“If you prick us, do we not bleed?” Antisemitism and psychosocial health among Jews in Germany

fpsyg-15-1499295 December 27, 2024 Time: 16:23 # 1 TYPE Original Research PUBLISHED 07 January 2025 DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1499295 OPEN ACCESS EDITED BY Ralph Erich Schmidt, University of Geneva, Switzerland REVIEWED BY Judith Meijer, University of Humanistic Studies, Netherlands Johannes Due Enstad, Norwegian Institute for Social Research (ISF), Norway *CORRESPONDENCE Maor Shani maor[email protected] RECEIVED 20 September 2024 ACCEPTED 17 December 2024 PUBLISHED 07 January 2025 CITATION Shani M, Goldberg D and van Zalk MHW (2025) “If you prick us, do we not bleed?” Antisemitism and psychosocial health among Jews in Germany. Front. Psychol. 15:1499295. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1499295 COPYRIGHT © 2025 Shani, Goldberg and van Zalk. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. “If you prick us, do we not bleed?” Antisemitism and psychosocial health among Jews in Germany Maor Shani*, Dana Goldberg and Maarten H. W. van Zalk Department of Developmental Psychology, Institute for Psychology, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany Introduction: Amid escalating global antisemitism, particularly following the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, this study addresses critical gaps in understanding the psychosocial impact of antisemitism on Jewish communities worldwide. Methods: Focusing on the Jewish community in Germany, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of 420 Jewish individuals (mean age = 40.71 years, SD = 15.90; 57% female). Participants completed measures assessing four distinct forms of perceived and experienced antisemitism: everyday discrimination, microaggressions (subtle antisemitism and collective experiences such as encountering antisemitic comments on social media), vigilance against antisemitism, and perceived prevalence of antisemitism. Psychosocial outcomes—including depression, anxiety, subjective well-being, and social participation—were also measured. Data were analyzed using correlation analyses and multiple linear regressions, and Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) identified distinct groups based on shared perceptions and experiences of antisemitism and levels of Jewish identification. Results: Results indicate that experiences of antisemitism, particularly everyday discriminatory acts, were significantly associated with poorer mental health outcomes and reduced social participation. The LPA revealed three distinct groups, with the high-identity, high-antisemitism group (53% of the sample) reporting significantly higher anxiety levels than those with average identification and more rare experience with antisemitism. Discussion: These findings underscore the pervasive nature of antisemitism and its detrimental effects on the well-being of Jewish individuals. The study highlights the need for targeted interventions to promote resilience within Jewish communities and calls for broader societal efforts to combat antisemitism. KEYWORDS antisemitism, perceived discrimination, racism-related stress, Jewish identity, microaggressions Frontiers in Psychology 01 frontiersin.org fpsyg-15-1499295 December 27, 2024 Time: 16:23 # 2 Shani et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1499295 1 Introduction Antisemitic incidents have surged worldwide, increasing by 235% in 2023, particularly in the United States and Europe (AntiDefamation League, 2024). Following the Hamas attack on Israel on 7 October 2023, the German Association for Research and Information on Antisemitism (RIAS) documented 994 antisemitic incidents in Germany between October 7 and November 9—a 320% increase over the same period in 2022 (Fischer and Wetzels, 2024). These incidents, ranging from violence and property damage to threats and offensive behavior, have eroded the Jewish community’s sense of safety. A 2024 report by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights found that 77% of Jewish respondents in Germany viewed public hostility toward Jews as a significant problem, with 52% personally experiencing antisemitism in public spaces (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2024). Given this alarming situation, it is crucial to ask: what are the consequences of antisemitism? At the societal level, antisemitism— like other forms of racial discrimination and bigotry—may damage social cohesion, reducing trust and cooperation among community members (Bonick, 2021). In Germany, it hinders reconciliation with the past and the commitment to Holocaust remembrance and nurturing Jewish life (Jikeli, 2020). From a human rights perspective, antisemitism infringes upon basic freedoms, including freedom of religion, equality, and the ability to practice cultural life free from harassment (OHCHR, 2019). Importantly, antisemitism may detrimentally affect victims’ everyday lives, psychological health, and wellbeing. Persistent exposure may lead to chronic stress, anxiety, and depression among Jewish individuals, potentially impacting their overall quality of life (Harrell, 2000;Rosen et al., 2018). The fear of antisemitism can result in behavioral changes, such as concealing one’s Jewish identity or avoiding public spaces, leading to social isolation and reduced participation in community life (Himmelstein et al., 2015;Watson-Singleton et al., 2019). These effects may extend beyond the individual, influencing family dynamics, career choices, and residential decisions, thereby shaping the broader Jewish experience in contemporary society. Indeed, extensive social psychology research shows that chronic exposure to discrimination among stigmatized groups is linked to maladaptive physiological outcomes like high blood pressure, obesity, and diabetes (Pascoe and Richman, 2009;Lee and Ahn, 2012). It also affects psychosocial health, including depression, anxiety, social interactions, subjective wellbeing (SWB), and selfesteem (Pascoe and Richman, 2009;Schmitt et al., 2014;Paradies et al., 2015;Williams et al., 2019;Priest et al., 2021;Emmer et al., 2024). The theory of racism-related stress posits that racism, whether perceived or real, acts as a chronic psychological stressor, detrimentally impacting both mental and physical health over time (Harrell, 2000;Ong et al., 2009;O’Connor et al., 2021;Ahuja and Haeny, 2024). Racial stigma spans social contexts and can be a source of devaluation (Miller and Kaiser, 2001). Repeated exposure to racism may lead to chronic overactivation of stress pathways, contributing to metabolic issues that impair development and potentially cause early aging, heart disease, and other illnesses (Selvarajah et al., 2022). Notably, even microaggressions—subtle and sometimes unintentional discrimination—can cause chronic stress that negatively affects mental health and quality of life, indicating poor psychological adjustment (Hu and Taylor, 2016; Lui and Quezada, 2019). These effects have been observed across various minority groups, although most research has focused on American minorities like Blacks, Latinos, and Asians. Despite a growing body of research on the outcomes of racism, relatively little is known about the impact of antisemitism on Jewish communities across the diaspora (Enstad, 2023;Walker et al., 2024). This gap is notable, given that research consistently shows Jews report significantly higher fear of victimization compared to other religious groups (Enstad, 2024;Scheitle et al., 2023). Using data from the EU Fundamental Rights Agency’s 2018 survey, Enstad (2024) found that higher perceived prevalence of societal antisemitism strongly predicts experiences of antisemitic victimization, including harassment and violence. Furthermore, country-level unfavorable opinions of Israel and the presence of larger Muslim populations were identified as predictors of increased experiences and perceptions of antisemitic victimization, supporting the concept of “new antisemitism.” Several factors contribute to this research gap. First, perceiving Jews as “white” in race, class, and culture has led to their exclusion from core analyses in racism research. This “passing” as white, while sometimes seen as advantageous, paradoxically fuels antisemitic attitudes viewing Jews as part of an undeserved elite (Stein et al., 2024). Second, the misconception of antisemitism as a historical artifact with little contemporary relevance persists, despite the current surge in anti-Jewish rhetoric and hate crimes (Kressel and Kressel, 2016). Third, the complexity and evolving nature of antisemitism across societal segments presents significant methodological challenges for researchers (Salzborn et al., 2011). Lastly, ongoing debates about what constitutes antisemitism, particularly regarding the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and the concept of “New antisemitism,” have politicized the topic, making it contentious even in scholarly fields (Waxman et al., 2022). We adopted Zick et al.’s (2011) definition of antisemitism as “a