![The “Charlie-Hebdo” Effect: Repercussions of the January 2015 Terrorist Attacks in France on Prejudice toward Immigrants and North-Africans, Social Dominance Orientation, and Attachment to the Principle of Laïcité [L’effet « Charlie-Hebdo » : Répercussions des attentats de Janvier 2015 en France sur les Préjugés à l’égard des Maghrébins, l’orientation à la Dominance Sociale et le degré d’attachement au Principe de Laïcité] Cover](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsciendo-parsed.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com%2Fubiquity%2F68406ce7da18af458e76840b%2Fcover-image.jpg&w=3840&q=75)
Table 1
Socio-demographic data for the three data collection periods.
| Period | Gender | Faith | Socio-professional group |
|---|---|---|---|
| Period 1 n = 65 | Women: 38 (58.5%) Men: 27 (41.5%) | Non-believer: 37 (56.9%) Catholic: 21 (32.3%) Protestant: 2 (3.1%) Muslim: 3 (4.6%) Jewish: 1 (1.5%) Pagan: 1 (1.5%) | Student: 18 (27.7%) Employed: 50 (76.9%) |
| Period 2 n = 56 | Women: 31 (55.4%) Men: 25 (44.6%) | Non-believer: 14 (25%) Catholic: 38 (67.9%) Protestant: 2 (3.6%) Buddhist: 1 (1.8%) Christian: 1 (1.8%) | Student: 14 (25%) Employed: 37 (66.1%) |
| Period 3 n = 41 | Women: 28 (68.3%) Men: 12 (29.3%) | Non-believer: 30 (73.2%) Catholic: 9 (22%) Deist: 1 (2.4%) Not stated: 1 (2.4%) | Student: 8 (19.5%) Employed: 31 (75.6%) |
Table 2
Means (and standard deviations) for prejudice toward immigrants and North-Africans, social dominance orientation (SDO) and attachment to laïcité for the three data collection periods.
| Prejudice | SDO | Attachment to laïcité | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Period 1 (n = 65) | 3.49 (1.26) a | 2.10 (1.03) | 5.44 (1.56) a |
| Period 2 (n = 56) | 4.32 (1.12) b | 2.54 (1.33) | 5.25 (1.80) a |
| Period 3 (n = 41) | 3.12 (1.37) a | 2.23 (.82) | 3.44 (.98) b |
[i] Note: For each column, means with a different subscript differ at at least p < .05 according to post-hoc tests with Bonferroni correction.
Table 3
Partial correlations for the three data collection periods between the measures of attachment to laïcité, prejudice toward immigrants and North-Africans and social dominance orientation (SDO), controlled for participants’ sex and religious belief.
| Period 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Attachment to laïcité | – | ||
| 2. Prejudice | –.07 | – | |
| 3. SDO | –.35 ** | .34 ** | – |
| Period 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| 1. Attachment to laïcité | – | ||
| 2. Prejudice | –.30* | – | |
| 3. SDO | –.54 *** | .39 ** | – |
| Period 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| 1. Attachment to laïcité | – | ||
| 2. Prejudice | .14 | – | |
| 3. SDO | .36* | .52 ** | – |
[i] Note: *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001. Correlations calculated without participants’ sex and religious belief as covariates gave similar results.