We tested how Muslim participants identify speeches as hate speech or not, and whether they thought an apology from the speakers is needed. In Studies 1a (N = 209) and 1b (N = 183), participants were asked about a speech delivered by a prominent ingroup figure showed that hate, meta-hate, and collective narcissism tended to identify a prejudiced speech about outgroup members as not related to hate speech, and thus no apology is needed. Nonetheless, the resulting path was in contrast to participants who believe the outgroup nature as good. With similar predictors of Study 1, Study 2 (N = 191) showed that when participants were asked to identify a (non-harmful) speech about ingroup delivered by a minority outgroup member, there was an opposite path compared to Study 1. Across all findings, we argue that in the real-world setting, how a speech, with or without harmful contents, is identified depends on positive or negative views about ingroup and outgroup members by which it can dictate people's understanding and denial.

中文翻译：

---

识别社会背景下的仇恨言论：当心理因素比内容更重要时

我们测试了穆斯林参与者如何将演讲识别为仇恨言论，以及他们是否认为演讲者需要道歉。在研究 1a ( N = 209) 和 1b ( N = 183) 中，参与者被问及由一位杰出的内群体人物发表的演讲表明仇恨、元仇恨和集体自恋倾向于将关于外群体成员的偏见言论视为不与仇恨言论有关，因此不需要道歉。尽管如此，由此产生的路径与认为外群体性质好的参与者形成鲜明对比。与研究 1、研究 2 的类似预测因子 ( N= 191) 表明，当参与者被要求识别由少数外群体成员发表的关于内群体的（无害）演讲时，与研究 1 相比存在相反的路径。在所有发现中，我们认为在现实世界中，如何识别是否包含有害内容的言论取决于对群体内和群体外成员的正面或负面看法，它可以决定人们的理解和否认。