The present research investigated the prevalence and effects of rape myths in newspaper headlines. In study 1, a content analysis of online news headlines from US media (N=555) surrounding the 2003-2004 Kobe Bryant sexual assault case showed that 10% endorsed a rape myth. In study 2, students at a mid-sized university in the midwestern USA (N=154) read headlines endorsing or not endorsing rape myths. Male participants exposed to mythendorsing headlines were (a) less likely to think Bryant was guilty than those exposed to non-myth headlines, (b) more likely to hold rape-supportive attitudes than those exposed to non-myth headlines, and (c) more likely to hold rapesupportive attitudes than were female participants exposed to myth-endorsing headlines.

Two studies examine the prevalence and effects of rape myths in the print media covering a real-life case of alleged sexual assault. Study 1 was an archival study of 156 sources from around the country. Articles about the Kobe Bryant case were coded for instances of rape myths, among other variables. Of the articles, 65 mentioned at least one rape myth (with "she's lying" being the single most common myth perpetuated). Study 2 assessed participants' (N = 62) prior knowledge of the Bryant case and exposed them to a myth-endorsing or myth-challenging article about the case. Those exposed to the myth-endorsing article were more likely to believe that Bryant was not guilty and the alleged victim was lying. The implications for victim reporting and reducing sexual assault in general are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract