzing the content and the extent of the problem. More research in this area is needed to develop better intervention programs that are adapted to the current reality of hate.The ProblemPeople use social media platforms to chat, search, and share information, express their opinions, and connect with others. But these platforms also facilitate the posting of divisive, harmful, and hateful messages, targeting groups and individuals, based on their race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or political views. Hate content is not only a problem on the Internet, but also on traditional media, especially in places where the Internet is not widely available or in rural areas. Despite growing awareness of the harms that exposure to hate can cause, especially to victims, there is no clear consensus in the literature on what specific impacts this exposure, as bystanders, produces on individuals, groups, and the population at large. Most of the existing research has focused on analyzing the content and the extent of the problem. More research in this area is needed to develop better intervention programs that are adapted to the current reality of hate.The objective of this review is to synthesize the empirical evidence on how media exposure to hate affects or is associated with various outcomes for individuals and groups.ObjectiveThe objective of this review is to synthesize the empirical evidence on how media exposure to hate affects or is associated with various outcomes for individuals and groups.Searches covered the period up to December 2021 to assess the impact of exposure to hate. The searches were performed using search terms across 20 databases, 51 related websites, the Google search engine, as well as other systematic reviews and related papers.Search MethodsSearches covered the period up to December 2021 to assess the impact of exposure to hate. The searches were performed using search terms across 20 databases, 51 related websites, the Google search engine, as well as other systematic reviews and related papers.This review included any correlational, experimental, and quasi-experimental study that establishes an impact relationship and/or association between exposure to hate in online and traditional media and the resulting consequences on individuals or groups.Selection CriteriaThis review included any correlational, experimental, and quasi-experimental study that establishes an impact relationship and/or association between exposure to hate in online and traditional media and the resulting consequences on individuals or groups.Fifty-five studies analyzing 101 effect sizes, classified into 43 different outcomes, were identified after the screening process. Initially, effect sizes were calculated based on the type of design and the statistics used in the studies, and then transformed into standardized mean differences. Each outcome was classified following an exhaustive review of the operational constructs present in the studies. These outcomes were grouped into five major dimensions: attitudinal changes, intergroup dynamics, interpersonal behaviors, political beliefs, and psychological effects. When two or more outcomes from the studies addressed the same construct, they were synthesized together. A separate meta-analysis was conducted for each identified outcome from different samples. Additionally, experimental and quasi-experimental studies were synthesized separately from correlational studies. Twenty-four meta-analyses were performed using a random effects model, and meta-regressions and moderator analyses were conducted to explore factors influencing effect size estimates.Data Collection and AnalysisFifty-five studies analyzing 101 effect sizes, classified into 43 different outcomes, were identified after the screening process. Initially, effect sizes were calculated based on the type of design and the statistics used in the studies, and then transformed into standardized mean differences. Each outcome was classified following an exhaustive review of the operational constructs present in the studies. These outcomes were grouped into five major dimensions: attitudinal changes, intergroup dynamics, interpersonal behaviors, political beliefs, and psychological effects. When two or more outcomes from the studies addressed the same construct, they were synthesized together. A separate meta-analysis was conducted for each identified outcome from different samples. Additionally, experimental and quasi-experimental studies were synthesized separately from correlational studies. Twenty-four meta-analyses were performed using a random effects model, and meta-regressions and moderator analyses were conducted to explore factors influencing effect size estimates.The 55 studies included in this systematic review were published between 1996 and 2021, with most of them published since 2015. They include 25 correlational studies, and 22 randomized and 8 non-randomized experimental studies. Most of these studies provide data extracted from individuals (e.g., self-report); however, this review includes 6 studies that are based on quantitative analysis of comments or posts, or their relationship to specific geographic areas. Correlational studies encompass sample sizes ranging from 101 to 6829 participants, while experimental and quasi-experimental studies involve participant numbers between 69 and 1112. In most cases, the exposure to hate content occurred online or within social media contexts (37 studies), while only 8 studies reported such exposure in traditional media platforms. In the remaining studies, the exposure to hate content was delivered through political propaganda, primarily associated with extreme right-wing groups. No studies were removed from the systematic review due to quality assessment. In the experimental studies, participants demonstrated high adherence to the experimental conditions and thus contributed significantly to most of the results. The correlational and quasi-experimental studies used consistent, valid, and reliable instruments to measure exposure and outcomes derived from well-defined variables. As with the experimental studies, the results from the correlation and quasi-experimental studies were complete. Meta-analyses related to four dimensions were performed: Attitudinal changes, Intergroup dynamics, Interpersonal behaviors, and Psychological effects. We were unable to conduct a meta-analysis for the "Political Beliefs" dimension due to an insufficient number of studies. In terms of attitude changes, exposure to hate leads to negative attitudes (d Ex = 0.414; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.005, 0.824; p < 0.05; n = 8 and d corr = 0.322; 95% CI = 0.14, 0.504; p < 0.01; n = 2) and negative stereotypes (d Ex = 0.28; 95% CI = -0.018, 0.586; p < 0.10; n = 9) about individuals or groups with protected characteristics, while also hindering the promotion of positive attitudes toward them (d exp = -0.227; 95% CI = -0.466, 0.011; p < 0.10; n = 3). However, it does not increase support for hate content or political violence. Concerning intergroup dynamics, exposure to hate reduces intergroup trust (d exp = -0.308; 95% CI = -0.559, -0.058; p < 0.05; n = 2), especially between targeted groups and the general population, but has no significant impact on the perception of discrimination among minorities. In the context of Interpersonal behaviors, the meta-analyses confirm a strong association between exposure to hate and victimization (d corr = 0.721; 95% CI = 0.472, 0.97; p < 0.01; n = 3) and moderate effects on online hate speech perpetration (d corr = 0.36; 95% CI = -0.028, 0.754; p < 0.10; n = 2) and offline violent behavior (d corr = 0.47; 95%CI = 0.328, 0.612; p < 0.01; n = 2). Exposure to online hate also fuels more hate in online comments (d = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.034-0.984; p < 0.05; n = 2) but does not seem to affect hate crimes directly. However, there is no evidence that exposure to hate fosters resistance behaviors among individuals who are frequently subjected to it (e.g. the intention to counter-argue factually). In terms of psychological consequences, this review demonstrates that exposure to hate content negatively affects individuals' psychological well-being. Experimental studies indicate a large and significant effect size concerning the development of depressive symptoms due to exposure (d exp = 1.105; 95% CI = 0.797, 1.423; p < 0.01; n = 2). Additionally, a small effect size is observed concerning the link between exposure and reduced life satisfaction(d corr = -0.186; 95% CI = -0.279, -0.093; p < 0.01; n = 3), as well as increased social fear regarding the likelihood of a terrorist attack (d corr = -0.206; 95% CI = 0.147, 0.264; p < 0.01 n = 5). Conversely, exposure to hate speech does not seem to generate or be linked to the development of negative emotions related to its content.ResultsThe 55 studies included in this systematic review were published between 1996 and 2021, with most of them published since 2015. They include 25 correlational studies, and 22 randomized and 8 non-randomized experimental studies. Most of these studies provide data extracted from individuals (e.g., self-report)
