NCJ Number
205963
Journal
Journal of Interpersonal Violence Volume: 19 Issue: 2 Dated: February 2004 Pages: 143-161
Editor(s)
Jon R. Conte
Date Published
February 2004
Length
19 pages
Annotation
This study assessed the role of rape myth acceptance and situational factors in the perception of three different rape scenarios: date rape, marital rape, and stranger rape.
Abstract
Attitudes toward rape are important to understand how people react or behave toward victims and perpetrators of rape. Rape myth acceptance (RMA) is the amount of stereotypic ideas people have about rape, such as that women falsely accuse men of rape, rape is not harmful, women want or enjoy rape, or women cause or deserve rape by inappropriate or risky behavior. The aim of this study was to investigate the interaction between RMA and characteristics of the rape situation on rape perception in three different rape scenarios: date rape, marital rape, and stranger rape. Three hypotheses were tested: 1) persons with high RMA would attribute more responsibility to the rape victim and less to the assailant, they would perceive rape as less traumatic, and they would be less prone to report the rape; 2) persons would attribute less responsibility to the victim in the stranger rape scenario than the other two situations; and 3) a significant interaction effect was expected between levels of RMA and situational factors. Data were obtained from 182 psychology undergraduates (91 men and 91 women) from the University of Granada, Spain, who voluntarily participated in the study. Using a questionnaire, each student was asked to emit four judgments about each rape situation: victim responsibility, perpetrator responsibility, intensity of trauma, and likelihood to report the crime to the police. The independent variables were the rape myth acceptance scale (RMAS), gender, and type of rape. The study first assessed the role of RMA and differences in rape settings separately and then examined the interaction between these two factors on perception of rape. Results of the analyses found strong support for the importance of RMA and situational factors in accounting for differences in rape attributions. Furthermore, the results support the hypothesis that it is the interaction between these two factors that best describes how individuals judge victim responsibility and the intensity of trauma. Finally, the results suggest that an interaction between RMA and situational factors affects the likelihood of reporting the rape to the police, whereas assailant responsibility attributions seem to depend mostly on situational factors. Study limitations are discussed. 54 figures, 2 notes, and 32 references