Anti-Semitism (A-S) Scale

Abstract

The Anti-Semitism (A–S) Scale is a foundational psychological scale developed by Daniel J. Levinson and R. Nevitt Sanford in 1944. It was designed to systematically measure the intensity and qualitative aspects of hostile attitudes and prejudiced beliefs held by individuals toward Jewish people. This instrument was a critical early component of the research program that led to the landmark study, The Authoritarian Personality (Adorno et al., 1950), aiming to quantify ideology and its relationship to personality structure. The scale operationalizes Anti-Semitism through distinct belief clusters, ranging from feelings of personal offensiveness to endorsement of discriminatory action.

Keywords

Anti-Semitism, Prejudice, Social Psychology, Psychological scale, Levinson, Sanford, Authoritarianism, Likert scale, Attitude measurement, Stereotypes.

Authors

Levinson, D. J., Sanford, R. N.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Anti-Semitism (A–S) Scale was to provide a standardized, quantifiable method for gauging the prevalence and depth of Anti-Semitism within the American population during the mid-1940s. Its creation was driven by the necessity of moving beyond simple expressions of opinion to measuring the underlying structure of prejudice as a psychological variable.

The scale sought not only to identify individuals holding high levels of prejudice but also to categorize the specific nature of their hostility. By differentiating between attitudes based on perceived personal offense, social threat, and desired action against Jews, the authors aimed to establish a comprehensive framework for studying the psychological roots of ethnic prejudice.

Construct

The A–S Scale measures the psychological construct of Anti-Semitic Prejudice, conceptualized as a cluster of negative attitudes, hostile stereotypes, and discriminatory action tendencies directed specifically toward Jewish people. The instrument assumes that these attitudes are organized and measurable along several distinct dimensions, reflecting various facets of hostility and fear.

The scale items were carefully crafted to tap into conventional anti-Jewish stereotypes prevalent in American society at the time. These stereotypes often revolved around themes of perceived Jewish clannishness, excessive financial power, moral laxity, and foreignness, thereby linking individual prejudice to broader cultural and social ideologies. The development of the A–S Scale laid the groundwork for the more generalized F-scale (Fascism scale), which measured the broader construct of the authoritarian personality.

Validity

While the original source content does not provide specific statistical coefficients (like correlation values or factor loadings), the validity of the A–S Scale is historically rooted in its face validity and construct validity within the context of the larger research project. The items were derived from extensive clinical interviews and thematic analyses of anti-Jewish propaganda, ensuring they reflected genuine expressions of prejudice.

The scale demonstrated strong predictive validity in subsequent research (notably in The Authoritarian Personality), where high scores on the A–S Scale consistently correlated highly with scores on other prejudice scales (E-scale for Ethnocentrism) and the F-scale for authoritarianism. This convergence supported the notion that Anti-Semitism was not an isolated attitude but part of a generalized, underlying personality syndrome.

Reliability

Specific statistical reliability measures (such as Cronbach’s Alpha or split-half reliability) are not detailed in the provided source material. However, historical documentation of the A–S Scale suggests that it possessed high internal consistency, which was crucial for its inclusion in the rigorous research methodology of the Frankfurt School researchers. The large number of items (52 across two forms) and the detailed subscale structure contributed to its stability in measuring the latent construct of prejudice.

Factor Analysis

The A–S Scale was structured around empirically determined subscales or factors, designed to capture different manifestations of Anti-Jewish sentiment, rather than treating Anti-Semitism as a monolithic construct. The source material identifies six primary categories of items, which functioned as subdimensions of the overall prejudice score:

• Jews as personally offensive (PO): 12 items focusing on perceived negative personal qualities (e.g., extravagance, dirtiness, conceit).
• Jews as socially threatening (ST): 10 items addressing perceived threats to Gentile society, culture, or economic stability (e.g., control over money, unfair business practices).
• Attitudes about what should be done to or against Jews (A): 16 items measuring the endorsement of restrictive or discriminatory actions (e.g., quotas, residential bans, preventing employment).
• Jews as being too seclusive (S): 8 items related to the belief that Jews keep too much to themselves or are clannish.
• Jews as being too intrusive (I): 8 items concerning the perception that Jews interfere too much in Gentile affairs or seek excessive prestige.
• Neutral (N): 4 items that were intended to assess general societal perceptions without necessarily being purely anti-Semitic, often serving as control items.