The Problem People use social media platforms to chat, search, and share information, express their opinions, and connect with others. But these platforms also facilitate the posting of divisive, harmful, and hateful messages, targeting groups and individuals, based on their race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or political views. Hate content is not only a problem on the Internet, but also on traditional media, especially in places where the Internet is not widely available or in rural areas. Despite growing awareness of the harms that exposure to hate can cause, especially to victims, there is no clear consensus in the literature on what specific impacts this exposure, as bystanders, produces on individuals, groups, and the population at large. Most of the existing research has focused on analyzing the content and the extent of the problem. More research in this area is needed to develop better intervention programs that are adapted to the current reality of hate. Objective The objective of this review is to synthesize the empirical evidence on how media exposure to hate affects or is associated with various outcomes for individuals and groups. Search Methods Searches covered the period up to December 2021 to assess the impact of exposure to hate. The searches were performed using search terms across 20 databases, 51 related websites, the Google search engine, as well as other systematic reviews and related papers. Selection Criteria This review included any correlational, experimental, and quasi‐experimental study that establishes an impact relationship and/or association between exposure to hate in online and traditional media and the resulting consequences on individuals or groups. Data Collection and Analysis Fifty‐five studies analyzing 101 effect sizes, classified into 43 different outcomes, were identified after the screening process. Initially, effect sizes were calculated based on the type of design and the statistics used in the studies, and then transformed into standardized mean differences. Each outcome was classified following an exhaustive review of the operational constructs present in the studies. These outcomes were grouped into five major dimensions: attitudinal changes, intergroup dynamics, interpersonal behaviors, political beliefs, and psychological effects. When two or more outcomes from the studies addressed the same construct, they were synthesized together. A separate meta‐analysis was conducted for each identified outcome from different samples. Additionally, experimental and quasi‐experimental studies were synthesized separately from correlational studies. Twenty‐four meta‐analyses were performed using a random effects model, and meta‐regressions and moderator analyses were conducted to explore factors influencing effect size estimates. Results The 55 studies included in this systematic review were published between 1996 and 2021, with most of them published since 2015. They include 25 correlational studies, and 22 randomized and 8 non‐randomized experimental studies. Most of these studies provide data extracted from individuals (e.g., self‐report); however, this review includes 6 studies that are based on quantitative analysis of comments or posts, or their relationship to specific geographic areas. Correlational studies encompass sample sizes ranging from 101 to 6829 participants, while experimental and quasi‐experimental studies involve participant numbers between 69 and 1112. In most cases, the exposure to hate content occurred online or within social media contexts (37 studies), while only 8 studies reported such exposure in traditional media platforms. In the remaining studies, the exposure to hate content was delivered through political propaganda, primarily associated with extreme right‐wing groups. No studies were removed from the systematic review due to quality assessment. In the experimental studies, participants demonstrated high adherence to the experimental conditions and thus contributed significantly to most of the results. The correlational and quasi‐experimental studies used consistent, valid, and reliable instruments to measure exposure and outcomes derived from well‐defined variables. As with the experimental studies, the results from the correlation and quasi‐experimental studies were complete. Meta‐analyses related to four dimensions were performed: Attitudinal changes, Intergroup dynamics, Interpersonal behaviors, and Psychological effects. We were unable to conduct a meta‐analysis for the “Political Beliefs” dimension due to an insufficient number of studies. In terms of attitude changes, exposure to hate leads to negative attitudes (dEx = 0.414; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.005, 0.824; p < 0.05; n = 8 and dcorr = 0.322; 95% CI = 0.14, 0.504; p < 0.01; n = 2) and negative stereotypes (dEx = 0.28; 95% CI = –0.018, 0.586; p < 0.10; n = 9) about individuals or groups with protected characteristics, while also hindering the promotion of positive attitudes toward them (dexp = −0.227; 95% CI = −0.466, 0.011; p < 0.10; n = 3). However, it does not increase support for hate content or political violence. Concerning intergroup dynamics, exposure to hate reduces intergroup trust (dexp = −0.308; 95% CI = –0.559, −0.058; p < 0.05; n = 2), especially between targeted groups and the general population, but has no significant impact on the perception of discrimination among minorities. In the context of Interpersonal behaviors, the meta‐analyses confirm a strong association between exposure to hate and victimization (dcorr = 0.721; 95% CI = 0.472, 0.97; p < 0.01; n = 3) and moderate effects on online hate speech perpetration (dcorr = 0.36; 95% CI = –0.028, 0.754; p < 0.10; n = 2) and offline violent behavior (dcorr = 0.47; 95%CI = 0.328, 0.612; p < 0.01; n = 2). Exposure to online hate also fuels more hate in online comments (d = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.034–0.984; p < 0.05; n = 2) but does not seem to affect hate crimes directly. However, there is no evidence that exposure to hate fosters resistance behaviors among individuals who are frequently subjected to it (e.g. the intention to counter‐argue factually). In terms of psychological consequences, this review demonstrates that exposure to hate content negatively affects individuals' psychological well‐being. Experimental studies indicate a large and significant effect size concerning the development of depressive symptoms due to exposure (dexp = 1.105; 95% CI = 0.797, 1.423; p < 0.01; n = 2). Additionally, a small effect size is observed concerning the link between exposure and reduced life satisfaction(dcorr = −0.186; 95% CI = −0.279, −0.093; p < 0.01; n = 3), as well as increased social fear regarding the likelihood of a terrorist attack (dcorr = −0.206; 95% CI = 0.147, 0.264; p < 0.01 n = 5). Conversely, exposure to hate speech does not seem to generate or be linked to the development of negative emotions related to its content. Author's Conclusions This systematic review confirms that exposure to hate in online and in traditional media has a significant negative impact on individuals and groups. It emphasizes the importance of taking these findings into account for policymaking, prevention, and intervention strategies. Hate speech spreads through biased commentary and perceptions, normalizing prejudice and causing harm. This not only leads to violence, victimization, and perpetration of hate speech but also contributes to a broader climate of hostility. Conversely, this research suggests that people exposed to this type of content do not show increased shock or revulsion toward it. This may explain why it is easily disseminated and often perceived as harmless, leading some to oppose its regulation. Focusing efforts solely on content control may then have a limited impact in driving substantial change. More research is needed to explore these variables, as well as the relationship between hate speech and political beliefs and the connection to violent extremism. Indeed, we know very little about how exposure to hate influences political and extremist views.
