T here has been much controversy about the treatment of asylum seekers in Australia in recent years, with the Australian Government continuing to enforce a very hard-line stance on asylum seekers who arrive to Australia by boat. The present study examined attitudes towards asylum seekers using 164 Australian community members during June 2015 by way of questionnaire. Our primary research question involved how five variables predicted false beliefs about asylum seekers. Specifically, we measured prejudice, the third-person effect, and confidence in the answers given to false beliefs about asylum seekers. Regression results indicated that the main predictors of false beliefs were right-wing political orientation, prejudice, confidence in espousing false beliefs, and the third-person effect (politicians). Furthermore, most of our community participants accepted a large number of false beliefs as being true, with approximately two-thirds of our participants scoring above the midpoint. This reflects similar findings over the last decade or so. Our results indicate that, if one believes in bottom-up change, a more nuanced approach needs to be undertaken with community anti-prejudice interventions.Keywords: asylum seekers, refugees, false beliefs, confidence, prejudice, third-person effect There has been much controversy about the treatment of asylum seekers in Australia in recent years, with the Australian Government continuing to enforce a very hardline stance on asylum seekers who arrive to Australia by boat. While community sentiment is mixed, with some Australians feeling compassion for asylum seekers (Surawski, Pedersen, & Briskman, 2008), many Australians have highly negative or prejudiced attitudes towards them (Markus, 2015). This is despite the fact that their arrival by boat does not violate any international or national law. Indeed, Markus (2015) found that many respondents of a community poll (approximately one-third) believed asylum-seeker boats should be turned back without asylum claims being assessed. We do not go into great detail about Australia's asylum-seeker policies as these can be found elsewhere (e.g., Fleay, 2010); however, suffice to say that they are extremely harsh, designed to both deter and punish asylum seekers who attempt to enter Australia by boat (Penovic, 2016). Furthermore, the fact that Australia's asylum-seeker policy regime (e.g., mandatoryAddress for correspondence: Anne Pedersen, Centre for Human Rights Education, Curtin University, Kent Street, Bentley, Perth WA 6102, Australia. Email: anne.pedersen@curtin.edu.au detention) is harmful both psychologically and physically to people seeking asylum cannot be disputed (Coffey, Kaplan, Sampson, & Tucci, 2010;Davidson, Murray, & Schweitzer, 2008;Steele et al., 2004). In response to various aspects of Australia's asylum-seeker policy, there has been considerable outrage from some quarters, including the Australian Human Rights Commission (2014). Relevantly, psychology's peak body strongly opposes Australia's immigration detention ...