social prejudice directed against Jews simply because they are Jewish.” This definition provides a broad socio-psychological lens for examining the associations between perceived or experienced antisemitism and psychosocial health, focusing on individual perceptions and responses. However, we also recognize the importance of definitions that address the specific contemporary manifestations of antisemitism, such as the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition. The IHRA definition delineates explicit examples of antisemitism, including Holocaust denial, conspiracy theories, and anti-Israel rhetoric (Weitzman, 2019). We utilized this discourse-specific IHRA definition to construct measurement items reflecting contemporary expressions of antisemitism (see below). Perceived antisemitism, adapted from definitions of perceived discrimination (Pascoe and Richman, 2009;Schmitt et al., 2014;Williams and Mohammed, 2009), refers to the subjective experience of being treated unfairly, excluded, or denigrated because one’s Jewish identity. Building on Zick et al.’s (2011) definition, perceived antisemitism encompasses individuals’ interpretations of behaviors, beliefs, or institutional practices that they attribute to antisemitic bias. This definition acknowledges that the psychosocial effects of antisemitism depend on the victim’s perception of discrimination, regardless of the perpetrator’s intent or whether the incident aligns with societal definitions of antisemitism. Consequently, the terms “perceived antisemitism” Frontiers in Psychology 02 frontiersin.org fpsyg-15-1499295 December 27, 2024 Time: 16:23 # 3 Shani et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1499295 and “experienced antisemitism” are used interchangeably throughout this article to reflect the subjective nature of these reports. While we situate perceived antisemitism within theoretical frameworks on racial discrimination, we also emphasize that antisemitism possesses unique historical, cultural, and social characteristics, as well as distinctive contemporary expressions, as highlighted in ongoing academic debates (e.g., Cousin and Fine, 2012;Yuval-Davis, 2024). Nevertheless, we believe that established theoretical models linking experiences of racism to psychosocial health outcomes, such as racism-related stress (Harrell, 2000), minority stress theory (Meyer, 2003), and linked lives theory (Elder et al., 2003), offer valuable insights into the effects of antisemitism. These frameworks have been successfully applied across multiple forms of discrimination, including antisemitism (e.g., Rosen et al., 2018;Trilesnik et al., 2022). Despite limited research, some recent studies have examined the psychological impact of antisemitism. In the United States, direct experiences of antisemitism have been linked to lower life satisfaction, decreased wellbeing, reduced self-esteem, and larger negative affect (Altman, 2011;Chase, 2018;Rosen et al., 2018). Such experiences also strongly predict feelings of being an outsider within one’s community (Alper and Olson, 2011) and correlate with higher levels of depression and a greater propensity for survivor guilt (Kosdon et al., 2021). However, instruments like the Antisemitism-Related Stress Inventory—which combine exposure frequency and stress reactions—make it challenging to isolate the specific impact on wellbeing (Paradies et al., 2015). In Canada, both explicit and ambiguous discrimination have been found to predict increased depressive symptoms among Jewish individuals (Matheson et al., 2019). Similarly, in Australia, concerns about antisemitism and Israel following traumatic events were positively related to increased anxiety, mediating the impact of exposure to graphic and distressing content on social media (Bankier-Karp and Graham, 2024). Although German studies are fewer, they reveal comparable patterns: experiences of antisemitism are associated with heightened worries, fears, and perceived burdens (Zick et al., 2017), significantly limiting individuals’ lives and hindering self-determination (Reimer-Gordinskaya and Tzschiesche, 2021). Among German and Austrian ex-Soviet Jews, perceived antisemitism predicts lower quality of life, while mental health appears more adversely affected by perceived xenophobia than by perceived antisemitism (Trilesnik et al., 2022). Collectively, these studies show consistent associations between perceived antisemitism and negative mental health outcomes among Jewish individuals—including decreased life satisfaction, increased anxiety and depression, and feelings of social exclusion. However, prior research predominantly focused on blatant, overt discrimination based on ethnic or religious affiliation. To better capture contemporary Jewish experiences with antisemitism in Western societies, it is necessary to address additional domains. Modern antisemitism manifests in complex forms beyond direct discrimination, often appearing as cultural codes, tropes, or metonymical worldviews within political, historical, and cultural contexts (Schuller, 2021). These include conspiracy theories, stereotypes, and delegitimizing beliefs about Israel as a Jewish collectivity (Weitzman, 2019). Moreover, antisemitism frequently appears as subtle microaggressions and collective-discursive forms, especially in online spaces and public discourse (Becker and Bolton, 2022;Weitzman et al., 2023). These developments mirror the evolution of modern racism and prejudice. Research suggests that ethno-racial prejudice is nowadays more likely expressed subtly or symbolically, as overt expressions are socially unacceptable (Pettigrew and Meertens, 1995;Akrami et al., 2000;Stanke et al., 2024). And still, recent studies indicated that subtle prejudice is no less harmful to minorities’ adjustment outcomes than blatant discrimination (Jones et al., 2016), whether these acts are attributed by targets to racism (Carter and Murphy, 2015;Platow et al., 2022) or cause stress due to their ambiguous interpretation (Cuevas et al., 2024). In this context, racial microaggressions are identified as subtle, indirect expressions of racism (Kanter et al., 2017). Parallel to such subtle manifestations of antisemitism, Jewish experiences can be affected by vicarious racism—indirect exposure through hearing about or witnessing racism in one’s environment or media (Harrell, 2000;Gee et al., 2012;Himmelstein et al., 2015;Heard-Garris et al., 2018). Social identity theory posits that self-image may be influenced by collective self-esteem, shaped by perceptions of norms and outgroup evaluations (Crocker and Major, 1989;Tajfel and Turner, 2004;Liang and Fassinger, 2008). Actions that devalue or stigmatize the ingroup may negatively affect self-concept and contribute to cumulative racism-related stress on psychosocial health. The theory of linked lives suggests that injustices against ingroup members lead to personal distress (Elder et al., 2003;Gee et al., 2012). Neuroscience evidence indicates that indirect racism can have spillover effects, activating brain regions associated with ostracism, exclusion, and rejection (Masten et al., 2013;Berger and Sarnyai, 2015). These notions suggest that racist or traumatic events can impact health among targeted group members (e.g., Tynes et al., 2019) or even extend beyond the immediate ingroup. Finally, research on minority stressors has focused on concealing one’s identity to avoid victimization (e.g., Beyer et al., 2024;Meyer, 2003;Lo et al., 2024). Vigilance to racial discrimination involves heightened attentiveness to the environment in anticipation of experiencing racism (Sawyer et al., 2012;Himmelstein et al., 2015). Beyer et al. (2024) recently found that hiding or concealing one’s Jewish identity among German Jews was more common among young individuals and those living in areas with higher perceived Muslim population, while direct experiences with antisemitic harassment was less predictive of such vigilance. While sometimes a coping mechanism, this vigilance can lead to intense worry, persistent monitoring, and social avoidance—the consequences of living “on alert.” During the COVID-19 pandemic, waves of racism against Asian and Black Americans showed that vigilance practices independently contributed to racism-related stress (LaVeist et al., 2014;Chae et al., 2021). In the context of antisemitism, Jews may contend not only with antisemitic experiences but also with the anticipation of such encounters (Reimer-Gordinskaya and Tzschiesche, 2021). This anticipation may lead some to conceal their Jewish identity in public, such as avoiding Jewish symbols or disguising religious practices. Such measures can add to anticipatory stress or perseverative cognitions—chronic worries and fears—which exacerbate the negative effects of racism-related stress on physical and mental health (Sawyer et al., 2012). Frontiers in Psychology 03 frontiersin.org fpsyg-15-1499295 December 27, 2024 Time: 16:23 # 4 Shani et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1499295 In conclusion, given this complexity in contemporary prejudice, it is crucial to examine both overt discriminatory acts and subtle, collective forms of antisemitism to fully understand their psychological impact on Jewish individuals and communities. A comprehensive approach is therefore essential for capturing the unique characteristics of contemporary antisemitism and its potential effects on mental health and social behavior. 1.1 The present study This study aims to fill research gaps on perceived and experienced antisemitism and its outcomes by conducting a crosssectional analysis among Jews living in Germany. Nearly eight decades after the fall of the Third Reich, the Jewish community in Germany numbers about 100,000 individuals—barely 0.2% of the population—with many immigrants from the former Soviet Union (Geller and Meng, 2020). As antisemitic incidents rise globally, understanding their psychological toll becomes increasingly crucial. This understanding can inform targeted interventions to mitigate negative psychological consequences like anxiety, stress, and social withdrawal (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2024), raise awareness among policymakers for effective prevention strategies, and provide insights into resilience factors applicable to combating other forms of discrimination. Given Germany’s unique historical context, understanding contemporary antisemitism is essential for addressing the Holocaust’s legacy and ensuring the safety and wellbeing of Jewish communities. The main objective was to examine relationships between perceptions and experiences of antisemitism and indicators of psychosocial health. In our theoretical review, we emphasized the importance of considering various forms of antisemitic discrimination, as different types of experiences can have distinct psychological impacts (Paradies et al., 2015;Williams et al., 2019;Zick et al., 2017). Traditionally, research has focused on overt, blatant discrimination based on ethnic or religious affiliation, which we operationalized as perceived antisemitic discrimination or everyday antisemitism, adapted from “everyday racism” scales (Williams et al., 1997). However, recent literature highlights the significance of subtle forms of discrimination, such as microaggressions, which can be equally harmful to mental health (Jones et al., 2016;Sue, 2010). Based on Sue’s (2010) framework, we distinguished between two types of microaggressions: subtle antisemitism, which are covert, sometimes automatic responses from non-Jews relying on stereotypes and prejudice; and collective antisemitism, involving devaluations and antisemitic expressions communicated publicly without directly targeting individuals, such as exposure to antisemitic hate speech online. These forms capture both direct subtle insults and indirect or public expressions of antisemitism that individuals may encounter. Furthermore, the literature points to the unique effects of vigilance against antisemitism, which involves heightened alertness to discrimination and efforts to reduce the likelihood of being targeted, an experience found to contribute to poor mental health among minorities (Himmelstein et al., 2015). Lastly, we considered the perceived prevalence of antisemitism in society, as research shows that merely perceiving antisemitism as a significant societal issue can impact individuals’ wellbeing, even without direct or indirect experiences (Paradies et al., 2015;Williams et al., 2019;Zick et al., 2017). Each of these types captures different dimensions of antisemitic experiences that may uniquely contribute to psychosocial stress and health outcomes among Jews. Regarding psychosocial outcomes, we focused on common mental health indicators: depression and anxiety, which are frequently examined in the context of perceived discrimination and linked to negative long-term outcomes and poor quality of life (Schmitt et al., 2014;Priest et al., 2021). We also examined associations between perceived antisemitism and SWB, referring to overall life satisfaction (Diener, 1994). Finally, we explored the manifestation of antisemitism in social life. Social participation, an important aspect of social capital, is linked to both psychological and physiological health (Berkman et al., 2000). Limited research has so far been published on social participation as an outcome of discrimination. Limited research has examined social participation as an outcome of discrimination; among African Americans, discrimination was found to be a significant risk factor for social exclusion, contributing to poor mental health and feelings of isolation (Saasa, 2019). Our second objective was to identify and characterize different profiles among members of the Jewish community in Germany based on their experiences with antisemitism and their identification as Jews. By moving beyond linear relationships, we aimed to gain deeper insights through homogeneous clusters and data-driven typologies of antisemitism-related perceptions and experiences, revealing non-linear relationships that conventional methods might overlook. To achieve this, we utilized latent profile analysis (LPA), a flexible categorical modeling approach that classifies participants into latent clusters based on patterns across various variables (Spurk et al., 2020). To our knowledge, no prior studies have employed LPA in research on perceived antisemitism. In exploring profiles based on antisemitic perceptions and experiences, we included a measure of social identification with Jewish religious or ethno-national identity, as it may influence perceptions and experiences of antisemitism and interact with them to determine psychosocial outcomes. Jews may utilize their Jewish identity as a coping mechanism or buffer against the negative impact of such experiences (Branscombe et al., 1999; Schmitt et al., 2014), or they may distance themselves from the social category as a disengagement strategy (Becker and Tausch, 2014;van Veelen et al., 2020). Prior research has found consistent evidence for a positive relationship between Jewish identification and self-reported experiences of antisemitism (e.g., Dubow et al., 2000;Altman, 2011;Rebhun, 2014;Zick et al., 2017;Trilesnik et al., 2022;Enstad, 2024). Individuals with stronger Jewish identity may be more attuned to recognizing and interpreting incidents as antisemitic due to heightened awareness of Jewish issues and history (Friedlander et al., 2010). Higher ingroup identification may increase Jewish visibility, but can also increase resilience, suggesting that a stronger sense of group cohesion and identity confidence can attenuate the sense of fear and worry (Wallengren and Mellgren, 2015;Enstad, 2024). Social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner, 2004) provides a robust framework for understanding this relationship: individuals derive significant parts of their self-concept from group membership, including religious and ethnic identities. For strongly identified Jews, their Jewish identity becomes central to their self-concept, making them more sensitive to potential threats or discrimination against their Frontiers in Psychology 04 frontiersin.org fpsyg-15-1499295 December 27, 2024 Time: 16:23 # 5 Shani et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1499295 group (Kessler and Hollbach, 2005) and more vigilant about subtle forms of antisemitism or microaggressions (Sellers and Shelton, 2003). Furthermore, the rejection-identification model suggests that perceiving discrimination can lead to increased ingroup identification as a coping mechanism, creating a reciprocal relationship between Jewish identity strength and antisemitism perception (Branscombe et al., 1999). Together, these research goals have the potential to significantly contribute to social psychology and antisemitism research. By addressing the understudied psychosocial impact of antisemitism amid the recent global surge in incidents, this study aims to fill a crucial gap in the literature. Examining four distinct forms of perceived antisemitism provides a comprehensive framework for understanding how various manifestations affect mental health and social behavior. This approach may inform future studies on subtle and collective forms of prejudice across different minority groups. Investigating the role of Jewish identification in relation to antisemitic experiences and mental health outcomes could offer valuable insights into coping mechanisms and resilience factors applicable to other forms of discrimination. Employing LPA to identify distinct groups within the Jewish community introduces a novel methodology for understanding heterogeneous responses to discrimination. Ultimately, the findings have the potential to inform the development of targeted interventions to promote resilience among Jewish communities and guide broader efforts to combat antisemitism and other forms of discrimination. 2 Materials and methods All measures, data, and analysis files are publicly available at https://osf.io/4f7s5/?view_only= 5c91dd5391aa4726b495237194d8a972. The study was approved by the ethics committee of the authors’ institute. 