Challenging the Dominant Frame: The Moderating Impact of Exposure and Knowledge on Perceptions of Sex Trafficking Victimization*

Abstract

Objective Human trafficking problems have largely been framed by political elites and the media as a sexual crime involving innocent victims who are largely women and children. It is unclear how this framing impacts the public's attitudes about the issue. Here, we ask what types of sex trafficking victim frames produce the strongest response among the American public and how does increased exposure and accurate knowledge about the issue moderate the impact of the victim frames? Methods To answer these questions, we utilize data from a unique nationally representative survey experiment fielded to 2,000 Americans in which we designed a 2 × 2 × 2 experiment manipulating the gender, age, and nationality of sex trafficking victims. Results We find the age of the victim has the greatest impact on affective, cognitive, and behavioral responses to human trafficking, but that these victim frames are conditional on the amount of exposure a subject has had to the issue of human trafficking and the level of correct knowledge he or she possesses about human trafficking. Conclusion Victim framing in public discourse on sex trafficking does make a difference, and the reasons these frames elicit different responses are complex and moderated by respondents’ exposure to information and knowledge about the issue.

Who is the (“Ideal”) Victim of Labor Exploitation? Two Qualitative Vignette Studies on Labor Inspectors’ Discretion

“…In news reports and NGO awareness campaigns, human trafficking victims are often portrayed as vulnerable and powerless (Bouché, Farrell, and Wittmer-Wolfe 2018;Johnston, Friedman, and Shafer 2014) and those who exploit them as villains who profit from other people's misery (O'Brien 2019). The typical narrative about victimhood is that victims passively try to survive and did not contribute to their tragic situation (O'Brien 2019).…”

“…Studies show that female sex trafficking victims are -in line with the "iconic" victim narrative -often portrayed as weak, vulnerable and passive (Bouché, Farrell, and Wittmer-Wolfe 2018;Johnston, Friedman, and Shafer 2014;O'Brien 2019). However, Contreras (2018) states that these characteristics do not apply to (all) human trafficking victims, for example, those who apparently are in a consensual sexual relationship with the trafficker or not physically forced but by means of "subtle threats of deportation to maintain [.…”

“…Nevertheless, studies have shown that assumptions about "iconic" victims and assailants still have an enormous impact on how people perceive human trafficking (Bouché, Farrell, and Wittmer-Wolfe 2018;O'Brien 2019). Research on mass-media reporting of sex trafficking shows that narratives about "sex slaves" and "all brothels as prisons [.…”

A Novel Method to Examine Public Communications and Policy Representations: A Case Example of Hawai‘i’s Perspective on Juveniles Involved in Commercial Sexual Activity

“…22 Juveniles who identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, or queer are at an increased risk of sexual exploitation, yet their experiences are largely absent from the dominant public narrative. [23][24][25] Despite the complex trauma that characterizes commercial sexual exploitation, this particular form of child sexual abuse has begun to be addressed only in the past 2 decades. 19 Increasingly, these juveniles are being identified as victims of insupportable sexual exploitation, as evidenced by passage of the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA) and 5 subsequent pieces of major federal legislation.…”

“…Before and after the passage of antitrafficking legislation, political decision makers framed sex trafficking as a criminal justice problem that should be addressed through criminal laws that punish traffickers, and this framing can be seen in the public policies now in place. 25,31 This foundational piece of legislation and this new framing of juveniles signaled an important shift in the federal perspective.…”