Search results

Your search found 173 items
Previous | Next
Sort: Relevance | Topics | Title | Author | Publication Year View all 1 2 3 4
Home  / Search Results
Date: 2003
Abstract: Background: Jewish culturally supported beliefs may discourage drinking and drunkenness as ways of socialising and coping with stress. Thus Jewish men under stress may be relatively more likely to become depressed, and less likely to use and abuse alcohol. This study is the first qualitative comparison of Jews and Protestants, men and women. It examines whether alcohol-related beliefs are consistent with the alcohol-depression hypothesis, i.e. that positive beliefs about alcohol use and effects are associated with high alcohol use and low depression. Material and discussion: A thematic (interpretive phenomenological) analysis on open-ended question responses, from 70 Jews and 91 Protestants, and on semi-structured interviews with five Jews and four Protestants, identified three salient themes: the importance of retaining self-control; the pleasures of losing inhibitions; and the relations of alcohol-related behaviour to identity. Compared to Protestants, Jews described alcohol-related behaviour as threatening to self-control, loss of inhibition as unenjoyable and dangerous and distinguished between the kinds of drinking behaviours appropriate for Jews and others. Sub-themes for Protestant men were denial that drinking threatens self-control, and appropriateness of going to the pub. Conclusions: The themes identified are not measurable using published research instruments. Alcohol-related behaviour may be a feature of Jewish identity. The beliefs identified are consistent with the alcohol-depression hypothesis.
Date: 2003
Author(s): Volovici, Leon
Date: 1994
Date: 1996
Abstract: W książce, którą Państwu przedstawiamy, omawiamy wyniki ogólnopolskiego badania ankietowego. Badanie to poświęcone było wielu różnym zagadnieniom, które wiązały się bezpośrednio i pośrednio ze stosunkiem Polaków do mniejszości narodowych, sąsiadów, a nade wszystko — do Żydów. [... ]
Obraz, jaki się wyłania z naszego badania, nie jest tak ciemny i niekorzystny dla społeczeństwa polskiego, jak by wynikało z opinii, popularnych choćby na początku lat dziewięćdziesiątych. [...]
Początek lat dziewięćdziesiątych nie był łaskawy dla obrazu Polski i Polaków w oczach opinii światowej. Zachwytowi zwycięstwem nad komunizmem i wprowadzeniem zasadniczych reform ustrojowych towarzyszyły opinie o Polakach - antysemitach, zamkniętych w sobie, a w dodatku wzajemnie ze sobą skłóconych. Do przywołania tego obrazu przyczynili się politycy, choć już wcześniej zaczęła to publicystyka, zwłaszcza w czasie kampanii wyborczych: prezydenckiej i do Sejmu. Wówczas to niektóre ważne osoby z dawnej opozycji demokratycznej nader często pisały — również w prasie zagranicznej — o niechęci Polaków do obcych i ich antysemityzmie. [...]
Na podstawie odpowiedzi na pytania ankiety wyodrębniliśmy dwa rodzaje antysemityzmu: pierwszy — polityczny [...], zwany nowoczesnym, oraz drugi — religijny, nazwany tradycyjnym. [...] W Polsce mamy do czynienia raczej z przejawami polityczno-ideologicznej formy antysemityzmu, na którą składa się charakterystyczny zespół poglądów występujący w całej Europie. Nie znajdujemy w nim nic „specyficznie polskiego". Natomiast tradycyjny, religijnie uzasadniony antysemityzm bardziej zasługiwałby na to miano. Jednakże obecnie występuje on rzadko. [..,] W żadnym więc przypadku nie można uznać go za charakterystyczny rys polskich postaw antyżydowskich. Również wiara religijna samodzielnie w niewielkim stopniu wyjaśnia niechęci i antyżydowskie stereotypy.
Date: 2013
Date: 2018
Abstract: Реализация этого проекта предполагала включение 25 вопросов в ежемесячный опрос по общенациональной выборке. Опрос был проведен 23–30 августа 2018 года по репрезентативной
всероссийской выборке городского и сельского населения объемом 1600 человек в возрасте от
18 лет и старше в 136 населенных пунктах, 52 субъектах РФ. Исследование проводилось на дому
у респондента методом личного интервью. Распределение ответов (если не указано иное) приводится в процентах от общего числа опрошенных. Полученные данные дополнены результатами и
выводами из аналогичных исследований Левада-центра, проводимых с 1990 года, прежде всего –
материалами июльского опроса 2018 года.
В настоящем Отчете акцент сделан на анализ ксенофобских установок и их изменений в России;
меньшее внимание уделено потенциалу и угрозе, вызванных антисемитизмом, поскольку сравнительно недавно (в 2016 г.) Левада-центром были проведено большое исследование населения
России по этой проблеме, а в 2018 году отдельно - опрос евреев России по этой же теме (количественный опрос и серия фокус групп)1
, посвященных среди прочего динамике ксенофобских
и антисемитских настроений в обществе и форм их выражения, а также оценкам потенциальных
угроз российскими евреями
Date: 2018
Abstract: В настоящем исследовании была использована значительная часть вопросов общеевропейского
опроса, проводившимся Агентством Европейского Союза по основным правам (АОП) в восьми
странах Европейского Союза в 2012 году1
, направленного на мониторинг антисемитизма, личного
опыта опрошенных с подобными проявлениями, среди еврейского населения 8 европейских
стран.2
Использование одних и тех же вопросов дает возможность сравнить мнения и оценки
российских евреев с такими же оценками среди евреев из других стран, то есть оценивать современный масштаб антисемитизма в России в общеевропейском контексте. Отметим, что методика
европейского опроса иная, в отличие от российского опроса, проводившегося методом интервью face-to-face, европейское исследование – опрос онлайн. Это означает, что респонденты самостоятельно принимали решение отвечать на анкету. Несмотря на эти методические расхождения, мы считаем возможным сравнение полученных нами данных с европейскими, поскольку
они указывают на общие тенденции.
Все приводимые в настоящем отчете данные представляют собой распределение ответов (процент ответов к числу всех опрошенных, равное 517 человек, старше 16 лет, если не указано иное).
Отправной точкой для проведения настоящего исследование служит представление, что в последние многие годы мы не наблюдаем явного роста антисемитизма, основанное на результатах предыдущих массовых общероссийских исследований, проведенных по заказу РЕК. На фоне
весьма высокого уровня ксенофобии, нараставшего с середины 1990-х гг. по отношению к представителям различных этнонациональных общностей, прежде всего – к приезжим из кавказских
и среднеазиатских республик бывшего СССР, массовый негативизм по отношению к евреям выражен достаточно слабо. Но таковы были зафиксированные в социологических опросах массовые
установки всего населения России. Общенациональная репрезентативная выборка не позволяла
при этом сколько-нибудь определенно судить о том, а как смотрят на те же самые проблемы сами
российские евреи, насколько они обеспокоены угрозой агрессивного национализма, расизма и
антисемитизма в России. Потребность ответить на эти вопросы обусловила проведение настоящего социологического исследования.
Date: 2013
Author(s): Staetsky, L. Daniel
Date: 2019
Abstract: Is criticism of Israel antisemitic? Do anti-Israel views and attitudes constitute a “new antisemitism”? These questions have occupied the minds of many academics and pubic intellectuals – both Jewish and non-Jewish – since the beginning of the twenty-first century. So far, no consensus has emerged. The definitions of antisemitism are many but all have been contested to varying degrees. This paper offers a brief survey of the definitions of antisemitism and the way in which these definitions accommodate anti-Israel and/or anti-Zionist views and attitudes. This is done, however, by way of introduction and without any assessment of the quality of the definitions in scientific terms, or their acceptability in political terms. The overview simply provides the background and the motivation for the main subject of the paper. The Jewish public’s perception of the link between antisemitism and anti-Israel/anti-Zionist attitudes forms the main focus of this paper. This is, to my knowledge, the first time that this subject has been treated in a strictly empirical, quantitative manner using large datasets.