People use social media platforms to chat, search, and share information, express their opinions, and connect with others. But these platforms also facilitate the posting of divisive, harmful, and hateful messages, targeting groups and individuals, based on their race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or political views. Hate content is not only a problem on the Internet, but also on traditional media, especially in places where the Internet is not widely available or in rural areas. Despite growing awareness of the harms that exposure to hate can cause, especially to victims, there is no clear consensus in the literature on what specific impacts this exposure, as bystanders, produces on individuals, groups, and the population at large. Most of the existing research has focused on analyzing the content and the extent of the problem. More research in this area is needed to develop better intervention programs that are adapted to the current reality of hate. The objective of this review is to synthesize the empirical evidence on how media exposure to hate affects or is associated with various outcomes for individuals and groups. Searches covered the period up to December 2021 to assess the impact of exposure to hate. The searches were performed using search terms across 20 databases, 51 related websites, the Google search engine, as well as other systematic reviews and related papers. This review included any correlational, experimental, and quasi-experimental study that establishes an impact relationship and/or association between exposure to hate in online and traditional media and the resulting consequences on individuals or groups. Fifty-five studies analyzing 101 effect sizes, classified into 43 different outcomes, were identified after the screening process. Initially, effect sizes were calculated based on the type of design and the statistics used in the studies, and then transformed into standardized mean differences. Each outcome was classified following an exhaustive review of the operational constructs present in the studies. These outcomes were grouped into five major dimensions: attitudinal changes, intergroup dynamics, interpersonal behaviors, political beliefs, and psychological effects. When two or more outcomes from the studies addressed the same construct, they were synthesized together. A separate meta-analysis was conducted for each identified outcome from different samples. Additionally, experimental and quasi-experimental studies were synthesized separately from correlational studies. Twenty-four meta-analyses were performed using a random effects model, and meta-regressions and moderator analyses were conducted to explore factors influencing effect size estimates. The 55 studies included in this systematic review were published between 1996 and 2021, with most of them published since 2015. They include 25 correlational studies, and 22 randomized and 8 non-randomized experimental studies. Most of these studies provide data extracted from individuals (e.g., self-report); however, this review includes 6 studies that are based on quantitative analysis of comments or posts, or their relationship to specific geographic areas. Correlational studies encompass sample sizes ranging from 101 to 6829 participants, while experimental and quasi-experimental studies involve participant numbers between 69 and 1112. In most cases, the exposure to hate content occurred online or within social media contexts (37 studies), while only 8 studies reported such exposure in traditional media platforms. In the remaining studies, the exposure to hate content was delivered through political propaganda, primarily associated with extreme right-wing groups. No studies were removed from the systematic review due to quality assessment. In the experimental studies, participants demonstrated high adherence to the experimental conditions and thus contributed significantly to most of the results. The correlational and quasi-experimental studies used consistent, valid, and reliable instruments to measure exposure and outcomes derived from well-defined variables. As with the experimental studies, the results from the correlation and quasi-experimental studies were complete. Meta-analyses related to four dimensions were performed: Attitudinal changes, Intergroup dynamics, Interpersonal behaviors, and Psychological effects. We were unable to conduct a meta-analysis for the "Political Beliefs" dimension due to an insufficient number of studies. In terms of attitude changes, exposure to hate leads to negative attitudes (  = 0.414; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.005, 0.824;  < 0.05;  = 8 and  = 0.322; 95% CI = 0.14, 0.504;  < 0.01;  = 2) and negative stereotypes (  = 0.28; 95% CI = -0.018, 0.586;  < 0.10;  = 9) about individuals or groups with protected characteristics, while also hindering the promotion of positive attitudes toward them (  = -0.227; 95% CI = -0.466, 0.011;  < 0.10;  = 3). However, it does not increase support for hate content or political violence. Concerning intergroup dynamics, exposure to hate reduces intergroup trust (  = -0.308; 95% CI = -0.559, -0.058;  < 0.05;  = 2), especially between targeted groups and the general population, but has no significant impact on the perception of discrimination among minorities. In the context of Interpersonal behaviors, the meta-analyses confirm a strong association between exposure to hate and victimization (  = 0.721; 95% CI = 0.472, 0.97;  < 0.01;  = 3) and moderate effects on online hate speech perpetration (  = 0.36; 95% CI = -0.028, 0.754;  < 0.10;  = 2) and offline violent behavior (  = 0.47; 95%CI = 0.328, 0.612;  < 0.01;  = 2). Exposure to online hate also fuels more hate in online comments (  = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.034-0.984;  < 0.05;  = 2) but does not seem to affect hate crimes directly. However, there is no evidence that exposure to hate fosters resistance behaviors among individuals who are frequently subjected to it (e.g. the intention to counter-argue factually). In terms of psychological consequences, this review demonstrates that exposure to hate content negatively affects individuals' psychological well-being. Experimental studies indicate a large and significant effect size concerning the development of depressive symptoms due to exposure (  = 1.105; 95% CI = 0.797, 1.423;  < 0.01;  = 2). Additionally, a small effect size is observed concerning the link between exposure and reduced life satisfaction(  = -0.186; 95% CI = -0.279, -0.093;  < 0.01;  = 3), as well as increased social fear regarding the likelihood of a terrorist attack (  = -0.206; 95% CI = 0.147, 0.264;  < 0.01  = 5). Conversely, exposure to hate speech does not seem to generate or be linked to the development of negative emotions related to its content. This systematic review confirms that exposure to hate in online and in traditional media has a significant negative impact on individuals and groups. It emphasizes the importance of taking these findings into account for policymaking, prevention, and intervention strategies. Hate speech spreads through biased commentary and perceptions, normalizing prejudice and causing harm. This not only leads to violence, victimization, and perpetration of hate speech but also contributes to a broader climate of hostility. Conversely, this research suggests that people exposed to this type of content do not show increased shock or revulsion toward it. This may explain why it is easily disseminated and often perceived as harmless, leading some to oppose its regulation. Focusing efforts solely on content control may then have a limited impact in driving substantial change. More research is needed to explore these variables, as well as the relationship between hate speech and political beliefs and the connection to violent extremism. Indeed, we know very little about how exposure to hate influences political and extremist views.
Author Mounchingam, Aoudou Njingouo
Borokhovski, Eugene
Pickup, David
Paillé, Sabrina
Hassan, Ghayda
Brouillette‐Alarie, Sébastien
Madriaza, Pablo
Durocher‐Corfa, Loïc
AuthorAffiliation 3 Centre for the Study of Learning and Performance (CSLP) Concordia University Montreal Quebec Canada
1 Department of Psychoeducation and Social Work Université du Québec à Trois‐Rivières Trois‐Rivières Quebec Canada
2 Canadian Practitioners Network for the Prevention of Extremist Violence (CPN‐PREV) Université du Québec à Montreal Montreal Quebec Canada
AuthorAffiliation_xml – name: 3 Centre for the Study of Learning and Performance (CSLP) Concordia University Montreal Quebec Canada
– name: 2 Canadian Practitioners Network for the Prevention of Extremist Violence (CPN‐PREV) Université du Québec à Montreal Montreal Quebec Canada
– name: 1 Department of Psychoeducation and Social Work Université du Québec à Trois‐Rivières Trois‐Rivières Quebec Canada
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Pablo
  surname: Madriaza
  fullname: Madriaza, Pablo
  email: pablo.madriaza@uqtr.ca
  organization: Université du Québec à Trois‐Rivières
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Ghayda
  surname: Hassan
  fullname: Hassan, Ghayda
  organization: Université du Québec à Montreal
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Sébastien
  surname: Brouillette‐Alarie
  fullname: Brouillette‐Alarie, Sébastien
  organization: Université du Québec à Montreal
– sequence: 4
  givenname: Aoudou Njingouo
  surname: Mounchingam
  fullname: Mounchingam, Aoudou Njingouo
  organization: Université du Québec à Montreal
– sequence: 5
  givenname: Loïc
  surname: Durocher‐Corfa
  fullname: Durocher‐Corfa, Loïc
  organization: Université du Québec à Montreal
– sequence: 6
  givenname: Eugene
  surname: Borokhovski
  fullname: Borokhovski, Eugene
  organization: Concordia University
– sequence: 7
  givenname: David
  surname: Pickup
  fullname: Pickup, David
  organization: Concordia University
– sequence: 8
  givenname: Sabrina
  surname: Paillé
  fullname: Paillé, Sabrina
  organization: Université du Québec à Montreal
BackLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39822240$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNp1ks1u1DAUhSNUREvpghdAltjQxbS248QOm6oaFag0EhtYWzfOTcejxB7sZMrseAR2fT-eBM-krVokVraPP5_74_s6O3DeYZa9ZfSMUcrPTcfPJKVMvciOmKrYjCmaHzzZH2YnMa5oQspcMiZeZYd5pTjngh5ld1c_1z6OAcngyRIGJNYR7zrrkIBryBCgsYP1DjrSY2PhI7kkcRsH7GGwhgTcWLzdoz0O8OfXb0joNtpIfEuGZfLr12CG6ZRUfIjnXQrV2I1tRuji3sH4vh9dCofxTfayTTKe3K_H2fdPV9_mX2aLr5-v55eLmRGSqhlWSgqay7JSpWxTjYJWFJPA2la00nAwZVFhUmirWm7qJheiBi5ViQ1VKj_OriffxsNKr4PtIWy1B6v3gg83GkIqtEMNOVaQc5BSgOAMayaLAmssWi6UlHXyupi81mOdemXQpe51z0yf3zi71Dd-oxmTeZm-Kzl8uHcI_seIcdC9jQa7Dhz6MeqcFaWsVFUUCX3_D7ryY0i931GyoqVUbFfeu6cpPebyMAAJOJ0AE3yMAdtHhFG9my-d5kvv5yux5xN7azvc_h_U8wWfXvwFvpbSMw
Cites_doi 10.1007/s10611-016-9661-3
10.1177/14773708231156328
10.4018/ijgcms.2014070101
10.1177/1745691615592234
10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x
10.33972/jhs.40
10.3389/feduc.2019.00046
10.1177/1754073917751229
10.4324/9781351135559-23
10.1080/18335330.2019.1667012
10.1073/pnas.1414822112
10.2139/ssrn.2831369
10.1027/1864-1105/a000139
10.1093/jeea/jvaa045
10.4324/9781315133744
10.1002/jclp.23050
10.1177/1473779521991557
10.1145/3487351.3488324
10.17185/duepublico/42132
10.1111/jcom.12313
10.1177/0002764202045006003
10.3390/ijerph16203992
10.1017/S0007123419000590
10.1177/0886260520958645
10.1089/cyber.2022.0185
10.1080/15213269.2019.1612760
10.1093/ssjj/jyaa015
10.1609/icwsm.v13i01.3354
10.1016/j.chb.2019.106192
10.1111/j.1468-2958.1996.tb00376.x
10.1177/15248380221108070
10.1007/s10964-016-0541-z
10.1177/000306519604400303
10.1016/j.tele.2014.08.007
10.1007/s11406-007-9108-2
10.1080/15205436.2019.1655768
10.1177/1461444820936292
10.24193/jmr.37.1
10.1093/esr/jcaa053
10.1371/journal.pone.0222194
10.1126/science.1070765
10.1089/vio.2017.0048
10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.02.009
10.1016/j.ssmph.2021.100750
10.1016/j.jadohealth.2008.08.021
10.1080/0144929X.2022.2027013
10.1177/15554120211039082
10.1177/1948550614548727
10.5817/CP2018-4-1
10.1080/10584609.2020.1736700
10.1016/j.avb.2021.101608
10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104026
10.1542/peds.2007-3377
10.1002/cl2.1106
10.1080/02560054.2011.545568
10.1080/09546553.2018.1442329
10.1111/pops.12557
10.1080/01419870.2021.1930094
10.1002/9780470743386
10.1186/s13673-019-0205-6
10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-14-00079
10.1108/OIR-05-2016-0133
10.1007/s11406-015-9658-7
10.1177/0093650215577859
10.1007/s11192-020-03737-6
10.1177/0894439316666272
10.1016/j.appdev.2019.101068
10.5964/jspp.v6i1.741
10.1177/0032329207308181
10.1007/s12103-020-09545-1
10.1017/9781108890960.005
10.1002/cl2.1245
10.1186/s40410-018-0096-2
10.1016/j.chb.2018.05.026
10.1145/3292522.3326032
10.1007/978-1-4939-3477-5_10
10.1111/soin.12274
10.1002/cl2.1243
10.1037/0003-066X.44.9.1175
10.1057/s41599-024-02761-8
10.1177/08862605211056032
10.1207/S15326926CLP0602_2
10.1007/s10940-019-09439-4
10.1080/09546553.2013.876414
10.1016/j.chb.2017.09.022
10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01222
10.1080/10584609.2017.1316807
10.12795/revistafuentes.2022.20240
10.1007/s10677-019-10002-0
10.5038/1944-0472.7.3.2
10.1177/14614448211017527
10.1177/1461444809342775
10.1177/00938548221104738
10.1007/s10579-020-09502-8
10.2196/jmir.9044
10.1037/a0018251
10.1017/CBO9781139042871.006
10.1126/sciadv.aao5948
10.1007/978-3-030-26450-5_2
10.1080/08838151.2018.1532430
10.3233/DEV-230341
10.2307/2669529
10.1002/cl2.1244
10.1016/j.ipm.2019.102087
10.4018/978-1-4666-5206-4.ch007
10.1177/2158244020973022
10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.03.008
10.1177/14614448221125417
10.33972/jhs.124
10.2105/AJPH.2018.304402
10.3233/DEV-170233
10.1002/cl2.1174
10.1080/01639625.2016.1196985
10.1057/978-1-137-52667-0_5
10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629
10.1016/j.avb.2018.05.006
10.2105/AJPH.2016.303512
10.1108/ITP-09-2014-0198
10.1002/ab.21737
10.3390/ijerph15092030
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright 2025 The Author(s). published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Campbell Collaboration.
2025 The Author(s). Campbell Systematic Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Campbell Collaboration.
2025. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the "License"). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Copyright_xml – notice: 2025 The Author(s). published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Campbell Collaboration.
– notice: 2025 The Author(s). Campbell Systematic Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Campbell Collaboration.
– notice: 2025. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the "License"). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
DBID 24P
AAYXX
CITATION
NPM
0-V
3V.
7U4
7XB
88B
88J
8AM
8BJ
8FK
ABUWG
AFKRA
AHOVV
ALSLI
AZQEC
BENPR
BGRYB
BHHNA
CCPQU
CJNVE
DWI
DWQXO
FQK
GNUQQ
HEHIP
JBE
K7.
M0O
M0P
M2R
M2S
PHGZM
PHGZT
PIMPY
PKEHL
POGQB
PQEDU
PQEST
PQQKQ
PQUKI
PRQQA
Q9U
WZK
7X8
5PM
DOA
DOI 10.1002/cl2.70018
DatabaseName Wiley Online Library Open Access
CrossRef
PubMed
ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection【Remote access available】
ProQuest Central (Corporate)
Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)
ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)
Education Database (Alumni)
Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)
Criminal Justice Database (Alumni Edition)
International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)
ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)
ProQuest Central (Alumni)
ProQuest Central UK/Ireland
Education Research Index
Social Science Premium Collection
ProQuest Central Essentials
ProQuest Central
Criminology Collection
Sociological Abstracts
ProQuest One
Education Collection
Sociological Abstracts
ProQuest Central Korea
International Bibliography of the Social Sciences
ProQuest Central Student
Sociology Collection
International Bibliography of the Social Sciences
ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)
Criminal Justice Database
Education Database
Social Science Database
Sociology Database
ProQuest Central Premium
ProQuest One Academic (New)
Publicly Available Content Database
ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)
ProQuest Sociology & Social Sciences Collection
ProQuest One Education
ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)
ProQuest One Academic
ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition
ProQuest One Social Sciences
ProQuest Central Basic
Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)
MEDLINE - Academic
PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)
DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
DatabaseTitle CrossRef
PubMed
Publicly Available Content Database
ProQuest One Education
ProQuest Sociology & Social Sciences Collection
ProQuest Central Student
ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)
ProQuest Central Essentials
ProQuest Social Science Journals (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest One Community College
Sociology & Social Sciences Collection
ProQuest Central
ProQuest Criminal Justice
International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)
ProQuest Central Korea
ProQuest Sociology Collection
ProQuest Central (New)
ProQuest Sociology
Social Science Premium Collection
Education Collection
ProQuest One Social Sciences
ProQuest Central Basic
ProQuest Education Journals
ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition
Sociology Collection
Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)
Criminology Collection
ProQuest Social Science Journals
ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)
Criminal Justice Periodicals (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection
ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition
Sociological Abstracts
ProQuest One Academic
ProQuest One Academic (New)
ProQuest Education Journals (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest Central (Alumni)
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList
Publicly Available Content Database
MEDLINE - Academic

PubMed
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: DOA
  name: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
  url: https://www.doaj.org/
  sourceTypes: Open Website
– sequence: 2
  dbid: 24P
  name: Wiley Online Library Open Access
  url: https://authorservices.wiley.com/open-science/open-access/browse-journals.html
  sourceTypes: Publisher
– sequence: 3
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 4
  dbid: BENPR
  name: ProQuest Central
  url: https://www.proquest.com/central
  sourceTypes: Aggregation Database
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Social Welfare & Social Work
Religion
DocumentTitleAlternate MADRIAZA et al
EISSN 1891-1803
EndPage n/a
ExternalDocumentID oai_doaj_org_article_a3e9a32a774a421eb1755ebe5f24877b
PMC11736891
39822240
10_1002_cl2_70018
CL270018
Genre reviewArticle
Journal Article
Review
GeographicLocations United Kingdom--UK
GeographicLocations_xml – name: United Kingdom--UK
GroupedDBID 0-V
0R~
1OC
24P
53G
5VS
AAHHS
ABUWG
ACCFJ
ACCMX
ACXQS
ADBBV
ADKYN
ADZJE
ADZMN
ADZOD
AEEZP
AEQDE
AFKRA
AIWBW
AJBDE
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
ALSLI
ARALO
ASOEW
AVUZU
AZQEC
BAWUL
BCNDV
BENPR
BGRYB
BPHCQ
CCPQU
CJNVE
DIK
DWQXO
EBS
EJD
GNUQQ
GROUPED_DOAJ
HEHIP
IAO
ITC
KQ8
M0O
M0P
M2R
M2S
OK1
PHGZT
PIMPY
PQEDU
PQQKQ
PROAC
RPM
AAMMB
AAYXX
AEFGJ
AGXDD
AIDQK
AIDYY
CITATION
M~E
PHGZM
POGQB
PRQQA
3V.
