Trauma recovery processes may be understood within a socioecological model. Individual factors (such as sex of the survivor) and microsystem factors (including trauma characteristics) have been studied extensively. However, there is a paucity of research examining the effects of macrosystem factors on the impact of trauma-especially examining how the response of the first person to whom the survivor disclosed affects trauma-related cognitions and distress. Sixty-three college student participants reported a history of disclosing at least one traumatic event in an online, anonymous survey. Participants also provided information on the first person they told about the trauma, the social reactions of that person, general social reactions to trauma disclosure, the participants' trauma-related cognitions and psychological distress (PTSD, other mental health issues), details about the traumatic event, and basic demographic information. Paired sample t tests showed that participants experienced the responses of the first person they told about their trauma as more favorable than the responses of the all of the people to whom they told about the event. Women and survivors of non-interpersonal trauma reported more supportive responses than men and survivors of interpersonal trauma. Hierarchical linear regressions showed that interpersonal trauma and victim blame on the part of the first person the survivor told were associated with more negative trauma-related cognitions. Interpersonal trauma, emotional support, and victim blame were associated with a greater degree of trauma-related distress. The results suggest that participants perceived the response of the first person they told as more beneficial than the response of the rest of their exosystem. However, the reactions of the first person the survivor told differed based on the sex of the survivor and the type of trauma they experienced. Consistent with previous research, interpersonal trauma and victim blame by the first person the survivor told about the trauma were associated with more trauma-related distress and negative cognitions. Trauma-related distress was also associated with greater emotional support by the disclosure partner. The results support the use of the socioeological model to better understand the complex nature of trauma recovery and have implications for prevention.

No abstract

Although studies analyzing the content of evolution curriculum usually focus on courses within the context of a biological sciences department or program, research must also address students and courses outside of the biological sciences. For example, using data solely from biological courses will not fully represent the scope of coverage of evolution in university education, as other fields, like anthropology, also utilize evolutionary principles. We analyzed the content of 31 university-level anthropology textbooks for the following: (1) presence of a definition of evolution in various sections of the textbooks, (2) accuracy and consistency of the definitions provided in the textbook sections, and (3) differences between textbooks for cultural and physical anthropology. Results of this study suggest that anthropology textbooks do not necessarily (1) provide a single definition of evolution or (2) provide an accurate, "baseline" definition of evolution when present. Additionally, substantive differences were observed between definitions provided in different sections within a single textbook, as well as between textbooks written for cultural anthropology and physical anthropology/archaeology courses. Given the inclusion of anthropology courses in general education curriculum at the university-level, we conclude that this situation may further exacerbate the misunderstanding of the basic tenets of evolution that university students have been repeatedly shown to demonstrate. We stress the role of the instructor in choosing textbooks that provide accurate information for students, as well as the responsibility they hold in providing a concise, accurate definition of evolution in social sciences courses.

This article examines the difference in blame attribution between men and women, heterosexuals and homosexuals, and heterosexual males, heterosexual females, gay males, and lesbians in response to a vignette depicting the acquaintance rape of a heterosexual female ( n = 177). While the levels of empathy for the victim and blaming of the perpetrator were high for every group and blaming of the victim and rape myth acceptance were low for every group, some important trends emerged. Consistent with previous research, women reported higher rates of empathy for the victim, lower rape myth acceptance, and lower victim blaming than did men. Men and homosexuals had higher rates of victim blaming and were more likely to excuse the perpetrator's behavior than were women and heterosexuals, respectively. Lesbians had various patterns where they were at times more similar to heterosexual males (e.g., how much they blamed the perpetrator) or heterosexual females (e.g. in terms of empathy levels). They were consistently different from gay males. Further, the majority of differences were attributed to gay males, who had the highest levels of victim blaming and empathy for the perpetrator, were the most likely to excuse the perpetrator's behavior, and had the highest rate of rape myth acceptance of all of the groups. We conclude that sex and sexual identity interact to shape attributions about rape and discuss avenues for future research to explore these patterns.

No abstract