What does the Jewish public, as opposed to the intellectual elite, think about the link between antisemitism and anti-Zionism? This question has so far remained unexplored, and in this paper I attempt to answer it utilising a newly created dataset. In summer 2012, a survey of experiences and perceptions of antisemitism among Jews took place in selected European countries.

Using advanced statistical techniques, it is possible to explore the extent to which the Jewish public makes a distinction between classic antisemitic and anti-Israel/anti-Zionist statements. Are anti-Israel/anti-Zionist statements perceived as antisemitic by Jews? Are they perceived to be antisemitic to the same extent as other, more classic, antisemitic statements? The paper addresses these questions focusing on the British and French samples of Jews, and comparing and contrasting insights produced by these two contexts.
Date: 2018
Abstract: This article analyses the results of a study conducted for the Russian Jewish Congress in 2018. 517 people over the age of 16, living in 21 towns in the Russian Federation and identifying as Jews were interviewed. The goal of the study was to establish the scale of modern day anti-Semitism in Russia and to put it into all-European context. With this goal in mind the scientists used a considerable part of the questions from the all-European survey conducted
by the European Union agency for Fundamental Rights in 8 EU countries in 2012. The use of the same questions allowed to compare the views and evaluations of Russian Jews with those of Jews from other countries, that is to evaluate the modern scale of anti-Semitism in Russia in a European context. Anti-Semitism in Europe and in Russia is similar in several ways. It’s most often demonstrated in the form of offences, threats and publishing
of anti-Semite materials in the media. The main platform for expression of anti-Semite views today
is the Internet. Nevertheless, Russia differs from European countries in several important aspects.