NPM
WIN
7U4
7XB
8BJ
8FK
AHOVV
BHHNA
DWI
FQK
JBE
K7.
PKEHL
PQEST
PQUKI
PUEGO
Q9U
WZK
7X8
5PM
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c4708-e987403769867f0004090e0371ff4f7c2ac659ee030f8f2cbd344ba2786ed0883
IEDL.DBID BENPR
ISSN 1891-1803
IngestDate Wed Aug 27 01:25:52 EDT 2025
Thu Aug 21 18:28:29 EDT 2025
Fri Jul 11 15:15:06 EDT 2025
Sat Aug 23 14:51:29 EDT 2025
Thu Jan 30 12:29:50 EST 2025
Thu Jul 24 02:15:22 EDT 2025
Thu Mar 20 09:30:39 EDT 2025
IsDoiOpenAccess true
IsOpenAccess true
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 1
Keywords hate speech
meta‐analysis
systematic review
exposure to hate
impact assessment
Language English
License Attribution
2025 The Author(s). Campbell Systematic Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Campbell Collaboration.
This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c4708-e987403769867f0004090e0371ff4f7c2ac659ee030f8f2cbd344ba2786ed0883
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ObjectType-Review-3
content type line 23
Protocol
Linked Article
OpenAccessLink https://www.proquest.com/docview/3179067818?pq-origsite=%requestingapplication%
PMID 39822240
PQID 3179067818
PQPubID 2040247
PageCount 47
ParticipantIDs doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_a3e9a32a774a421eb1755ebe5f24877b
pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11736891
proquest_miscellaneous_3156798955
proquest_journals_3179067818
pubmed_primary_39822240
crossref_primary_10_1002_cl2_70018
wiley_primary_10_1002_cl2_70018_CL270018
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate March 2025
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2025-03-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 03
  year: 2025
  text: March 2025
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationPlace United States
PublicationPlace_xml – name: United States
– name: Oslo
– name: Hoboken
PublicationTitle Campbell systematic review
PublicationTitleAlternate Campbell Syst Rev
PublicationYear 2025
Publisher John Wiley & Sons, Inc
John Wiley and Sons Inc
Wiley
Publisher_xml – name: John Wiley & Sons, Inc
– name: John Wiley and Sons Inc
– name: Wiley
References e_1_2_13_3_24_1
e_1_2_13_3_47_1
Vidgen B. (e_1_2_13_3_111_1) 2019
e_1_2_13_3_28_1
e_1_2_13_3_89_1
e_1_2_13_3_20_1
e_1_2_13_3_66_1
United Nations (e_1_2_13_3_110_1) 2019
e_1_2_13_3_43_1
e_1_2_13_3_112_1
e_1_2_13_2_32_1
e_1_2_13_3_92_1
e_1_2_13_3_116_1
Hussain G. (e_1_2_13_3_56_1) 2014
e_1_2_13_2_17_1
e_1_2_13_3_2_1
Brown A. (e_1_2_13_3_21_1) 2020
e_1_2_13_2_13_1
e_1_2_13_2_36_1
e_1_2_13_3_16_1
e_1_2_13_3_35_1
e_1_2_13_3_58_1
e_1_2_13_3_39_1
e_1_2_13_2_9_1
e_1_2_13_3_50_1
e_1_2_13_3_77_1
e_1_2_13_3_120_1
e_1_2_13_2_5_1
Awan I. (e_1_2_13_3_8_1) 2015
e_1_2_13_3_12_1
Mosharafa E. (e_1_2_13_3_67_1) 2015; 15
e_1_2_13_3_73_1
e_1_2_13_3_96_1
Davidson J. (e_1_2_13_3_30_1) 2019
e_1_2_13_3_101_1
e_1_2_13_3_124_1
e_1_2_13_2_20_1
e_1_2_13_2_1_1
e_1_2_13_2_43_1
e_1_2_13_3_105_1
Hong Q. N. (e_1_2_13_3_55_1) 2018
e_1_2_13_3_109_1
Gerbner G. (e_1_2_13_3_45_1) 1994
e_1_2_13_2_24_1
European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) (e_1_2_13_3_36_1) 2016
e_1_2_13_2_47_1
Rieger D. (e_1_2_13_2_28_1) 2013
e_1_2_13_3_27_1
e_1_2_13_3_69_1
Government of Canada (e_1_2_13_3_48_1) 2019
Botan M. (e_1_2_13_2_4_1) 2020
Del Vigna F. (e_1_2_13_3_31_1) 2017
e_1_2_13_3_61_1
New Zealand Government (e_1_2_13_3_72_1) 2019
e_1_2_13_3_88_1
e_1_2_13_3_23_1
e_1_2_13_3_42_1
e_1_2_13_3_84_1
e_1_2_13_2_10_1
e_1_2_13_2_33_1
e_1_2_13_3_91_1
e_1_2_13_3_115_1
e_1_2_13_3_119_1
e_1_2_13_2_18_1
e_1_2_13_2_14_1
e_1_2_13_2_37_1
e_1_2_13_3_38_1
Asal V. (e_1_2_13_3_6_1) 2013
Rieger D. (e_1_2_13_3_90_1) 2013
e_1_2_13_3_15_1
e_1_2_13_3_57_1
e_1_2_13_2_8_1
e_1_2_13_3_76_1
e_1_2_13_3_99_1
e_1_2_13_3_34_1
e_1_2_13_3_53_1
e_1_2_13_3_95_1
e_1_2_13_3_100_1
e_1_2_13_3_123_1
e_1_2_13_2_21_1
e_1_2_13_2_44_1
e_1_2_13_2_40_1
Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights (e_1_2_13_3_104_1) 2019
e_1_2_13_3_108_1
e_1_2_13_2_29_1
e_1_2_13_2_48_1
e_1_2_13_2_25_1
e_1_2_13_3_49_1
e_1_2_13_3_26_1
e_1_2_13_3_68_1
e_1_2_13_3_41_1
e_1_2_13_3_87_1
e_1_2_13_3_60_1
Lipsey M. W. (e_1_2_13_3_65_1) 2001
e_1_2_13_3_83_1
e_1_2_13_3_64_1
e_1_2_13_2_30_1
e_1_2_13_3_114_1
e_1_2_13_2_11_1
Beninger K. (e_1_2_13_3_14_1) 2014
e_1_2_13_3_118_1
e_1_2_13_3_4_1
e_1_2_13_2_38_1
e_1_2_13_2_19_1
e_1_2_13_2_34_1
e_1_2_13_2_15_1
e_1_2_13_3_37_1
e_1_2_13_3_18_1
e_1_2_13_3_79_1
Petty R. E. (e_1_2_13_3_85_1) 2015
e_1_2_13_2_7_1
e_1_2_13_3_52_1
e_1_2_13_3_75_1
e_1_2_13_3_98_1
Blazak R. (e_1_2_13_3_17_1) 2009
e_1_2_13_2_3_1
e_1_2_13_3_10_1
e_1_2_13_3_33_1
e_1_2_13_3_71_1
e_1_2_13_3_94_1
e_1_2_13_3_122_1
e_1_2_13_2_41_1
e_1_2_13_3_103_1
e_1_2_13_2_22_1
e_1_2_13_3_107_1
e_1_2_13_2_49_1
e_1_2_13_2_45_1
e_1_2_13_2_26_1
Asal V. (e_1_2_13_3_7_1) 2012
Pate U. A. (e_1_2_13_3_80_1) 2020
e_1_2_13_3_25_1
e_1_2_13_3_29_1
Busselle R. (e_1_2_13_3_22_1) 2017
e_1_2_13_3_40_1
e_1_2_13_3_63_1
e_1_2_13_3_86_1
e_1_2_13_3_44_1
e_1_2_13_3_82_1
e_1_2_13_2_31_1
e_1_2_13_3_113_1
e_1_2_13_3_70_1
e_1_2_13_3_117_1
e_1_2_13_2_16_1
e_1_2_13_2_39_1
e_1_2_13_3_5_1
e_1_2_13_2_12_1
e_1_2_13_2_35_1
e_1_2_13_3_9_1
Borenstein M. (e_1_2_13_3_19_1) 2019
Herman J. L. (e_1_2_13_3_54_1) 2015
Bandura A. (e_1_2_13_3_11_1) 1986
e_1_2_13_3_13_1
e_1_2_13_3_59_1
Lazarus R. S. (e_1_2_13_3_62_1) 1984
Noriega C. A. (e_1_2_13_3_74_1) 2012; 25
e_1_2_13_3_51_1
e_1_2_13_3_97_1
e_1_2_13_3_78_1
e_1_2_13_3_93_1
e_1_2_13_2_6_1
e_1_2_13_3_32_1
e_1_2_13_3_121_1
e_1_2_13_2_42_1
Ahmed W. (e_1_2_13_3_3_1) 2017
e_1_2_13_3_102_1
e_1_2_13_2_2_1
e_1_2_13_3_81_1
e_1_2_13_3_125_1
Gerbner G. (e_1_2_13_3_46_1) 2002
e_1_2_13_3_106_1
e_1_2_13_2_27_1
e_1_2_13_2_23_1
e_1_2_13_2_46_1
References_xml – ident: e_1_2_13_2_45_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_69_1
  doi: 10.1007/s10611-016-9661-3
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_76_1
  doi: 10.1177/14773708231156328
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_40_1
  doi: 10.4018/ijgcms.2014070101
– volume-title: Adult online hate, harassment and abuse: A rapid evidence assessment
  year: 2019
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_30_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_38_1
  doi: 10.1177/1745691615592234
– volume-title: Christchurch Call to eliminate terrorist and violent extremist online content adopted
  year: 2019
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_72_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_34_1
  doi: 10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_112_1
  doi: 10.33972/jhs.40
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_3_1
  doi: 10.3389/feduc.2019.00046
– start-page: 86
  year: 2017
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_31_1
  article-title: Hate me, hate me not: Hate speech detection on Facebook
  publication-title: Proceedings of the First Italian Conference on Cybersecurity (ITASEC. 17)
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_40_1
  doi: 10.1177/1754073917751229
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_82_1
  doi: 10.4324/9781351135559-23
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_106_1
  doi: 10.1080/18335330.2019.1667012
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_42_1
  doi: 10.1073/pnas.1414822112
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_43_1
  doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2831369
– volume-title: Trauma and recovery: The aftermath of violence; from domestic abuse to political terror
  year: 2015
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_54_1
– volume-title: General Policy Recommendation No. 15: On Combating Hate Speech (No. CRI(2016)15)
  year: 2016
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_36_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_2_1
  doi: 10.1027/1864-1105/a000139
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_70_1
  doi: 10.1093/jeea/jvaa045
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_2_1