2.1 Participants and procedure Due to the difficulty of obtaining a representative sample of the Jewish community in Germany, we employed a convenient snowball sampling method to recruit participants aged 18 and above who live in Germany and identify as Jewish. Recruitment was conducted through contacts with Jewish and professional organizations, mailing lists, and personal networks. A total of 619 individuals accessed the online survey between December 2022 and March 2023. After excluding 179 participants with over 90% missing data, four who selected “Christianity” as their religion (retaining three who identified as “Atheists”), and 16 who failed an attention check, the final sample comprised 420 participants—sufficient for statistical power (see Supplementary material). After signing a standard consent form, participants completed questionnaires assessing perceptions and experiences of antisemitism, outcome variables, sociodemographic and sociopolitical characteristics, and other measures not reported here. The average age of participants was 40.71 years (SD = 15.90). Gender distribution was 57% female (n= 239), 42% male (n= 177), and three participants chose “other.” German nationality was held by 78%, with the remainder mostly having dual German and Israeli citizenship, only Israeli citizenship, or citizenship of another European country. A majority (80%) had a migration background. Approximately half were born in Germany, 27% in the former Soviet Union, 13% in Israel, and 10% in other countries. Regarding education, 10% did not achieve a high-school diploma (Abitur or equivalent), 32% held a high-school diploma, and 43% had academic education—including 18% with a master’s degree and 10% with a doctoral degree. Socioeconomic status (SES) was perceived as “very good” by 14%, “good” by 50%, “medium” by 30%, “bad” by 6%, and “very bad” by one participant. Employment status included 41% full-time employed, 11% part-time employed, 20% students, and 7% retired. Marital status was 41% married, 19% in a relationship, nearly 30% single, 8% divorced, and 1% widowed; 48% had children. Over 60% resided in large cities with over 500,000 inhabitants, and only 7% lived in towns or villages with fewer than 20,000 residents. Most participants (82%) were members of Jewish communities across the country, and 32% frequently participated in community activities. 2.2 Measures All measures not originally in English, or without an existing validated German version, were translated using a forwardbackward translation procedure by a member of the research team highly proficient in both English and German. While we did not explicitly differentiate between online and offline experiences in our measures of everyday antisemitism and subtle antisemitism, these scales were designed to capture antisemitic encounters that could occur in any context, including both physical and virtual environments. Acknowledging the significant role of online platforms in the dissemination of antisemitic content (Becker et al., 2024), the collective antisemitism scale specifically includes items referring to online antisemitism, such as exposure to antisemitic comments on the internet or social networks (e.g., “You see antisemitic comments on the internet, e.g., in social networks”). 2.2.1 Everyday antisemitism To assess perceptions of direct discriminatory experiences, we used the German-translated Everyday Discrimination Scale (Williams et al., 1997). Participants rated nine items (e.g., “You are treated with less courtesy than other people are”; “People act as if they are afraid of you”) on a 5-point scale (1 = never to 5 = very often), indicating the frequency they felt discriminated against due to their Jewish, Israeli, or religious affiliation. The scale showed high internal consistency (α= 0.89). 2.2.2 Antisemitic microaggressions Antisemitic microaggressions were measured using a similar 5-point frequency scale. As mentioned earlier, we measured antisemitic microaggressions with two subscales: subtle and collective antisemitism. The collective antisemitism subscale included items referring to demonization and delegitimization of the Jewish state, in accordance with the IHRA definition of antisemitism and its contemporary manifestations (Weitzman, 2019), such as “You hear or read media reports that demonize Israel, the Israeli military, or the Israeli people.” Specifically, we aimed to cover the spectrum of contemporary manifestations of Frontiers in Psychology 05 frontiersin.org fpsyg-15-1499295 December 27, 2024 Time: 16:23 # 6 Shani et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1499295 antisemitism in Germany, including Holocaust-related secondary antisemitism and Israel-related antisemitism (Kempf, 2015). Specifically, subtle antisemitism was assessed with five items (e.g., “Someone makes you feel like you’re not part of German society”; “Someone makes you feel like you have to justify yourself for all sorts of things as a Jewish person”), showing good reliability (α= 0.87). Collective antisemitism was measured with seven items (e.g., “You hear or read conspiracy theories involving Jews”), also with high reliability (α= 0.89). 2.2.3 Perceived prevalence of antisemitism The perceived prevalence of antisemitism in German society was measured using a sliding scale ranging from 1% to 100%. Participants estimated the percentage of people in German society who hold negative views of Jews. 2.2.4 Vigilance against antisemitism Vigilance against antisemitism was assessed using nine items adapted from Zick et al.’s (2017) instrument measuring antisemitism-related worries, security perceptions, and behaviors. Participants rated their agreement on a 5-point scale (1 = completely disagree to 5 = completely agree). Sample items include “There are events and places to which I do not go because of antisemitism” and “I would not want my neighbors to know that I am Jewish.” The scale demonstrated good reliability (α= 0.86). 2.2.5 Depression and anxiety Depression and anxiety were measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS; Petermann, 2011), a widely used instrument assessing psychological distress on a 4-point scale with varying anchors. After removing one item due to insufficient model fit in a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) (see below), the anxiety subscale comprised five items (e.g., “Worrying thoughts go through my mind,” α= 0.79), and the depression subscale included six items (e.g., “I have lost interest in my appearance,” α= 0.74). 2.2.6 Subjective wellbeing Subjective wellbeing was assessed using the Satisfaction with Life scale (Diener, 1994). Participants responded to five items (e.g., “In most ways my life is close to my ideal”) on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (not true at all) to 7 (completely true), with high reliability (α= 0.87). 2.2.7 Social participation Social participation was measured with a four-item scale developed for this study. Participants rated how often they visit friends, meet new people, and engage in activities outside the Jewish community on a 5-point scale (1 = never to 5 = very often). The scale showed acceptable reliability (α= 0.77). 2.2.8 Jewish identification Jewish identification was measured using four items adapted from Frindte and Dietrich (2017). Participants indicated their agreement on a 6-point scale (1 = completely disagree to 6 = completely agree) with statements such as “Being Jewish is an important part of who I am.” The scale’s reliability was acceptable (α= 0.72). 2.2.9 Demographics and personal characteristics Sociodemographic and personal characteristics were collected as control variables for regression analyses and to characterize latent profiles (see below). These included gender, age, highest educational level, migration background and nationality, family status and number of children, SES, religiosity, political orientation (left-right scale), and frequency of participation in Jewish community events and activities. For all multi-item scales, arithmetic means were calculated to represent each construct, with higher scores indicating a greater degree of the respective quality. 3 Results 3.1 Preliminary analysis First, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to validate the conceptual distinction between everyday, subtle, and collective antisemitic experiences at the measurement level. A correlated three-factor model, with four added inter-item residual covariances (between items 1–2 and 8–9 on the everyday antisemitism scale, and items 6–7 and 7–8 on the collective antisemitism scale), yielded an acceptable model fit according to acceptable criteria (Hu and Bentler, 1999), χ2(182) = 432.635, p<0.001, CFI = 0.944, TLI = 0.935, RMSEA = 0.062, 90% CI [0.054, 0.069], SRMR = 0.061. Second, we examined the factor structure of the HADS using CFA. The initial two-factor model (depression and anxiety) demonstrated insufficient fit, χ2(55) = 193.489, p<0.001, CFI = 0.987, TLI = 0.0972, RMSEA = 0.083, 90% CI [0.071, 0.096], SRMR = 0.057. Modification indices indicated a high crossloading on item 4 of the anxiety subscale, which we removed. By adding covariances between the residuals of items 2 and 7 in the anxiety subscale and items 6 and 8 in the depression subscale, the model fit improved significantly: χ2(41) = 100.543, p<0.001, CFI = 0.950, TLI = 0.932, RMSEA = 0.062, 90% CI [0.046, 0.077], SRMR = 0.043. Finally, the vigilance against antisemitism scale showed a good fit to a single-factor structure, as indicated by a principal component analysis (PCA) with an added residual covariance between items 6 and 7: χ2(26) = 52.57, p= 0.002, CFI = 0.977, TLI = 0.968, RMSEA = 0.054, 90% CI [0.033, 0.075], SRMR = 0.040. Missing data at the item level did not exceed 16.7%. Little’s MCAR test indicated that the data were missing completely at random (χ2(10,591) = 10,738.464, p= 0.155; therefore, the data were assumed to be missing at random and cases with missing data were omitted per analysis. 