Firstly, the origins and nature of anti-Semitism are different. In Russia anti-Semitism is built into xenophobia and is most often expressed on a mundane level. Its carriers are average citizens and not members of certain (neo-nazi) organizations. Xenophobia in Russia is, in turn, oriented against the “ethnically different” and not Jews who are
after all considered ‘insiders”. Secondly, there’s no anti-Zionist component in Russian anti-Semitism,
unlike European countries, where waves of antiSemitism are closely tied with Israel’s policies in the
Middle East.
Date: 2016
Abstract: Le dispositif d’enquête dont les principaux enseignements sont présentés ci-après a été conduit par l’Institut Ipsos à la demande de la Fondation du Judaïsme Français. Ce dispositif d’études s’articule autour de trois volets.

Le premier volet concerne l’ensemble de la population française : nous avons interrogé 1005 personnes constituant un échantillon représentatif de la population française âgée de 18 ans et plus (méthode des quotas). L’enquête a été réalisée par internet du 15 au 24 juillet 2014.

Le second concerne les personnes se considérant comme juives : après avoir réalisé 45 entretiens qualitatifs d’environ 2h auprès de juifs (45) dont des responsables communautaires (15) en région parisienne, à Toulouse et Strasbourg, Ipsos a réalisé une étude quantitative auprès de 313 personnes.
Il n’existe pas de définition satisfaisante de qui est juif et qui ne l’est pas. Il n’existe pas non plus de statistiques permettant d’appliquer des quotas. La méthode utilisée a été celle de l’autodéfinition par les personnes elles-mêmes. Est juif celui ou celle qui se considère comme tel. A partir de plusieurs dizaines de milliers de panélistes interrogés, on a ainsi pu extraire un échantillon de 313 personnes se déclarant comme juif ou juive, auquel le questionnaire a été administré du 24 février au 8 juin 2015. Cette méthode a l’avantage de limiter les biais que l’on rencontre lors de recrutement « dans la rue » ou à proximité de lieux de culte

Le troisième concerne les personnes se considérant comme musulmanes. Pour les mêmes raisons, il a été procédé exactement de la même façon que pour les répondants juifs. Un échantillon de 500 personnes se déclarant musulman/musulmane extrait de notre Acces Panel a ainsi été interrogé du 24 février au 9 mars 2015.
Author(s): Kovács, András
Date: 2006
Abstract: [From the introduction to the article]
Between March and November 1999, under the auspices of the Minority Research Institute of the Department of Sociology, Eötvös Loránd University, I conducted a sociological survey of the current situation of the Jewish community in Hungary. In the course of the survey, 2015 respondents were interviewed. The most important demographic and social data were collected for four generations – from respondents’ grandparents to their children. Participants in the survey were asked to respond to questions concerning their relationship towards Jewish traditions and their acceptance or rejection of various forms of Jewish identity. They were also asked for their opinions on assimilation, integration and dissimilation, on Israel, and on the current significance of the Holocaust. Finally, an attempt was made to gauge the opinions of Hungarian Jews on the state of their own community, on their relationships with non-Jews, and on antisemitism in postcommunist Hungary.
My purpose in this article shall be to analyse the data that we collected in this latter area. Firstly, I shall reveal how Jews living in Hungary define antisemitism, and whether – when it comes to classifying particular statements as antisemitic – there are any significant differences between younger and older groups of Jews, between those who are better educated and those with less education, and between those with a stronger and those with a weaker sense of Jewish identity. I shall then explore how the various respondent groups judge the extent, intensity and gravity of anti-Jewish sentiment in the country, examining in particular whether respondents themselves have experienced such sentiment or have been subjected to discrimination. I shall reveal whether respondents think that antisemitism will increase or decrease in the coming years. Finally, I shall touch upon the policies that respondents consider desirable when it comes to tackling antisemitic phenomena. Evidently, the images formed by Jews and non-Jews shall determine in large part the relations between the two groups of one other.
Author(s): Kovács, András
Date: 2012
Abstract: The article analyzes the newest survey results on antisemitic prejudices, antisemitic political discourses, and political antisemitism in present-day Hungary. According to the research findings, during the first decade and a half after the fall of communism, 10%-15% of the Hungarian adult population held a strong antisemitic prejudice. Surveys conducted after 2006 show not only an increase in the absolute percentage of antisemites, but also an increase in the proportion of antisemites who embed their antisemitism in the political context. This phenomenon is linked with the appearance on the political scene of Jobbik, a more or less openly antisemitic party. When examining the causes of antisemitism, the most interesting finding was that the strength of antisemitic feelings is regionally different and that these differences correlate with the strength of Jobbik’s support in the various regions. Accordingly, we hypothesized that support for a far-right party is not a consequence of antisemitism, but conversely should be regarded as a factor that mobilizes attitudes leading to antisemitism. Thus, antisemitism is—at least in large part—a consequence of an attraction to the far right rather than an explanation for it. While analyzing antisemitic discourse, we found that the primary function of the discourse is not to formulate anti-Jewish political demands but
to establish a common identity for groups that, for various reasons and motives, have turned against the liberal parliamentary system that replaced communism.
Date: 2018
Date: 2015
Date: 2019
Abstract: In late 2017, JPR published a major study of attitudes towards Jews and Israel among the population of Great Britain, a project supported by the Community Security Trust and the Department for Communities and Local Government. We regard it as a groundbreaking piece of work - the first study conducted anywhere that empirically demonstrates a clear connection between extreme hostility towards Israel and more traditional forms of antipathy towards Jews.