  doi: 10.4324/9781315133744
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_7_1
  doi: 10.1002/jclp.23050
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_71_1
  doi: 10.1177/1473779521991557
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_53_1
  doi: 10.1145/3487351.3488324
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_91_1
  doi: 10.17185/duepublico/42132
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_32_1
  doi: 10.1111/jcom.12313
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_63_1
  doi: 10.1177/0002764202045006003
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_44_1
  doi: 10.3390/ijerph16203992
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_21_1
  doi: 10.1017/S0007123419000590
– volume-title: We fear for our lives: Offline and online experiences of anti‐Muslim hostility
  year: 2015
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_8_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_34_1
  doi: 10.1177/0886260520958645
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_103_1
  doi: 10.1089/cyber.2022.0185
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_17_1
  doi: 10.1080/15213269.2019.1612760
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_109_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_66_1
  doi: 10.1093/ssjj/jyaa015
– volume-title: Strategy and plan of action on hate speech
  year: 2019
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_110_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_27_1
  doi: 10.1609/icwsm.v13i01.3354
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_117_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2019.106192
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_98_1
  doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1996.tb00376.x
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_60_1
  doi: 10.1177/15248380221108070
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_41_1
  doi: 10.1007/s10964-016-0541-z
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_119_1
  doi: 10.1177/000306519604400303
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_19_1
  doi: 10.1093/jeea/jvaa045
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_11_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2014.08.007
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_15_1
  doi: 10.1007/s11406-007-9108-2
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_49_1
  doi: 10.1080/15205436.2019.1655768
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_23_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_1_1
  doi: 10.1177/1461444820936292
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_6_1
  doi: 10.24193/jmr.37.1
– start-page: 43
  volume-title: Media effects: Advances in theory and research
  year: 2002
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_46_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_102_1
  doi: 10.1093/esr/jcaa053
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_116_1
  doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222194
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_4_1
  doi: 10.1126/science.1070765
– volume-title: Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) Version 2018—User guide
  year: 2018
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_55_1
– volume-title: How much online abuse is there: A systematic review of evidence for the UK ‐ Policy Briefing—Full Report (Hate Speech: Measures and Counter Measures)
  year: 2019
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_111_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_29_1
  doi: 10.1089/vio.2017.0048
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_39_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.02.009
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_22_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2021.100750
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_39_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2008.08.021
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_92_1
  doi: 10.1080/0144929X.2022.2027013
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_5_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_38_1
  doi: 10.1177/15554120211039082
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_37_1
  doi: 10.1177/1948550614548727
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_32_1
  doi: 10.5817/CP2018-4-1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_97_1
  doi: 10.1080/10584609.2020.1736700
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_25_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2021.101608
– volume: 25
  start-page: 69
  year: 2012
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_74_1
  article-title: Toward an empirical analysis of hate speech on commercial talk radio
  publication-title: Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_43_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104026
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_48_1
  doi: 10.1542/peds.2007-3377
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_24_1
  doi: 10.1002/cl2.1106
– start-page: 79
  volume-title: Advances in research ethics and integrity
  year: 2017
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_3_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_101_1
  doi: 10.1080/02560054.2011.545568
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_24_1
  doi: 10.1080/09546553.2018.1442329
– volume-title: Common mistakes in meta‐analysis and how to avoid them
  year: 2019
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_19_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_96_1
  doi: 10.1111/pops.12557
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_61_1
  doi: 10.1080/01419870.2021.1930094
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_20_1
  doi: 10.1002/9780470743386
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_93_1
  doi: 10.1186/s13673-019-0205-6
– volume-title: Taking action to end online hate: Report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights
  year: 2019
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_104_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_26_1
  doi: 10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-14-00079
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_46_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2019.106192
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_15_1
  doi: 10.1108/OIR-05-2016-0133
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_28_1
  doi: 10.1007/s11406-015-9658-7
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_18_1
  doi: 10.1177/0093650215577859
– volume: 15
  start-page: 23
  issue: 7
  year: 2015
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_67_1
  article-title: All you need to know about: The cultivation theory
  publication-title: Global Journal of Human Social Science
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_107_1
  doi: 10.1007/s11192-020-03737-6
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_10_1
  doi: 10.1177/0894439316666272
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_12_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2019.101068
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_9_1
  doi: 10.5964/jspp.v6i1.741
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_73_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2021.100750
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_105_1
  doi: 10.1177/0032329207308181
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_47_1
  doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09545-1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_108_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2008.08.021
– start-page: 133
  volume-title: Hate crimes. 1: Understanding and defining hate crime
  year: 2009
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_17_1
