New psychological model explains why antisemitism emerges on both the right and the left

A new psychological model provides evidence that believing Jewish people hold excessive societal power fuels antisemitism across opposite ends of the political and ideological spectrum. The findings indicate that tailored educational and social interventions might be needed to address prejudice depending on a person’s underlying worldview. The study was published in the journal American Psychologist.

Antisemitism involves prejudice, discrimination, and hostility directed at Jewish people. The researchers note that this specific form of bias presents two paradoxes in the social sciences. First, people generally tend to respect or defer to individuals they view as powerful. Yet, when prejudiced individuals perceive Jewish people as powerful, they respond with hostility and suspicion rather than respect.

Second, antisemitism surfaces among people with entirely opposed ideological beliefs. It is found among individuals who strongly support social hierarchies, meaning they believe certain groups should naturally dominate others in society. It also appears among those who strongly oppose social hierarchies and actively advocate for an equal society without class divisions.

“Although I’m Jewish and study hierarchy, I was never particularly interested in antisemitism as a research topic,” said Britt Hadar, an assistant professor at Reichman University. “I knew it was real, I knew it was persistent, and I knew it was hard to mitigate, but I mainly kept it outside the center of my work.”

Hadar explained that ignoring the topic became harder to do in recent years. The specific idea for the study emerged after she listened to an interview with the historian Christopher Clark. “He made an observation that really stayed with me: antisemitism often intensifies when Jews are highly assimilated, integrated into society, and occupy visible positions of influence and power,” Hadar said.

Free daily newsletter

“That made me think there may be something psychological in this process,” she continued. “Maybe antisemitism is tied to perceptions of Jewish power. And maybe that perceived power threatens people in different ways, depending on how they think about hierarchy. That idea became the basis for this paper.”

To explain these contradictions, the scientists developed the dual-threat model of antisemitism. The model suggests that the core driver of modern antisemitic attitudes is the perception that Jewish people possess an excessive amount of power and control over important societal resources. This perceived power triggers different psychological threats depending on a person’s political or social worldview.

For supporters of social hierarchy, the perceived power of Jewish people threatens their own group’s dominance. These individuals desire to see their own social group at the top of the societal ladder. Believing that a minority group holds significant influence challenges that desire and makes intergroup relations feel highly competitive.

On the other hand, for opponents of social hierarchy, perceived Jewish power threatens their vision of an egalitarian society. An egalitarian society is one where all people are treated equally and have the same opportunities for success. These individuals tend to view society through a lens of oppressors and the oppressed. Perceiving Jewish people as an overly powerful group positions them as a barrier to total equality.

To test this model, the authors recruited participants through an online survey platform. The initial sample underwent a screening process where individuals who failed an attention check were removed. The final sample included 1,765 adults from six different countries. These countries were the United States, Mexico, Australia, the United Kingdom, Germany, and Poland.

The researchers measured several specific psychological and ideological traits using numerical rating scales ranging from one to seven points. Participants read various statements and indicated how much they agreed or disagreed with them. One set of questions measured perceived Jewish power. This included items asking if participants believed Jewish people have too much control over global affairs or international financial markets.

The survey also measured the two types of perceived threats. Participants answered questions assessing whether they felt Jewish successes come at the expense of their own group. This captured the perceived threat to in-group dominance. They also answered questions about whether Jewish successes undermine equality in society, which measured the perceived threat to egalitarianism.

To understand participants’ broader worldviews, the scientists measured pro-hierarchy and anti-hierarchy beliefs. They used a concept called social dominance orientation to identify people who prefer group-based hierarchies and inequality. People who score high in this area tend to view certain groups as inferior. They also measured right-wing authoritarianism, which captures a preference for strict obedience to authority, strong leaders, and punitive measures against dissenters.

To capture anti-hierarchy beliefs, the survey measured left-wing authoritarianism. This concept involves a willingness to use forceful or coercive measures, such as censorship, to achieve social equality and dismantle existing power structures. The survey also included questions to assess general dedication to egalitarian causes and fairness. Finally, the researchers measured antisemitic attitudes using established psychological scales that capture prejudiced beliefs, malicious stereotypes, and mistrust.

The data provided evidence supporting the dual-threat model. The researchers found that perceiving Jewish people as powerful strongly predicted feelings of threat to both in-group dominance and egalitarian ideals. These feelings of threat, in turn, strongly predicted antisemitic attitudes across the sample.

The participants’ ideological worldviews amplified these effects. Among individuals who endorsed hierarchical societies, believing that Jewish people hold power strongly predicted a threat to their own group’s dominance. Among individuals who opposed hierarchical societies, perceiving Jewish power strongly predicted a threat to their egalitarian ideals.

“Antisemitism is often tied to the perception that Jews are powerful, influential, or in control,” Hadar told PsyPost. “This helps explain why antisemitism can appear on very different sides of the ideological spectrum, and why reducing it may require understanding the specific kind of threat people perceive.”

The scientists also wanted to know if these psychological dynamics apply exclusively to Jewish people or to other minority groups seen as successful. To do this, they asked participants the exact same set of questions about Asian people. This allowed the researchers to compare prejudice against two different groups that are often stereotyped as having high social status, competence, and wealth.

When comparing attitudes toward Jewish people and Asian people, the researchers found notable differences. Participants in the sample viewed Jewish people as significantly more powerful and attributed more malicious intent to them compared to Asian people. The statistical model also explained a much larger portion of the variations in antisemitism than it did for anti-Asian prejudice.

“Because both Jews and Asian people are often stereotyped as ‘successful,’ we also examined whether the model could explain anti-Asian prejudice,” Hadar said. “We found that it did, but to a much lesser extent than it explained antisemitism. This was really interesting to me because it shows how societal narratives shape the way people feel threatened by different groups.”

This comparison suggests that while the model can help explain prejudice against other high-status groups, it is especially relevant to antisemitism. The authors note that Jewish people make up a tiny fraction of the global population. The perception of their immense global power appears to be shaped by deep-rooted historical conspiracy narratives rather than actual numerical representation.

The researchers point out a few limitations and potential misinterpretations of their work. The study relies on correlational data gathered from surveys at a single point in time. This means it cannot definitively prove that perceived power directly causes these specific feelings of threat. Future experimental research that manipulates perceptions of power in a controlled setting is needed to provide evidence of a direct causal relationship.

The model’s findings also varied slightly depending on the country. The interaction between perceived power and anti-hierarchy ideology on feelings of threat only appeared in the United States and Australia. The authors suggest that the meaning and expression of anti-hierarchy beliefs might differ across cultural and political contexts around the world.

Another area for future research involves understanding the role of perceived legitimacy in intergroup relations. The researchers suggest exploring how people react when they believe a group has gained power in an unfair or unusual way, rather than through accepted social norms. Clarifying the difference between perceived power, which involves control over resources, and perceived status, which involves social respect, might also refine the model in future studies.

The findings highlight new directions for educational and social interventions aimed at reducing bias. Because antisemitism arises from different types of perceived threats, generic approaches might not work. Tailored strategies that address a specific political group’s unique fears might be more effective at reducing prejudice.

The study, “The Perils of Perceived Power: The Dual-Threat Model of Antisemitism,” was authored by Britt Hadar, Nir Halevy, Taya R. Cohen, Evan P. Apfelbaum, and Lauren Chan.