Dating violence is a serious problem among college students. Research indicates that females perpetrate as much, if not more, psychological and physical aggression against their dating partners relative to their male counterparts. Unfortunately, there is considerably less research on risk factors for female-perpetrated dating violence, hindering efforts aimed at preventing violence in their relationships. This study examined 2 risk factors for female-perpetrated dating violence, namely alcohol use and emotion regulation, within a sample of undergraduate female college students (N = 379). Using structural equation modeling, results demonstrated that emotion regulation was associated with psychological aggression perpetration, and this was partially mediated by alcohol use. Moreover, a 2-chain mediation was present, such that emotion regulation deficits predicted alcohol use, which in turn predicted psychological aggression, which finally predicted physical aggression. These findings are consistent with theoretical models of dating violence and indicate that intervention programs should focus their efforts on increasing adaptive emotion regulation, decreasing alcohol use, and reducing psychological aggression.

Sexual victimization of women by men on college campuses is a growing societal concern, with research identifying a host of situational and characterological factors that may predict men's likelihood to engage in sexual misconduct. In the present study, we examined the relative contribution and potential interplay of these various determinants on college men's perceptions of women's sexual desire and consent in hypothetical dating scenarios depicting a sexual interaction. We found that the men ( N = 145) in this sample (a) conflated sexual desire with consent, (b) varied their appraisals of consent and desire depending on whether and how the woman in the vignette communicated consent or refusal, (c) perceived higher levels of consent if the man in the vignette had intercourse with the woman previously and as a function of escalating sexual intimacy in the ongoing interaction, (d) endorsed higher levels of perceived desire and consent across situations if they more strongly held rape-supportive attitudes, and (e) moderated their association between situational factors and perceptions of a woman's sexual intentions based on their endorsement of rape myths and a hypermasculine ideology. We conclude that efforts to prevent sexual violence among college students may benefit from being modeled on our findings that some men are likelier to infer consent regardless of the situation, that specific situational factors can foster misperceptions of consent across men in general, and that certain individuals in particular situations may pose the greatest risk for sexual misconduct.

We examined whether incident- and observer-level factors found previously to influence blame assignment and foster justification for severe unidirectional partner aggression would replicate in the context of reciprocated psychological and minor physical dating violence. We employed a factorial vignette methodology, simultaneously varying the form of the violence (i.e., psychological or minor physical), gender of the initiator and retaliator, alcohol use, history of aggression, and commitment status. Observer-level variables included participant gender, history of dating violence perpetration and victimization, and social desirability. Using a sample of 321 undergraduates, we found that initiating violence with physical versus psychological tactics was judged comparably in terms of blame, but responding with symmetrical physical violence was viewed more negatively than the reciprocation of psychological aggression. Men’s aggression was more negatively evaluated only in situations involving physical force, except in cases where the woman’s capacity to inflict physical harm was comparable. Other characteristics of the incident (e.g., alcohol use) and observer (e.g., gender) were also relevant, but their effects were tethered to the particulars of the violent exchange or the type of attribution being solicited. Asymmetrical violence (e.g., physical response to psychological initiation) appeared to elicit the most attributional activity with respect to the predictors. Exploratory analyses also revealed that participants with intimate partner violence (IPV) histories responded differently to vignettes wherein the violence initiator had aggressed previously. The overall pattern of results highlights that attributions about dating violence are complexly determined and contextualized, and that the form and relative symmetry of the violence may shape how incident- and observer-level variables impact evaluations of blame and justification.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious and widespread problem. Unfortunately, like many other private behaviors, self-report is one of the few practical means of assessing IPV. Despite its known limitations, few studies have examined methods for improving the assessment of IPV through self-report, particularly in research contexts. The current study examined implicit goal priming (IGP) and restricted response latencies (RRL), which have previously been used successfully to improve reporting of other types of sensitive information. Participants in the IGP condition engaged in a word-matching task intended to subliminally prime an honesty goal immediately before completing the IPV self-report measure. In the RRL condition, the amount of time participants were allotted to answer each question was restricted to 3 s. Using a pilot sample of 71 cohabiting/married couples, we currently provide experimental support for the utility of the IGP task for increasing the frequency of reported IPV, as well as agreement between self-reports and partner reports, particularly when used in conjunction with the RRL method. We found the strongest and most consistent effects for women’s reports of severe IPV perpetration and victimization, which is important given the extreme nature of these forms of IPV and because they are frequently underreported by women. We also found evidence to support the use of these methods to enhance reporting of other forms of IPV and provide additional directions for future research.

Rapes perpetrated during college are both common and underreported. Research highlights that several person- and incident-level factors relating to gender and sexuality may diminish reporting, by themselves and as they pertain to attributions of blame for the assault. In this study, male and female college students ( N = 916) read vignettes describing a rape perpetrated by a man against a woman, a man against a man, or a woman against a man. Participants rated the blameworthiness of both perpetrator and victim and rated the likelihood that they would disclose the rape to social ties or health services or report it to authorities if they were in the victim's position. We found that male gender and heterosexual orientation predicted higher victim blame, lower perpetrator blame, and lower likelihood of disclosure, although relative endorsement of masculine gender ideology seemed to be driving these associations, as well as predicted lower likelihood of reporting to authorities. Controlling for other factors, vignettes portraying a woman raping a man led to a lower likelihood of disclosing or reporting the assault, compared with a male-on-female rape. We also found that the effects of female-on-male rape and traditional masculine ideologies tied to rape disclosure partially by decreasing blame to the perpetrator, which itself carried a unique influence on decisions to report. Our findings overall indicate that factors related to gender, sexuality, and blame have myriad influences and may contribute to low rates of disclosing rape to important outlets.