– volume-title: Canada's digital charter in action: A plan by Canadians, for Canadians
  year: 2019
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_48_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_99_1
  doi: 10.1017/9781108890960.005
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_51_1
  doi: 10.1002/cl2.1245
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_86_1
  doi: 10.1186/s40410-018-0096-2
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_18_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2018.05.026
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_29_1
  doi: 10.1145/3292522.3326032
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_78_1
– volume-title: Propaganda 2.0: Psychological effects of right‐wing and Islamic extremist internet videos
  year: 2013
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_90_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_89_1
  doi: 10.1609/icwsm.v13i01.3354
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_27_1
  doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-3477-5_10
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_9_1
  doi: 10.1111/soin.12274
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_120_1
  doi: 10.1002/cl2.1243
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_12_1
  doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.44.9.1175
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_125_1
  doi: 10.1057/s41599-024-02761-8
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_113_1
  doi: 10.1177/08862605211056032
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_64_1
  doi: 10.1207/S15326926CLP0602_2
– start-page: 89
  volume-title: Advances in human and social aspects of technology
  year: 2020
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_80_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_123_1
  doi: 10.1007/s10940-019-09439-4
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_25_1
  doi: 10.1080/09546553.2013.876414
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_59_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.09.022
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_42_1
  doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01222
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_30_1
  doi: 10.1080/10584609.2017.1316807
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_57_1
  doi: 10.12795/revistafuentes.2022.20240
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_13_1
  doi: 10.1007/s10677-019-10002-0
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_77_1
  doi: 10.1080/09546553.2018.1442329
– volume-title: Research using social media; users' views
  year: 2014
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_14_1
– volume-title: Jihad trending—A comprehensive analysis of online extremism and how to counter it
  year: 2014
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_56_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_41_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_95_1
  doi: 10.5038/1944-0472.7.3.2
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_23_1
  doi: 10.1177/14614448211017527
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_121_1
  doi: 10.1177/1461444809342775
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_36_1
  doi: 10.1093/esr/jcaa053
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_118_1
  doi: 10.1177/00938548221104738
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_87_1
  doi: 10.1007/s10579-020-09502-8
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_58_1
  doi: 10.2196/jmir.9044
– volume-title: The politics of hate speech law
  year: 2020
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_21_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_5_1
  doi: 10.1037/a0018251
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_79_1
  doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139042871.006
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_10_1
  doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aao5948
– volume-title: Stress, appraisal, and coping
  year: 1984
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_62_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_37_1
  doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-26450-5_2
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_49_1
  doi: 10.1080/08838151.2018.1532430
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_26_1
  doi: 10.3233/DEV-230341
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_33_1
  doi: 10.2307/2669529
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_122_1
  doi: 10.1002/cl2.1244
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_68_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.ipm.2019.102087
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_88_1
  doi: 10.4018/978-1-4666-5206-4.ch007
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_81_1
  doi: 10.1177/2158244020973022
– volume-title: Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change
  year: 2015
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_85_1
– start-page: 247
  volume-title: Practical meta‐analysis
  year: 2001
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_65_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_8_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.03.008
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_14_1
  doi: 10.1080/15205436.2019.1655768
– start-page: 56
  year: 2020
  ident: e_1_2_13_2_4_1
  article-title: Deep‐rooted prejudices: The online proliferation of hate speech against the roma minority group in Romania
  publication-title: Politics and Knowledge: New Trends in Social Research
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_75_1
  doi: 10.1177/14614448221125417
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_33_1
  doi: 10.1080/10584609.2020.1736700
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_83_1
  doi: 10.33972/jhs.124
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_94_1
  doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2018.304402
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_47_1
  doi: 10.1177/1461444809342775
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_50_1
  doi: 10.3233/DEV-170233
– volume-title: Analysis of factors related to hate crime and terrorism. Final Report to the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism
  year: 2012
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_7_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_124_1
  doi: 10.1002/cl2.1174
– volume-title: Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory
  year: 1986
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_11_1
– start-page: 17
  volume-title: Media effects: Advances in theory and research
  year: 1994
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_45_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_52_1
  doi: 10.1080/01639625.2016.1196985
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_84_1
  doi: 10.1057/978-1-137-52667-0_5
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_35_1
  doi: 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_44_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_16_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2018.05.006
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_100_1
  doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2016.303512
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_20_1
  doi: 10.1108/ITP-09-2014-0198
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_31_1
  doi: 10.1111/pops.12557
– volume-title: Understanding Lone‐actor Terrorism: A Comparative Analysis with Violent Hate Crimes and Group‐based Terrorism—Report to the Resilient Systems Division, Science and Technology Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
  year: 2013
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_6_1
– volume-title: Propaganda 2.0: Psychological effects of right‐wing and islamic extremist internet videos