Instrument

Test Type: Psychological scale / Ideological Attitude Questionnaire

Format: Self-report questionnaire utilizing a 6-point Likert scale response format.

Language Available: English (Original development context was the United States).

Population Group: Non-Jewish individuals, primarily college students and middle-class American adults, targeted for research into prejudiced attitudes.

Age Group: Adults (typically 18+).

Population Details: The scale was administered to various non-clinical samples across the United States as part of the extensive empirical work conducted by the researchers affiliated with the Berkeley Public Opinion Study.

Test Methodology: Respondents rate their level of agreement or disagreement with each statement using the following 6-point scale:

+3: strong support, agreement; +2: moderate support, agreement; +1: slight support, agreement; –1: slight opposition, disagreement; –2: moderate opposition, disagreement; –3: strong opposition, disagreement

Keywords

Prejudice measurement, Attitude scale, Social discrimination, Stereotype content, F-scale precursor, Social threat, Exclusionary attitudes.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not applicable (Developed prior to ORCID implementation).

Affiliation Email addresses: Not applicable (Historical instrument).

Correspondence Address: Research conducted primarily at the University of California, Berkeley (Institute of Child Welfare and Department of Psychology).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Permissions: Historically utilized for academic research; the scale is now widely cited in social psychology literature and is generally considered to be in the public domain for research purposes due to its age and academic context.

Fee: None known for academic use.

Test Year: 1944

The original PDF of the instrument can be downloaded here: http://ada.evergreen.edu/cr‎eatearunc/texts/frankfurt/ap/ASscale.pdf and here: http://www.ajcarchive.org/AJC_DATA/Files/AP6.pdf

Reference’s

Levinson, D. J., Sanford, R. N. (1944) A scale for the measurement of anti-Semitism. Journal of Psychology, 17(2), 339–370.

Items of the Anti-Semitism (A–S) Scale

Public Opinion Questionnaire A

1. Jews seem to prefer the most luxurious, extravagant, and sensual way of living. (PO)
2. The Jews must be considered a bad influence on Christian culture and civilization. (ST)
3. In order to maintain a nice residential neighborhood it is best to prevent Jews from living in it. (A)
4. A major fault of the Jews is their conceit, overbearing pride, and their idea that they are a chosen race. (PO)
5. One trouble with Jewish businessmen is that they stick together and connive, so that a Gentile doesn’t have a fair chance in competition. (ST & I)
6. Colleges should adopt a quota system by which they limit the number of Jews in fields which have too many Jews now. (A)
7. No matter how Americanized a Jew may seem to be, there is always something basically Jewish underneath, a loyalty to Jewry and a manner that is never totally changed. (PO)
8. Jewish power and control in money matters is far out of proportion to the number of Jews in the total population. (ST)
9. A step toward solving the Jewish problem would be to prevent Jews from getting into superior, profitable positions in society, for a while at least. (A)
10. Districts containing many Jews always seem to be smelly, dirty, shabby, and unattractive. (PO)
11. There are too many Jews in the various federal agencies and bureaus in Washington, and they have too much control over our national policies. (T & I)
12. The Jewish problem is so general and deep that one often doubts that democratic methods can ever solve it. (A)
13. There are a few exceptions, but in general Jews are pretty much alike. (PO)
14. Jews tend to lower the general standard of living by their willingness to do the most menial work and to live under standards that are far below average. (ST)
15. It is wrong for Jews and Gentiles to intermarry. (A)
16. The Jews should not pry so much into Christian activities and organizations nor seek so much recognition and prestige from Christians. (PO & I)
17. Much resentment against Jews stems from their tending to keep apart and to exclude Gentiles from Jewish social life. (S)
18. It is best that Jews should have their own fraternities and sororities, since they have their own particular interests and activities which they can best engage in together, just as Christians get along best in all-Christian fraternities. (A)
19. One thing that has hindered the Jews from establishing their own nation is the fact that they really have no culture of their own; instead, they tend to copy the things that are important to the native citizens of whatever country they are in. (I)
20. The Jews should give up their un-Christian religion with all its strange customs (kosher diet, special holidays, etc.) and participate actively and sincerely in the Christian religion. (S)
21. It is sometimes all right to ban Jews from certain apartment houses. (A)
22. One big trouble with Jews is that they are never contented, but always try for the best jobs and the most money. (N)
23. Jews tend to remain a foreign element in American society, to preserve their old social standards and to resist the American way of life. (S)
24. Anyone who employs many people should be careful not to hire a large percentage of Jews. (A)
25. Jews go too far in hiding their Jewishness, especially such extremes as changing their names, straightening noses, and imitating Christian manners and customs. (I)
26. There is little doubt that Jewish pressure is largely responsible for the U. S. getting into the war with Germany (N)