3.2 Descriptive analysis Participants reported experiencing subtle antisemitism more frequently than everyday antisemitism (i.e., perceived direct discrimination). As illustrated in Figure 1, over 40% indicated that they were at least rarely threatened or harassed, and 45% reported being called names or insulted due to their Jewish affiliation. In contrast, more than half of the participants stated they were Frontiers in Psychology 06 frontiersin.org fpsyg-15-1499295 December 27, 2024 Time: 16:23 # 7 Shani et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1499295 FIGURE 1 Percentage distribution of selected items measuring everyday, subtle, and collective antisemitism. Nvaries between 412 and 419 due to missing responses across items. often or very often blamed for the policies of the State of Israel or exposed to conspiracy theories about Jews. Approximately two-thirds encountered antisemitic statements in the media at least sometimes. Participants in our study estimated that, on average, 45% of Germans harbor antisemitic views (SD = 21.37), a figure significantly higher than recent survey-based estimates. For instance, a 2019 survey by the Anti-Defamation League. (2019) reported that 15% of Germans hold such views. This substantial discrepancy highlights the gap between the perceived prevalence of antisemitism among the German Jews in our sample and broader societal estimates, indicating a heightened perception of antisemitism within the Jewish community. 3.3 Correlational analysis Pearson correlations among the study’s main variables are presented in Figure 2 (a more conventional correlation matrix is presented in Supplementary Table 1). All measures of perceived everyday, subtle, collective, and prevalent antisemitism were positively correlated. Participants who experienced more everyday antisemitism also tended to report more frequent microaggressions, as measured through subtle and collective antisemitism, perceived a higher prevalence of antisemitism in German society, and, to a lesser extent, exhibited higher vigilance against exposure to antisemitism. More frequent experiences of everyday antisemitism were moderately associated with lower SWB and social participation, as well as higher anxiety and depression. Subtle and collective antisemitism, two dimensions of antisemitic microaggressions, were also moderately linked to increased anxiety and depression. Perceiving a higher prevalence of antisemitism was weakly but significantly related to higher anxiety and depression, and to reduced social participation and SWB. Additionally, embracing more vigilant behavior was weakly to moderately associated with higher anxiety and depression and with lower social participation. Finally, Jewish identification was positively related to all measures of perceived and experienced antisemitism but was not related to vigilance against antisemitism. Interestingly, we found no significant relationship between Jewish identification and psychosocial outcomes. 3.4 Multiple linear regressions predicting outcomes from antisemitism To examine the unique predictive power of perceived and experienced antisemitism domains beyond demographic variables, we conducted four multiple linear regression analyses on the outcome variables: SWB, anxiety, depression, and social participation. The results are illustrated in Figure 3, with detailed parameters provided in Supplementary Tables 2–5. Regarding demographic predictors, higher age and SES significantly predicted higher SWB. Higher anxiety was associated with being female and leaning toward the left of the political spectrum. Only higher SES significantly predicted lower depression. Higher social participation was predicted by several demographic variables, including having fewer children, higher religiosity, higher SES, and more frequent involvement in the Jewish community. After controlling for demographics and relevant personal characteristics, everyday antisemitism emerged as a significant predictor of higher anxiety and depression, as well as lower SWB and social participation, surpassing other predictors in the models. Additionally, perceiving a higher prevalence of antisemitism significantly predicted lower SWB and increased depressive symptoms. Vigilance against antisemitism significantly predicted reduced social participation. While the effect of subtle Frontiers in Psychology 07 frontiersin.org fpsyg-15-1499295 December 27, 2024 Time: 16:23 # 8 Shani et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1499295 FIGURE 2 Bivariate Pearson correlations among the study’s main variables. AS, antisemitism. Correlations with absolute values of 0.11 or higher are statistically significant (p<0.05). Non-significant correlations are not displayed (cells remain blank). Stronger colors represent higher correlation coefficients, as indicated by the scale on the right side of the figure. antisemitism on anxiety, depression, and social participation was marginally significant (ps<0.07), collective antisemitism did not uniquely contribute to explaining variance in the outcome variables beyond other forms of antisemitic experiences. To control for multiple comparisons across the regression models, we applied the Holm-Bonferroni correction to the p values of all predictors. The adjusted pvalues for each predictor across the models are presented in Supplementary Table 6. After adjustment, from the main variables, only antisemitic experiences in everyday life remained a consistently significant predictor across all outcomes. In contrast, subtle antisemitism, collective antisemitism, perceived prevalence of antisemitism, vigilance and Jewish identification were not significant in any model after adjustment, with adjusted pvalues above 0.05 across outcomes. Finally, we conducted an additional series of multiple linear regressions to examine a potential interaction between Jewish identification and everyday antisemitism in predicting the four outcomes (see Supplementary Table 7). The results indicated no significant interactions, suggesting that the strong predictive relationship between everyday antisemitic experiences and psychosocial outcomes is consistent across different levels of identification with the Jewish ethnic or religious identity. 3.5 Profiles of experiences with antisemitism and Jewish identification We conducted a LPA using the R package tidyLPA (Rosenberg et al., 2018). The profiling variables were Jewish identification, vigilance against antisemitism, perceived prevalence of antisemitism, everyday antisemitism, and antisemitic microaggressions (subtle and collective antisemitism). All variables were standardized, and complete cases (n= 344) were included. To determine the optimal profile solution, we compared models with different variance and covariance structures: equal variances with fixed covariances (EV/FC), varying variances with fixed covariances (VV/FC), equal variances with equal covariances (EV/EC), and varying variances with varying covariances (VV/VC) (Rosenberg et al., 2018). Models ranging from 1 to 10 profiles were assessed using empirical criteria such as the Bayesian information criterion (BIC), sample size-adjusted BIC (SABIC), and the bootstrapped likelihood ratio test (BLRT) with 999 resamples, which provided pvalues for model improvement (Nylund et al., 2007). Conceptual criteria favored parsimonious models with meaningful profiles representing at least 5% of the sample. The 3-class model with equal variances and equal covariances (EV/EC) was selected as optimal based on low BIC and SABIC values and a significant BLRT (see Supplementary Table 9). Although a 4-class EV/EC model showed slightly better fit, it included a profile representing only 1% of the sample. Clustering means are depicted in Figure 4, and detailed differences are available in Supplementary Table 8. Jewish identification and experiences of everyday, subtle, and collective antisemitism significantly differentiated the profiles. In contrast, vigilance against antisemitism was moderate and similar across profiles, and perceived prevalence of antisemitism was relatively high (over 40% on average) in all profiles. Frontiers in Psychology 08 frontiersin.org