Does a report = support? A qualitative analysis of college sexual assault survivors’ Title IX Office knowledge, perceptions, and experiences

Abstract

Universities in the United States are required to remedy sexual assault under Title IX. Thus, college sexual assault survivors have the option to report to their university's Title IX Office as a mechanism for seeking sanctions and accommodations. The current study examined what survivors think about the Title IX Office, the possibility of seeking help there, and experiences with the reporting processes. Additionally, we examined the intersection between survivors’ gender and sexual identity in their perceptions and interactions. We conducted qualitative interviews with 40 survivors at a large Midwestern University and analyzed these data using content analysis and thematic analysis. The majority knew about the Title IX Office and its function, but most did not use it. Campus climate often fostered service barriers, including the minimization of sexual assault, fear of negative treatment, and social–emotional concerns. Survivors who reported rarely saw accountability for their perpetrators and frequently experienced negative treatment from investigators. There were substantial inconsistencies in reporting processes across survivors. There were few differences in knowledge and barriers across sexual and gender identities, but only cisgender women reported. Findings suggest the value in reducing barriers fostered by the campus climate and establishing mechanisms for Title IX Office oversight and accountability.

The illusion of choice: Organizational dependency and the neutralization of university sexual assault complaints

“…The findings from this study underscore both the importance and the perils of providing survivors options for recourse. For most of the participants in this study, the loss of control of their complaints was a source of harm, echoing previous research on institutional betrayal (Smith & Freyd, 2013, 2017) and survivors' negative experiences with Title IX reporting (Germain, 2016; Holland & Cipriano, 2021; Lorenz et al, 2022; Nesbitt & Carson, 2021). It follows that survivors need autonomy over the course of their complaints to feel truly supported by their universities.…”

Inconsistency is the Consistency: The Title IX Reporting Process for Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Within Maryland Public Universities

“…Some of what participants described represented Title IX staff prioritizing due process and neutrality over care for survivors, consistent with prior research on Title IX Coordinators (Cruz, 2021). Student descriptions of the confusing, opaque, and harmful aspects of the Title IX process reinforce findings from prior research (e.g., Fleming et al, 2021; Germain, 2016; Holland & Cipriano, 2021; Holland & Cortina, 2017; Khan et al, 2018; Nesbitt & Carson, 2021; Sall & Littleton, 2022). These experiences contributed to a perception of the Title IX process as overwhelmingly negative, unhelpful, and untrustworthy, and for many students enacted a sense of institutional betrayal (i.e., a perception that their institutions would not protect or support them).…”

“…Institutional betrayal was especially relevant for non-binary students, women students, Black students, and students with disabilities, who described ways in which they were disserved by the Title IX process and how this may have negatively impacted the outcome of their cases. This echoes Holland and Cipriano (2021), who found that only cisgender women (not transgender women, non-binary individuals, or cisgender men) in their sample reported to the Title IX office, and it was only two White women whose perpetrators were found “responsible.” Similarly, Sall and Littleton (2022) found higher rates of institutional betrayal endorsed among racial/ethnic minority women compared to White women.…”

Adopting a “Both/And” Mindset to Address Relationship Violence and Sexual Misconduct (RVSM) in Institutions of Higher Education

“…At MSU, our harms were large-scale, catastrophic, and very public, and many IHEs have policies and practices that disregard the needs of or are harmful to survivors. IHEs harm survivors when they disempower their choices and control (Holland et al, 2018), when they make help-seeking burdensome and retraumatizing (Holland & Cipriano, 2021), and when they do not even offer help to marginalized and minoritized communities (Jacobson López, 2023). IHEs must take meaningful action to stop these abuses.…”