Public Opinion Questionnaire S

1. The Jews should make sincere efforts to rid themselves of their conspicous and irritating faults, if they really want to stop being persecuted. (PO)
2. War shows up the fact that the Jews make sacrifices for their country. (ST)
3. It would hurt the business of a large concern if it had too many Jewish employees. (A & I)
4. There is something different and strange about Jews; one never knows what they are thinking or planning, nor what makes them tick. (PO)
5. Jews may have moral standards that they apply in their dealings with each other, but with Christians they are unscrupulous, ruthless, and undependable. (ST)
6. The best way to eliminate the Communist menace in this country is to control the Jewish element which guides it. (A)
7. The trouble with letting Jews into a nice neighborhood is that they gradually give it a typical Jewish atmosphere. (PO & I)
8. The Jew’s first loyalty is to Jewry rather than to his country. (ST)
9. In order to handle the Jewish problem, Gentiles must meet fire with fire and use the same ruthless tactics with the Jews that the Jews use with the Gentiles. (A)
10. I can hardly imagine myself marrying a Jew. (PO)
11. Jews seem to have an aversion to plain hard work; they tend to be a parasitic element in society by finding easy, nonproductive jobs. (ST)
12. It is not wise for a Christian to be seen too much with Jews, as he might be taken for a Jew, or be looked down upon by his Christian friends. (A)
13. One general fault of Jews is their over aggressiveness, a strong tendency always to display their Jewish looks, manners, and breeding. (PO & S)
14. There seems to be some revolutionary streak in the Jewish make-up as shown by the fact that there are so many Jewish Communists and agitators. (ST)
15. One of the first steps to be taken in cleaning up the movies and generally improving the situation in Hollywood is to put an end to Jewish domination there. (A)
16. Jews should be more concerned with their personal appearance, and not be so dirty and smelly and unkempt. (PO)
17. The Jewish districts in most cities are results of the clannishness and stick-togetherness of Jews. (S)
18. Most hotels should deny admittance to Jews, as a general rule. (A)
19. The true Christian can never forgive the Jews for their crucifixion of Christ. (I)
20. Jewish millionaires may do a certain amount to help their own people, but little of their money goes into worthwhile American causes. (S)
21. Jewish leaders should encourage Jews to be more inconspicuous, to keep out of professions and activities already overcrowded with Jews, and to keep out of the public notice. (A)
22. There is little hope of correcting the racial defects of the Jews, since these defects are simply in their blood. (N)
23. The Jews keep too much to themselves, instead of taking the proper interest in community problems and good government. (S)
24. It would be to the best interests of all if the Jews would form their own nation and keep more to themselves. (A)
25. When Jews cr‎eate large funds for educational or scientific research (Rosenwald, Heller, etc.) it is mainly due to a desire for fame and public notice rather than a really sincere scientific interest. (I)
26. On the whole, the Jews have probably contributed less to American life than any other group. (N)

Short Form

1. Anyone who employs many people should be careful not to hire a large percentage of Jews.(A)
2. One trouble with Jewish businessmen is that they stick together and connive, so that a Gentile doesn’t have a fair chance in competition.(ST & S)
3. The Jewish districts in most cities are results of the clannishness and stick-togetherness of Jews.(S)
4. Persecution of the Jews would be largely eliminated if the Jews would really make sincere efforts to rid themselves of their harmful and offensive faults.(PO)
5. Jewish leaders should encourage Jews to be more inconspicuous, to keep out of the professions and activities already overcrowded with Jews, and keep out of the public notice.(A)
6. I can hardly imagine myself marrying a Jew. (PO)
7. The trouble with letting Jews in to a nice neighborhood is that they gradually give it a typically Jewish atmosphere.
8. No matter how Americanized a Jew may seem to be, there is always something different and strange, something basically Jewish underneath. (PO)
9. There may be a few exceptions, but, in general, Jews are pretty much alike. (PO)
10. There are too many Jews in the various federal agencies and bureaus in Washington, and they have too much control, over our national policies. (ST & I)