fpsyg-15-1499295 December 27, 2024 Time: 16:23 # 9 Shani et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1499295 FIGURE 3 Results of multiple linear regression analyses predicting psychosocial outcomes. The plot presents standardized regression coefficients from four multiple linear regression models, each with 15 predictors displayed on the y-axis. These models predict social participation, depression, anxiety, and subjective wellbeing. The horizontal lines extending from each standardized beta estimate represent 95% confidence intervals. Predictors whose confidence intervals do not cross the zero point on the x-axis are considered statistically significant (p<0.05). The first profile, High Identity,High Antisemitism, comprised 53% of the sample. Individuals in this group (see Table 1) were highly identified with their Jewish identity and experienced antisemitism more frequently than those in other profiles. They were more religious, participated more in Jewish community activities, and 62% were born in Germany. The second profile, Low Identity,Low Antisemitism, included 8% of the sample. Participants had significantly lower Jewish identification and reported less perceived and experienced antisemitism compared to profile 1. They were less religious, less active in the Jewish community, and younger on average; 28% were born in Israel, higher than in profiles 1 (8%) and 3 (13%). The third profile, Average Identity,Low Antisemitism, accounted for nearly 40% of the sample. These individuals identified less strongly with Jewish identity than those in profile 1 but more than those in profile 2. Their experiences with antisemitism were similar to profile 2. About one-third were immigrants from the former Soviet Union, and they were less religious and less active in the Jewish community compared to profile 1. We then examined whether the three profiles differed in their average scores on the study’s outcome variables (see Table 2). The groups did not differ significantly in SWB, depression, or social participation. Significant differences emerged only for anxiety, F(2,341) = 10.51, p<0.001, η2= 0.07. Post hoc Tukey’s HSD tests indicated that high identifiers experiencing frequent antisemitism (profile 1) had higher anxiety levels (M= 2.09, SD = 0.55) than those with average identification and low perceived antisemitism (profile 3, M= 1.82, SD = 0.53), p<0.001. Interestingly, low identifiers with low perceived antisemitism (profile 2) and high identifiers with high antisemitism (profile 1) had similar levels of anxiety. 4 Discussion The study results confirm that antisemitism, in its various forms, continues to be a major stressor for Jews in Germany— a country that has seemingly come to terms with its past and where antisemitism is legally sanctioned. Despite measures to address it, Jewish communities remain vulnerable. Similar to previous studies on exposure to antisemitism among German Jews (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2024;Zick et al., 2017;Beyer et al., 2024), antisemitism remains a daily reality. Our profiling analysis revealed that more than half of the sample Frontiers in Psychology 09 frontiersin.org fpsyg-15-1499295 December 27, 2024 Time: 16:23 # 16 Shani et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1499295 Branscombe, N. R., Schmitt, M. T., and Harvey, R. D. (1999). Perceiving pervasive discrimination among African Americans: implications for group identification and well-being. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 77, 135–149. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.77.1.135 Brondolo, E., Brady Ver Halen, N., Pencille, M., Beatty, D., and Contrada, R. J. (2009). Coping with racism: a selective review of the literature and a theoretical and methodological critique. J. Behav. Med. 32, 64–88. doi: 10.1007/s10865-008-9193-0 Carter, E. R., and Murphy, M. C. (2015). Group-based differences in perceptions of racism: what counts, to whom, and why? Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 9, 269–280. doi: 10.1111/spc3.12181 Chae, D. H., Yip, T., Martz, C. D., Chung, K., Richeson, J. A., Hajat, A., et al. (2021). Vicarious racism and vigilance during the COVID-19 pandemic: mental health implications among Asian and black Americans. Public Health Rep. 136, 508–517. doi: 10.1177/00333549211018675 Chase, E. R. (2018). Measuring the Positivity of Jewish Experiences: Scale Development and Validation. Alhambra, CA: Alliant International University. Cousin, G., and Fine, R. (2012). A COMMON CAUSE: Reconnecting the study of racism and antisemitism. Eur. Soc. 14, 166–185. doi: 10.1080/14616696.2012.676447 Crandall, C. S., Miller, J. M., and White, M. H. (2018). Changing norms following the 2016 U.S. presidential election: the trump effect on prejudice. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 9, 186–192. doi: 10.1177/1948550617750735 Crocker, J., and Major, B. (1989). Social stigma and self-esteem: the self-protective properties of stigma. Psychol. Rev. 96, 608–630. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.96.4.608 Cruwys, T., South, E. I., Greenaway, K. H., and Haslam, S. A. (2015). Social identity reduces depression by fostering positive attributions. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 6, 65–74. doi: 10.1177/1948550614543309 Cuevas, A. G., Williams, D. R., Krobath, D. M., Lyngdoh, A., Kaba-Diakité, F., and Allen, J. D. (2024). The cost of doubt: assessing the association between attributional ambiguity and mental health. BMC Public Health 24:126. doi: 10.1186/s12889-02417664-1 Diener, E. (1994). Assessing subjective well-being: progress and opportunities. Soc. Indic. Res. 31, 103–157. Dietz, B. (2003). Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union in Germany: history, politics and social integration. East European Jewish Affairs 33, 7–19. doi: 10.1080/13501670308577998 Dubow, E. F., Pargament, K. I., Boxer, P., and Tarakeshwar, N. (2000). Initial investigation of jewish early adolescents’ ethnic identity, stress, and coping. J. Early Adolesc. 20, 418–441. doi: 10.1177/0272431600020004003 Elder, G. H., Johnson, M. K., and Crosnoe, R. (2003). “The emergence and development of life course theory,” in Handbook of the Life Course, eds J. T. Mortimer and M. J. Shanahan (Boston, MA: Springer), 3–19. doi: 10.1007/978-0-306-48247-2_1 Emmer, C., Dorn, J., and Mata, J. (2024). The immediate effect of discrimination on mental health: a meta-analytic review of the causal evidence. Psychol. Bull. 150, 215–252. doi: 10.1037/bul0000419 Enstad, J. D. (2023). Accounting for contemporary antisemitism: a four-dimensional framework and a new dataset. Antisemitism Stud. 7, 4–49. doi: 10.2979/ast.2023. a885991 Enstad, J. D. (2024). Facing antisemitism in Europe: individual and country-level predictors of Jews’ victimization and fear across twelve countries. Soc. Forces soae091. doi: 10.1093/sf/soae091 European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. (2024). Jewish people’s Experiences and Perceptions of Antisemitism:EU Survey of Jewish People. LU: Publications Office. Available online at: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2811/058304 (Accessed August 19, 2024). Fischer, J. M. K., and Wetzels, P. (2024). Die Verbreitung antisemitischer Einstellungen in Deutschland: Befunde aktueller repräsentativer Befragungen zu Trends seit 2021 und den Einflüssen von Migrationshintergrund, Religionszugehörigkeit und Religiosität. Z. Für Relig. Ges. Polit. doi: 10.1007/ s41682-024-00167-6 Fleming, M. C., Stevenson, H. C., Aisenbrey, E., and McWhirter, B. T. (2024). Using RECAST theory to examine racial stress appraisal across high schools: differences in racial threat and support. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 27, 2503–2526. doi: 10.1007/s11218-02409950-y Friedlander, M. L., Friedman, M. L., Miller, M. J., Ellis, M. V., Friedlander, L. K., and Mikhaylov, V. G. (2010). Introducing a brief measure of cultural and religious identification in American Jewish identity. J. Couns. Psychol. 57, 345–360. doi: 10.1037/ a0019577 Frindte, W., and Dietrich, N. (2017). Muslime, Flüchtlinge und Pegida. Berlin: Springer. Gee, G. C., Walsemann, K. M., and Brondolo, E. (2012). A life course perspective on how racism may be related to health inequities. Am. J. Public Health 102, 967–974. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2012.300666 Geller, J. H., and Meng, M. (2020). Rebuilding Jewish Life in Germany. New Brunswick, NJ. Rutgers University Press. Gerson, J. M. (2018). Gender theory, intersectionality, and new understandings of jewishness. J. Jewish Ident. 11, 5–16. doi: 10.1353/jji.2018.0002 Gottlieb, J. D., and Steigerwald, A. (2024). Editorial: social work’s role in ending antisemitism: if not us, who? Int. J. SW Values Ethics 21, 14–27. doi: 10.55521/10-021103 Harrell, S. P. (2000). A multidimensional conceptualization of racism-related stress: implications for the well-being of people of color. Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 70, 42–57. doi: 10.1037/h0087722 Heard-Garris, N. J., Cale, M., Camaj, L., Hamati, M. C., and Dominguez, T. P. (2018). Transmitting trauma: a systematic review of vicarious racism and child health. Soc. Sci. Med. 199, 230–240. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.04.018 Himmelstein, M. S., Young, D. M., Sanchez, D. T., and Jackson, J. S. (2015). Vigilance in the discrimination-stress model for Black Americans. Psychol. Health 30, 253–267. Hodge, D. R., and Boddie, S. C. (2021). Anti-semitism in the united states: an overview and strategies to create a more socially just society. Soc. Work 66, 128–138. doi: 10.1093/sw/swab011 Holmes, S. C., Zare, M., Haeny, A. M., and Williams, M. T. (2024). Racial stress, racial trauma, and evidence-based strategies for coping and empowerment. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 20. doi: 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-081122-020235 Hope, E. C., Velez, G., Offidani-Bertrand, C., Keels, M., and Durkee, M. I. (2018). Political activism and mental health among Black and Latinx college students. Cult. Divers. Ethnic Minor. Psychol. 24, 26–39. doi: 10.1037/cdp0000144 Hu, E., and Taylor, M. J. (2016). The relationship among ethnicity-related experiences, minority mental health, and ethnic awareness in social interactions. J. Ethn. Cult. Divers. Soc. Work 25, 193–207. Hu, L., and Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. Multidiscip. J. 6, 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118 Jikeli, G. (2020). A model for coming to terms with the past? Holocaust remembrance and antisemitism in Germany since 1945. Isr. J. Foreign Aff. 14, 427–446. doi: 10.1080/23739770.2020.1859247 Jones, K. P., Peddie, C. I., Gilrane, V. L., King, E. B., and Gray, A. L. (2016). Not so subtle: a meta-analytic investigation of the correlates of subtle and overt discrimination. J. Manag. 42, 1588–1613. doi: 10.1177/01492063135 06466 Kanter, J. W., Williams, M. T., Kuczynski, A. M., Manbeck, K. E., Debreaux, M., and Rosen, D. C. (2017). A preliminary report on the relationship between microaggressions against black people and racism among white college students. Race Soc. Probl. 9, 291–299. doi: 10.1007/s12552-017-9214-0 Kempf, W. (2015). Anti-semitism and criticism of Israel: methodology and results of the ASCI survey. Confl. Commun. Online 14, 1–20. Kessler, T., and Hollbach, S. (2005). Group-based emotions as determinants of ingroup identification. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 41, 677–685. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2005. 01.001 Keum, B. T., and Li, X. (2023). Online racism, rumination, and vigilance: impact on distress, loneliness, and alcohol use. Couns. Psychol. 51, 422–448. doi: 10.1177/ 00110000221143521 Klar, Y., Schori-Eyal, N., and Klar, Y. (2013). The “Never Again” state of Israel: the emergence of the holocaust as a core feature of israeli identity and its four incongruent voices. J. Soc. Issues 69, 125–143. doi: 10.1111/josi.12007 Kosdon, S. M., Keller, A., Berry, J. W., Stiver, D. J., Whiteford, K., and O’Connor, L. E. (2021). The experience of being Jewish: living with antisemitism. Psocial 7, 44–50. Kressel, N. J., and Kressel, S. W. (2016). Trends in the psychological study of contemporary antisemitism: conceptual issues and empirical evidence. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 38, 111–126. doi: 10.1080/01973533.2016.1164704 LaVeist, T. A., Thorpe, R. J., Pierre, G., Mance, G. A., and Williams, D. R. (2014). The relationships among vigilant coping style, race, and depression. J. Soc. Issues 70, 241–255. doi: 10.1111/josi.12058 Lavner, J. A., Hart, A. R., Carter, S. E., and Beach, S. R. H. (2022). Longitudinal effects of racial discrimination on depressive symptoms among black youth: betweenand within-person effects. J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 61, 56–65. doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2021.04.020 Lee, D. L., and Ahn, S. (2012). Discrimination against Latina/os: a meta-analysis of individual-level resources and outcomes. Couns. Psychol. 40, 28–65. Lees, C. (2018). The ‘Alternative for Germany’: the rise of right-wing populism at the heart of Europe. Politics 38, 295–310. doi: 10.1177/0263395718777718 Lewis, T. T., Cogburn, C. D., and Williams, D. R. (2015). Self-reported experiences of discrimination and health: scientific advances, ongoing controversies, and emerging issues. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 11, 407–440. doi: 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032814112728 Liang, C. T. H., and Fassinger, R. E. (2008). The role of collective self-esteem for Asian Americans experiencing racism-related stress: a test of moderator and mediator hypotheses. Cultur. Divers. Ethnic Minor. Psychol. 14, 19–28. doi: 10.1037/1099-9809. 14.1.19 Lo, I. P. Y., Kim, Y. K., Liu, E. H., and Yan, E. (2024). Typologies of minority stressors and depressive symptoms among LGBTQ employees in the workplace: a Frontiers in Psychology 16 frontiersin.org fpsyg-15-1499295 December 27, 2024 Time: 16:23 # 17 Shani et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1499295 moderated mediation model of workplace climate and resilience. Sex. Res. Soc. Policy. doi: 10.1007/s13178-024-01027-x Lui, P. P., and Quezada, L. (2019). Associations between microaggression and adjustment outcomes: a meta-analytic and narrative review. Psychol. Bull. 145, 45–78. doi: 10.1037/bul0000172 Masten, C. L., Eisenberger, N. I., Pfeifer, J. H., and Dapretto, M. (2013). Neural responses to witnessing peer rejection after being socially excluded: fMRI as a window into adolescents’ emotional processing. Dev. Sci. 16, 743–759. doi: 10.1111/desc.12056 Matheson, K., Foster, M. D., Bombay, A., McQuaid, R. J., and Anisman, H. (2019). Traumatic experiences, perceived discrimination, and psychological distress among members of various socially marginalized groups. Front. Psychol. 10:416. doi: 10.3389/ fpsyg.2019.00416 Meyer, I. H. (2003). Serving our youth 2015: the needs and experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning youth experiencing homelessness. Psychol. Bull. 129, 674–697. Miller, C. T., and Kaiser, C. R. (2001). A theoretical perspective on coping with stigma. J. Soc. Issues 57, 73–92. doi: 10.1111/0022-4537.00202 Moffic, H. S., Peteet, J. R., Hankir, A., and Seeman, M. V. (eds) (2020). AntiSemitism and Psychiatry: Recognition, Prevention, and Interventions. Cham: Springer International Publishing, doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-37745-8 Molina, L. E., Phillips, N. L., and Sidanius, J. (2015). National and ethnic identity in the face of discrimination: ethnic minority and majority perspectives. Cultur. Divers. Ethnic Minor. Psychol. 21, 225–236. doi: 10.1037/a0037880 Neville, H. A., Monette, M., Lewis, J. T., and Safir, S. (2024). Shifting the gaze from racism to healing from racism: A systematic review of selected psychology journals from 1992 to 2022. Am. Psychol. 79, 706–724. doi: 10.1037/amp0001317 Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T., and Muthén, B. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: a monte carlo simulation study. Struct. Equ. Model. Multidiscip. J. 14, 535–569. doi: 10.1080/ 10705510701575396 O’Connor, D. B., Thayer, J. F., and Vedhara, K. (2021). Stress and health: a review of psychobiological processes. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 72, 663–688. doi: 10.1146/annurevpsych-062520-122331 OHCHR,. (2019). Report on Combating Antisemitism to Eliminate Discrimination and Intolerance Based on Religion or Belief. Available online at: https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/thematic-reports/a74358-report-combatingantisemitism-eliminate-discrimination-and (accessed August 21, 2024). Ong, A. D., Fuller-Rowell, T., and Burrow, A. L. (2009). Racial discrimination and the stress process. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 96, 1259–1271. doi: 10.1037/a0015335 Paradies, Y., Ben, J., Denson, N., Elias, A., Priest, N., Pieterse, A., et al. (2015). Racism as a determinant of health: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 10:e0138511. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138511 Pascoe, E. A., and Richman, L. S. (2009). Perceived discrimination and health: a meta-analytic review. Psychol. Bull. 135, 531–554. doi: 10.1037/a0016059 Pearl, J. (2023). Paradoxical position: White American Jewish experiences of racial and ethnic identity. Doctoral dissertation. Saint Paul, MN: University of St. Thomas. Petermann, F. (2011). Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Deutsche Version (HADS-D). Z. Für Psychiatr. Psychol. Psychother. 59, 251–253. doi: 10.1024/1661-4747/ a000077 Pettigrew, T. F., and Meertens, R. W. (1995). Subtle and blatant prejudice in western Europe. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 25, 57–75. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420250106 Platow, M. J., Van Rooy, D., Wang, C., Ollis, L., Knight, C. G., Blakey, P., et al. (2022). Lay perceptions of modern prejudice toward “White” and “Asian” people: it matters who said it, whom it’s about, and who’s judging. Asian J. Soc. Psychol. 