This report explores this connection yet further, focusing specifically on two particularly prevalent ideas that are often experienced by Jews as antisemitic: the contention that Israel is 'an apartheid state' and that it should be subjected to a boycott.

In the first instance, the study finds that large proportions of people actually have no view at all on these ideas, either because they do not know anything about the issues, or because they are simply unsure of where they stand on them. This is particularly the case for young people and women - knowledge levels improve and opinions sharpen the older people are, and, as has been found in numerous other studies, women tend to be less opinionated than men on these types of political issues.

However, among those who do have a view, 21% agree with the contention that 'Israel is an apartheid state,' 5% strongly so, and 10% endorse the argument that 'people should boycott Israeli goods and products (3% strongly so). About the same proportion (18%) disagrees with the apartheid contention as agree with it, but a much higher proportion disagrees with the boycott one (47%) than agrees with it.

Disagreement with the boycott idea is higher in older age bands than in younger ones, increasingly so among those aged 40-plus, a phenomenon that is not found in relation to the apartheid contention. But the ideas are not particularly sensitive to educational level - both agreement and disagreement with both contentions increase the higher the educational qualification achieved.

However, clear distinctions can be found when looking at the data through the lens of religion, with Muslims much more likely than other groups to support both contentions.

The report goes on to explore the correlations between these views and more traditional anti-Jewish ones, and finds clear links between the two, although this is more the case with the boycott idea than the apartheid one. However, it also notes that the correlation is stronger with other anti-Israel beliefs, particularly those arguing that Israel exploits the Holocaust for its own purposes, and those claiming that Israel is excessively powerful or the primary cause of troubles in the Middle East.
Date: 1994
Abstract: Background We wished to ascertain immunization uptake rates in the strictly orthodox Jewish community in Hackney and to survey reasons for non-uptake and attitudes to immunization and immunization services within this community.

Methods A total of 575 strictly orthodox Jewish children, aged under 2 5 years, were identified from three general practices in the community, and a random sampling of 100 of these children was carried out. The sample uptake recorded by family doctors was compared with District uptake rates. A questionnaire was administered to parents. The main outcome measures were immunization uptake rate, reasons for non-uptake, and attitudes to immunization. Results Percentage immunization uptake (95 per cent confidence intervals) was: third diphtheria 86 per cent (82–90 per cent); third pertussis 82 per cent (78–86 per cent); and MMR 79 per cent (75–85 per cent). District uptake rates for a cohort of the same age, and at the time of the study, were: third diphtheria 82 per cent; third pertussis 79 per cent; and MMR 83 per cent. Sixty-seven parents completed the questionnaire (72 per cent response) and their children's uptake was the same as for children of nonresponders. All parents thought immunization to be important.

ConclusionsFor all immunizations, uptake in the strictly orthodox Jewish community is not significantly different from that of the District. Responding parents had positive attitudes to the value and safety of immunizations but wished better access to services. Health professionals need to question their perceptions so that efforts to improve uptake amongst ethnic minority groups are based on facts and are responsive to identified needs.