Likelihood of Acquaintance Rape as a Function of Males’ Sexual Expectations, Disappointment, and Adherence to Rape-Conducive Attitudes

Abstract

Past research has found that individual differences in both attitudinal and situational variables may be associated with males’ likelihood of acquaintance rape (LAR). The present research was conducted to examine the predictive value of both attitudinal and situational factors on males’ likelihood of forcing a female acquaintance to have non-consensual sexual intercourse. In Study 1, male and female respondents (Rs) were presented with a scenario depicting a hypothetical sexual interaction between the respondent and a newly acquainted member of the opposite sex. As the encounter progressed from one sexual activity to the next, Rs made three ratings regarding their own and partner’s intent to engage in each successive activity. The scenario ended with the female refusing further activity and males’ affect ratings, adherence to attitudes conducive of rape, and LAR were measured. Males’ initial perceptions of female sexual intent (to later engage in sexual intercourse) best predicted LAR. Study 2 was conducted to examine the role of female sexual communication on perceptions of consent to sexual intercourse. Rs were presented with a scenario similar to that in Study 1, but at each stage were requested to rate the extent to which the female had consented to engage in each sexual activity. Males completed the same affect and attitudinal measures. The results of Study 2 again suggested that males’ initial perception of female consent to (later) engage in sexual intercourse best predicted LAR. The present research suggests that further investigation into the role of situational factors and males’ initial perception of sexual intent and consent in the aetiology of acquaintance rape is required.

Young men’s likelihood ratings to be sexually aggressive as a function of norms and perceived sexual interest.

“…Next, participants were that told they would now start Study 2, which was explained to them as investigating sexual behaviors and situations college students sometimes find them selves in. After giving consent, participants read a hypothetical scenario depicting a sexual encounter with a newly acquainted woman (see Willan & Pollard, 2003; see Appendix for example scenario). Participants were asked to rate how likely they would force the woman to engage in three kinds of sexual activities (petting, oral sex, vaginal intercourse) if they were in a situation like that depicted in the story.…”

Sexual Assault Perpetrators’ Justifications for Their Actions

“…Men who frequently misperceive women’s level of sexual intent more strongly endorse rape supportive attitudes (Abbey et al, 1998; Jacques-Tiura, Abbey, Parkhill, & Zawacki, 2007). In addition, men who assume a woman is sexually interested in them are more likely to feel “led on” (Muehlenhard & Linton, 1987; Willan & Pollard, 2003), and may feel especially justified in pushing for unwanted sexual activity when their sexual advances are rejected (Abbey et al, 2001; Goodchilds & Zellman, 1984). Consistent with this hypothesis, misperceptions of sexual intent are a direct proximal predictor of sexual assault perpetration (Abbey et al, 1998; Zawacki, Abbey, Buck, McAuslan, & Clinton-Sherrod, 2003).…”

“…Some potential perpetrators assume that a woman’s agreement to any sexual activity constitutes her willingness to engage in whatever sexual activities they desire (Willan & Pollard, 2003). In a cross-sectional survey of male college students, Abbey and colleagues (2001) compared characteristics of sexual assault perpetrators’ most severe incident with the characteristics of nonperpetrators’ “worst date.” Perpetrators reported engaging in significantly more consensual sexual activity with the woman, compared with nonperpetrators.…”

Escala de Crenças sobre Violência Sexual (ECVS)

“…Mais concretamente, os estudos revelam que os homens concordam mais com mitos sobre a violação do que as mulheres (Brady et al, 1991;Davies, Pollard, & Archer, 2001;Geiger, Fisher, & Eshet, 2004;Hinck & Thomas, 1999), culpam mais as vítimas (White & Kurpius, 2002) e sustentam atitudes menos tolerantes face às mesmas (Jiminez & Abreu, 2003;Nagel, Matsuo, McIntyre, & Morrison, 2005;William & Pollard, 2003). Autores como Doherty e Anderson (1998) concluem que tal realidade decorre "da natureza altamente genderizada da violação e das expectativas culturais que norteiam as relações sexuais e suas transgressões" (p. 229).…”