25, 674–687. doi: 10.1111/ajsp.12525 Priest, N., Doery, K., Truong, M., Guo, S., Perry, R., Trenerry, B., et al. (2021). Updated systematic review and meta-analysis of studies examining the relationship between reported racism and health and well-being for children and youth: a protocol. BMJ Open 11:e043722. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043722 Rebhun, U. (2014). Correlates of experiences and perceptions of anti-Semitism among Jews in the United States. Soc. Sci. Res. 47, 44–60. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch. 2014.03.007 Reimer-Gordinskaya, K., and Tzschiesche, S. (2021). Der Berlin-Monitor: Antisemitismus–Heterogenität–Allianzen. Völksen: zu Klampen Verlag. Rosen, D. C., Kuczynski, A. M., and Kanter, J. W. (2018). The Antisemitism-related stress inventory: development and preliminary psychometric evaluation. Psychol. Violence 8, 726–734. doi: 10.1037/vio0000208 Rosenberg, J., Beymer, P., Anderson, D., van Lissa, C. J., and Schmidt, J. (2018). tidyLPA: an R package to easily carry out Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) using opensource or commercial software. J. Open Source Softw. 3:978. doi: 10.21105/joss.00978 Saasa, S. K. (2019). Discrimination, coping, and social exclusion among African immigrants in the United States: a moderation analysis. Soc. Work 64, 198–206. Saleem, F. T., and Lambert, S. F. (2016). Differential effects of racial socialization messages for African American adolescents: personal versus institutional racial discrimination. J. Child Fam. Stud. 25, 1385–1396. doi: 10.1007/s10826-015-0326-0 Salzborn, S., Brosig, B., and Schmidt, P. (2011). Antisemitism research using methodological triangulation: a case study in Germany. Qual. Quant. 45, 1201–1215. doi: 10.1007/s11135-009-9286-z Sawyer, P. J., Major, B., Casad, B. J., Townsend, S. S. M., and Mendes, W. B. (2012). Discrimination and the stress response: psychological and physiological consequences of anticipating prejudice in interethnic interactions. Am. J. Public Health 102, 1020– 1026. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300620 Scheitle, C., Mabute-Louie, B., Ferguson, J., Hawkins, E., and Ecklund, E. H. (2023). Fear of religious hate crime victimization and the residual effects of anti-semitism and islamophobia. Soc. Forces 101, 2059–2086. doi: 10.1093/sf/soac100 Schmitt, M. T., Postmes, T., Branscombe, N. R., and Garcia, A. (2014). The consequences of perceived discrimination for psychological well-being: a metaanalytic review. Psychol. Bull. 140, 921–948. doi: 10.1037/a0035754 Schuller, S. (2021). World conspiracy literature and antisemitism. Transit 13, 194– 206. doi: 10.5070/T713153441 Schwarz-Friesel, M. (2019). “Antisemitism 2.0’—The Spreading of Jew-hatred on the World Wide Web,” in Comprehending and Confronting Antisemitism, eds A. Lange, K. Mayerhofer, D. Porat, and L. H. Schiffman (Berlin: De Gruyter), 311–338. doi: 10.1515/9783110618594-026 Scotto Rosato, N., and Baer, J. C. (2012). Latent class analysis: a method for capturing heterogeneity. Soc. Work Res. 36, 61–69. doi: 10.1093/swr/svs006 Sellers, R. M., and Shelton, J. N. (2003). The role of racial identity in perceived racial discrimination. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 84, 1079–1092. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.5.1079 Selvarajah, S., Corona Maioli, S., Deivanayagam, T. A., De Morais Sato, P., Devakumar, D., Kim, S.-S., et al. (2022). Racism, xenophobia, and discrimination: mapping pathways to health outcomes. Lancet 400, 2109–2124. doi: 10.1016/S01406736(22)02484-9 Smith, A. U., Bostwick, W. B., Burke, L., Hequembourg, A. L., Santuzzi, A., and Hughes, T. L. (2023). How deep is the cut? The influence of daily microaggressions on bisexual women’s health. Psychol. Sex. Orient. Gender Divers. 10, 535–548. doi: 10.1037/sgd0000556 Smith, T. B., and Silva, L. (2011). Ethnic identity and personal well-being of people of color: a meta-analysis. J. Couns. Psychol. 58, 42–60. doi: 10.1037/a0021528 Spurk, D., Hirschi, A., Wang, M., Valero, D., and Kauffeld, S. (2020). Latent profile analysis: a review and “how to” guide of its application within vocational behavior research. J. Vocat. Behav. 120:103445. Stanke, F. A., Kuper, N., Fetz, K., and Echterhoff, G. (2024). Discriminatory, yet socially accepted? Targets’ perceptions of subtle and blatant expressions of ethno-racial prejudice. Front. Soc. Psychol. 2:1343514. doi: 10.3389/frsps.2024.1343514 Stein, M., Perry, B., and Levit, I. (2024). Punishing “Privilege”: antisemitic hate crime in Canada. J. Interpers. Violence 39, 3876–3903. doi: 10.1177/08862605241259996 Steinhardt, M. (2022). Jewish Pride. New York, NJ: Post Hill Press. Sue, D. W. (2010). Microaggressions and Marginality: Manifestation, Dynamics, and Impact. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons. Sun, X., Hall, G. C. N., DeGarmo, D. S., Chain, J., and Fong, M. C. (2021). A longitudinal investigation of discrimination and mental health in Chinese international students: the role of social connectedness. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 52, 61–77. doi: 10.1177/0022022120979625 Tajfel, H., and Turner, J. C. (2004). “The social identity theory of intergroup behavior,” in Political Psychology, eds J. T. Jost and J. Sidanius (Hove: Psychology Press), 276–293. doi: 10.4324/9780203505984-16 Trilesnik, B., Graef-Calliess, I. T., Stompe, T., and Fydrich, T. (2022). Religiosity, perceived anti-Semitism, xenophobia and mental health: experiences of Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union in Austria and Germany. Transcult. Psychiatry [Epub ahead of print]. doi: 10.1177/13634615221107204 Tynes, B. M., Willis, H. A., Stewart, A. M., and Hamilton, M. W. (2019). Race-related traumatic events online and mental health among adolescents of color. J. Adolesc. Health 65, 371–377. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.03.006 van Veelen, R., Veldman, J., Van Laar, C., and Derks, B. (2020). Distancing from a stigmatized social identity: state of the art and future research agenda on self-group distancing. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 50, 1089–1107. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2714 Vargas, S. M., Huey, S. J., and Miranda, J. (2020). A critical review of current evidence on multiple types of discrimination and mental health. Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 90, 374–390. doi: 10.1037/ort0000441 Walker, L. E. A., Cole, E., Friedman, S. L., Rom-Rymer, B., Steinberg, A., and Warshaw, S. (2024). The American Psychological Association and antisemitism: toward equity, diversity, and inclusion. Am. Psychol. doi: 10.1037/amp0001369 Wallengren, S., and Mellgren, C. (2015). The role of visibility for a minority’s exposure to (hate) crime and worry about crime – a study of the Traveller community. Int. Rev. Victimol. 21, 303–319. doi: 10.1177/0269758015592108 Frontiers in Psychology 17 frontiersin.org fpsyg-15-1499295 December 27, 2024 Time: 16:23 # 18 Shani et al. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1499295 Watson-Singleton, N. N., Hill, L. K., and Case, A. D. (2019). Past discrimination, race-related vigilance, and depressive symptoms: the moderating role of mindfulness. Mindfulness 10, 1768–1778. doi: 10.1007/s12671-019-01143-5 Waxman, D., Schraub, D., and Hosein, A. (2022). Arguing about antisemitism: why we disagree about antisemitism, and what we can do about it. Ethn. Racial Stud. 45, 1803–1824. doi: 10.1080/01419870.2021.1960407 Weitzman, M. (2019). “The IHRA working definition of antisemitism,” in Comprehending and Confronting Antisemitism, eds A. Lange, K. Mayerhofer, D. Porat, and L. H. Schiffman (Berlin: De Gruyter), 463–474. doi: 10.1515/97831106185 94-035 Weitzman, M., Williams, R. J., and Wald, J. (eds.). (2023). The Routledge history of antisemitism (1st ed.). Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780429428616 Williams, D. R., Lawrence, J. A., Davis, B. A., and Vu, C. (2019). Understanding how discrimination can affect health. Health Serv. Res. 54, 1374–1388. doi: 10.1111/14756773.13222 Williams, D. R., and Mohammed, S. A. (2009). Discrimination and racial disparities in health: evidence and needed research. J. Behav. Med. 32, 20–47. doi: 10.1007/ s10865-008-9185-0 Williams, D. R., Yu, Y., Jackson, J. S., and Anderson, N. B. (1997). Racial differences in physical and mental health: socio-economic status, stress and discrimination. J. Health Psychol. 2, 335–351. doi: 10.1177/13591053970020 0305 Yuval-Davis, N. (2024). Antisemitism is a form of racism – or is it? Sociology 58, 779–795. doi: 10.1177/00380385231208691 Zick, A., Hövermann, A., Jensen, S., and Bernstein, J. (2017). Jüdische Perspektiven auf Antisemitismus in Deutschland Ein Studienbericht für den Expertenrat Antisemitismus. Bielefeld: Universität Bielefeld. Zick A., Küpper B., and Hövermann A. (2011). Intolerance, prejudice and discrimination: A European report. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Frontiers in Psychology 18 frontiersin.org