  year: 2013
  ident: e_1_2_13_2_28_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_35_1
  doi: 10.1002/ab.21737
– start-page: 69
  volume-title: Media effects: Advances in theory and research
  year: 2017
  ident: e_1_2_13_3_22_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_13_1
– ident: e_1_2_13_2_16_1
  doi: 10.1177/0002764202045006003
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_115_1
  doi: 10.3390/ijerph16203992
– ident: e_1_2_13_3_114_1
  doi: 10.3390/ijerph15092030
SSID ssj0001637114
Score 2.3111398
SecondaryResourceType review_article
Snippet The Problem People use social media platforms to chat, search, and share information, express their opinions, and connect with others. But these platforms also...
People use social media platforms to chat, search, and share information, express their opinions, and connect with others. But these platforms also facilitate...
The Problem People use social media platforms to chat, search, and share information, express their opinions, and connect with others. But these platforms also...
Abstract The Problem People use social media platforms to chat, search, and share information, express their opinions, and connect with others. But these...
SourceID doaj
pubmedcentral
proquest
pubmed
crossref
wiley
SourceType Open Website
Open Access Repository
Aggregation Database
Index Database
Publisher
StartPage e70018
SubjectTerms Aggression
Attitude change
Behavior
Beliefs
Bullying
Bystanders
Change agents
Consensus
Data collection
Discrimination
Emotions
Ethnic Stereotypes
Evidence
exposure to hate
Extremism
Groups
Hate crimes
Hate speech
Hostility
impact assessment
Internet
Intervention
Life satisfaction
Mental depression
Meta Analysis
Methodological problems
Minority groups
Negative Attitudes
Policy making
Political attitudes
Political violence
Prejudice
Propaganda
Psychological aspects
Race
Racism
Religion
Rural areas
Sexual orientation
Social media
Social networks
Social Problems
Speech
Stereotypes
Suicide
Systematic review
Systematic Reviews
Variables
Victimization
Victims of Crime
Violence
Well Being
SummonAdditionalLinks – databaseName: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
  dbid: DOA
  link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV3NbtQwELZQT70g_gksaIoQ4hKa-CdxuLVVqwoBJyp6i2zHVle0SbXdShx5BG68H0_CjJ1sdwWIC8eMrdjxjO0v9sw3jL0sQ6mDtCGvuXe5NFbkVlUut4gdfJA-OEmBwh8-Vscn8t2pOl1L9UU-YYkeOA3crhG-MYIbhClG8hKXllopbFkFjli7trT64p639jMVT1cqUSPSn6iECr7rzvkbumPVGxtQ5On_E7j83UdyHbvGzefoDrs9okbYS729y275_h6bpdBa-OzPg1l4eAWTYFh8uc9-HH69HOj8D5YDnCGkhHkPiRgDTN8BttfN00kgxPiRt7AHN8TOkIJaYtULvzQ_v303I4EJDAEQN0KKsExPKPVTe0MP81Wc11V8g0txKMTe-oCdHB1-OjjOxzQMuZN1oXPfUNo-XIgaXdWBQGDRFJ6o_kKQoXbcuEo1HiVF0IE72wkpreG1rnyHi5h4yLb6ofePGWgEB0G6oguWWBG9toI73XUUx-lUV2bsxaSb9jKxbbSJV5m3qMA2KjBj-6S1VQUiyI4CNJt2NJv2X2aTsdmk83actVetILoy3L2pjZ1VMc43ukQxvR-uqY6ii6tGqYw9Siay6okgMkSESBnTG8az0dXNkn5-Fjm9y7IWlW5wBF5HO_v757cH76OzgH7yP8bhKdvmlNE4etXN2NZyce2fIcxa2udxRv0CxEYojg
  priority: 102
  providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals
– databaseName: Wiley Online Library Open Access
  dbid: 24P
  link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwjV3LbtQwFLVK2bBB5R06IIMQYhMavxIHVqVqVSFALKjoLrIdm44oSTUzlVjyCez4P76Ee-0kwwiQWMZ2Yif3XvvE9jkm5AkLTAdpQ15x73JprMitKl1uATv4IH1wEonCb9-Vxyfy9ak63SIvRy5M0oeYJtwwMmJ_jQFu7HJvLRrqzvlzXDTVV8hVpNaicD6X79cTLKWoWNT2ZrpmOdOFGJWFCr433b0xHkXZ_r9hzT-3TP4OZeNYdLRDrg8gku4nq98gW767SWaJaUs_-vNgFp4-pWNCv_h8i_w4_HrR43QgXfX0DBAmnXc0fQdqupZCfe08TQzSSCd5QffpWueZJo5LLPrFr8zPb9_NoGdC-0ABRtJEuExXkOrH-vqOzifa1zI-wSVaCoq53iYnR4cfDo7z4VSG3Mmq0Lmv8RQ_6JdqXVYBMWFRFx6V_0KQoXLcuFLVHlKKoAN3thVSWsMrXfoW-jRxh2x3fefvEaoBKwTpijZYFEn02grudNsirdOplmXk8Wib5iKJbzRJZpk3YMAmGjAjr9BqUwHUy44J_eJTM4RfY4SvjeAGwK6RnMEAVSkF_qsChz-2ymZkNtq8GYJ42QhUL4PBHOt4NGVD-OGaiul8f4llFK5j1Upl5G5ykaklArURATFlRG84z0ZTN3O6-VmU-GasEiW4bUaeRT_79-s3B2_i3gF9__-L7pJrHI8xjlvpZmR7tbj0DwBbrezDGEO_ANd-IT0
  priority: 102
  providerName: Wiley-Blackwell
Title Exposure to hate in online and traditional media: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the impact of this exposure on individuals and communities
URI https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002%2Fcl2.70018
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39822240
https://www.proquest.com/docview/3179067818
https://www.proquest.com/docview/3156798955
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC11736891
https://doaj.org/article/a3e9a32a774a421eb1755ebe5f24877b
Volume 21
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwfV1Lb9QwELZoKyEuCMorsKwMQohLaOJH4nBBbbVVhaCqEBW9RbZjtytKsuxuJY78BG78P34JM3ayZcXjGMeKncx4_GU88w0hz3KfKy-MT0vmbCq04amRhU0NYAfnhfNWYKLwu6Pi8ES8OZWnvcNt0YdVDjYxGOqms-gj3-FIJQWWNVevZ19SrBqFp6t9CY0NsgUmWMHP19be5Oj4_ZWXpeAlIP6BUihjO_aCvcSzVrW2EQW-_r-BzD9jJX_HsGETOrhFbvboke5Gcd8m11y7Ta4PYcXbZBSzbelHd-H13NHndGjo5p_ukB-Tr7MOXYJ02dFzQJl02tLIlUF121AYuplG5yANKSWv6C694nqmMc8ldP3slvrnt--65zShnacAJWlMuoxX0OqG8bqWTlepX4vwBBtTU5DQ9S45OZh82D9M-8oMqRVlplJXYSU_sE2VKkqPuDCrMofsf94LX1qmbSErBy2ZV55Z03AhjGalKlwDdo3fI5tt17oHhCrAC17YrPEGiRKdMpxZ1TSY2mllkyfk6SCmehYJOOpItcxqkGUdZJmQPRTgqgNyZoeGbn5W90uw1txVmjMNgFcLlsMmVUoJOiw9g7-20iRkNIi_7hfyor5Su4Q8Wd2GJYjnKrp13SX2kXiWVUmZkPtRW1Yz4ciPCKgpIWpNj9amun6nnZ4Hmu88L3mhKvgCL4LK_fv16_23IX5APfz_KzwiNxiWLw4hdCOyuZxfuseAqZZmTDaYOB73y2ccPBO_APaEJo0
linkProvider ProQuest
linkToHtml http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV3NbtQwEB6VrQRcEJS_wAIGAeISmjhO4iAh1JattnS7QqhVewuOY9MVJVl2twJuPAI33oKH4kkY28kuK35uPca2HCczY3-2Z74BeBjqkGtWaD-lSvpMFJFfxIn0C8QOSjOlJTOBwnvDpH_AXh3FRyvwo42FMW6V7ZxoJ-qyluaMfD0yVFI4s4b8xfijb7JGmdvVNoWGU4td9eUTbtmmz3deonwfUbrd29_q-01WAV-yNOC-ykwWOrSrjCepNpgmyAJlmOu0ZjqVVMgkzhSWBJprKosyYqwQNOWJKtEmI-z3HKyyCLcyHVjd7A1fv1mc6iTYT8haCqOArssT-tTc7fKlhc_mB_gbqP3TN_N3zGwXve3LcKlBq2TDqdcVWFHVGpxv3ZjXoOuie8mhOtFioshj0hbUk_dX4Xvv87g2R5BkVpNjRLVkVBHHzUFEVRJ8dTlyh5HEhrA8IxtkwS1NXFyNbfpBzcTPr99Ew6FCak0QuhIX5OmesFS176srMpqHmk1tD9KFwhgC2WtwcCYyuw6dqq7UTSAc8YlmMih1YYgZFS8iKnlZmlBSGZehBw9aMeVjR_iRO2pnmqMscytLDzaNAOcNDEe3Lagn7_LG5HMRqUxEVCDAFoyGuCimcYw2E2uKu8S08KDbij9vJo5pvlBzD-7Pq9HkzT2OqFR9atrE5u4si2MPbjhtmY8kMnyMiNI84Et6tDTU5ZpqdGxpxcMwjRKe4R94YlXu35-fbw2svwK_9f9PuAcX-vt7g3ywM9y9DRepSZ1s3fe60JlNTtUdxHOz4m5jRATenrXd_gJzaF-M
linkToPdf http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV3dbtMwFD4anTRxg2D8BQoYBIib0MRxEgcJof202tioJsS03QXHsVnFSErbCbjjEbjjXXgcnoRjO2mp-LnbZR3LSXrOsb_Y5_sOwMNQh1yzQvspVdJnooj8Ik6kXyB2UJopLZkhCr8aJjuH7OVxfLwCP1oujEmrbOdEO1GXtTR75L3ISEnhzBrynm7SIg62By_GH31TQcqctLblNJyL7Kkvn_Dzbfp8dxtt_YjSQf_N1o7fVBjwJUsD7qvMVKTDGMt4kmqDb4IsUEbFTmumU0mFTOJMYUuguaayKCPGCkFTnqgS4zPCcS_AKo6RBh1Y3ewPD14vdngSHCdkrZxRQHvylD4157x8aRG0tQL-BnD_zNP8HT_bBXBwGS41yJVsOFe7AiuqWoe1NqV5HbqO6UuO1KkWE0Uek7ahnry_Ct_7n8e12Y4ks5qcIMIlo4o4nQ4iqpLgrcuR25gkls7yjGyQhc40cRwb2_WDmomfX7-JRk-F1JogjCWO8Ol-Yatq71dXZDSnnU3tCNLRYoyY7DU4PBebXYdOVVfqJhCOWEUzGZS6MCKNihcRlbwsDa1UxmXowYPWTPnYiX_kTuaZ5mjL3NrSg01jwHkHo9dtG-rJu7wJ_1xEKhMRFQi2BaMhLpBpHGP8xJriF2NaeNBtzZ83k8g0X7i8B_fnlzH8zZmOqFR9ZvrE5hwti2MPbjhvmT9JZLQZEbF5wJf8aOlRl69UoxMrMR6GaZTwDP-BJ9bl_v36-da-zV3gt_7_CvdgDeM1398d7t2Gi9RUUbaZfF3ozCZn6g5Cu1lxt4khAm_PO2x_AclWY8E
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Exposure+to+hate+in+online+and+traditional+media%3A+A+systematic+review+and+meta%E2%80%90analysis+of+the+impact+of+this+exposure+on+individuals+and+communities&rft.jtitle=Campbell+systematic+review&rft.au=Madriaza%2C+Pablo&rft.au=Hassan%2C+Ghayda&rft.au=Brouillette%E2%80%90Alarie%2C+S%C3%A9bastien&rft.au=Mounchingam%2C+Aoudou+Njingouo&rft.date=2025-03-01&rft.pub=John+Wiley+and+Sons+Inc&rft.eissn=1891-1803&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=1&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002%2Fcl2.70018&rft.externalDocID=PMC11736891
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1891-1803&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1891-1803&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1891-1803&client=summon